Mirror, Mirror in the Mall: An Empirical Application of Self-concept Theory in Segmenting Gay Male Fashion Innovators in London

Alexander J. Aidan BSc (Hon) PhD *

London College of Fashion, University of the Arts London London, United Kingdom Alex2sqaure@gmail.com

Firat Bayir BSc MSc PhD

Faculty of Business Administration Social Sciences Institute, Istanbul University Istanbul, Turkey firat_bayir@ogr.iu.edu.tr

* Corresponding author

Mirror, Mirror in the Mall: An Empirical Application of Selfconcept Theory in Segmenting Gay Male Fashion Innovators in London
ABSTRACT This paper is the second outcome of a larger study, which is an empirical merger between self-concept theory and male fashion innovativeness. It also serves as a cross-replication and extension of the pioneering Goldsmith et al. (1999) study into female fashion innovativeness in Florida, USA. The research consisted of a self-administered questionnaire in London with a sample size of 750. The statistical analyses showed that the male gay fashion innovators have a unique self-image that is they considered them selves as. more excitable, stronger, more indulgent, more informed, more adventurous, more sophisticated, bolder, more impulsive, less masculine and less modest. Further analyses showed that demographics did a poor job in distinguishing the gay fashion innovators from gay fashion followers. It also showed that that fashion innovativeness of gay males in London was positively correlated with fashion magazine readership and the time and money spent on clothing. The findings of this study strongly support the use of self-concept segmentation as an alternative way to identify the gay fashion innovators in London. The study also empirically replicated the usability of Goldsmith et al. (1999)s methodology in identifying fashion innovators other than female and non-USA samples hence giving much credence to global validity of the DSI scale they used.

1. Introduction Recently an increased interest in aspects of mens fashion consumption can be detected amongst consumer researchers, but so far, authors have found no studies focusing solely on male fashion innovators The published academic research on male samples are almost non-existent, exceptions include Darden and Reynolds (1972), Baumgarten (1975), Midgley (1983), and Shin and Dickerson (1999). Some insight into male fashion innovativeness is provided by research where the sample population was of mixed gender, but in many cases gender differences were not a considered factor. This dearth of research per se clearly denotes the need for doing research in this particular field. Aidan and Ross (2006) reviewed the key assumptions that are commonly presented by fashion scholars about male consumers disinterest in fashion and critically presented the major attitudinal, behavioural and social shifts that now challenge these assumptions lending great confidence to need for research in the field. We need to expand our scope of consumer behaviour research to include new groups or types of consumer. In this respect, self-concept and both gay and heterosexual males fashion innovativeness present a fruitful area to be explored for both theoretical and practical reasons, which are discussed in the literature review. Therefore, this study contributes to this effort as well as making a theoretical contribution to the study of fashion innovativeness. Recent market research showed that male gay consumers tend to be among the buyers of both innovative and fashion products than their heterosexual counterparts (Mintel, 2001). For this reason, this

study rather focused on gay male innovators. It empirically investigated whether gay male fashion innovators had a different self-concept profile from gay male fashion followers. Drawing on data from gay male informants the study tested if self-concept was a relevant approach to segmenting fashion innovators. In doing so, it aimed to test if selfconcept could be used as an alternative segmentation method in profiling gay male fashion innovators, which are proven to be difficult to be reached by solely simple demographics. This study is loosely based on Goldsmith et al. (1999) pioneering study in female fashion innovativeness in Florida, USA. The initial aim was to replicate their findings and methodology in a non-US and non-female sample to test the applicability of their methodology in profiling other niche target groups. Despite Goldsmith et al. (1999) had been a pioneering study and has led to further research in many innovativeness subfields both in USA and elsewhere (nevertheless the authors have found no replication taking place in the UK), in all these replications, male innovativeness in general and gay male innovativeness in particular have been ignored. Given the gap in the literature, this study examined the self-image profiles of gay male fashion innovators in London by using a similar methodology that Goldsmith et al. (1999) and its followers adopted.

2. Theoretical Background 2.1. Fashion Innovativeness The main components in the `Theory of Adoption and Diffusion are: (a) the innovation, (b) which is communicated through certain channels, (c) over time and (d) among the members of a social system (Rogers, 1995) and which (e) spreads as a result of interpersonal communication channels. Workman and Johnson (1993) split these channels into three main groups as (1) opinion leaders, (2) innovators and (3) innovative communicators: who are both opinions leaders and innovators Fashion marketers endeavour to identify communicative innovators (Tatzel, 1982; Zandl and Leonard, 1992). Innovator groups play a crucial role in financing development costs and dominating the larger number of later adopters who look to them for information and influence (Slywotzky and Morison, 1997; Martinez and Polo, 1996). Efforts to profile such agents have focused mainly on demographics (i.e Gutman & Mills, 1982; Scrugge, 1997; Hirschman and Addock, 1978), buying behaviour (i.e. Lumpkin, Allen & Greenberg, 1981; Crowdhary, 1988), personality research (i.e. Painter and Pinegar, 1971; Lennon and Davis, 1987), and socio-economic status (i.e Mason and Bellenger, 1973-74; Summers, 1970; and Rosencranz, 1962), fashion involvement (i.e. Shin and Dickerson, 1999;Auty and Elliott, 1998), and recently psychological forces (Cholachatpinyo et al.,2002). Goldsmith, et al. (1996) pioneering study of female fashion innovativeness, in the light of the self-concept theory, found evidence of a unique self-concept profile among female fashion innovators. Goldsmith et al. (1999), replicated the results with a larger sample, which this study will be empirically replicating for a different target group, which consisted of a non-US and non-female sample. 2.2. Homo-economics Unlike in the USA, dearth of data in the UK per se proves the need for further study for the gay consumer profiles in the UK. The National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and

