INFORMATION TO USERS

This reproduction was made from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this document, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted.

The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction.

1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure complete continuity.

2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark, it is an indication of either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, duplicate copy, or copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed. For blurred pages, a good image of the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listing the pages in the adjacent frame.

3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photographed, a definite method of “sectioning” the material has been followed. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete.

4. For illustrations that cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted into your xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the Dissertations Customer Services Department.

5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed.

U niversi^ M ia d ilm s international 300 N. Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Ml 48106

8410370

Chowdhary, Usha

FASHION PROCESS AS RELATED TO MEDIA EXPOSURE, SOCIAL PARTICIPATION, AND ATTITUDE TOWARD CHANGE AMONG COLLEGE WOMEN IN INDIA

The Ohio Stale University Ph.D. 1984

University Microfiims I ntern&tion&i 300 N. Zeab Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106

Copyright 1984 by Chowdhary, Usha Aii Rights Reserved

PLEASE NOTE:

In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy. Problems encountered with this document have been identified here with a check mark V

1. Glossy photographs or pages.

2. Colored illustrations, paper or _____print

3. Photographs with dark background_____

4. Illustrations are poor copy______

5. Pages with black marks, not original copy.

6. Print shows through as there is text on both sides of page,

7. Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages

8. Print exceeds margin requirements______

9. Tightly bound copy with print lost in spine______

10. Computer printout pages with indistinct print

11. Page(s)______lacking when material received, and not available from school or author.

12. Page(s)______seem to be missing in numbering only as text follows.

13. Two pages numbered ______. Text follows.

14. Curling and wrinkled pages______

15. Other______

University Microfilms International

FASHION PBOCESS AS fiilAIEO TO MEDIA EXEOSOBE,

SOCIAL PAfiXICIPAIION, AND ATTITUDE TCHABD CHANGE

AHCNG COLLEGE NOMEN IN INDIA

DISSEBTATIGN

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Bequirements for

the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate

School of The Ohio State University

By

Usha Chowdhary, B.Sc., M.Sc.

*****

The Ohio State University

1984

Beading committee: Approved By

Dr. Lois £. Dickey

Dr. Gisela J. Hinkle

Dr. Esther Meacham Adviser Dr. David 0. Hansen Textiles and Clothing © 1984

USHA CHOWDHARY

All Rights Reserved ACKHOMIEDGEHEBIS

übe author wishes to express her thaaks and apprecia­ tion toward the contributors in the development and comple­ tion of the study. Special indebtness is felt toward the following:

Or. lois E. Dickey for her constant inspiration, end­

less help, everwilling guidance and deep concern ex­

tended throughout the study.

Or. Gisela J. Hinkle for her constructive ideas in

strengthening the context section and development of

the measure on attitude toward change.

Or. Esther Meacham for her thoughtful suggestion tc in­

clude sketches of the Indian fashion items for improve­

ment in the communicability of the research fcr ncnln-

dian readers.

Or. David 0. Hansen for his positive motivation, help­

ful ideas and supportive attitude offered over time.

Dr. 0. P. Singh, Mrs. P. Punia, Or. Harknandan, Or. P.

Sundaram, Dr. P. S. Abrol and Mrs. V. Kapoor for their

valueable help in data collection.

- 11 - All the resposdants foe their willing participation in

the study.

Hcea Economics Alumni Association (Ihe Ohio State Uni­

versity) , University Graduate Students Alumni Associa­

tion (The Ohio State University), and Association of

Clcthing Professors for Textiles and Clothing— Central

Region for awarding research fellowships during differ­

ent phases of the study.

Haryana Agricultural University for granting study leave. Myriam Velez for her willingness to sketch the

Indian fashion items. Mary Rhodes for typing the final

dissertation.

The author's parents and brothers for taking care of

her son for over three years, helping with data collec­

tion, and being constant source of motivation over

time.

The author's brother-in-law, H. I. Chowdhary, and his

wife S. C. Chowdhary, for their efforts, timely help

and encouragement offered to envision their dream come true.

The author's husband for acting as an inspirational

force to help her accomplish this endeavor, in spite of constraints of his own Ph.D. work; her sen, Abhineet, for living with the frustrations of being away from his

- iii - parents and tearing the consequences; and daughter,

Neha, who was a source of delight to have around even in the strenuous times.

- IV - VIIA

February 18, 1952 Born# Delhi, India

1972 B.Sc., Home Science,Delhi

University, Delhi, India

1974 M.Sc.(Home),M.S. Univer­

sity, Baroda, India

1974-1980 Assistant Professor, De­

partment of Clothing and

Textiles, I. C. College

of Home Science, Haryana

Agricultural University,

Bissar, Haryana, India

1981-1984 Graduate leaching Associ­

ate, Ihe Ohio State Uni­

versity, Columbus, Chio

BESIABCH PUBIICAIICNS

A Study on Developing and Standardizing the Ease Allowance fcr the Fitted Jackets of Women. Barvana Agricultural Uni­ versity Journal of Besearch. 1981, 11 (1), 82-86 (with J.

A .Singh).

- V - changing focus of Textiles and Clothing within Home Econom­ ics: An Analysis of Two Professional Journals. Textiles and

Clothing Besearch Journal, 1984 (with E. Meacham).

In addition, nine edited articles have teen published in university publications.

flEIDS Of STUDY

Hagor Field: Textile and Clothing

Minor Field; Sociology

- VI - TABLE OF CONTENTS

Paye

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...... il

VITA......

LIST OF TABLES . . . .X

LIST OF FIGURES...... xvi

CHAPTER

I INTRODUCTION ...... 1

Statement of Problem ...... 4 Definition of Terms ...... 6 Organization of Presentation ...... 7

II REVIEW OF LITERATURE ...... 8

Contextual Overview: India — A Land of Diversity. .9 Geography...... 9 Topography ...... 10 People ...... 10 language ...... 12 Government ...... 12 Family ...... 13 Status of Women ...... 14 Women and the Fashion Industry...... 15 Education ...... 16 Means of Livelihood ...... 17 Music and Dance ...... 18 Costumes ...... 18 Theoretical Structure: Fashion Process ...... 22 Fashion Diffusion ...... 22 Fashion Adoption ...... 29 Media Exposure ...... 44 Social Participation ...... 47 Attitude Toward Change ...... 49 Summary ...... • .51 Statement of Hypotheses ...... 53

- vii - III HETiiOCOLOGY...... 56

Preliminary Survey ...... 56 Research Design ...... 58 Population and Sample ...... 60 Identification and Development of Measures .... 63 fashion Innovators ...... 63 fashion Opinion Leader...... 65 Media Exposure ...... 66 Social Participation ...... 67 attitude Toward change ...... 68 Demographic Variables...... 69 Pretest ...... 69 Data Collection ...... 72 Data analysis ...... 73

IV SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AMD PRELIMINARY DATA ANALYSIS...... 75

Response to Questionnaire ...... 77 Demographic Characteristics of Respondents .... 79 Reliability and Validity of the Instruments Osed tc Measure the Selected Variable...... 85 Identification of fashion Innovators, fashion Opinion Leaders and fashion Innovative Communicators...... 89 Identification of fashion Innovators...... 91 Identification of fashion Opinion Leaders . . 92 Identification of fashion Innovative communicators...... 93

V HYPOTBESIS ŒESIING, SOBSEQUENI ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION...... 95

fashion Innovativeness...... 96 The Explanation of Characteristics of fashion Innovators and fashion Noninnovators .... .98 The Prediction of fashion Innovativeness. . .112 Liscrimination between fashicn Innovators and fashion Ncninnovators ...... 115 Summary...... 119 fashion Opinion Leadership ...... 125 The Explanation of Characteristics of fashion Opinion Leaders and fashion Nonopinion leaders ...... 12b The Prediction of fashion Opinion leadership ...... 140 Discrimination between fashion Opinion leaders and fashion Opinion Nonleaders . . . 144

- viii - Summary ...... 148 Additional findings ...... 154 Selected Background Characteristics of fashion Innovators/fashion Noninnovators and fashicn Opinion leaders/fashion Nonopinion leaders...... 154 Contextual Information...... 161 Contextual Information on learning ahout Clothing fashions...... 162 Influence of family Members in the legitimation Stage of Adoption ...... 166 Variety of fashion Items Owned ...... 167

VI SOHMAfY AND IMfLICATICNS...... 170

Summary...... 171 Implications ...... 179 Conceptual framework Testing ...... 179 Application of the framework...... 181 Suggestions for future Research ...... 184

