• Ingen resultater fundet

Shopping  Item  Quantity

Data  Presentation  &  Analysis

4.3   Main  Analysis

4.3.2   Shopping  Item  Quantity

related   behavior   in   a   positive   way,   can   be   explained   because   as   consumers   turn   more   vain   they   care   more   about   their   appearance   and   therefore   spend   more   resources,   especially  time,  on  fashion,  which  is  one  of  the  main  ways  to  affect  appearance.  

The   last   of   the   statistically   significant   predictors   of   behavior   when   including   all   independent   variables   was  perceived   ability   to   promote   ethical   trade   (B   <   0.000)   even   though  the  coefficient  was  relatively  low.  This  was  surprising  because  this  instrument   measures  whether  respondents  feel  that  they  are  able  to  influence  ethical  trade  and  that   ethical   product   options   are   available   to   them.   These   two   concepts   may   barely   seem   connected  at  first  but  as  consumer  become  more  knowledgeable  about  ethical  fashion   and  its  options,  staying  updated  on  fashion  as  a  whole  and  caring  about  doing  so  would   also  seem  natural,  as  ethical  fashion  is  a  sub-­‐concept  of  general  fashion.  

behavior.   These   were  hedonic   shopping   values,  self-­fulfillment   from   the   list   of   values,   environmental  concern,  and  thrifty  vs.  indulgent  and  organized  vs.  unorganized  from  the   self-­‐concept  scale.  Hedonic  shopping  values  (B  =  0.056)  proved  to  be  the  most  influential   of  the  significant  motivation  variables  with  a  beta  coefficient  of  0.172.  This  means  that   the   more   shopping   becomes   something   that   consumers   enjoy   and   finds   exciting   the   more   they   will   shop.   This   finding   is   interesting   as   it   proves   what   most   people   would   assume,   namely   that   if   shopping   stimulates   a   person   in   a   positive   manner   then   this   person  also  tends  to  shop  more  to  achieve  this  stimulation.  

The  second  most  influential  variables  were,  as  mentioned,  from  Malthotra’s  self-­‐concept   scales,   the   variable  thrifty   vs.   indulgent   (B   =   -­‐0.290,   Beta   =   -­‐0.128)   and  organized   vs.  

unorganized   (B   =   0.313,   Beta   =   0.128).   The   finding   that   considering   oneself  thrifty   vs.  

indulgent   negatively   explains  shopping   item   quantity   was   very   surprising.   This   means   that  the  more  thrifty  a  consumer  considers  him  or  herself  the  more  items  they  tend  to   purchase   when   shopping   and   on   the   other   hand,   the   more   indulgent   they   consider   themselves  the  less  items  they  tend  to  purchase.  However,  because  the  answers  given  by   the  survey  do  not  provide  any  information  about  how  much  money  was  spent  on  each   item,  a  possible  explanation  could  be  that  the  respondents  feel  that  they  got  a  bargain   and   therefore   saved   money   and   thus   feeling   thrifty   even   though   in   reality   they   purchased  many  clothing  items.  However  unlikely  this  may  seem,  at  the  moment  it  is  the   only   apparent   explanation   for   these   results.   Therefore,   if   correspondents   consider   themselves  indulgent,  then  they  purchase  fewer  items,  which  are  more  expensive.  These   respondents   are   not   interested   in   bargain,   but   rather   feeling   good   about   the   items   purchased.   On   the   other   hand,   the   positive   explanation   of  shopping   item   quantity   by   respondents   considering   themselves  organized   vs.   unorganized,   makes   more   sense,   as   being   organized   is   often   connected   with   a   rational   approach   to   things.   In   the   case   of   shopping  for  clothes  one  might  assume  that  organized  consumers  therefore  would  only   buy   the   things   they   need   when   they   need   them   and   thus   not   shop   for   many   items   of   clothing  during  one  single  shopping  trip.  

From   Kahle’s   list   of   values,   placing   importance   on  self-­fulfillment   was   significant   in   explaining  behavior.  The  more  importantance  the  respondents  place  on  self-­fulfillment,   the  more  items  they  purchased  during  their  last  shopping  trip.  This  is  accordance  with  

psychological   definition   of   self-­‐fulfillment,   which   is   described   as   realizing   of   one's   deepest   desires   and   capacities.   This   would   explain   the   increase   in   items   purchased   following   the   increase   in   importance   of  self-­fulfillment,   as   the   consumer   attempts   to   realize  him  or  herself  through  consumption.  

The  last  of  the  motivational  variable  that  turned  out  to  be  statistically  significant  was  the   variable   measuring   environmental   concern   (B   =   -­‐0.045).   This   variable   negatively   explains  shopping  item  quantity,  so  that  the  more  concerned  the  consumers  is  with  the   environment  then  less  clothing  items  they  will  purchase  during  a  shopping  trip.  This  is   very   interesting   although   it   can   also   be   argued   to   be   obvious,   as   consumers   who   are   concerned   with   the   environment   will   buy   less   in   order   to   do   less   harm   to   the   environment.   Nevertheless,   it   also   shows   that   if   awareness   and   concern   for   the   environment  can  be  raised  then  consumers  should  in  theory  consume  less.  Ability  Variables  

The  ability  factor  variables  explained  34.3%  (R2  =  0.343,  Sig.  =  0.000)  of  the  variance  in   behavior   relating   to  shopping   item   quantity   and   29.1   (Adjusted   R2   =   0.291)   when   adjusted  for  the  sample  size,  which  can  be  seen  from  table  1.  Of  the  ability  variables  four   of   the   individual   variables   were   statistically   significant   (sig.   ≤   0.050)   and   these   were   subjective/perceived   fashion   knowledge,   financial   resources,   skepticism   of   environmental   product   claims   and   label   use,   see   table   three.   As   for   ability   factors   explaining   the   shopping  item  quantity,  the  most  important  construct  was  the  financial  resources  (Beta  =   0.495),  followed  by  skepticism  of  environmental  product  claim  (Beta  =  0.262).  

