Apparel Product Quality: Its Nature and Measurement
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
An important issue of apparel - apparel product quality -has not been significantly addressed in past research, particularlywhere the pre-purchase perceptions of consumers areconcerned. The goal of this study is to identify how consumersdefine intrinsic apparel product quality. This will be accomplishedby 1) examining the issue of quality as applied toproducts, 2) exploring past research on apparel product quality,3) constructing a scale (ApparEx) to assess intrinsic apparelproduct quality, and 4) relating ApparEx with service qualityas measured by SERVQUAL. Product quality is the consumer’s judgment of the standardof performance for a product. The cues used by consumers tojudge quality can be classified as either intrinsic or extrinsic. While the topic of apparel product quality has been examinedin the literature, the focus of such efforts has been largely onperceptions of apparel quality resulting from post-use orpost-exposure analysis. What has not received significant researchattention are the pre-use expectations or beliefs aboutintrinsic apparel quality. These pre-use expectations can be expectedto be a primary determining factor of consumer purchasingbehavior. The initial stage in the development of an instrument tomeasure prepurchase perceptions of intrinsic apparel productquality is to generate a set of items deemed to cover the domainof the intrinsic apparel product quality construct. Sincethe literature suggests that this construct is multi-dimensionalin nature, the scale was developed with the goal of identifyingand measuring the salient dimensions of intrinsic apparel productquality. Drawn from studies of consumer satisfaction/dissatisfactionwith apparel items, texts documenting apparel manufacturingstandards, and from technical standards drawn by theAmerican Association for Textile Technology, eight dimensionsof apparel quality were proposed. Seventy-four items were developedbased on the above sources to address each proposeddimension of the construct. Four forms of the instrument wereconstructed, each focusing on a different apparel product classification(underwear/lingerie or sleepwear, casual sportswear, dresswear, and coats and jackets (outerwear)). The sampling design used in this study was a purposiveone, using students enrolled in upper-division (junior and seniorlevel) university business courses at major universities locatedin the Midwest and in the Southern U.S. The instrumentwas administered on-site to students present in selected businessclasses chosen to preclude the possibility of students beingsolicited more than once. Of the 984 questionnaires distributed,131 were not determined to be usable, resulting in ausable return rate of 86.6 percent. Interestingly, the resultssuggest that the findings were not significantly different betweenthe product categories indicating that the subject datamay reasonably be pooled. A factor analysis resulted in sevenfactors being retained: 1) performance, 2) components, 3) garmentcare, 4) appearance, 5) construction/workmanship, 6)style/fashion, and 7) fit. While the pattern does not reproduceexactly the relationships proposed in the early stages ofApparEx development, the results were largely consistent. How well does the measure relate to other constructs towhich the construct is theoretically related? This was accomplishedby relating ApparEx with SERVQUAL, an instrumentdeveloped to measure the related concept of service quality. The objective was to determine how, if at all, the dimensionsof the ApparEx scale relate to the dimensions of theSERVQUAL scale. The results seem to display a consistentpattern. It appears that two factors of the SERVQUAL scale(dependability and tangibility) are positively correlated with thefactors of the ApparEx scale and that the other two factors ofthe SERVQUAL scale (empathy and responsiveness) are negativelyrelated with the factors of the ApparEx scale. The resultsalso suggest that the garment care factor of the ApparExscale is not related strongly with the SERVQUAL factors, andthat the style/fashion factor of the ApparEx scale relates onlywith the dependability and responsiveness factors of theSERVQUAL scale. These findings support the multidimensionalityof the instrument, and that quality is not a genericphenomenon - quality as it relates to apparel productsand quality as it relates to service issues appear to be twodistinct concepts, at least as far as expectations are concerned. This provides additional evidence of the construct validity ofthe ApparEx scale. Previous research has largely ignored the consumer’s perspectivein the discussion of product quality; apparel has notbeen an exception. In practice, intrinsic apparel product qualityhas been typically defined based on production-orientedstandards. In the instances where the consumers’ perspectivehas been addressed, it is most often within the context ofwhat is thought to be what customers desire, instead of their actual desires. The natural outcome of this approach is that agap likely exists between what consumers want and what managersthink that consumers want. The ApparEx instrument developedin this paper can provide a mechanism by which managerscan directly determine the apparel product quality expectationsof their clientele. The results also suggest that consumers of apparel productsexpect the same dimensions of quality across product categorylines. If consumers hold lower expectations of quality for apparelitems which cost less, it was not apparent from thisstudy. While it is true that consumers can best objectively assessproduct quality only after purchase and use, and that apurchased product’s inability to adequately perform will likelyaffect an individual’s subsequent purchasing behavior, it is theinitial prepurchase quality assessment which will have an immediatematerial effect on consumers’ purchasing decisions.
