Perceived Apparel Quality Revisited: Testing of Its Structural Dimensions from the Perspective of the Generation Y Female Consumers

Abstract

The perceived quality is defined as “the customer’s judgmentabout a product’s overall excellence or superiority”(Zeithaml, 1988, p. 3). The importance of perceived productquality in the consumer decision-making process includes itscrucial role in affecting purchase intention or choices (Brucks,Zeithaml, and Naylor, 2000; Teas and Agarwal, 2000), consumersatisfaction (Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry, 1994),and as one of the core/primary facets of customer-based brandequity (Netemeyer et al., 2004). College-aged consumers have shown their growing purchasingpower for apparel products (Mintel International GroupLtd., 2006). The buying power of college students in the U.S. retailing industry reached $200 billion a year (Gardyn, 2002). Due to their purchase power in the marketplace, it is importantfor marketers and retailers to better understand this segment’sapparel quality perception during their purchase decision makingprocess. However, little research effort has been paid totheir perceptions of apparel quality as one of the major apparelpurchase criteria from a college-aged consumers’perspective. This paper presents methods and results of PhasesOne and Two of a multi-phase research program in whichlong-term goals are to develop an instrument to measure multidimensionalattributes of apparel quality perception. In the first phase, the researcher investigated insights intoperception of apparel quality from the college-aged consumer’sperspective using focus group interviews. A total of 15 femaleundergraduate students attending a Midwestern university in theU.S. participated in the interviews. They were born betweenborn between 1980 and 1983. The number of participants ineach session was fewer than eight, based on suggestions fromthe literature on focus group interviews (Berg, 1998; Churchill,1999; Neuman, 1997). The interview schedule was semi-structuredwith open-ended questions. During the interviews, the researcherread the open-ended questions to each participant andrecorded answers in writing and on audio-tape. Quick notesabout the facial and nonverbal expressions of participants duringthe interviews were taken as a reminder of the context ofthe interview for later interpretation of the interview content(Lincoln and Guba, 1985). The researcher performed member checking after the interview sessions with selected participantsto ensure the credibility (validity) of the data, analytic categories,interpretations, and conclusions that the researcher haddrawn from the interview data. The outcome of Phase One includes 1) re-conceptualizingthe perceived apparel quality construct from a college-agedconsumer’s perspective and 2) generating 13 perceived apparelquality items based on the findings focus group interviews andprevious literature in the fields of Marketing and Clothing andTextiles. Participants’ verbal expressions on perceived apparelquality reconfirmed the major components of the concept identifiedin previous literature. They, however, defined the qualityof apparel using more of the intrinsic attributes rather than extrinsicattributes of a garment. The major components of theapparel quality definition were 1) durability and performanceof a garment, 2) construction, and 3) materials and fabrichand. Based on the findings of focus group interviews as wellas the previous literature, a total of 13 items were generated. In the second phase, the researcher empirically tested the dimensionality,reliability, and validity of the perceived apparelquality instrument. Three hundred sixty-one U.S. female collegestudents, born between 1980 and 1984, provided usable responsesfor the quantitative data analysis. Sweaters for fall/winterseasons were chosen as stimuli for this quantitative studybecause it has been often chosen as stimuli for testing perceivedquality for apparel products (e.g., Heisey, 1990;Sternquist and Davis, 1986). In addition, it was suggested asan appropriate product category for understanding consumer’squality perception during the focus group interviews. Photographs of 10 different sweaters were shown on two versionsof a mock Internet apparel retailer site (higher vs. lowerservice quality). The questionnaire was administered after participantsviewed one of two Internet apparel retail sites. In theexperimental study, the treatment effect (higher vs. lower servicequality of an Internet retailer sites) had no mean differenceon participants’ perception of apparel quality shown on retailsites (t=1.92; p>.05). Therefore, responses were pulled togetherto create one group for further analyses. Cronbach’s reliability test showed that each of three factorsachieved adequate internal validity ranged between .74 and .87. Confirmatory factor analyses using AMOS 6.0 conducted totest the dimensionality of the perceived apparel qualityconstruct. In order to examine the factor structure, a hierarchicalmodel comparison was conducted. Four nested modelswere created: Model 1 with complete independent items,Model 2 with three independent factors, Model 3 with threerelated factors, and Model 4 with three related factors with measurement errors. The hierarchical model comparison analysisusing fit indices revealed that perceived apparel qualityconstruct has three correlated factor dimensions -Construction/Materials, Style/Design, and Durability/Performance- with avery good model fit for female college students. Theoreticaland managerial implications and future research directions arediscussed.