It   is   worth   noting   that   out   of   the   four   significant   variables   explaining  shopping   item   quantity,  the  most  important  variable  was  financial  resources  (B  =  0.002,  Beta  =  0.495).    

This   indicates   that   the   more   disposable   income   consumers   have   available   the   more   clothes   they   consume.   This   might   be   hard   to   influence   but   nevertheless   an   important   assumption   to   prove,   as   it   enables   the   prediction   of   behavior   and   the   necessity   of   counter  measures.  The  second  most  influential  variable  was  the  respondents’  skepticism   of  environmental  product  claims.  Again,  this  meets  expectations  as  consumers  who  are   skeptical  of  environmental  product  claims  would  most  likely  also  be  skeptical  of  other   types   of   environmental   claims   and   therefore   not   feel   that   they   would   be   able   or   even  

need  to  make  any  adjustments  to  their  behavior.  Thus  the  amount  of  items  bought  per   shopping  trip  would  increase  with  increased  skepticism,  as  has  been  shown  by  the  data   from   the   survey.   On   the   other   hand,   the   data   shows   a   positive   prediction   of   behavior   caused   by   use   of   environmental   labels   (B   =   0.236).   This   means   that   the   more   respondents   answered   that   they   used   environmental   labels   while   shopping   the   more   items   they   purchased   during   their   last   shopping   trip.   This   finding   can   be   seen   in   opposition   to   the   previous   finding,   namely   that  skepticism   of   environmental   product   claim,  which  exhibits  that  consumers  who  are  skeptic  of  environmental  claims  purchase   more   items   but   so   does   consumers   who   use   environmental   while   shopping.   This   however,  does  not  mean  that  a  consumer,  who  presents  one  ability  trait,  necessarily  will   have  to  present  the  other  trait  as  well.  The  two  traits  are  not  mutually  exclusive  either   because  any  given  consumer  could  easily  be  skeptic  of  something  like  a  product  claim  or   label,  while  still  making  use  of  it  in  a  purchase  situation.  

The  last  significant  variable,  measuring  the  subjective/perceived  fashion  knowledge  of  the   respondents,   showed   that   this   variable   predicts  shopping   item   quantity   in   a   negative   manner,   that   is,   as   the   subjective   fashion   knowledge   of   the   consumer   increases   the   number  of  clothing  items  purchased  decreases.  This  finding  is  interesting,  as  one  might   believe   that   consumer   would   buy   more   clothing   items   as   their   knowledge   of   fashion   increases.  However,  this  finding  may  be  cause  by  the  fact  that  as  consumers’  knowledge   about  fashion  increases  they  buy  fewer  items  but  more  fashionable  or  expensive  ones   instead  of  many  low  quality  or  low  priced  items.  Opportunity  Variables  

Opportunity   factors,   on   the   other   hand,   could   not   predict   variance   in  shopping   item   quantity.  Adjusted  R2  was  below  0,000  and  showing  no  significance  (adjusted  R2  <  0.000,   sig.   0.433),   see   table   1.   It   also   did   not   show   any   significance   for   any   of   the   constructs   used  to  measure  this  factor,  as  can  be  seen  from  table  one.  This  is  likely  due  to  the  fact   that   the   opportunity   construct   was   only   measured   using   a   small   quantity   (4)   of   instruments.  This  was  mainly  done  because  opportunity  was  not  the  main  focus  of  this   investigation,  as  most  of  the  opportunity  factors  rely  on  external  influences,  whereas  the   aim   of   this   paper   is   to   only   investigate   internal   factors   connected   with   sustainable   fashion  consumption.  It  therefore  does  not  present  a  significant  problem  that  it  has  not  

been  further  explored.  All  Independent  Variables  

Analyzing   the   influence   of   all   the   independent   variables   on   the   dependent   variable   shopping  item  quantity  showed  that  50.4%  (R2  =  0.504,  Sig.  =  0.029)  of  the  variance  in   behavior   was   explained   by   these.   When   this   was   adjusted   for   sample   size,   it   fell   quite   dramatically   due   to   the   large   quantity   of   variables   but   still   accounted   for   19.5%  

(adjusted  R2  =  0.195)  of  the  variance  in  behavior,  which  can  be  seen  in  table  one.  The   only  significant  variable  here  was  financial  resources  (B  =  0.002),  as  shown  in  table  five.  

As  in  the  case  of  fashion  related  behavior,  the  variable  measuring  financial  resources  was   under  the  ability  variables  which  were  the  ones  with  the  largest  explanation  of  variance   in   behavior   and   under   this   construct   it   was   also   the   most   important   of   the   individual   variables.  Furthermore,  it  is  in  agreement  with  expectation  that  consumers  with  more   money  would  exhibit  higher  degrees  of  shopping  item  quantity.  As  previously  mentioned   this  may  not  be  easy  or  even  possible  to  influence.  Nevertheless,  it  is  still  an  important   confirmation,  as  it  can  be  used  to  predict  unsustainable  consumption  behavior.