BIBLIOGBAEHY...... 188

APPENDICES ...... 199

- IX - LISI OF lâEIES

Table Bags

1. Distribution of Questionnaires and Percentage of

Return...... 76

2. Demographic Characteristics of the Respondents. . . 00

3. Educational Program and Belated Information

Regarding Respondents ...... 84

4. Descriptive Statistics for the five instruments

and the Reliability and Validity Coefficients .... 88

5. Classification of fashicn Innovators, fashion

Opinion Leaders and Fashion Innovative

Communicators ...... 90

6. ANOVA: fashion Information Sources (Cumulative

Score) by class of Fashion Innovativeness...... 99

7. ANOVA: Differences in freguency Use of fashion

Information Sources by fashion Innovators and

Fashicn Noninnovators...... 10

8. ANOVA: Differences in fashion Information Sources

Used by Fashion Innovators and fashion Moninncva-

tors during Comprehension and Legitimation Stages

- X - of Adoption...... 103

9. Chi Square Analysis of the Host Important Sources

of fashion Informaltion Used by Fashion Innovators

and Fashion Noninnovators during Awareness, Compre­

hension, and legitimation Stages of Adoption .... 106

10. ANOVA: Social Earaticipation (Cumulative Score)

by Class of fashion Innovativeness ...... 107

11. ANOVA: Differences in Participation in Social

Organizations by fashicn Innovators and Fashion

Noninnovators...... 108

12. ANOVA: Participation in Individual Activities by

fashicn Innovators and Fashion Noninnovators .... 110

13. ANOVA: Attitude Toward Change (Cumulative Score)

by Class of Fashion Innovativeness ...... 110

14. ANOVA: Differences in Elements of Attitude Toward

Change by Class of Fashion Innovativeness for Each

Item ...... 113

15. Multiple Begression: Prediction of Fashion

' Innovativeness with Media Exposure, Social

Participation, and Attitude Toward Change...... 114

16. comparison of fashion Innovators (FI) and Fashion

Noninnovators (FNI) Osing Discriminant Analysis. . . 116

17. Classification Matrix Using Discriminant Functions

- XX - for Fashion Innovators and fashion Noninncvarcrs . , 118

18. Chi Square Analysis of Selected Demographic Char­

acteristics by Class of fashicn Innovativeness . . . 124

19. Analysis of Variance: sources of fashion infor­

mation (Cumulative Score) by Class of Fashion Opinion

Leadership ...... 128

20. ANOVA: Differences in Frequency Use of Sources of

fashion Information by fashion Opinion Leaders and

fashicn Nonopinion Leaders for Each Source ..... 129

21. ANOVA: Differences in the Fashion Information

Sources Used by Fashion Opinion Leaders and Nonopinion

Leaders during comprehension and legitimation Stages

of Adoption...... 132

22. Chi Square Analysis of the Host Important Sources

of fashion Information Used by Fashion Opinion

Leaders and Fashion Nonopinion leaders at Awareness,

comprehension and Legitimation Stages of Adoption. . 134

23. ANOVA: Social Participation (Cumulative Score) by

Class of Fashion Cpinion Leadership...... 136

24. ANOVA: Differences in Participation in Social

Organizations by fashion Cpinion Leaders and

fashicn Nonopinion Leaders ...... 138

25. ANOVA: Participation in Individual Activities by

fashion Opinion Leaders and Fashion Ncnopinion

- xii - Leaders...... 139

26. ANOYA:Attitade Toward Change (Cumulative Score)

by Class of Fashion' Opinion leadership ...... 141

27. ANOVA:Differencas in Attitude Toward Change

by Class of Fashicn Opinion leadership for

Each Item...... 142

28. Multiple Begression: Prediction of Fashicn Cpinion

leadership with Media Exposure, Attitude Toward

Change and Social Participation ...... 144

29. Comparison of Fashion Cpinion Leaders (FOX) and

Fashion Nonopinion Leaders (FNCI) Using

Discriminant Analysis...... 145

30. Classification Matrix Using Discriminant functions

for Fashion Opinion Leaders and Fashion Nonopinion

Leaders...... 147

31. Selected Demographic Characteristics by Fashion

Opinion Leadership ...... 153

32. Chi Square Analysis of Background Characteristics

for the Subgroups: Fashion Innovators/Noninnovators

and Fashion Opinion Leaders/Ncnopinion Leaders . . . 156

33. Freguency Distribution of the Contextual Infor­

mation for the Total Sample...... 163

34. Means and Standard Deviations of Fashion Infor­

mation sources (Cumulative Score) fcr Fashion

- xiii - innovators and fashion Noninncvators ...... 228

3 5 . deans and Standard Deviations of the Frequency

Ose of fashion Information sources ty fashion

Innovators and fashion Noninncvators...... 229

36. deans and Standard Deviations of the Va riety

of fashion information Sources used During

Comprehension and legitimation Stages of Adoption

by fashion Innovators and fashicn Ncninnovators. . . 231

3 7 . deans and Standard Deviations of Social Partici­

pation (Cumulative Score) by Class of fashion

Innovators...... 234

3 8 . deans and Standard Deviations of Participation

in Social Organization by Class of fashion

Innovativeness ...... 235

3 9 . deans and Standard Deviations of Participation

in Individual Activities by Class of Fashion

Innovativeness...... 236

40. Means and Standard Deviations of Attitude lovard

Change (Cumulative Score) by Class of fashion

Innovativeness...... 237

41. deans and Standard Deviations of Elements of

the Attitude louard Change by Class of fashion

Innovativeness...... 238

42. Means and Standard Deviations of fashion

Information Sources (Cumulative Score) by Fashion

- xiv - Opinion leaders and Fashion Hcncpinion leaders. . . .240

43. Means and Standard Deviations of the Frequency

Ose of Fashion Information sourcesoky Class of

Fashicn Opinion leaders and Fashion Honopinion

Leaders ...... 241

4 4 . Means and Standard Deviations of the Variety of

Fashion Information Sources Used During Compre­

hension and Legitimation Stages of Fashion Adoption

hy Class of Fashion Opinion leadership...... 243

45. Means and Standard Deviations of Social Parti­

cipation (Cumulative Score) hy Class of Fashion

Opinion leadership...... 245

46. Means and Standard Deviations of Participation

in Social Organizations hy Class of Fashion

Opinion leadership...... 246

4 7 . Means and Standard Deviations of Participation in

Individual Activities ky Class of Fashicn Cpinicn

Leadership...... 247

48. Means and Standard Deviations of Attitude toward

Change (Cumulative Score) ky Class of Fashicn

Opinion leadership...... 248

4 9 . Means and Standard Deviations of Attitude toward

Change ky Class of Fashion Opinion leadership . . . .249

- XV - IISl OF FIGOBFS

Figure Paga

1. Robertson's Model of the Adoption Process...... 31

2. Hap of India ...... 62

3. Churridar Pyjama, Rurta and Dupatta...... 252

4. Churridar Pyjama, Rurta and Vest...... 252

5. Churridar Pyjama and Rurta...... 253

6. Jeans and Shirt...... 253

7. Jeans, Shirt and Jacket ...... 254

8. Saluai, Rameez and Dupatta ...... 254

9. Bell Bottom Suit ...... 255

10. Middy Dross ...... 255

11. Full length Maxi...... 256

12. Saree ...... 256

- XVI - CHAPTEB 1

IKÎECEUCTIOS

fashion is a concept which is generally associated with

Western societies and has teen investigated ty a nunter of researchers, both as a process and as an object. The fa­ shion process has teen studied as a dynamic mechanism of change through which an innovation is transmitted from the point of its creation to eventual ctsclescenoe (Sproles,

1S79:3). In contrast, the study cf fashicn as an ctject fo­ cuses on specific characteristics of the item, such as styl­ ing details, construction technigues, or fiber and fabric design. A review of literature indicated that ccnsiderarle research has been conducted on fashion as a process in West­ ern societies. These studies have teen carried out within the frameworks of (a) diffusion and adoption cf innovations

(Eehal, 1S77; Blumer, 1969; field, 1970; Grindereng, 1967;

Kaigler, 1975; King, 1963; Thompson, 1977); (t) characteris­ tics cf fashion innovators and followers (Brett and Kernal- guen, 1975; King, 1965; King and Bproles, 1973; Polegato and

- 1 - 2 Wall, I960; fiobertson and HeyezSj, 1S69; Schrank, 1S70;

Spxoles, 1979); and (c) identification of fashion innova­ tors, opinion leaders, and innovative communicators (Baum- qarten, 1975; Schrank, 1970; King and Summers, 1970; Sum­ mers, 197C). Such of this research has been focused or the young adult and, in particular, on college women.

An important question is whether the fashion process operates in developing countries in a manner similar to

Western societies. Ihe cultural setting in India, a devel­ oping ccurtry, is quite traditional and there are limited economic resources. Ihese factors are contrary to the set­ ting in the developed Western countries. Historic and cur­ rent events in India inform about the operation cf the fa­ shion process in India. Historically, personal appearance has been very important in India. Clay figurines of the lady goddess during the Mohenjcdaro and Harappa civilization

(2500-15CC B.C.) were adorned with jewelry and knee-length wrap-arcutd skirts. During the Vcdic age (15CÛ-500 B.C.), a general fashicn of being well-dressed appears to have teen cf great importance and was indicated by the use of specific terms such as 'Suvasa* (well dressed), *Surathi' (well fit­ ted), and *Suvasna* (splendid garments). Indian dress for women has undergone gradual change as a result of many for­ eign invasions over the centuries and the advancement of science aid technology. Many fashion changes have occurred in the costumes during the 20th century. 3

India has recently exerted effort and resources to

develop export trade tc support technological developments.

It has increased the use of media fcr communication and edu­

cation. As a result, some traditional ways are changing as

various social, economic, psychological, and technological

forces interact. kestern styles in apparel are seen in in­

creasing numbers in the metropolitan centers, along with

traditional costumes. Clothing researchers in India in the

1S60’s (Harrison, 1S6S; and Singh, 1967) found that with the

development of communication and education, the modern sari

(a draped garment) and the salwai/kcrta (trousers and tunic)

had replaced the traditional costumes. Abrol (1974) in a study of different styles of jackets found that the jacket style most preferred by college women was a style similar to a dress style which was in fashion, for those observing fa­ shion items in India over a period of years, changes are ev­ ident. For instance, the salwar/kurta costume has been var­ ied in the length of the kurta and the width of trouser legs and cuffs of the salwar,

A study of the fashion process in India can help to identify consumer markets and their characteristics. Sree- nivasan (1978), Director of the National Textiles Corpora­ tion cf India, noted that a continuous study of fashion would be a useful area to improve economic conditions of the country. Dhamija (1981) advocated the need to identify and u plan incoEs-generating activities for vcoen in developing countries in order to improve their economic conditions.

Information alout the fashion process can he used hy the ap­ parel industry. This industry provides hoth jots and varkets to skilled and semi-skilled later interested in clothing construction as an income-generating activity. This study will improve the visibility of the field of textiles and clothing in the business community in India. It will also add tc the knowledge of the fashion process in a non-Nestern society.

Statement of Problem

Fashion innovators and fashion opinion leaders account for initial levels cf penetration in the fashion process.

Fashion innovators tend to be influential in encouraging the noninnovators to be aware of the fashion innovation and to provide information to them by socially displaying the new item (King, 1965, Turnbull and Keenghan, 1980). Fashion opinion leadars are individuals who persuade the nonopinion leaders tc purchase the innovations by interpersonal cocmu- nication (Summers, 1970; Echrank, 1970). Baumgarten (1975) identified another group of individuals who are hoth innova­ tors and opinion leaders, and namely, innovative communica­ tors. Influential groups were found tc have more media ex­ posure, greater social participation, and more positive 5 attitude toward change. Ihey feel mere secure and have higher sociceccnomic status than the influenced. Much of this research was focused cn college women (Katz and lazers- feld, 1S5E).

Based on the literature review, the research focused on the fashion process and how it operates among college women in India. Distinct groups of individuals involved in the fashion process are (a) fashion innovators, (t) fashicn ncn- innovators, (c) fashicn opinion leaders, and (d) fashicn no- ncpinion leaders. Differences among these groups in regard tc media exposure, social participation, attitude toward change, and demographic characteristics were assessed.

Ihe specific objectives for the study were:

1. lo identify fashion innovators, fashion noninnova­

tors, fashion opinion leaders, and fashion nonopinion

leaders among college women in India.

2. lo determine the extent of media exposure, social

participation, and attitude toward change for these

categories cf individuals.

3. lo assess the demographic characteristics of fashion

innovators, fashion noninnovators, fashion opinion

leaders, and fashion nonopinion leaders.

4. lo identify innovative communicators. 6 £efioiti£Q of 3erjs

1. i fashion innovator is an individual «ho adopts new

stales early in the fashion cycle, and owns and wears

a larger number of new fashion items than the late

adopters (Schrank, 1S7Û).

2. A fashion opinion leader is an individual who serves

as a source of information and advice for ether indi­

viduals she knows (Schrank, 1970).

3. Media exposure refers tc the sources of information

and influence (both personal and impersonal) used by

individuals to seek information ahout the latest

styles (lurnbull and Meenaghan, 1980). h. Social participation refers to the extent cf affilia­

tion with various organizations tc get group accep­

tance and involvement in personal activities for a

positive response from peers (Gilbride, 1980; Miller,

1S70).

5. Attitude toward change refers to the tendency tc ac­

cept or reject the newly introduced ideas, items, or

information (Sogers and Shoemaker, 1971). 7

Organization of fzesenlation

chapter II consists cf a review of literature and statement of hypotheses emerging from the review. Methodo­ logical considerations related to the research are presented in Chapter III. Chapter IV includes dscripticn of the sam­ ple and preliminary data analyses. Chapter V focuses cn hy­ potheses tesning. Chapter VI includes the summary and im­ plications of the investigation. It is followed by bibliography and appendixes. CHAPIEB II

REVIEW CF IIIEEATORE

Since research or fashicn has been ignored in India, empirical studies of fashicn from ether countries were exam­ ined to identify a theoretical framework, the pertinent con­ cepts, and possible relationships among variables. Fcr the benefit of the non-Indian readers, literature regarding In­ dian culture was reviewed to provide contextual knowledge to understand the symbolic significance cf materials, objects, and events.