Lifestyles (1994) suggests that 3 per cent of Britains population is gay who are drawn to live in urban areas such as London, Brighton and Manchester (Burston, 1998). In the UK the gay market accounts for between 6bn and 8bn in consumer spending per year (Mintel, 2001) and 77 per cent of Britains gays are in the desirable ABC1 groups (Wall Street Journal Europe, 2000). On average gay men spend 1,650 each on cloths and cosmetics every year, compared to the UK average of 649 (Menswear, 2000) and in the UK the monthly average spend on clothing by gay men is 95 per cm (Mintel, 2001) and buying new clothes is a higher priority for gay men at 34 per cent compared to just 24 per cent for straight males (British lifestyles Survey, 2001). Although one can always argue that income differences and the number of gay people might be exaggerated (Boulard, 1994) and because of persistent prejudice and homophobia in public many gay people are still reticent or indeed secretive of their sexuality (Precision Marketing, 1998). The literature clearly postulates that the British gay males represent a viable segment in terms of size and profitability for fashion marketers and hence is well-worth examining in terms of fashion innovativeness. Nevertheless, the accessibility of the segment by demographics remained as a major problem due to lack of a reliable consumer database. The literature has also explored the self-concept and fashion innovativeness theories in order to examine if the self-image could be used as an alternative segmentation method to the demographics in mapping the gay fashion innovators. Further exploration on the extant literature established that however useful demographics variables were in defining fashion innovators, there is a necessity to supplement the findings by the study of additional ways in which fashion forward buyers differ from fashion followers. Based on the accessibility issue that appears to be a problem for both gay consumers and fashion innovators in general, the study decided to focus on gay males fashion innovativeness rather than heterosexual counterparts. 2.3. Self-concept in Consumer Research Self-concept is the totality of an individuals thoughts and feelings having reference to himself as an object (Rosenberg 1979: 7). It has been established that an individuals self-concept greatly influences his/her behaviour, including consumption activities. The consumer researchers interest in the self-image stems from the belief that this construct is an important determinant of product and brand choice because these consumption objects may contribute to consumers self-perception since fashion brands are often purchased and consumed for their social meaning rather their utilitarian attributes (Aaker, 1997; Solomon, 1996; Pettijohn et al., 1992; Graeff, 1996). Such symbolic qualities are often determinants of product evaluation and adoption (Sirgy, 1982, 1985; Hogg et al., 2000). Self-concept research has clearly indicated, so far, that a consumer is more likely to purchase and/or consume a brand where the image positively correlates to a brands image to be him or herself (Sirgy, 1986; Durgee, 1988) lending great confidence to mapping consumers through their self-concepts. 2.4. Communication of Self-concept in Gay Subcultures In the communication process, an individuals self-presentation is likely to involve the disclosure of his/her self-concept to others by means of verbal and/or non-verbal symbols, which set the conditions for the social interaction. Non-verbal symbols are the signified appearances and styles of the interacting people. McCracken (1986) in his 3

article Clothing as Language argues that clothing is a very different system of communication the cultural significance of which cannot be fully assessed until the language metaphor is abandoned. Clothing reveals both the themes and the formal relationships, which serve cultures in orienting ideas on a real, or imagined basis according to which cultural categories are organised (Barnard, 1996). In this respect, gayselves could then be established, mobilised and harmonised in appearances, which are subject to these categories. Freitas et al. (1996), believe that style (especially fashion style) provides heuristic possibilities for understanding the interdependencies among issues of visibility, identity, community, and cultural spaces. These spaces were once predominantly analytical and fortified by tradition, but are now predominately synthetic and radically innovative. Within these cultural spaces, fashion is a cultural system that serves a communicative function, which also exists within the gay community. Kaiser (1997) suggests that individuals continually negotiate meaning through their appearance styles and interactions. The style and interaction are constantly negotiated between the sender and the receiver, as symbols acquire new meanings and thus suggest new responses (Rudd, 1996) creating the need to be in need of new styles that would correctly represent the right self-concepts. An aggregate or corporate self-image may also be used to signify citizenship of communities: the expression of common feelings and values or a separation from a more generational culture (ibid). Like in many sub-cultural communities, citizenship in the gay community may be marked through the development of an ideal style and its communication through an idealised and aggregated self-concept. In support of the above argument, Kates study (2002) found that gay men differentiate themselves within the subculture, in order to preserve individual identity. This is very relevant to this papers thesis about self-concept as an approach to segmentation. It also provides theoretical justification for our method of selecting gay male informants because his ethnographic findings suggest that self-concept considerations are important in the gay sub-culture and that innovation is relevant. In conclusion, postmodernism clearly places emphasis on symbolism too, and this is naturally extended to fashion consumption (Wilson, 1985). Fashion, as a symbolic expression of the self and identity, should theoretically fit into the post-modern ideal (Breward, 1995). Whereas previously, men were deemed fashion-less, postmodernism has allowed them the same scope for self-expression through fashion as women (Breward, 1999). A seemingly key point is that post-modern conditions have allowed heterosexual men the same scope for self-expression through fashion communication as gay men. If one is to argue that Postmodernism has `affected all genders equally, then this fortifies the basis for examining the fashion innovativeness of males (both gay and heterosexual)-an area that has been ignored in consumer behaviour literature, giving great credence to this research. The preceding theoretical background can be distilled into the following research questions: 1. Is there a significant relationship between the fashion innovativeness of gay males in London and (a) their age, (b) their income level, (c) their education level, (d) their relationship status and (e) their race?

