the relationship between low-rise denim jeans and consumers’ aspirations: the study of symbolic...
TRANSCRIPT
The Relationship between Low-rise Denim Jeans and Consumers’ Aspirations:
The Study of Symbolic Value and Emotional Attribution
Reasons why denim jeans were deliberately selected for this study
1. Ubiquitous & Homogenous
2. The Canadian denim jeans market has been
growing.
3. The denim jeans culture has been transformed
and re-signified.
Fashion Consumption
1. beyond physical needsAs Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi explained, “Objects take on symbolic
value with reference to one’s personal history”.
2. multitude of meanings (McCracken, 1989)
3. social status (Bourdieu, 1984)
4. hedonism (Weber, 1958)
5. expression of self (Campbell, 1983)
Consumer Market
• Fragmented society (Firat & Shultz, 1997)
• Hypersegmented society (Crane, 2000)
• Image tribes (Turow, 1997)
As asserted by Firat, “The market is, itself, fragmented,
since it appears to have no central, unified agenda.”
PRODUCT ATTRIBUTES AND SYMBOLIC VALUES 1. Fit and Brand Name: Consumers loyal to certain brands
because they fit their body type and made them look good and feel good.
2. Fit and Style: About 70% preferred low-rise, slim fit and stretch.
3. Fit and Fabric: 67.7% preferred stretch denim. • the stretch denim made them look sexier and thinner • they felt more comfortable with stretch denim instead of
non-stretch • it hugged their body well
4. Fit and comfort
5. Fit and Price: young people have no problem to pay a premium price for a pair of denim jeans that fits their body type and their aspirations.
They are flattering and hot. Fit great; look hot. They look cool.I love them. I love the fit.My bum looks good. My buttock looks swell and nice.The jeans look and feel amazing. They make me feel good in them.I feel sexier.
They make me sexier and thinner.
CONSUMERS THINK EMOTIONALLY AND IRRATIONALLY
5 stages in purchasing:
1. need recognition 2. information search 3. evaluation
of alternatives 4. purchase decision 5. post purchasebehavior
“Neurological research has revealed that people don’t think
in linear and hierarchical ways” (Thomas, 1997).