Within the context of consumer motivation theory, the purpose of this research was to investigate how fashion consumer groups and gender are related to need for touch. Differences between individuals high and low in need for touch are consistent with differences between fashion change agents and fashion followers. Participants (101 females; 70 males) from 54 different majors completed demographic information, the Need For Touch (NFT) scale, and the Measure of Fashion Innovativeness and Opinion Leadership. Fashion change agents and females had a greater NFT—total, autotelic and instrumental—than fashion followers and males. Fashion change agents and females scored equally high on autotelic and instrumental dimensions of NFT but fashion followers and males scored higher on the instrumental than the autotelic dimension. Using a diverse sample that included male and female college students from a variety of majors countered limitations of earlier research and provided new insights into the role of need for touch in consumer behavior.
Babin, B.J., Darden, W.R., & Griffin, M. ( 1994). Work and/or fun: Measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research, 20, 644-656.
2.
Beaudoin, P., Goldsmith, R., & Moore, M.A. ( 1998). Consumers’ ethnocentrism and fashion leadership . Psychological Reports, 83, 1239-1247.
3.
Beaudoin, P., Moore, M.A., & Goldsmith, R. ( 2000). Fashion leaders’ and followers’ attitudes toward buying domestic and imported apparel. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 18, 56-64.
4.
Behling, D. ( 1992). Three and a half decades of fashion adoption research: What have we learned? Clothing and Textiles Research Journal , 10, 34-41.
5.
Bloch, P., Brunel, F., & Arnold, T. ( 2003). Individual differences in the centrality of visual product aesthetics: Concept and measurement. Journal of Consumer Research , 29, 551-565.
6.
Bruner, G.C. & Pomazal, R.J. ( 1988). Problem recognition: The crucial first stage of the consumer decision process. The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 5, 53-63.
7.
Burns, L.D., Brown, D.M., Cameron, B., Chandler, J., & Kaiser, S.J. ( 1995). Sensory interaction and descriptions of fabric hand. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 81, 120-122.
8.
Childers, T.L., Carr, C.L., Peck, J., & Carson, S. ( 2001). Hedonic and utilitarian motivations for online retail shopping behavior. Journal of Retailing, 77, 511-535.
9.
Cho-Che, J., & Kang, J. ( 1996). Underlying dimensions of fashion opinion leadership. In C. Ladisch (Ed.), Proceedings International Textile and Apparel Association (p. 86). Monument, CO: ITAA.
10.
Citrin, A.V., Stem, D.E., Spangenberg, E.R., & Clark, M.J. ( 2003). Consumer need for tactile input: An Internet retailing challenge. Journal of Business Research, 56, 915-922.
11.
Cleaver, J. ( 2004, February). What women want: The growing economic power of women consumers is transforming today’s marketplace. Entrepreneur. Retrieved October 2008, from http://findarticles.com
12.
Darley, W., & Johnson, D. ( 1993). Effects of female adolescent locus of control on shopping behavior, fashion orientation and information search. International Review of Retail, Distribution, and Consumer Research, 3, 149-165.
13.
Falk, P., & Campbell, C. ( 1997). The shopping experience. London: SAGE.
14.
Fiore, A.M., & Kimle, P.A. ( 1997). Understanding aesthetics for the merchandising & design professional. NY: Fairchild.
15.
Flynn, L.R., Goldsmith, R.E., & Kim, W-M. ( 2000). A cross-cultural validation of three new marketing scales for fashion research: Involvement, opinion seeking, and knowledge. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 4, 110-120.
16.
Goldsmith, R.E., Heitmeyer, J.R., & Freiden, J.B. ( 1991). Social values and fashion leadership. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 10, 37-45.
17.
Hirschman, E.C., & Adcock, W. ( 1978). An examination of innovative communicators, opinion leaders, and innovators for men’s fashion apparel. In H. K. Hunt (Ed.), Advances in Consumer Research (pp. 303-314). Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research.