2. Is there a positive correlation between fashion innovativeness and (a) fashion magazine readership, (b) time spent for shopping and (c) money spent for shopping? 3. Is there a unique self-image (self-concept) profile for gay male fashion innovators in London?

3. Methodology 3.1. Sampling and Data Collection The GBA (Gay Businesses Association) supplied the researchers with GAYtoZ directories handbook, which has over 7000 listings, and over 200 gay advertisers. 296,000 people had used the on-line version of the directory by May 2005 From this directory, the contact list of gay-owned and gay-friendly fashion related retail businesses based in 3 main gay districts of London were obtained. Initially a list of 17 fashion stores was randomly generated. Their product range included the most innovative fashion apparel and in some instances, other innovative gadgets. The store managers were informed about the nature of the research. 10 out of these 17 stores agreed to participate our research. Seven hundred and fifty questionnaires were distributed to these stores. During a specified period of time, following a purchase at the payment stage, the cashiers briefly informed the customers about the research and put a copy of the questionnaire into their bag. The stores with mixed product ranges were requested to give the questionnaires only to their customers who bought fashion apparel. The customers were chosen randomly. The questionnaire had a stamped and addressed envelope to return. All 750 questionnaires were distributed via these 10 retail channels over a period of 3 weeks. The questionnaire had an introductory page where the participant was informed about the nature of the research and that only gay males were asked to participate in. Out of these 750 questionnaires 105 were returned and only 96 were usable due to various reasons. This meant a 12.8 % return rate. The tolerance level can be computed as:

z 2 . 2 z 2 . p.q e= = . n n
The maximum variance is taken as

2 = p.q = 0,5.0,5 = 0, 25 . ( z =0,05 = 1,96 ).

Therefore, in a 95 % confidence interval, the tolerance level of error by a sample of 96 is calculated as 1,962.0,5.0,5 e= = 0,1 = %10 96 3.2. Measures 3.2.1. Fashion Innovativeness Scale The survey measured fashion innovativeness with Goldsmith and Hofakers (1991)Domain Specific Innovativeness Scale (DSI). This is a valid and reliable tool for measuring fashion innovativeness (Flynn and Goldsmith, 1993a, 1993b; Goldsmith 1996, 5

2000, 2001; Goldsmith and Flynn, 1995; Goldsmith et al., 1999). It contains six likerttype items on a five-point scale. Moreover, the main reason of selecting this scale was initially to have some degree of consistency between this study and Goldsmith et al., (1999), as initially mentioned one of the initial aims of this study was to empirically replicate their findings with a non-US non-female sample. 3.2.2. Adjusted Malhotra (1981) Person Concept Scale The semantic differential scale format was selected for two main reasons. This format theoretically sound for this type of measurement and its popularity and widespread use in marketing research indicate its usefulness (Malhotra, 1999a, 1999b). Studies similar in purpose and design to the current one have successfully employed this format (i.e. Graeff, 1997; Swartz, 1983; Golsmith et al., 1999). All of these studies examined self-concept in relation to the different independent variables such as fashion consciousness etc. The first pilot questionnaire contained Malhotra (1999b) self-concept scale which consisted of 15 image dimensions and which was also used in Goldsmith et al. (1999), study (for replication purposes. This questionnaire was tested by 30 randomly selected gay men and 22 out of 30 gay male respondents who tested the questionnaire concluded that they actually did not find these 15 image-dimensions relevant to common gay values and lifestyle. At this stage the researchers decided that applying a fixed image-dimension scale (which was initially used by Goldsmith et al., 1999) would lead to a great bias. Hence the conclusion was to adjust the scale according to the specificities of the target group in mind. Nevertheless, due to the time and resource constraints, it was infeasible to carry out all stages of recommended scale development procedures (i.e. Malhotra, 1988). However, steps were taken to make the items on scale relevant to the concepts being judged (Sirgy, 1982; Malhotra, 1981). Firstly a pool of 50 bipolar adjectives that have been used in relation to person/brand concept measurement research was generated from search of relevant literature. The brand concept images were taken out. Three gay industry insiders were consulted in the generating of the pre-test scale (Heath and Scott, 1998). Then a secondary pool of 32 bipolar adjectives was generated. The authors followed a similar method used in Graeffs (1996) study to develop the final set of image dimensions to be included in the scale. The final scale included 14 of the total 15 image dimensions used in Goldsmith et al. (1999), study and it was tested on 182 pre-test subjects. The field research took 3 days and the sample was randomly chosen in the trendiest gay socializing spaces in 3 different gay districts of London, namely: Soho, Angel and Earls Court. This pre-quantitative analysis resulted in the removal of the initial 15 bipolar adjectives, which were used by Goldsmith et al. (1999), from the questionnaire and the final scale included only 4 of the image dimensions used in their study.