The literature reviewed is presented in two sections:

(1) contextual overview, and |2) theoretical structure: fashion process. The context section includes information about the land, people, customs, and costumes cf India. It is anticipated that the information in this section will help the reader interpret information presented about a set­ ting unlike that in the West. The latter section includes the theoretical structure based cn the concepts of fashion diffusion, fashion adoption, media exposure, social partici­ pation, and attitude toward change.

- 8 - 9

Çonjextual Owefview: India % J land of Jiaersity

India is one of the ancient cultures which has survived the destructive forces over time and whose cultural heritage has been preserved in spite of several foreign invasions and natural calamities (Venkateswara, 1528). Historic India was net a country hut an old and consistent culture whose origin goes hack to the 4th Millenium B.C. India was vulnerable to invasions because of its geographio location and rich re­ sources: thus an uncountable number of people flowed into the country for thousands of years and were absorbed in the

Indian culture (Schulberg, 1968). Ihe migrants brought with them ideas and thoughts which were adapted to the Indian setting; thus, an element of unity was added to the hetroge- nous mixture of people in India.

Geography

India forms a subcontinent with Burma, Ceylon, and Pa­ kistan although Ceylon is separated from India by a shallow strait and Burma by a jungle and tangle of tilts (Spear,

1S61). Ihe northern boundary cf India is formed by the great mountain walls of the Himalayas. lo the north of the

Himalayas is the Tibetan plateau, to the south are lush val­ leys of the Himalayas, and beyond are the alluvial plains.

Southward into India is the plateau of Deccan and at the southern tip is Cape Comerin, beyond which lies the vastness 10 of the Indian Ocean. On the east coast is the £ay of Bengal

• 1 and off the west coast is the Aratian Sea (Chopra, 1977; In­ dia: 1980; Spear, 1961).

Iherc is great diversity of climatic conditions amcng various regions of the country. Ihe tropic of Cancer passes through central India and divides the subcontinent intc two climatic zones: (1) the North which is temperate, and (2) the scuth which is arid. Ihe northern region has six sea­ sons: summer, rainy, autumn, frost, winter, and spring; and the southern region has three seasons: cold, dry, and mon­ soon (facts ahout India. 1953; Nheeler, 1956) . Ihe diversi­ fied climate is supplemented ty two types cf rivers which flow in the country: (1) the glacier fed rivers which flow in the northern region, such as Satiej. Bias, Bavi, Ganges, and Yamuna; and (2) the rain-fed rivers which flow in the central and southern regions of India, the Krishna, Goda­ vari, Mahanadi, and Kaveri rivers (Chopra, 1977).

EèqeIê Heterogenity is also revealed in the physical charac­ teristics of the people, their religion, and languages; each exhibits diversity cf its own kind. Basically, there are three types of people who differ in appearance, origin, and 11 region cf the country: the Aryans, Mongoloids, and Dravidi-

ans. Ihe Aryans are inhabitants cf the ncrtb and northwest­

ern states: Punjab, Rajasthan, Dttar Pradesh, and Jassu and

Kashmir. The Aryans have light skin and sharp features.

Ihe Mongoloids are inhabitants of northeastern states: As­ sam, Sikkim and Bhutan; they have broad heads, light skin, and flat and broad noses. Eravidans, inhabitants of the southern region of India, have dark complexion and are short tc medium height in stature (Spear, 1S61). However, pure forms of the regional characteristic distinctions are not seen in the contemporary times.

Indian history records the rise and fall of dynasties of theological systems, and their philosophy and culture.

India's religious thoughts range from monotheism tc polythe­ ism to atheism. About 80 percent of the Indian population is Hindu. Hinduism is a hierarchical based religioc which believes in the trinity of gods: Eiahma (the creator),

Vishnu (the preserver), and Mahesh (the destroyer). ether religions common to India are Eudhism, Christianity, Islam,

Jainism, and Sikhism (Chopra, 1577; India: 1980; Sohulberg,

1S68) .

Ihe social structure of India is based on a class structure which is influenced by religion. According to the ancient law-giver Manu, society should consist of four classes, namely: Brahmins (to perform teaching); Kshatriyas 12

(Harriets to protect people); Vaishyas (farmers and

merchants to handle trade and commerce); and Sudras (to

serve the other three classes). since India's independence

in 19W7, castelines have become weak for it is illegal to

discriminate on the basis of the individual's caste (Chopra,

1S77; Ghurye, 1951; Ghurye, 1966; Sohulberg, 1968).

language

India is a multilingual country. Ihe constitution

lists fifteen principal languages: Assamia, Bengali, Bibari,

Guiarati, Hindi (unofficial national language), Kannada,

Kashmiri, Malyalam, Marathi, Criya, Eunjabi, Sajastbani,

lamil, lelugu, and libetan (Chopra, 1977; India: 1980). In

addition, India has many dialects which further reaffirms

the concept of unity in diversity in India.

SgTefnment

India has a central, national level, democratic govern­

ment. The constitution of India came intc effect cn January

26, 1950, and provides for single and uniform citizenship

1er all people in the nation. Every person who is a citizen of India and 21 years of age or older is conferred the right

to vote. Each federal division cf India has its own state level government. India's federal divisions include twenty two states and nine union territories (Chopra, 1977; India: 13

A SSM3£iA&I 3L iiiS £Sl£f JlSJl îMÂllâ federal Structure, 1S82) . fjBlilZ Traditionally, all family members often worked together at a common undertaking and shared property. The work areas included agriculture, business, or craft. In addition, liv­ ing together under one roof was a common practice. Even in the present, the family structure is strong and enduring al­ though there is a decline in the number of joint families.

In the contemporary times, family structure ranges from joint, to extended, to nuclear, or a combination of the three forms (Chopra, 1977; Iamb, 1975; Schulberg, 1968).

Marriage is one of the religious rituals and is consid­ ered a biological necessity. Marriage is still regarded a union of two families and not merely the union of two indi­ viduals. Marriages materialize after long negotiations be­ tween the parents of the prospective bride and groom, the exchange cf the horoscopes, and agreement upon the financial terms which is commonly known as dowry system. The dowry system consists of three elements: (1) household goods and equipment to be used by the young couple; (2) personal orna­ ments and clothes for the husband and kin; and (3) a trous­ seau of clothes and ornaments tc be used by the bride her­ self (Bedi, 1980; Lewis, 1958; Sharma, 198C). 14

Traditionally, child marriages were ccmaon; however, in con­ temporary times the government has passed a law that the minimum age for girls should he 16, and for hoys 16. Mar­ riages in India are still arranged hy the parents. However,

dating is becoming permissible. Divorce is neither encour­ aged nor an accepted norm (Evertt, 1979; Goldstein, 1972;

Jain, 1S7E; lewis, 1958; Singh, 1S82) .

Status SÊ "omen

The concept cf mac and woman as cgual halves of divine unity who are complimentary to each other has teen described in the holy scriptures such as the Opanishads and Vedas (In­ dia; A Cecocracy £n Move. 1S81) . Baig (1576) labelled Indi­ an woman as embodiment cf power with nothing weak or neg­ ative atout her. India News (October 28, 1983:5) reported a quote from the Eig-Veda (a holy India scripture) which reaf­ firms Baig's statement.

I am the mistress of this universe. I gather all the produce cf this earth. I am the prime per­ former of sacrifices. It is through me that He eats food; it is through me that He sees all that He sees. . . Yes, it is through me that He breathes; I fight the battles for Him and I pro­ vide both Heaven and Earth. I give birth to his father. My place is above His Head.

In spite of the fact that an Indian woman considers motherhood as the most cherished accomplishment, she has en­ tered all fields of national life. Baig (1976) reported that the number of women in administrative, executive, and 15 managarlal groups had increased from 10,000 in I960 to

12,000 in 1968; the clerical figure raised from 37,000 in

I960 to 75,000 in 1968; in sports and recreation, women's employment increased from 5,0CC in 1560 to 13,000 in 1968.

However, in unskilled positions, women's employment dropped from 25,000 to 16,000 in the eight year period of 1960-1968.

In addition, significant increases have been noticed in the traditional professional fields for women in India which in­ cluded medicine, education, and nursing. In contemporary

India, there is no sphere where Indian women do not have representation. Secent figures provide further support for there are more than 600,000 women working as teachers, near­ ly 40,000 are medical doctors, 18,000 are qualified scien­ tists in various disciplines, and about 2,000 are lawyers

(India News, (a)1983). In addition, women continue to serve as Prime Minister, governors, chief ministers, ambassadors, ministers, magistrates, and bureaucrats

Women and the Fashion Industry

Baig (1976) reported that three housewives were the pi­ oneers who contributed toward the popularity cf Indian hand­ icrafts abroad and the revival of the cottage industries by selling handicrafts in India from house to house. later, one of the women, Frem Berry, became the director of exports fcr ready to wear clothes and was responsible for the high- 16

Styled clcthQS sold in the United States, Canada, Europe,

Hcnq Konq, and Australia. Baig (1976) reported that 5,000 women hac entered the garment business which started as workshops in their garages and later became fully developed factories. Moreover, many big industrial houses have start­ ed garment businesses and some men administrators have hand­ ed over the management of the business to their wives.

Employment of women who work in their homes has in­ creased. Some entrepreneurs have employed two to three hun­ dred women in piecework, while hundreds of others make laces and embroideries in centers all over the country (Baig,

1S76). In large cities, Indian women also manage leather good export businesses and boutiques which feature unusual costume jewellery, modern clothing, traditional saris, as well as lamps and antigues.

2duca±i05 Before the arrival of the British in the seventeenth century, Indian education was based on religion. Britishers imposed the English education system and dismissed education in the Indian languages. Both primary and secondary educa­ tion were ignored under British rule, but more emphasis was placed on higher education than before. After independence in 19

1S75). In 1980, 87 percent of children in the age group of

6 to 11 years attended school as compared to 33 percent in

1951; and about one hundred millicn students attended middle school against 23.5 millicn in 1951. Ihe number of univer­ sity students increased ninefold and a 600 percent increase was registered in the number of colleges for the same dura­ tion (India: A Democracy on Move. 1S81). Traditionally, wo­ men were deprived of formal education; however in indepen­ dent India they have egual access to education Including higher education (Astfaana, 1974; £aig, 1976; OeSouza, 1975;

Goldstein, 1972; lamb, 1975).

aeaas fif jiwelihogd

About 70 percent of the Indian population is involved in agriculture. The remaining 30 percent earn their liveli­ hood from industry, trade, and governmental jobs. The trade and industry of India include loth public and private sec­ tors. The major industries include handicrafts, handlcoo products, metals, minerals, and textile products (Chopra,

1S77). Presently, the industrial policy cf India is focused or boosting productivity, creating new jobs, making the best use of existing facilities, protecting traditional crafts and cottage industries, promoting export oriented business, protecting the consumer against high prices and poor guali- 18 ty, arid providing support for agrc-related industries (In­ dia: Ids Turning £sii}i. 1982). Technologically, India uses simple to complicated tools fcr the production of gocds.