18.
Hirschman, E.C. & Stern, B.B. ( 1999). The roles of emotion in consumer research. Advances in Consumer Research, 26, 4-11.
19.
Holbrook, M.B., & Hirschman, E.C. (1982). The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 132-140.
20.
Kwon, Y., & Workman, J.E. ( 1996). Relationship of optimum stimulation level to fashion behavior. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 14, 249-256.
21.
Lee, M.K.O., & Turban, E. ( 2001). A trust model for consumer Internet shopping. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 6, 75-91.
22.
Lester, D.H., Forman, A.M., & Loyd, D. ( 2005). Internet shopping and buying behavior of college students . Services Marketing Quarterly, 27, 123-138.
23.
Mahatoo, W.H. ( 1989). Motives must be differentiated from needs, drive, wants: Strategy implications. European Journal of Marketing, 23, 29-36.
24.
McCabe, D.B., & Nowlis, S.M. ( 2003). The effect of examining actual products or product descriptions on consumer preference. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13, 431-439.
25.
Park, K., & Dyer, C. ( 1993). Differentiating consumer innovative behavior: Purchase versus use. In C. Ladisch (Ed.), Proceedings International Textile and Apparel Association (p. 102). ITAA, Monument, CO.
26.
Peck, J., & Childers, T. ( 2003a). Individual differences in haptic information processing: The ‘‘Need for Touch’’ scale. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 430-442.
27.
Peck, J., & Childers, T. ( 2003b). To have and to hold: The influence of haptic information on product judgments. Journal of Marketing, 67, 35-48.
28.
Peck, J., & Childers, T. ( 2006). If I touch it I have to have it: Individual and environmental influences on impulse purchasing. Journal of Business Research , 59, 765-769.
29.
Peck, J., & Wiggins, J. ( 2006, October). It just feels good: Customers’ affective response to touch and its influence on persuasion. Journal of Marketing, 70, 56-69.
30.
Phau, I., & Lo, C. ( 2004). Profiling fashion innovators: A study of self-concept, impulse buying and Internet purchase intent. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 8, 399-411.
31.
Punj, G., & Srinivasan, N. (1992). Influence of problem recognition on search and other decision process variables: A framework for analysis. Advances in Consumer Research, 19, 491-497.
32.
Quick, R. ( 1999, December 31). Web shopping brings many unhappy returns . Wall Street Journal, 224, B5-B6.
33.
Schifferstein, H.N.J. ( 2006). The perceived importance of sensory modalities in product usage: A study of self-reports. Acta Psychologica, 121, 41-64.
34.
Schifferstein, H.N.J., & Cleiren, M. ( 2005). Capturing product experiences: A split-modality approach . Acta Psychologica, 118, 293-318.
35.
Solomon, M.R., & Rabolt, N.J. ( 2009). Consumer behavior in fashion (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.
36.
Stanforth, N. ( 1995). Fashion innovators, sensation seekers, and clothing individualists . Perceptual and Motor Skills, 81, 1203-1210.
37.
Studak, C.M., & Workman, J.E. ( 2004). Fashion groups, gender, and boredom proneness. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 28, 66-74.
38.
Who reads fiber and care labels? (2008, November). AATCC News. Retrieved November 11, 2008, from newsletter@aatcc.org
39.
Workman, J.E., & Caldwell, L.F. (2007). Centrality of visual product aesthetics, tactile and uniqueness needs of fashion consumers. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31, 589-597.
40.
Workman, J.E., & Johnson, K. ( 1993). Fashion opinion leadership, fashion innovativeness, and need for variety. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 11, 60-64.
41.
Workman, J.E., & Kidd, L.K. ( 2000). Use of the need for uniqueness scale to characterize fashion consumer groups. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal , 18, 227-235.
42.
Workman, J.E., & Studak, C.M. ( 2006). Fashion consumers and fashion problem recognition style . International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30, 75-84.