4. Results 4.1. DSI Scores The Explanatory Factor Analysis (EFA) was used to assess the validity of the constructs and to identify a possible underlying factor structure. Descriptive studies were completed prior to conducting an EFA using the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and the

Principal Axis Factoring (PAF). Solutions were generated based upon an examination of factor loadings, eigenvalues, explained variance, and conceptual fit of the items with each factor being used in determining the best and most reasonable representation of the data. The EFA results confirmed the intended factor structure, i.e. the resulting component was clearly related to the items which were supposed to constitute the corresponding constructs of the DSI scale. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett's Test of Sphericity results satisfies measure of sampling adequacy (KMO=0,871, , df=15, p=0,000). The results of the PCA and PAF revealed one factor explaining 59,93% and 51,94% of the total variance in the data correspondingly. From Table 2, the single factor (eigenvalue of 3,596) that is related with the DSI scale was strongly correlated (convergent validity). Reliability analysis has been performed in order to ensure the internal consistency of the DSI scores that constitute construct. The Cronbach alpha is a measure for the degree to which the items reflect the same underlying construct and therefore the scales internal consistency. The Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient of a scale was 0,93. The results of the reliability analysis indicate an acceptable internal consistency and reliability of the constructs.
DSI1 DSI1 DSI2 DSI3 DSI4 DSI5 DSI6 0,583** 0,446** 0,602** 0,453** 0,468** Table 1: Correlation Matrix DSI2 DSI3 DSI4 DSI5 DSI6

0,452** 0,518** 0,523** 0,555**

0,506** 0,483** 0,587**

0,547** 0,520**

0,538**

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

DSI1 DSI2 DSI3 DSI4 DSI5 DSI6

Table 2: Component and Factor Matrix Component Matrix Factor Matrix Component Factor 0,765 0,708 0,784 0,733 0,744 0,680 0,798 0,754 0,762 0,704 0,791 0,744
Extraction Method: Principal Axis Factoring. 1 factors extracted. 4 iterations required.

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. 1 components extracted.

The theoretical range of the DSI summed score is between 6 and 30. The mean score was 18,61 (SD=5,94). A Kolmogorov-Smirnov one sample test showed that the null hypothesis that these scores were normally distributed about their mean which this variance could not be rejected (p=0,318). Distribution of DSI scores was split so that the 82 respondents (or 85,4 percent) scoring between 6 and 23 were designated as fashion followers, and the 14 respondents (or 14.6 percent) who scored between 24 and 30 were defined as fashion innovators. The cutting point was 24 out of 30. This is because this study adopted Rogers (1995) bell shaped curve for diffusion of innovativeness. According to Rogers (1995), innovators represent 2,5 % of the market and early adopters represent 13,5%. Like Goldsmith et al. (1999) this study included a combination of both so 16%. After the determining the cut off point and coding innovators and followers, discrimination and classification ability of the DSI sum scores needs to be tested by discriminant analysis. The test of Equality of Group Means showed that, means of groups are not equal (Wilks =0,433, F=122,847, df1=1, df2=94, p=0,000). Boxs M test equality of covariance matrix showed that covariances are equal (Boxs M=1,806, F=1,760, df1=1, df2=4367, p=0,185). These results showed that, DSI sum scores can be tested by discriminant analysis. The results of the discriminant analysis revealed canonical discriminant function explaining 100% of the total variance in the data with the eigenvalue 1,307 and the canonical correlation 0,753. The discriminant function with the classification percentage 97,9 is valid and powerful (Willks =0,433, 2 = 78,168 , df=1, p=0,000). According to these results, DSI sum scores could be used to discriminate and classify the participants as fashion innovator and follower.
Table 3: Group Statistics Mean SD Valid N Followers 16,78 4,08 82 Innovators 29,36 3,00 14 Total 18,61 5,94 96