Abstract
An important issue of apparel - apparel product quality -has not been significantly addressed in past research, particularlywhere the pre-purchase perceptions of consumers areconcerned. The goal of this study is to identify how consumersdefine intrinsic apparel product quality. This will be accomplishedby 1) examining the issue of quality as applied toproducts, 2) exploring past research on apparel product quality,3) constructing a scale (ApparEx) to assess intrinsic apparelproduct quality, and 4) relating ApparEx with service qualityas measured by SERVQUAL. Product quality is the consumer’s judgment of the standardof performance for a product. The cues used by consumers tojudge quality can be classified as either intrinsic or extrinsic. While the topic of apparel product quality has been examinedin the literature, the focus of such efforts has been largely onperceptions of apparel quality resulting from post-use orpost-exposure analysis. What has not received significant researchattention are the pre-use expectations or beliefs aboutintrinsic apparel quality. These pre-use expectations can be expectedto be a primary determining factor of consumer purchasingbehavior. The initial stage in the development of an instrument tomeasure prepurchase perceptions of intrinsic apparel productquality is to generate a set of items deemed to cover the domainof the intrinsic apparel product quality construct. Sincethe literature suggests that this construct is multi-dimensionalin nature, the scale was developed with the goal of identifyingand measuring the salient dimensions of intrinsic apparel productquality. Drawn from studies of consumer satisfaction/dissatisfactionwith apparel items, texts documenting apparel manufacturingstandards, and from technical standards drawn by theAmerican Association for Textile Technology, eight dimensionsof apparel quality were proposed. Seventy-four items were developedbased on the above sources to address each proposeddimension of the construct. Four forms of the instrument wereconstructed, each focusing on a different apparel product classification(underwear/lingerie or sleepwear, casual sportswear, dresswear, and coats and jackets (outerwear)). The sampling design used in this study was a purposiveone, using students enrolled in upper-division (junior and seniorlevel) university business courses at major universities locatedin the Midwest and in the Southern U.S. The instrumentwas administered on-site to students present in selected businessclasses chosen to preclude the possibility of students beingsolicited more than once. Of the 984 questionnaires distributed,131 were not determined to be usable, resulting in ausable return rate of 86.6 percent. Interestingly, the resultssuggest that the findings were not significantly different betweenthe product categories indicating that the subject datamay reasonably be pooled. A factor analysis resulted in sevenfactors being retained: 1) performance, 2) components, 3) garmentcare, 4) appearance, 5) construction/workmanship, 6)style/fashion, and 7) fit. While the pattern does not reproduceexactly the relationships proposed in the early stages ofApparEx development, the results were largely consistent. How well does the measure relate to other constructs towhich the construct is theoretically related? This was accomplishedby relating ApparEx with SERVQUAL, an instrumentdeveloped to measure the related concept of service quality. The objective was to determine how, if at all, the dimensionsof the ApparEx scale relate to the dimensions of theSERVQUAL scale. The results seem to display a consistentpattern. It appears that two factors of the SERVQUAL scale(dependability and tangibility) are positively correlated with thefactors of the ApparEx scale and that the other two factors ofthe SERVQUAL scale (empathy and responsiveness) are negativelyrelated with the factors of the ApparEx scale. The resultsalso suggest that the garment care factor of the ApparExscale is not related strongly with the SERVQUAL factors, andthat the style/fashion factor of the ApparEx scale relates onlywith the dependability and responsiveness factors of theSERVQUAL scale. These findings support the multidimensionalityof the instrument, and that quality is not a genericphenomenon - quality as it relates to apparel productsand quality as it relates to service issues appear to be twodistinct concepts, at least as far as expectations are concerned. This provides additional evidence of the construct validity ofthe ApparEx scale. Previous research has largely ignored the consumer’s perspectivein the discussion of product quality; apparel has notbeen an exception. In practice, intrinsic apparel product qualityhas been typically defined based on production-orientedstandards. In the instances where the consumers’ perspectivehas been addressed, it is most often within the context ofwhat is thought to be what customers desire, instead of their actual desires. The natural outcome of this approach is that agap likely exists between what consumers want and what managersthink that consumers want. The ApparEx instrument developedin this paper can provide a mechanism by which managerscan directly determine the apparel product quality expectationsof their clientele. The results also suggest that consumers of apparel productsexpect the same dimensions of quality across product categorylines. If consumers hold lower expectations of quality for apparelitems which cost less, it was not apparent from thisstudy. While it is true that consumers can best objectively assessproduct quality only after purchase and use, and that apurchased product’s inability to adequately perform will likelyaffect an individual’s subsequent purchasing behavior, it is theinitial prepurchase quality assessment which will have an immediatematerial effect on consumers’ purchasing decisions.