India's scientific establishment consists of 2.4 million scientists and is third largest in the wcrld ilndia; The iafoiag fiiat, 1982). dusic and £an£e

The art forms cf music and dance date tack tc the Vedic

Age (15C0-500 B.C.). Vedic hymns were recited musically, and originally dancing formed part of the Vedic rituals

(facts ahcut India. 1951). There are four schools of clas­ sical dancing in India: Bharat Matyam, Kathakali, Kathak, and Manipuri. The classical dancer tells a story poetically with movement of hands and feet, and gesture of eyes and brows. Fclk music and dance are rich in tradition and vari­ ety, and portray the life of the people of the country (In­ dia: A Lemocracv cn Move. 1981).

Ças&umes

India's capacity to let the traditional and new coexist is very evident in the variety of costumes available. How­ ever, there is more diversity in costume and movement away from tradition in seme areas than in others. This variety of costumes is particularly seen in the northern India for 19 it haa teea invaded by foreigners over the centuries; in ad­ dition, the climate provides six seasons in contrast tc the three seasons in the South.

Ihe sari (a draped garment) is the national costume for wcmon in India; it is worn with petticoat and blouse. Ihe dhoti (a draped bifurcated garment), kurta (panelled shirt with round neck), and cap fcrm the national costume fcr men.

However, in daily life, men's costume shows more western in­ fluence than women's costume (Chushan, 1958).

Ghurye (1966) noted that the Indian costumes can be categorized as gravitational (draped garments) and anatomic

(garments cut and shaped to fit the body contours). Ihe au­ thor further elucidated that some literary remains from the

Vedic Age (15CC-50C B.C.) signified the importance of being well dressed. 'Suvasna' (splendid garments), 'surbhi' (well fitted garments), and 'suvasa' (well dressed) were the terms used in the Vedic literature. During 320 B.C. to 320 A.D. a dhoti (draped garment), dupatta (scarf), and a three, five, or seven strand girdle were worn by women. Other female costumes included the salvar (a loose baggy trouser with drawstring waist), kameez (a long tunic with slits on sides), and a dupatta (scarf) ; voluminous skirt and dupatta with close fitting bodices; lungi (a straight piece wrapped only once around the lower part of the body) and odhni (head covering); and the sari. 20

Ouiir.q 320-1 ICO A.D., the use of cut acd sewn tcdices

with front and back openings were evident* Such bodices

were either worn with the sari or voluminous skirts. Waist­ line belts were introduced during this period. In the southern region of India, saris with ornamental borders were

worn.

I he regionalization of the Indian costume became very evident bctwaen 1100-1600 A.D. Foreign invasions affected the costumes of northern India and Kaharashtra. Four vari­ eties in female attire were distinguished in northern India:

I) sari; 2) very tight drawers fcr legs, high waisted frock like long coat with long and tapering close-fitting sleeves

(from the back it looked like Victorian frocks of English ladies) ; 3) close-fitting skirt fastened by string at the waist, a short bodice, and scarf or dupatta to cover the ex­ posed bed), face and bead; and 4) voluminous skirt (gbagra) with short sari and choli appeared to be focus cf fashion with V or Y shaped neck and sbcrt sleeves to enhance the contours of arms and breasts. South Indian females were only a sari to wrap their whole body or a sari and blouse

(Ghurye, 1966).

During the nineteenth and aarly twentieth century, Fun-

-jani (northern India) female costumes included three types: salvar (baggy trousers), ‘khamis* (tunic like upper gar­ ment), and long scarf; skirt, choli, and odhni (scarf): and 21 sari, blouse, and petticoat. Rajasthani female attire con­

sisted cf ghaqhra (a voluminous skirt), kacali (backless bodice fastened by snaps in the back), coli (a close fitting

bodice), and veil (odhni with 4-1/2* to 7* dimensions). fe­

males in both Southwestern and Southeastern regions general­

ly wore a 7-10 yards long sari. Ihe length of sari depended

upon the mode of draping sari. In the eastern and central

regions of India, women wore the sis yard sari with blouse

ir. the public places. Ihe mode cf draping varied according

tc region and caste of females (Ghurye, 1S66).

Ghurye (1966:104) reported the existence of fashion in

historic India.

Ihe history has demonstrated the incorrectness of the general view regarding lack cf fashion outside the costume of the modern industrial society cf Europe and America, which has been current among sociologists and historians of taste and fashion of the last hundred and fifty years.

Contemporary Indian magazines have shown a variety of

types of costumes worn by college women: 1) churridar pyja­

ma (a closefitting trouser), kurta (panelled tunic with high neck and full sleeves), and scarf with or without jacket; 2)

jeans and top; 3) pants and top; and 4) skirt and blouse

(3he Illustrated Weekly of India, 1982; Society. 1982). 22 IhSSiaïiSBl JL£0£ejs The lashicQ process has teen identified as a dynamic

mechanism of change through which an innovation is transmit­

ted from the stage of its creation to eventual decline

(Enrôles, 1979:3). The fashion process operates hoth at the societal and individual levels. At the societal level, the

fashicn process is termed as fashion diffusion and is asso­ ciated with the diffusion of new styles within,between, and among various social classes. At the individual level, it

is termed as fashion adoption and is associated with the in­ volvement of individuals in the decision-making process to accept or reject new styles. Several variables, such as me­ dia exposure, social participation, attitude toward change, and demographic characteristics, influence the fashicn pro­ cess at both the levels. Therefore, the reviewed literature is presented in five sections: fashion diffusion, fashion adoption, media exposure, social participation, and attitude toward change.

fashion diffusion

Fashion diffusion is based cn the phenomena of diffu­ sion cf innovations that includes the process through which an innovation spreads in a society from its points of incep­ tion to decline. The conceptual foundation of diffusion re­ search is in the behavioral sciences. Thus, study of the 23 phenomena of diffusion has been an area of concern tc an­ thropologists, sociologists, social psychologists, and com-

Dunicatior. researchers since the beginning of the century, and to market researchers and hone economists since the

1960*s. The anthropological tradition of the diffusion re­ search is the oldest and has influenced ether disciplines.

The diffusion literature offers a fairly veil developed the­ oretical framework which applies to the flow of ideas, in­ formation, and products (Botertson, 3971).

The theoretical framework of diffusion includes four crucial elements for the spread of new ideas: 1) the innova­ tion, 2) communication channels, 3} period of time, and 4) members of a social structure (Rogers and Shoemaker, 1971).

Ar innovation is defined as an idea, practice, or object perceived to be new by an individual. The authors defined communication channels as the means to send a message from source to receiver. The channels may include mass-media or interpersonal communications. The period of time was de­ fined as the time taken for an innovation to be adopted within a social structure. Rogers and Shoemaker (1971) rec­ ognized a social system as a collectivity cf units which are functionally differentiated and engaged in joint-problem solving with respect to a common goal. They further pur­ ported that the social structure acts to facilitate or im­ pede the rate cf diffusion and adoption of new ideas within a social system. 2U Diffusion research has strong conceptual and analytical frameworks. However, some methodological weaknesses should be recognized, such as the use cf "recall data", overempha­ sis on massage content, the focus on optional innovation de­ cisions, the use of individuals instead of a sccicmetiic network as a unit for studying the process, the bias cf us­ ing modern (Western) data for generalizations, and the prac­ tice cf ignoring the traditional counterparts (Bogers, 1962;

Ecgers and Shoemaker, 1971; Botertson, 1971) . The present study was an effort tc strengthen the conceptual and analyt­ ical frameworks by addressing the last two weaknesses cited, that is, the bias cf using Western data fcr generalizations and the practice of ignoring traditional counterparts.

Fashion diffusion is a process in which the spread cf a new garment style is involved frcm its creation to eventual obsolescence (Sprcles, 1979). Until the early 1960*s, fashion was perceived to diffuse from the upper class to lower class, thus, the process was identified as the verti­ cal flow cf fashicn or the trickle-down theory. Cther theo­ ries have been proposed and examined in the realm of fashion diffusion since the early 60*s, such as the trickle-across or horizontal flow of styles, and the "trickle up flew* or

'status float phenomenon". Simmel (1909) termed fashion as a product of class distinction which involves the antagonis­ tic forces of unicn and differentiation, depending on the 25 class to khich the adopter belonged. fallens (1954) noted

that the trickle down of fashion over the long term is sta­

tus-relevant and labelled it as 'treadmill* fcr status-sym­

bolic consumption goods. He further hypothesized that the

trickle-down pattern is commonality specific and may not be

generalized for all gocds. Barber and lobel (1952) believed

that the fashion industry is based on the trickle-dcvn pat­

tern and that the fashion leaders are different for women

frcm different social classes. Ihey further contended that

for the most part the 'trickle* system does not result in a

progressive imitation of exact models in all strata of

ready-to-wear since the attempt of industry is to avoid com­

plete uniformity. However, Ereninkmeyer (1961) doubted the

mere operation of the 'trickle down* theory as a process

of fashion diffusion. She referred to fashicn as a phenom­

enon of collective behavior and noted that fashion "as the

socially approved sequence of variation on a cultural theme

adds more to the pleasures of the modern life" (p. 3).

King (1963) also challenged the trickle-down theory as

an accurate descriptor of fashicn diffusion. He contended

that the changing social environment, increasing impact of mass media, and the manufacturing and marketing strategies

used by the fashion industry actually impede the vertical

flow of fashion. Iherefore, King (1963) put forth the the­ sis of the horizontal flew of fashions within a social 26

class. be did not deny the existence oi tie trickle down

theory hux advocated for the coexistence cf the horizontal

and vertical flow of fashion within and between different

social classes. Field (1970) also attacked the concept of

trickle-dcwn flow of fashion hy citing several examples from

tfce history of fashicn tc indicate that a "trickle up flew"

occurred which he called the "status float phenomenon". He

argued that the dominant majority has always borrowed cul­

tural artifacts from minorities, no matter how low their

status may be.

Ihe cited references clearly indicate that the trickle-

down theory is not the only explanation of the diffusion

process in the Western world. Gather, there are other theo­

ries, such as "trickle across" and "trickle up", which seem

to operate along with the trickle-down theory. Since spe­

cific evidence of the operation of the fashion process is not available fcr the Indian setting, empirical studies re­

lated tc fashion diffusion were reviewed to understand the

strategies used to test the various theories in the Western

setting.

King (1963) conducted an exploratory consumer survey

based, on the category of women's millinery buying context in

a metropolitan area of Boston. Ihe sample included 303 re­

spondents selected by random cluster sampling procedure.

Ihe empirical data supported the rejection cf trickle-down 27 theory in the women's millinery context. Cn the basis of research findings. King proposed a mass market theory which suggested that within a fashion season individuals from each social class buy simultaneously, that all consumers have a wide range from which to select, that innovators and influ- entials from each social class play an important role in di­ recting the fashicn, and that the information and personal influence trickle across (horizontally) within social strata rather than vertically across strata.