4.2. Demographics The questionnaire included demographics questions about education level, age, relationship status, income level and race. In this study, demographics did not do a good job in profiling the innovative group in target. Chi-square statistics of all of six demographic characteristics showed that there are no significant difference between innovators and followers in terms of their age, relationship status, income level, and education (p> 0,05). The chi square analysis between innovativeness and race could not be done, because, there were more than 2 cells with expected counts less than 5 and some cells were 0. 4.3. Self-image Profile A series of independent sample T tests has been conducted where the two samples represent respectively, innovators and followers. Relevant statistics are shown below in Tables 1. Following table gives the t-test results regarding the self-image profiles of gay

fashion innovators in London. It can be seen-based on P-Values-that there are ten significant comparisons. Specifically, compared to followers, innovators rate themselves markedly; more excitable, stronger, more indulgent, more informed, more adventurous, more sophisticated, bolder, more impulsive, less masculine and less modest.
Variable Masculine Excitable* Strong* Popular Thrifty Informed* Contemporary Modern Adventurous* Confident Sophisticated* Selfconfident Bold* Extravert Impulsive* Interesting Modest Table 4. T tests and mean scores of self-concept scale Innovators Followers t Feminine* 5,27 4,29 2,348 Calm 3,16 4,77 -3,632 Weak 2,38 3,25 -2,287 Unpopular 3,47 3,36 0,268 Indulgent* 4,97 2,86 5,832 Uninformed 3,26 4,84 -4,917 Noncontemporary 2,55 3,03 -1,209 Oldfashioned 2,15 1,48 1,539 Timid 2,32 4,24 -4,254 Mature 2,93 2,72 0,718 Unsophisticated 2,39 4,27 -4,704 Nonselfconfident 3,48 3,43 0,126 Shy 2,04 3,09 -3,475 Introvert 2,98 3,23 -0,723 Deliberate 3,07 4,35 -3,117 Dull 3,23 3,92 -1,632 Vain* 5,18 3,23 4,809 p-value 0,022 0,000 0,024 0,789 0,000 0,000 0,230 0,127 0,000 0,474 0,000 0,900 0,001 0,472 0,002 0,106 0,000

Notes: Each self-images item was scaled from 1 (extreme left adjective) and 7 (extreme right adjective) * t statistic is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). All p value of Levennes test statistics > 0,05, satisfying the equality of variances of the items.

Addition to the independent sample T tests, a discriminant analysis has been conducted to discover which adjective is to best classify and to discriminate the fashion innovators and followers. The table of the test of equality of group means indicate that, the images masculine, excitable, strong, thrifty, informed, adventurous, sophisticated, bold, impulsive and modest have ability to discriminate solely. After the extracting remaining images, the deeper discriminant analysis conducted, according to the standardized canonical discriminant function coefficients, the images thrifty, adventurous and modest have been found to discriminate more. Results are showed in the Table 5 and 6.

Table 5: Tests of Equality of Group Means

Masculine* Excitable* Strong* Popular Thrifty* Informed* Contemporary Modern Adventurous* Confident Sophisticated* Selfconfident Bold* Extravert Impulsive* Interesting Modest*

Wilks' 0,949 0,851 0,958 0,999 0,794 0,875 0,986 0,964 0,872 0,997 0,866 1,000 0,948 0,998 0,935 0,974 0,854

F 5,042 16,405 4,119 0,080 24,435 13,482 1,346 3,490 13,783 0,239 14,595 0,037 5,205 0,198 6,515 2,504 16,018

df1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

df2 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94

p-value 0,027 0,000 0,045 0,778 0,000 0,000 0,249 0,065 0,000 0,626 0,000 0,847 0,025 0,657 0,012 0,117 0,000

*F statistic is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 6: Standardized Canonical Discriminant Function Coefficients Function Masculine -0,395 Excitable 0,362 Strong 0,028 Thrifty* -0,549 Informed 0,295 Adventurous* 0,422 Sophisticated 0,363 Bold 0,129 Impulsive 0,184 Modest* -0,561
*Biggest absolute coefficients

Boxs M test equality of covariance matrix showed that covariances are equal (Boxs M=1,629, F=1,587, df1=1, df2=4367, p=0,208). The results of the discriminant analysis revealed that canonical discriminant function explaining 100% of the total variance in the data with the eigenvalue of 1,790 and the canonical correlation of 0,801. The discriminant function with the classification percentage 100 %, is valid and powerful (Willks =0,358, 2 = 87, 738 , df=17, p=0,000). Discriminant analysis results are obeying the independent sample T tests results. According to these results, self-image

10

profiles could be used to discriminate and classify the gay fashion participants as fashion innovator and follower in London. 4.4. Buying Behaviour and Fashion Readership The questionnaire also included 2 buying behaviour questions and 1 fashion readership question. Respondents were asked if they read any fashion magazines regularly and how much time and money they spend on shopping for clothes in a regular interval. Additional Pearson correlation analysis showed that, DSI scores were significantly correlated with occasion of shopping for clothing (r=0,36, p=0,012), fashion magazine readership (r=0,48, p=0,003) and money spent shopping for clothing (r=0,52, p=0,001) and the cross correlation table is shown below.
Table 7: Pearson Correlations DSI_sum Time Spend 0,36** 0,48** 0,69** 0,52** 0,72** Money Spend