참고문헌 (41)
- American Association for Textile Technology., "A Guide for Garment Evaluation", Council on Technology, ~ (1972)
- Burns, D. J., "The self: Beyond the postmodern crisis", pp.149~167 (2006), ISI Books
- Carrillat, F. A., "The validity of the SERVQUAL and SERVPERF scales : A meta-analytic view of 17 years of research across five continents", International Journal of Service Industry Management, 18, pp.472~490 (2007)[DOI]
- Churchill, G.A., Jr., "Marketing research : Methodological foundations" (1995), Dryden Press
- Comrey, A. L., "A first course in factor analysis" (1973), Academic
- Cronbach, L.J., "Construct validity in psychological tests", Psychological Bulletin, 52, pp.281~302 (1955)
- Cronin, J. J., "SERVPERF versus SERVQUAL : Reconciling performance-based and perceptions-minus-expectations measurement of service quality", Journal of Marketing, 58, pp.125~131 (1994)
- Culp, L. A., "Consumers’ perceptions of apparel quality: Low income vs. upper income", 석사, pp.1993
- Davis, F., "Fashion, culture, and identity" (1992), University of Chicago Press
- Davis, L. L., "Effects of physical quality and brand labeling on perceptions of clothing quality", Perceptual and Motor Skills, 60, pp.671~677 (1985)
- Davis, L. L., "Consumer use of label information in ratings of clothing quality and clothing fashionability", Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 6, pp.8~14 (1987)
- De Klerk, H. M., "Female consumers’ evaluation of apparel quality : Exploring the importance of aesthetics", Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 12, pp.36~50 (2008)[DOI]
- De Klerk, H. M., "The early-adolescent female clothing consumer", Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 11, pp.413~428 (2007)[DOI]
- Forsythe, S. M., "Dimensions of apparel quality influencing consumers’ perceptions", Perceptual and Motor Skills, 83, pp.299~305 (1996)
- Fowler, D., "A Comparison of apparel quality : Outlet stores versus department stores", Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 5, pp.57~66 (2001)[DOI]
- Ghylin, K. M., "Clarifying the dimensions of four concepts of quality", Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 9, pp.73~94 (2008)[DOI]
- Hajji, A., "Integrated product specifications and productivity decision making in unreliable manufacturing systems", International Journal of Production Economics, 129, pp.32~42 (2011)[DOI]
- Heisey, F. L., "Perceived quality and predicted price: Use of the minimum information environment in evaluating apparel", Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 8, pp.22~28 (1990)
- Hjorth Andersen, C., "The concept of quality and the efficiency of markets for consumer products", Journal of Consumer Research, 11, pp.708~718 (1984)
- Kwak, D. H., "Symbolic purchase in sport : The roles of self-image congruence and perceived quality", Management Decision, 47, pp.85~99 (2009)[DOI]
- Lonial, S., "An evaluation of SERVQUAL and patient loyalty in an emerging country", Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 21, pp.813~827 (2010)[DOI]
- Na, K. J., "The effect of evaluation criteria on design attributes and brand equity in the product evaluation process", Journal of Brand Management, 16, pp.195~212 (2008)[DOI]
- Nunnally, J. C., "Psychometric theory" (1978), McGraw Hill
- Olson, J. C., "Advances in Consumer Research", pp.167~179 (1972), Association for Consumer Research
- Parasuraman, A., "SERVQUAL : A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality", Journal of Retailing, 64, pp.12~40 (1988)
- Parasuraman, A., "Alternative scales for measuring service quality : A comparative assessment based on psychometric and diagnostic criteria", Journal of Retailing, 70, pp.201~230 (1994)
- Rayman, D. M., "Consumer expectations of apparel product quality. In Fourth annual academic apparel research council" (1993), Manufacturing Technology Information Analysis Center
- Sasser, W. E. Jr., "Management of service operations : Text and cases" (1978), Allyn and Bacon
- Shostack, L., "The service encounter", pp.243~254 (1985), Lexington Books
- Solinger, J., "Apparel manufacturing handbook : Analysis, principles and practice" (1988), Bobbin Media Corp
- Stamper, A. A., "Evaluating apparel quality" (1986), Fairchild Publications
- Sullivan, P., "Looking at gen Y shopping preferences and intentions: Exploring the role of experience and apparel involvement", International Journal of Consumer Studies, 32, pp.285~295 (2008)[DOI]
- Swan, J. E., "Product performance and consumer satisfaction: A new concept", Journal of Marketing, 40, pp.25~33 (1976)
- Swan, J. E., "Disconfirmation of expectations with a retail service", Journal of Retailing, 57, pp.49~67 (1981)
- Tsiotsou, R., "The role of perceived product quality and overall satisfaction on purchase intentions", International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30, pp.207~217 (2006)[DOI]
- Veale, R., "Do consumer expectations match experience? Predicting the influence of price and country of origin on perceptions of product quality", International Business Review, 18, pp.134~144 (2009)[DOI]
- Wheatley, J. J., "Physical quality, price, and perceptions of product quality : Implications for retailers", Journal of Retailing, 57, pp.100~115 (1981)
- "Who’s Buying Apparel" (2010)[URL]
- Winer, B. J., "Statistical principles in experimental design" (1991), McGraw Hill
- Yu, K., "Relative impacts from product quality, service quality, and experience quality on customer perceived value and intention to shop of the coffee shop market", Total Quality Management, 20, pp.1273~1285 (2009)[DOI]
- Yuen, E., "The effect of retail service quality and product quality on customer loyalty", Journal of Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management, 17, pp.222~240 (2010)[DOI]