Grindereng (1S67) carried cut a study to investigate fashion diffusion in one category of women's apparel (suits) within a social class framework to identify women who were style leaders and these who were style followers, and to compare the differential characteristics of these two groups. Ihe study covered a nine month period in a midwest- ern metropolitan area. Charge sales records of a retail store were used as a source of data, and a questionnaire was mailed to £16 charge customers. Eased cn the responses, the subjects were classified as early and late adopters depend­ ing on their buying position in a fashion cycle. Grinder- eng's findings revealed that for all social classes there were no differences between the choices of the basic silhou­ ettes cf suits and design details cf suits sold tc all classes during the same period. Ihe group of self-identi­ fied early adopters tended to he women with high fashion in- 28 terest, were users of mass media rather thas personal con­ tacts as sources of information, looked to nationally and internationally prominent women as their frame of fashion reference, and were independent of normative referrants.

Grindereng's findings also supported the existence of the trickle-across or horizontal flow theory of fashion along with the trickle-down theory which further confirmed King's findings.

Ihcmfson <1977) analyzed the fashion process of the mini-length garment as shown in fashion publications. She purpose of her research was to determine whether distinct modification of a style occurs in relationship to time and whether agricultural theories are applicable to clothing in­ vestigations. Data sources included four fashion publica­ tions Hogue« Mademoiselle^ Seventeen, and Sears. Ecehuck and Co. Catalog) between 1965-1S75. Photographs (n=l147) of the mini-length garment were selected and promotional curves were drawn. She visual analysis did net support the thesis used in the agricultural practices that the acceptance pat­ terns approaches a normal curve. Father, five periods of a fashion cycle were identified for the ten year period: in­ troduction (1965-1566), refinement (1967), elaboration

(1968-1965), adultration (1970-1972), and decline

(1973-1975) . 29 In summary, considerable attention has been given to fashion diffusion in Western society, and several possible types of diffusion processes have been recognized tc under­ stand tha process in its totality. However, no single ref­ erence was found on the diffusion process as it operates in the developing countries, in general, nor to India specifi­ cally .

fashion Adoption

Several researchers realized the seed tc study fashion process in terms of the adopter categories and fashion lead­ ership by testing the frameworks put forth by Rogers (1962),

Regers and Shoemaker (1971) and Robertson (1971). The lit­ erature on adoption relevant to the present research is pre­ sented in two sections: theoretical basis and fashion re­ search.

Iheoretical Basis. The adoption process may be defined as a mental seguenoe of stages through which the consumer passes in arriving at the acceptance or rejection of a deci­ sion (Robertson, 1971; Rogers, 1962). Rogers (1962) identi­ fied the basic five-stage model of adoption which includes awareness, interest, evaluation, trial, and adoption or re­ jection as the sequential stages. Robertson (1971) contend­ ed that human behavior is more complex than is suggested by the five-stage model. He proposed a comprehensive eight- 30 stage model which is divided into three fields: cognitive, attitude, and behavior. ihe eight stages of Bofcertscn*s model include problem perception, awareness, comprehension, attitude, legitimation, trial, adoption, and dissonance

(figure 1).

In the person perception stage, an individual perceives the need for a product which is rew. Ihe awareness stage makes the individual aware of new products which nay meet his/her need. The comprehension stage is an information processing stage in which individuals learn about the char­ acteristics and functions of the product. Ihe attitude stage is believed tc be the predisposition of the individual tc evaluate the object in a favorable or unfavorable manner.

If the attitude is positive, the individual will either try the product or seek more information for legitimation. Cur­ ing the legitimation stage. individuals become convinced that the purchase is an appropriate course of action if the result is positive. If the result is negative, then the person is convinced not to try the product and the adoption process discontinues. In the trial stage, the consumer uses the product on a limited scale which may lead the individual to make a commitment toward adoption of the product by expe­ rience. In adoption stage, the consumer accepts the product and continues the purchase and/or use. The dissonance stage, suggests that the consumer may face dissonance for 31

DISSONANCE '

BEHAVIOR

FIELD < ADOPTION /

TRIAL /V

LEGITIMATION ATTITUDE / FIELD

ATTITUDE

I 1 COMPREHENSION •rl k- U 0 I 0 k I M I 0) t CO I r M I 1 L_ AWARENESS CO Pm 1 COGNITIVE ~7V FIELD PROBLEM PERCEPTION

Figure 1.- Robertson's Model of the Adoption Process (Robertson, 1971, p. 75) 32 ha/she may not be satisfied by the purchase and seeks fur­

ther legitimation to develop consonance through the use of

advertisements and interpersonal communication. If the con­

sumer fails to achieve consonance, he/she may disccntirue

the product. Robertson's adoption process model does in­

clude provision for skipping stages and feed back effect.

Ihe conceptualization of Robertson's model is based on mar­

ket research.

lurnfull and Heenaghac (1960) presented an overview of

the diffusion and adoption research and identified three

types of studies: (1) those which trace the diffusion pro­

cess, (2) those which include the adoption process, and (3) those which involve patterns of influence. Since the pres­ ent investigation focussed on the adoption process using the basis that there are influentials in each group who serve as pace setters for the group, only relevant information was included from the exhaustive work of Turnbull and heenaghan

(1980). Ihe authors examined Roger's and Robertson's models of adoption and criticized the concepts of the one-step flow

(spread of innovations from opinion leaders to consumers) and the two-step flow (spread of innovations from change agents to opinion leaders to consumers). Their criticism focussed on the dichotcmization of opinion leaders and fol­ lowers with the implication that scholars had emphasized competitive rather than complimentary role for mass media 33 and interpersonal communication channels. Ihe authors re­ commended coinfluence of both personal and impersonal chan­ nels for both leaders and followers.

Since all individuals of a social system dc not adopt an innovation at the same time, Rogers and Shoemaker (1971) set forth five adopter categories: innovators, early adop­ ters, early majority, late majority, and laggards who repre­ sent 2.5 percent, 13.5 percent, 3^ percent, 34 percent, and

If percent of the adopters respectively. The authors recog­ nized venturescmeness as a basic trait for innovators, gre­ gariousness for early adopters, deliberation for early ma­ jority, skepticism for late majority, and suspiciousness toward innovations for laggards. In addition, characteris­ tics related to socioeconomic status, personality, and com­ munication behavior were also identified for each category on the basis of 3,CCC subjects. Ihe concept of innovators being the top 2.5 percent was used for the present investi­ gation.

Similar research findings have been noted in regard to agricultural practices in India. Mohammad (1978) investi­ gated the extent of adoption of improved agricultural prac­ tices by the farmers in the Easti district of Uttar Pradesh in India. Ihe findings indicated that farmers with high ed­ ucation had higher adoption index than the farmers with low education; progressive farmers were more innovative than the 34 ones with traditional value orientation; and younger farmers

adopted innovations mere readily than the older farmers.

Fashion Besearch. In regard to the fashion process,

Sproles (1979) identified five adopter categories corre­

sponding to fiogers and Shoemaker (1971): fashion innova­

tors, fashion opinion leaders, mass market consumers, fa­ shion followers, and fashion laggards. However, Sproles

(1979) emphasized the need to consider ncnadopters as a sep­

arate category for some individuals may reject an innova­ tion. Sproles (1981) also noted that several researchers have focussed their studies on developing a profile of the characteristics of consumers in terms of their demographics, psychology, social life, exposure to communications, and product involvement varieties (awareness, interest, knowl­ edge and innovativeness). Such studies have helped in iden­ tifying patterns of behavior accng consumers involved in the fashion process. Cther studies relevant to the research un­ der investigation are presented.

Katz and lazarsfeld (1955) conducted a study to assess the concentration of the fashion leaders in terms of life cycle, interest, social status, and gregaricusness. Fashion leaders were defined as the respondents who identified them­ selves as persons who had been asked for advice by others.

The sample was comprised of 711 women. Ihe findings of the study revealed that fashion leadership was highest amcng the 35 ycunq and single women and lowest among matrons. Fashion interest was found to he highly related to the stage in the life cyole. Fashion leadership was reported to he higher for more gregarious than the less gregarious individuals.

The findings of the researoh did not reveal any difference in fashion leadership between middle and high socioeccnonic groups; however, the number of fashion leaders was reported to be less in the lower socioeconomic group.

King (1963) interviewed 303 women selected a random cluster sampling procedure to investigate the socioeconomic status of both early and late adopters. The findings of the study revealed that the early buyers were well distributed across each social class. Early buyers were higher in so­ cial status than late buyers within each social class. An­ other interesting finding of the consumer survey was that the fashion influentials were more dominant among the late adopters rather than among the early adopters.

Sproles (1968) focused his research on the profile analysis cf the durable press clothing information communi­ cator across the following dimensions: demographic; commu­ nication behavior; media exposure; attitudes; values; psy­ chological factors; social factors; and clothing awareness, ownership, innovativeness, and interest. A sample of 1000 female homemakers was randomly selected. The survey was conducted by questionnaire and personal interview techr.i- 36 ques. ahe significant predictors of the durable press clothing information communicator were found to be demo­ graphics; fashion ard man-made fibers involvement; mass me­ dia exposure, social activities, sociological variables such as number of locations lived in during last ten years; and psychological factors. Sproles suggested that the mass ma­ dia exposure needed to be analyzed further to determine spe­ cial magazines or media used by communicators.

Pasnak (1S68) identified innovators and roninnovatcrs and compared them in terms of clothing attitudes, self actu­ alization, and tolerance of ambiguity. Iho groups of twen­ ty-five undergraduate students were identified as innovators and noninnovators, and were administered the selected scales for the designated characteristics. Ihe findings revealed that innovators had positive clothing related attitudes to­ ward experimentation, intensity, closure, involution, and dressing for self. Innovators preferred the aesthetic gual- ity of complex asymmetry in design tc a greater extent than ncninnovators, which was interpreted as tolerance for ambi­ guity .

Ectertson and Myers (1S69) studied the relationship be­ tween selected personality variables, innovativeness, and opinion leadership. A sample of 95 housewives was randomly selected as the subjects for the study. Ihe findings cf the study revealed that the innovators were more self-accepting. 37 dependable, moderate, and tactful than noninnovators. In addition, the innovators were less socially mature, mere modest, and more serious. Innovativeness in clothing was found to be correlated with sociability. Ihe personality variables did not relate to opinion leadership across any of the selected product categories. Opinion leadership and in­ novativeness were reported to be related to some extent for the clothing product category.

King and Summers (1970) analyzed the overlap of opinion leadership across six broad product categories. Ihe data were collected in a survey cf new product adoption in Marian

County (Indianapolis). A random sample of 1000 respondents was selected by cluster sampling technique in spring 1967.

Ihe measure of opinion leadership used for this study was the modification of the six question self-designating method suggested by Sogers (1962) and tested by Sogers and Cartano

(1962). Ihe modification of the Soger's scale included the following: omission of the word 'new* in each of the six questions to eliminate innovator's bias, addition cf one question "In general, dc you like to talk about _____ with your friends? Yes No ,” and a change in the or­ der of questions. Opinion leadership overlapped across product categories and was highest between the categories of similar interest; the existence of a generalized opinion leader in the consumer product context was a possibility. 38 Cne of the implications of the study for future research vas the identification of opinion leaders for specific product categories as related to demographic, sociological and psy­ chological characteristics; media exposure; product inter­ est; and attitude dimension.