Time Spend Money Spend Readership

0,73**

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Linear Regression method has been conducted between independent variables (occasion of shopping for clothing, fashion magazine readership and money spent shopping for clothing) and the dependent variable (DSI sum scores). Due to the multicollinearity of independent variables, the coefficients of the regression model were insignificant. In order to overcome this, principal component analysis has been conducted to express independent variables as one or two independent factor. Solutions were generated based upon an examination of factor loadings, eigenvalues, and variance explained. The Bartlett's Test of Sphericity and The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) results satisfies measure of sampling adequacy (KMO=0,743, 2 = 150, 691 , df=3, p=0,000). The results of the PCA revealed one factor explaining 80,84% of the total variance in data. As shown in the table, there is only one factor with eigenvalue of 2,425. The single factor that is related to both buying behavior and magazine readership was strongly correlated.
Table 8: Component Matrix Component Time Spend 0,891 Money Spend 0,896 Magazine Readership 0,910
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. 1 components extracted.

The linear regression analysis was conducted with the DSI sum scores as dependent variable and the factor generated from previous analysis as independent variable.

11

Although the low R2 (0,254), the regression results confirmed that the intended linear relation, i.e. the resulting component was clearly linearly related to the DSI sum scores (F= 31,949, df=1, p=0). The coefficient of the model was also significant (=2,989, p=0). A series of independent sample t-tests has been conducted where the two samples represent respectively, innovators and followers. Relevant statistics are shown below in Tables 9. Following table gives the t-test results regarding buying behaviour and magazine readership of gay fashion innovators in London. It can be seen-based on PValues- that comparisons of all three behavioural items are significant. Specifically, innovators are more frequently shopping for clothing, more frequently reading fashion magazines and spending more money shopping fashion items.
Table 9: Independent Sample T Test Innovator Follower t 5,214 2,829 -6,362 5,214 2,341 -9,409 5,928 3,158 -8,027 p-value 0,000 0,000 0,000

Time Spend Money Spend Readership

Notes: Each behaviour item was scaled from 1 (none) and 7 (too much) * t statistic is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). All p value of Levennes test statistics > 0,05, satisfying the equality of variances of the items.

5. Discussion The main research question of this study was to test if there were a unique self-image (self-concept) profile for gay male fashion innovators in London. The statistical analyses showed that the male gay fashion innovators have a unique self-image that is they considered them selves as. more excitable, stronger, more indulgent, more informed, more adventurous, more sophisticated, bolder, more impulsive, less masculine and less modest. They found that female fashion innovators in Florida perceived themselves as more comfortable, pleasant, contemporary, formal, colourful, and vain. None of the unique self-image pairs in the present study was identical to those reported in Goldsmith et al., (1999). This might be partly due to the adjusted self-concept dimensions. As explained in limitations, a comparison between the current study and Goldsmith et al. (1999) would not be scientifically valid. The comparison of the two studies made here only to give a relative view on global fashion innovative behaviour. The second research question was to test if there were a significant relationship between the fashion innovativeness of gay males in London and (a) their age, (b) their income level, (c) their education level, (d) their relationship status and (e) their race? In a similar vain to Goldsmith et al. (1999), further analyses showed that demographics did a poor job in distinguishing the gay fashion innovators from gay fashion followers. Thirdly, the study tried to test Is there a positive correlation between fashion innovativeness and (a) fashion magazine readership, (b) time spent for shopping and (c) money spent for shopping? It also showed that that fashion innovativeness of gay males

12

in London was positively correlated with fashion magazine readership and the time and money spent on clothing. The findings of this study strongly support the use of self-concept segmentation as an alternative way to identify the gay fashion innovators in London. The study also empirically replicated the usability of Goldsmith et al. (1999)s methodology in identifying fashion innovators other than female and non-USA samples hence giving much credence to global validity of the DSI scale they used. The results of Goldsmith et al. (1999) do not appear to be consistent with the findings of this study. Nevertheless, this study empirically replicated that Goldsmith et al. (1999) methodology is a valid and fruitful way of profiling fashion innovators other than US female target groups. The results of this study might yield 3 strategic implications. First, regardless of their level of disposable income, some consumers will spend more on clothing, which says something about them (Lurie, 1981). It appears that the present study found support for this statement for gay males. Empirical statistics have shown that income level did not have a significant correlation with fashion innovativeness. Secondly, the clothes consumers wear tell other people what kind of person is inside the clothes (Kaiser, 1997) and this allows the mapping and/or segmentation of markets in terms of differentiated self-concept. The unique self-concept profile for gay male fashion innovators might be used in segmenting gay male fashion consumers. Finally, self-concept and brand-image congruity stresses the strategic importance of brand image in consumer choice: the higher the self-image/brand-image congruity is, the higher the intention to purchase the item (Onkvisit et al., 1987). Hence such unique self-image profiles, if successfully integrated into the brand meaning, might serve as a strategic tool in communicating with gay male fashion innovators. 6. Limitations and Research Agenda Goldsmith et al., (1999) reports that size-effects are common in studies of personality characteristics therefore other samples of gay consumers with greater number of respondents might yield different results. In this study, the tolerance level was %10. `in order to decrease the tolerance level under %3, in future studies the sample size should be kept larger. The authors used the Goldsmith and Hofackers (1991) Domain Specific Innovativeness Scale (DSI) to measure fashion innovativeness. Other scales to measure fashion innovativeness might yield different results. Goldsmith et al.s (1999) study of female innovativeness used Malhotras (1999b) Self-concept scale. The authors developed and used an adjusted version of this scale. Also this study employed ideal selfimage-that is how fashion innovators would like to see themselves-whereas Goldsmith et al. (1999), used actual self-image like-how they see themselves. Hence a comparison between the two studies would not be scientifically valid. Moreover, researchers should study fashion innovativeness of gay populations other than those in London. Heterosexual male and lesbian fashion innovativeness should also be studied to examine if they present a different self-image profile than the gay male segment. The results of self-image studies into fashion innovativeness should also be combined with those in other product categories to examine if there are similarities between the self-images of gay fashion innovators and gay innovators in other product fields.

13

References Anon.Gay Marketing Strategies Wall Street Journal Europe, 2000 (April, 5): 28 Anon, Gay Lifestyles (March), London, (2001) International Group Ltd. Anon. Gay Marketing. Precision Marketing 1998; (August): 19 Aaker, J. L. Dimensions of Brand Personality. Journal of Marketing Research 1997: 34 (August): 347-356. Aidan, A.J Ross F. Male fashion innovativeness under the microscope: a comparative, critical and inter-disciplinary literature review by gender differences to aid the mapping of male innovators in the UK 2005. Conference proceedings 2005 Auty, S., and Elliott, R. Fashion Involvement, Self-monitoring and the Meaning of Brands Journal of Product & Brand Management 1998; 7 (2): 109-123 Boulard, G. Numbers: No matter what you say about gay income levels, theres now a study to back you up. The Advocate, 1994 (October, 4):30-31 Baumgarten,S. The Innovative communicator in the diffusion process. Journal of Marketing Research 1975; 7:12-18 Barnard, M. Fashion as Communication. London and New York: NY 1996 Breward, C. The Culture of Fashion, Manchester University Press: Manchester and New York .1995 Breward, C. The Hidden Consumer: Masculinities, fashion And City life 1860-1914, Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press. 1999 Burston, P. Queens Country: A tour Around the Gay Ghettos, Queer Spots and Camp Sites of Britain, London: Abacus-Little, Brown & Company 1998 Crowdhary, U Are Fashion Opinion Leaders Different from Fashion Non Leaders?, In Joan E. Gritzmacher & Rebecca P. Lovingood (Eds.), American Home Economics Association Annual Meeting Research Abstracts. 1988: Bloomington,2: Meridian Education. Darden W R Reynolds F. D. Predicting Fashion Opinion Leadership for Mens Apparel Fashions. Journal of Marketing Research 1972; 9 (August): 324-328 Durgee, J. F. Understanding Brand Personality. Journal of Consumer Marketing 1988; 5 (3): 21-5. Flynn, L. R., and Goldsmith. R. E. Identifying Innovators in Consumer Service Markets Service Industries Journal, 1993a, 13(3):97-109 Flynn, L. R., and Goldsmith. R. E. A validation of the Goldsmith and Hofacker Innovativeness Scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1993b 53 (4):105116 Freitas, A., Kaiser, S., and Hammidi, T. Communities, Commodities, Cultural Space and Style, Journal of Homosexuality, 1996, 31(1/ 2) : 83-107 Goldsmith R. E. Hofacker C. F. Measuring Consumer Innovativeness. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 1991; 19 (3): 209-21. Goldsmith R. E. Moore M. A. Beaudoin P. Fashion Innovativeness and Self-concept: A Replication. Journal of Product & Brand Management 1999; 8, (1): -18. Goldsmith R. E. Flynn L.R. Moore M.A TheSelf-concept of Fashion Leaders. Clothing and Textile Research Journal 1996; 14 (4): 242-8