In another study from the same sample. Summers (1970) analyzed the characteristics of women's clothing fashion opinion leaders in regard tc their demographic, attitudinal, and sociological characteristics. Ihe findings revealed that the top 26 percent of the sample were identi­ fied as fashion opinion leaders. Ihe fashion opinion lead­ ers were reported to he younger, bad more education, were more gregarious and cosmopolite, and were more assertive and emotionally stable than the ncncpinicn leaders. In addi­ tion, magazine readership was strongly related to opinion leadership among the participants in the study of women's clothing fashions. fashion involvement was found tc occur more frequently among the fashion opinion leaders than non­ leaders.

Schrank and Gilmore (1973) investigated the character­ istics of fashion innovativeness and fashion opinion leader­ ship as related to security-insecurity, attitude toward con­ formity in dress, interest in clothing, and socicmetric level. Ihe sample included 145 college women. The findings indicated that innovators appeared to he more secure than 39 laggards, were non-conformists, were increasingly interested

in clothes, and were not a source of information for the late adopters. In contrast, fashion opinion leaders were

found tc he comparatively less secure than fashion ncncpin-

ion leaders and bad positive interest in clothes. A signif­

icant relationship was reported between fashion opinion

leadership and fashion innovativeness.

Cstlund (1974) focussed on predicting innovativeness by

perceptions of the attributes of an innovation and relating

them to the personal characteristics dimension in twc stud­ ies. a guora sample of 605 housewives from the Boston area was used for the first phase; for the second phase cf the study, 300 housewives were selected from the co-going panel to view a series cf IV commercials. The researcher found that perception of innovations by potential adopters was a mere effective predictor of innovativeness than the personal characteristic variables. Ihe author did recognize the methodological problem in data collection, that is, tc gath­ er perceptions before the adoption of a product since it may be difficult tc know the innovations to be introduced in ad­ vance. he also realized that perceptions collected after adoption may contaminate data because cf post-decision dis­ sonance .

Carden and Reynolds (1972), King and Sproles (1973),

Baumgarter. (1975) , and Behai (1977) have investigated the DO fashion variables using male samples; the results were simi­ lar to those for female samples ir terms of demographic, so­ ciological, and personality variables for fashion leaders ard nonleaders.

Polegato and Hall (1980) examined whether fashion opin­ ion leaders could be differentiated from followers in terms of their use of fashion information sources. A stratified sample cf D06 women was drawn from which 187 questionnaires were returned and useable for data analysis. The findings revealed that the two groups did not differ in terms of the variety of fashion information sources. However, fashion leaders used instore display, window shopping (marketer dom­ inated sources) , and clothing seen worn in public places

(consumer dominated source) more frequently than cther fashion sources. No significant differences were observed in the type of sources used by both fashion leaders and fol­ lowers. However, during the stage of awareness. DD percent of the leaders used magazines as opposed to 17 percent of the followers. Both leaders ard followers used marketer dominated sources the most during the awareness stage. Dur­ ing the comprehension stage, leaders used marketer dominated sources more than the followers. The marketer dominated in­ formation sources included window displays, fashion maga­ zines, radio programs, advertisements in campus newspaper, fashion shows, indoor displays, fashion counsellors, pattern 41 hocks, mail order catalogs, and sales clerks. Ihe followers used consumer-dominated sources such as class-mates, female friends, social gatherings, public places and male friends mere than the leaders. However, leaders and followers did net differ in the number of sources used during the compre­ hension stage. In the legitimation stage, leaders used a greater number of sources than the followers, although the two groups did not differ in the variety and type of sources used. Nc differences existed in terms of the demographic variables.

Guttsan and Mills <1962) extended the knowledge of the characteristics of various fashion market segments tc the retail fashion area. A 26-paqe questionnaire was completed by 6,261 subjects. Ihe findings revealed that seven fashion segments could be identified: leaders, followers, indepen­ dents, neutrals, uninvclvads, negatives, and rejectors. In terms of demographic variables, leaders were found tc he in the range between 18-24 years, higher than median in ircome, and single as compared tc those in the other categories.

Among the subjects, educational differences were minimal.

However, significant differences were reported in self con­ cept between different groups. leaders and independents perceived themselves as more sophisticated, modern, differ­ ent, chance taking, confident, creative, sociable, and out­ standing than the remaining groups. 42 Fashion adoption research in a nccwestern society was conducted by Kim and Schrank (1962). Ihe relations amcng fashion innovativeness, fashion opinion leadership, attitude toward change, and socioeconomic levels were investigated for a sample of Korean women. Cne-hundred Korean college women were selected to participate in the study. Socioeco­ nomic level was not related tc fashion innovativeness or fashion opinion leadership. However, attitude toward change was found to be correlated to leadership categories and to various adopter categories. Since significant differences were found between attitude toward change among fashion in­ novators, fashion opinion leaders, innovative communicators and non-leaders, the authors advocated further examination to ascertain the underlying differences. Since Korea is a developing country as is India, a similar study seems feasi­ ble in an Indian setting.

Schrank, Suqawara and Kim (1962) compared female stu­ dents in Korea and America in relation to their socioeconom­ ic level, attitude toward change, and fashion opinion lead­ ership. The findings revealed that socioeconomic level did not make a significant difference cn fashion opinion leader­ ship for the American students. However, attitude toward change showed a positive relationship with opinion leader­ ship but not for the fashion innovators. A comparison was made of the Korean and American samples on the basis of so- *3 cioecoccmic levels and significant differences were observed in the mean scores: the American fashion innovators and the

Amarican fashion opinion leaders were from higher socioeco­ nomic levels. Korean fashion innovators and opinion leaders scored less than the American fashion innovators and fashion

opinion leaders. However, the Korean nonleaders were from the higher socioeconomic level than the American nonleaders.

The authors reported that the norm of fashion change is in­ dependent of the cultural norms once fashion change is es­ tablished in a cultural setting. However, the authors did recognize data collection problems in two different cultures on account of the difference in the language and in adequate ccntrcl of variables.

Khanra and Verghese (1978) conducted a study of fashion consciousress among women in India. They identified and characterized fashion conscious individuals as younger in age, higher in education level, and socioeconomic status than less fashion conscious people in India.

To summarize, fashion adoption literature indicated that in the Western societies considerable study has heen done in this area. However, researoh information was limit­ ed from India, in specific, and the developing countries, in general. Thus, it is necessary tc extend the research knowledge of fashion adoption tc the developing countries. 44 aedia £j££^re

Ihe literature reviewed indicated that media exposure is an important variable in impeding or expediting the fashion process. Media exposure refers to the sources of information (both personal and isperscnal) used fcy individu­ als to seek information about the latest styles. Ihe per­ sonal sources of information include interpersonal cotcmuni- cation between the informant and his/her relatives, friends, neighbors, and sales people. Ihe impersonal sources com­ prise the use of mass-media, such as radio, television, mag­ azines, newspaper, movies, fashion shows, and agencies (Seal and Rogers, 1957; lurnhull and Meenaghan, 198G).

heal and Rogers (1957) conducted a study to investigate the use of information in adopting selected manmade fabrics; subjects for the study were 148 homemakers. Findings indi­ cated that different sources of information were used at different stages of adoption. Curing the awareness and the information stages the most freguently mentioned sources were mass media and agencies. However, during the trial stage, commercial sources (salespersons) led in number and were followed by informal agencies and mass media.

Sproles (1968) emphasized the need tc determine special magazines or media used by the communicators cf new ideas, products, and styles. Summers (1970) found that fashion opinion leaders for woman's clothing fashions had strong 45 magazine leadership. Bogers and Shoemaker (1971) reported that fashion innovators and fashion opinion leaders were ex­

posed more tc media conmunioations than were individuals in the other categories cf the fashion cycle.

Reynolds and Darden (1972) examined the importance of

fashion information seeking sources from the awareness to the rejection stage of a fashion item, the midi. Ihe find­

ings revealed that impersonal sources were the main channels for awareness of the midi hut personal sources were most im­ portant at the evaluation stage. fashion magazines were noted as the most important impersonal source to acquire in­ formation ahout the midi at the awareness stage. fashion specialized sources were more important to leaders than non­ leaders at the awareness stage whereas personal sources were of greatest importance to the nonleaders.

Baumgarten (1S75) noted that the innovative communica­ tor had a high reading level and was a reader of cosmopolite sources. Kaiglar (1975) reported that a positive relation­ ship existed between fashion innovativeness and the fashion information sources. Behai's (1977) study indicated that media exposure differed significantly among various adopter categories among male students. Polegato and Hall (1980) observed that leaders and followers differed in the frequen­ cy of media use. lurnhull and Meenaghan (1980) expounded that both personal and impersonal sources of information 46 were influential in fashion adoption and fashion diffusion

processes. Many researchers have emphasized the need tc

further analyze the use of media by the fashion communica­

tors (Baungarten, 1975; Eehal, 1977; Polegato and Kail,

1S80; Ihompson, 1977; lurnhull and Meenaghan, 1980).

Ihe influence of media has also keen observed in the

developing countries. Several writers and researchers have

indicated that mass media is used effectively in developing

countries and is influential in promoting the sale cf com­

mercial products, such as clothing, decorative objects, and

perfumes (Dhar, 1981; Singh, flesicg and Singh, 1980; O'­

Brien, 1980; Boncaglicto and Janus, 1980; Eichstad, 1979).

fiogers (1978) reported that mass communication was used in the developing countries to provide the technical infor­ mation alcng with alternatives, and tc circulate information about self development accomplishments of the local groups,

fiadio was the most popular source in the 19S0*s and televi­ sion in the 1960's. However, radio was noted tc be a mere influential source than television since it reached a wide range of audiences and contributes toward bridging the gap between elite and poor groups. In India the number cf radio stations increased from six in 1947 tc eighty four in 1979.

Ihe first IV center was set up in India in 1959. By 1979, there were eight IV centers and seven transmitters of S H E

(Satellite Instructional lelevision Experiment) on-going U7 plans. Ihe press includes newspaper, magazines, and bocks

(India, 1580:135-140). Bagbavan (1961) reported data show­

ing a significant increase in the number of radio, televi­ sion, documentary films, and cinema in India. Beltran et ai. (198C) noted that radio was the most commonly used mass

media all over the world. They further reported that radio has wider penetration in the developing countries than the developed countries. Bishra (1972) noted that the interper­ sonal communication was most influential in the diffusion of the improved agricultural practices.

Media exposure has been identified as the most impor­ tant factor in studying various adopter categories. How­ ever, in the developing countries use cf mass media was not reported to be used for fashion research specifically. Lim­ ited information was found on interpersonal communication; the information was very general and not pertinent to fa­ shion process. Most of the reports regarding use in devel­ oping countries lacked empirical evidence.

Social participation!

Social participation refers to the extent an individual affiliates with various organizations and includes frequency of participation, holding responsible positions in the or­ ganizations, and frequency cf being involved in personal ac­ tivities in a group setting such as holding and attending 48

parties, going tc movies and other related activities (Gil-

hride, I960; Miller, 1970). Ifae Western literature cn so­

cial participation and fashion process provides evidence of

the role of this variable in influencing the fashion pro­

cess. Bogers and Shoemaker (1971) reported that fashion inno­

vators and fashion opinion leaders have greater social par­

ticipation than the remaining adopter categories. King

(1965) noted that fashion leaders are more involved in so­

cial activities than fashion followers or non-leaders.

Katz and lazarsfeld (1955) found a positive relationship be­

tween fashion leadership and gregariousness. Summers (1970)

indicated that opinion leaders were more gregarious and cos­

mopolite, and Baumgarten (1975) characterized the innovative

communicator as highly sociable and a socially active indi­

vidual.

Gilbride (1980) determined the importance of sociabili­

ty as it affects fashion opinion (check) leadership amcng

semirural high school students. Gilbride adopted Chapin's

(1970) measure cf social participation in organizational

level. Sociability and fashicn opinion leadership were

found tc be related positively.

Ihe researcher did not find such studies conducted in a developing country. Ihus, it was felt imperative to inves­ tigate such a problem in a nonWestexn setting in general and

India specifically. «9

Alîiijf⣠JSMàLû SAaaaf àt. attitude toward change refers to the tendency of an individual to accept or reject newly introduced ideas, items, or information. Several researchers in the western world have reported that a positive attitude toward change is a necessary condition for the fashicn process to operate in any society (Blumer, 1966; Mertes, 1970; Biggins, 1981).

The literature review on attitude toward change is presented for Loth Western countries and India.

Blumer (1S66) identified fashicn as an expression of modernity and emphasized its association with changing tastes cf society. Ihe author further reported that in spite cf fashion's association with modernity and change orientation, fashicn does bring cchesiveness in a changing society. Hertes (1S70) recognized fashion as a concept which is motivated by change. Be alsc added that fashicn as an object is static by itself, whereas fashicn as a process is dynamic and appeals tc the motivating drive of individu­ als of any achieving society.

Bogers (1962), King (1963), and Bogers and Shoemaker

(1971) reported that innovators and opinion leaders have a more positive attitude toward change than dc those in ether adopter categories. Inkeles and Smith (1974) identified twenty-four themes for the overall modernity in their re­ search study conducted in six developing countries: Argen- 50 tiaa, Chile, East Pakistan, India, Israel, and Nigeria. Ihe sample was restricted to about 900 male students in each country. Change orientation was one of the twenty-four measures to obtain a common dimension of overall modernity.

Ihe authors developed a distinctively Indian scale of over­ all modernity which was reported to be highly correlated with overall modernity. Eaiq (1976) noted that Indian women dc have a positive attitude toward change. Eerry (1980) noted that a positive attitude toward change was a step to­ ward modernity. It was reported in India News a (1983:5) that Dr. Radhakrishnan (Ex-president of India) interpreted the blue colored wheel with 24 spckes on the Indian national flag as a symbol cf motion and dynamism for a peaceful change.

Kim and Schrank (1982) conducted a study in 1977 con­ cerning fashion adoption; the sample included 100 female students at Seoul National University cf Korea. Ihe find­ ings revealed that the early adopters of new clothing fashions had more positive attitude toward change than late adopters. Both fashion innovators and fashion opinion lead­ ers had more positive attitude toward change than the ncnin- novatcrs and nonopinicn leaders.

Schrank, Sugawara and Rim (1982) compared fashicn lead­ ership characteristics of the Korean college women and the

American college wcmen. Ihe findings indicated that for the 51

At«cicac mampi* the early adopters did net necessarily show

positive attitude toward change. When the Korean and iiraci- can samples were compared, it was icund that fashion innova­

tors did not have positive attitude toward change for the

American sample hut the Korean fashicn innovators showed po­

sitive attitude toward change. In addition, a significant

difference was found between the Kcrear innovative communi­

cators and the Amarican innovative communicators in terms of attitude toward change.

SÿÈMSn Several researchers have reported that fashicn innova­ tors and fashion opinion leaders have mere exposure to media than tha fashicn followers (Behai, 1975; Kaigler, 1975; Eo- leqato and Wall, 1980; Bogers and shoemaker, 1971; Sproles,

1568; Summers, 1570). Others have noted that the type of media used differ for various stages of adoption (Beal and

Rogers, 1557; Polegato and Wall, 1960; Reynolds and Carden,

1972). Many researchers have provided evidence that fashion innovators and fashicn opinion leaders have greater social participation than the fashion followers (Gillride, 1975;

Katz and lazarsfeld, 1955; King, 1965; Rogers and Shoemaker,

1971; Summers, 1970). In addition, a number cf researchers have indicated that fashion innovators and fashion opinion leaders have a more positive attitude toward change than the 52 fashicn followers (Kim and Schrank, 1982; Rogers, 1962; Rog­ ers and Shoemaker, 1971; Schrank, Sugawara ard Kim, 1982} whereas Blumer (1966), Higgins (1961), Mertes (1970) identi­ fied change as a necessary condition for fashicn to exist in any society.

Baumgarten (1975), King (1965), and Sproles (1979) rec­ ognized the overlap between fashior. innovators and fashion opinion leaders and labelled the group as innovative commu­ nicators. This group performs a dual role cf both innova­ tors and opinion leaders.

Host of the research work cited above was conducted in the Western countries. Although use of media in the diffu­ sion of information , changing attitudes, and changing so­ cial roles have been recognized by several writers and re­ searchers (Beltran et al., 1980; Ehushar, 1958; Cbaturvedi,

1982; Char, 1981; Ghurye, 1966; Inkeles and Smith, 197U;

Lamb, 1975; Mishra, 1972; Hohammad, 1978; C*Brien, 1980; Ba- qhavan, 1981; Richstad, 1979; Bogers, 1978; Boncagliolo and

Janus, I960; Singh, 1966, Singh, Fleming and Singh, 1980), very little information was found in context cf developing countries, in general, and India, specifically. Host cf the literature available relating to the fashion process in de­ veloping countries (including India) lacked empirical evi­ dence. 53 Statement of Hypotheses

Eased on the literature reviewed, the four hypotheses

were formulated.

Hypothesis 1: Among college women in northern India,

the variables of media exposure, social par­

ticipation, attitude toward change can be

used to discriminate between fashion innova­

tors and fashion ncninnovators.

a) fashion innovators will have greater

media exposure than fashion roninnova-

tors.

h) fashion innovators will be higher in

social participation than fashion non­

innovators,

c) fashion innovators will have a more po­

sitive attitude toward change than fa­

shion ncninnovators.

Hypothesis II: Among Indian college women in northern

India, fashion innovators will differ from

fashion nonicncvatcrs for the selected demo­

graphic characteristics.

a) fashion innovators will be from higher

income segments of society than fashion

Eoninnovators. 5« k) fashion innovators will more frequently

come from families with urkan back­

ground than will fashion eoninnovators.

c) fashion innovators will belong to mere

educated families than fashion ncninno­

vators.

Hypothesis III: Among the college women in Northern India,

the variables of media exposure, social par­

ticipation and attitude toward can be used to

discriminate between fashion opinion leaders,

and fashion noncpinion leaders.

a) fashion opinion leaders will have

greater media exposure than fashion no­

nopinion leaders.

b) fashion opinion leaders will be higher

in social participation than fashion

nonopinion leaders.

c) fashion opinion leaders will have a

more positive attitude toward change

than fashion noncpinion leaders.

Hypothesis IV: Among college women in northern India,

fashion opinion leaders will differ from fa­

shion nonopinion leaders for the selected de­

mographic characteristics. 55 a) fashion opinion leaders will be from

higher income segment of than fashion

nonopinion leaders,

h) fashion opinion leaders will belong to

more educated families than fashion no-

rcpinion leaders.

In addition to the proposed hypotheses, fashion innova­ tive communicators were identified to find out the percent­ age representation of the individuals in this category. CBAFTEfi 1 1 1

HZIE0 DC1 0 GÏ

Ihe theoretical framewcrk of the study was based or the diffusion and adoption of innovations (Fogers, 1962; Robert­ son, 1971) with particular emphasis on the fashion process.

Ihe procedure is presented under the following topics: (1) preliminary survey, (2) research design, (3) population and sample, ^^) identification and development of measures, (5) pretest, (6) final data collection, and (7) analysis of data.

iceliminaij Jorvei

An open-ended questionnaire of fifteen questions was developed to obtain current descriptive information about the fashion process for the population under investigation

(Appendix A). Included in the questionnaire were such items as style of outfits added tc wardrobe, criteria used in se­ lection, reasons for purchase, use of informational sources tc become familiar with the latest styles, places for pur-

- 56 - 57

Chase, and reasons fer enjoying the latest styles. Twenty

questionnaires were sailed in Hintei of 1982 tc two colleges

in north India: lady Irwin College, Delhi; and J. C. College

cf Home Science, Hissar. The questionnaires were distribut­

ed to fashion conscious students in each of the locations by

two faculty coordinators selected for the purpose. Fashion

conscious students were charactereized as the ones -who

adopted the latest styles. Fifteen completed questionnaires

were returned in March of 1982.

The responses were tabulated and the following observa­

tions were mads: (1) respondents used a variety of dress

styles which included saree, (sari and saree are used inter­

changeably in Indian literature}, salwar/Kaneez with or

without dupatta, churridar pyjama and kurta with or without

scarf (chunri), dresses, jeans, jeans with jackets, and bell

bottom suit; (2) informational sources frequently used to

acquire fashion information included movies, magazines, . and

fashion shows; and (3) interpersonal communication (friends

and parents) played a very important rcle in seeking infor­

mation regarding the latest styles. Seasons tc purchase fa­

shionable clothes were cited as follows: tc he appreciated

by others, to look smart, to be in style, to change with the

times, tc move with the crowd, to Icok graceful, tc acquire self satisfaction, and to develop self confidence. The in­

formation obtained from responses to the questionnaire was 58 further validated hy interviewing Indian visitors to Colum­ bus and reviewing Indian magazines regarding current fa­ shions. Although the fashion process appeared to operate among college women in India, empirical evidence was be­ lieved to be needed tc validate the observations and to test the theoretical basis of the fashion process.

Research JDjsign

Ihe research design of the study can be classified as separate-sample pretest-pcsttest design (Campbell and Stan­ ley, 1963:40). Ihe diagram is as follows:

(X)

£ = fiandomized Sample

C - Observation

(A) = Pretest questionnaire

X = Posttest questionnaire

Campbell and Stanley (1963) noted that such a design is ap­ propriate for large populations, such as students in 59 schools, and that the research design takes the laboratory

into the field situation. Ihe separate-sample pretest-post-

test design does not have protleis with external validity.

However, some of the threats to internal validity are histo­

ry, maturation, morality, and interaction of selection and

maturation. Ihe authors noted that the threat tc history

can be controlled by repeating this design in different set­

tings. Maturation, according to Campbell and Stanley

(1963), is not a serious problem when the setting for a sur­

vey is in college classrooms since the samples are large and

hetrcgenous, both in terms of age and the year in college.

Thus, the pretest and posttest data are equivalent. Ihe au­ thors further noted that instrumentation error could be im­

proved by using self-administered questionnaires in the

classroom situation. Independent selection of pretest and

posttest samples at appropriately different times can con­ trol the problem cf morality tc some extent. The authors recognized that the use of such a design in social science research was appropriate.

Ihe techniques suggested tc control the elements of

threat to internal validity could be incorporated into the

design. In addition, this design offers better generaliz-

aiility. Therefore, for the research under investigation, the separate-sample pretest-posttest design seemed to be an

appropriate research design. 60 fSfjiiatign and J a ulj

Fesale collage students were identified as the popula­ tion to he studied. Eeseazcbeis (Katz and lazarsfeld* 1955) reported that college women who were young and single were tha most active in influencing fashion. Khanna and fergbese

(1978) reported that highly fashion conscious women in India were younger in age, higher in educational level, and higher in socio-economic status than less fashion conscious women.