Goldsmith, R. E Service Innovativeness and Price Sensitivity: An Exploratory Study in Moore, D. L. (Ed), Association of Marketing Theory and Practice Proceedings, (1996) 5:85-91 Goldsmith, R. E. Identifying Wine Innovators : A test of the Domain Specific Innovativeness Scale Using Known Groups, International Journal of Wine Marketing 2000, 12 (2): 37-46 Goldsmith, R. E. Using the Domain Specific Innovativeness Scale, Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy. 2001. 11(2) :149-158 Goldsmith, R. E, and Flynn, L. R. The Domain Specific Innovativeness Scale: Theoretical and Practical Dimensions in Moore, D. L. (Ed), Association of Marketing Theory and Practice Proceedings, 1995 (4): 177-82 Gutman, J., and Mills, M. K. Fashion Life Style, Self-concept, Shopping Orientation, and Store Patronage: An Integrative Analysis. Journal of Retailing, 1982, 58(2):64-86. Graeff, T.R. Image Congruence Effects on Product Evaluation: The Role of Selfmonitoring and Public/Private Situation, Psychology of Marketing, 1996(Aug 13.) 5:.481-500 Graeff, T. R. Consumption Situations and the Effects of Brand Image on Consumers Brand Evaluations, Psychology & Marketing, 1997(14)1: 49-70 Hirschman, E., and Adcock, W. (1978), An Examination of Innovative Communicators, Opinion Leaders, and Innovators for Mans Fashion Apparel, in H. Keith Hunt (Ed.), Advances in Consumer Research , pp.303-314 Hogg, K. M., Cox, J. A., and Keeling, K. The Impact of Self-monitoring on Image Congruence and Product / Brand Evaluation.European journal of Marketing, 2000 (34)5/6:641-666. Kaiser, S. B. The Social Psychology of Clothing 2nd Ed. New York, NY: Fairchild Publications 1997 Lumpkin, J. R., Allen, G. S., and Greenberg, B. A. Profiling Heavy-Users of Wearing Apparel. Southern Marketing Association Proceedings, 1981:167-170. Lennon, S., and Davis, L. Individual Differences in Fashion Orientation and Cognitive Complexity. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1987 (64): 327-330 Martinez, E., and Polo, Y. (1996), Adopter Categories in the Acceptance Proces for Consumer Durables, Journal of Product & Brand Management , Vol. 5, No.3, pp. 34-45. Mason, J. B., and Bellenger, D. Analysing High Fashion Acceptance, Journal of Retailing, 1973-74 (49)4: 79-88, 95-96. Malhotra, N. K. Self-concept and Product Choice: An Integrated Perspective. Journal of Economic Psychology 1988.(9)(March):1-28 Malhotra, N. K. Marketing Research, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall International 1999a Malhotra, N. K. A scale to Measure Self-concepts, Person Concepts and Product Concepts Journal of Marketing Research, 1999b (23) November: 456-64 McCracken, G. Clothing as Language: an object lesson in the study of the expressive properties of material culture In: Culture and Consumption, Chapter 4, 1986, Pp: 57-70 Midgley D. F. Patterns of Interpersonal Information Seeking for the Purchase of a Symbolic Product. Journal of Marketing Research 1983; 20 (February): 74-83 Onkvisit, S.,and Shaw, J Self-concept and Image Congruence : Some Research and Managerial Implications, Journal of Concumer Marketing, 1987(4)1,(Winter):13-23.

15

Painter, J. and Pinegar, M. L. Post-High Teens and Fashion Information, Journal of Marketing Research 1971 (8)3: 368-369. Pettijohn, L. S., Mellot, D., and Pettijohn, C. E. The Relationship Between Retailer Image. Psychology and Marketing,1992 (9)4:311-28. Rosenberg, M. Conceiving the Self. New York, NY: Basic Books, 1979 Rogers E. M. Diffusion of Innovations 4th ed., New York, N-Y: The Free Press 1995 Rudd, N.A. Appearance and Self-presentation Research in Gay Consumer Cultures: Issues and Impact. Journal of Homosexuality 1996; 31 (1/2): 109-134 Shin S. Dickerson K. Personal and Non-personal References Used by South Korean Men in Apparel Purchase Decisions. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management 1999; 3(1): 7-17 Shin, S. and Dickerson, K. Personal and Non-personal References Used by South Korean Men in Apparel Purchase Decisions Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 1999 (3)1:7-17 Scrugge, B. Clothing Attitudes, Consumer Use Practices, and Appeal of Fashion Features for Never-Married Women Who Work. ACPTC Proceedings, 1977:110-111. Sirgy, M. J. Self-concept in Consumer Behaviour :a critical review. Journal of Consumer Research, 1982 (9) (December): 283-300 Sirgy, M. J. Using Self-congruence and Ideal Congruence to Predict Purchase Motivation. Journal of Business Research, 1985 (13): 195-206. Sirgy, M. J. Self-congruity, New York, NY: Praeger. 1986 Slywotzky, A. J., and Morrison, D. J. The Profit Zone: How Strategic Business Design will Lead You to Tomorrows Profits, 1997, New York, NY: Times Business. Summers, J. O. The Identity of Womens Clothing Fashion Opinion Leaders Journal of Marketing Research. 1970 (7)(May, 2):178-185 Swartz, T. A. Brand Symbols and Message Differentiation Journal of Advertising Research, 1983 (23):59-64 Tatzel, M. Skill and Motivation in Clothes Shopping: Fashion Conscious, Independent, Anxious, and Apathetic Consumers, Journal of Retailing, 1982 (4)(winter):90-7. Wilson, E. Adorned in Dreams: Fashion and Modernity, London: Virago.1985 Workman J. E. Johnson K.K.P. Fashion Opinion Leadership, Fashion Innovativeness, and Need for Variety. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal 1993; 1 (3): 60-64 Zandl I. and R. Leonard Targeting the Trend-setting Consumer, Homewood, IL: Business one Irwin.1992

16