Female college students in the north-west region of India were selected for the following reasons: 1) the diversity of seasons which exist in this region encourages the changes in mode of dressing according to the season; the southern region of India does not have such diversity of seasons; 2) the area has been vulnerable tc foreign invasions over the centuries and this has contributed to the ability of the people to adapt to changes (Schulberg, 1968}; on the contra­ ry, the southern region cf India has not teen exposed to such invasions and is well known for preserving the cultural traditions of India; and 3) diversity in mode cf dressing is more visible and changes in dress-styles are more freguent in northwest India than in the southern region (Ehushan,

1950; Ghurya, 1966) . 61 aamEie

Seven universities were selected in noithvest India in the states of Gujarat, Haryana, Punjab, Rajasthan, and Dttar

Pradesh, and in a union territory, Delhi (figure 2). Five of the universities had colleges which offered the Bachelor of Science degree in Home Science; cne university had six women's colleges, one home science and five with general bachelor's degrees in science and arts (E.Sc., F.a.); and ons university did not have a home science college but had a college in which home science was offered as cne of the sub­ jects. Iherefcre, twelve colleges were contacted and asked to participate in the study. Cf these, four home science colleges and three colleges with Bachelor of Science and Art degree (henceforth referred to as con-home science) agreed tc participate. From the seven colleges, two non-hose sci­ ence colleges were used for pretest and the remaining five were used for the final data collection. Different settings were used for pretest and posttest to control threat to his­ tory as internal validity (Campbell and Stanley, 1963).

Within northwest India there is diversity; therefore, the use of hose science colleges in a university was considered a common basis for the sample for the study. Ihe inclusion of one non-home science college for the final data collec­ tion was to ascertain whether the variable of major area of study made a difference in the findings. 62

X JAMMU » KASHMIR / t o / imûtaf FEDERAL DIVISIONS

« i6 5 fil J PAKISTAN Punjab,

N48J)ELHI RAJASTHAN \UTTAR PRADESH IWMNI / '""TJ'W BHUTAN

BIHAR ;'BAN=LA^Æ“y . GUJARAT (I7<008| T DESH RJ.O'goi 11870911 WEST O B b o p o lQ MADHYA PRADESH BENGAL! 0 " (Mi l B U R M A A hredobod M 4 3 4 5 9 I (876761okutloO \ 5i/vaii0 ORISSA (IS S B 6 0 ) MAHARASHTRA Bhubantihwof O Bombay (J 0 7 2 6 9 ) BENGAL

Q H f d e r o b o d ANDHRA PRADES (2 7 S 2 4 4 ) G dT d U MYSORE 13723) \ (I9I7S7)

aongofen M a d fa i PondfCherfy ANDAMAN AND LACADIVE, K E . . , . i TAMILNAOU 0 MINICOY a. ^7?8«P t Pretest sites NICOBAR ISLANDS AMINCIVI ISLANDS 187971 i2 8 l

m r e n d r u m • Final Data Collection;

Sri Iflfiàa Sites Q

c E A NI

Figure 2. Map of India and Sites of Participating Colleges 63

Identjficatigfl and Development oj Begsares

Since little leeearch has teen dene related to fashion

in India, empirical studies of the fashion process in socie­

ties ether than India were examined tc identify pertinent

concepts and possible relationships of variables. Ihe vari­

ables tc be investigated were as fellows: fashion innova­

tors, fashion opinion leaders, fashion noninnevators, itedia exposure, social participation, attitude toward change, and

demographic information. Ihe literature was reviewed to identify pertinent measures for the selected variables and modified to be relevant for the Indian sample. Final selec­ tion of the instruments was subject to their performance in the pretest in terms of reliability and validity. Ihe pre­ test measures are included in Appendix E.

fashion Innovators

A fashion innovator is an individual who adopts new styles early in the fashion cycle, and owns and wears a larger number of new fashion items then the late adopters

(Schrank, 1S7Û). Ihe Fashion Innovativeness Beasure of

Schrack (1970) was selected to identify fashion innovators; it had been used with an American sample and was later adapted fer a Korean sample (Kin and Schrank, 1982). 64 Ihe original fashion Innovativeness Measure consisted

of two parts. Part I was based on the premise that innova­

tors adopt many new fashions rather than just cne, and, that

they adopt new styles early in the fashion cycle. Part II

cf the measure consisted of four self-designating Guttman-

type questions. Each response was assigned scores from 0 to 4 depending on the response category, k composite score ob­ tained from the response to the four questions was used to

determine the fashion innovativeness of the individual and to identify the fashion innovators. Ihe top 2.5 percent of the sample were identified as the innovators (Ecgers and

Shoemaker, 1971).

Part I of the measure was adapted for the Indian popu­ lation and was reworded for clarity. Ihe dress items used by the college women in India are different from those used by the American college students. Iherefore, ten fashion items used by the Indian college women were identified on the basis of the preliminary survey, review cf Indian maga­ zines, ard interviews with the Indian visitors to Columius

(Appendix F, Sketches were not used in the measure, but are included for the clarity of fashion items used in the fa­ shion Innovativeness Measure, particularly for the nonlndian readers.) Additional information requested were the numter owned for each item (Column A), and the tips (month and year) when each of the dress items were first acquired (Col­ 65 umn B). Schrank (1970) used the general terms "owned" and

"when acquired" in the original framework cf the measure.

Part 1 was used to confirm whether the fashion inncvatcrs adopted new fashion items early in the fashion cycle and owned a larger number than the ncniincvators as suggested by

Schrank (1970). Ihe style rejection index of Eehal (1977) was used to identify whether any of the ncninnovators were really style rejectors. Responses to column C, *dc net plan tc own* included the styles which individuals neither owned ncr intended to own.

iâëhiss Opinion Leaders A fashion opinion leader is an individual whc serves as a source cf advice and information for ether individuals she knows (Schrank, 1970). Ihe measure selected to identify fa­ shion opinion leaders was a modified six-item opinion lead­ ership measure of Boger (1962) which was used by Pclegato and Wall (1980). Roger's (1962) self-designating opinion leadership has also been modified and successfully used by other researchers in the fashicn area (Eehal, 1977; Summers,

1970). Ihe identified measure. Part III of the question­ naire, is a Guttman type scale. Each item had three respon­ ses, and each response was scored from 0-2 depending on the response category. Ihe possible score range was from 0 to

12; a high score indicated fashion opinion leadership. 66 Media ^gassure

Media exposure refers to the sources cf information

(loth personal and impersonal) used by individuals tc seek information about the latest styles (Folegato and Wall,

1S80). Pclgato and Wall's (1980) measure for fashion infor­ mation sources was selected to measure the media exposure variable for it was designed to identify the channels used at the awareness, comprehension and legitimation stage of adoption (Bobertson, 1971) ; and to obtain responses on the frequency of media use.

Pclegato and Wall's measure was adapted for the present study as shown in Part IV and V cf the questionnaire (Appen­ dix B); the length of questionnaire was shortened tc include only that information needed for the present investigation.

A few charges were made in the list of fashicn information sources tc make the measure pertinent to the Indian sample.

In addition, to enable the researcher tc include items deemed necessary in an Indian context, the response catego­ ries for the awareness, comprehension, and legitimation stage were increased from six to nine, and frequency ques­ tions from ten to thirteen. Information received from Part

IV' of the questionnaire was used tc assess the knowledge about the type of media used during the various stages of adoption. Each response for frequency of media use (Part V of the questionnaire) was assigned scores from 0 tc h da- 67 pendicg cc the response category. The scores ranged froo 0 to 52; a high score on this measure was assumed to reflect a greater degree of media exposure than a lew score.

Social farticifation

Social participation refers to the extent of affilia­ tion with various organizations, such as by holding respon­ sible positions in those organizations to get group accep­ tance and by involvement in personal activities for a positive response from peers (Gilbride, 1980; Miller, 1970}.

A two part Social Participation Measure (Gilbride, 1980) was selected to measure the variable of social participation

(Part VI 6 VII of the questionnaire). Iwo types of ques­ tions were asked in Part VI: affiliation with social organi­ zations and whether an officer's position was held. Part

VII was designed to measure respondent's (students in this case) personal activities. Appropriate activities and events were used in the framework of the measure such as Na­ tional Cadet Corps, National Service Scheme, literary Socie­ ty, and Cultural Society. Items specifically pertinent to

American society were excluded. Scores from 0 to 3 were as­ signed to quantify student's affiliation with social organi­ zations ard personal activities. In addition, one point was assigned for each office which was held. Ihe possible score range was from 0 to 54; a high score indicated active social participation. 68 Attitude Jgward Change

Attitude toward change refers tc the individual's feel­

ing regarding the adoption or rejection of newly introduced

ideas, items, or information (Rogers and Shoemaker, 1971).

Since fashion involves change, it would he expected

that fashion oriented individuals would feel positive toward

change. Iherefore, the literature was reviewed regarding

change in traditional societies. Inkeles and Smith (1974)

developed an overall modernity measure which included a sec­

tion in Change Orientation. Ihe measure had keen used in

five developing countries (including India) in context of

agricultural practices. The section on change orientation

served as a basis for part cf the Attitude Toward Change

Measure (Part VIII of the questionnaire. See Appendix E).

Items 5, 6, and 7 were modified from the charge orientation

section (Inkeles and Smith, 1974). Other items in the Atti­

tude toward Change Measure were developed by the researcher

which included a set of eleven dichotomous questions under

item 4b. The basis for these questions was drawn from the

history and culture of India. Items 1, 2, 3, 4a, and 8 were

developed by the researcher to provide context elements in the measure.

Each response for items 4b, £, 6, and 7, was assigned a score ranging from C to 1. The items with more than two re­

sponses were weighted to make responses from all items 69 equivalent. Ihe possible score ranged from 0 to 14. A cu­

mulative score for the respondent determined the intensity

of her attitude toward change, with a high score indicating a positive attitude toward change. Eespcnse to items 1, 2,

3, 4a and 8 were not assigned a score hut frequency courts

were used to understand the context of questions which were

quantified.

Demographic Variables

Demographic variables included parent's education, oc­

cupation, income, background, travel abroad, student's age,

brothers and sisters in the family, year in the college, scholar status (day scholar or hosteller), and major area of study.

Pretest

Twenty questionnaires (Appendix B) were mailed in June

1982 to the coordinators for data collection in two col­ leges: ore in Rajasthan (a state) and cne in Delhi (a union territory). Ihe coordinators were requested tc randomly se­ lect the sections cf the classes to administer the question­ naire by either flipping a coin or using the lot system.

Ihey were asked to distribute the questionnaires to the sec­ ond and third year students cf a three-year E.Sc. program, and the third and fourth year students in the four year pro- 70 qram. It vas telieved that the students in the final year

of study vould he well acquainted with the college setting.

Ihe purpose of the pretest was tc examine the measures se­

lected for identified va riahles, clarity cf language, and

tc identify non-discriminating items. Ihe sites selected

for the pretest ware not included for posttest tc avoid de­

layed effect on the subjects.

Iwenty-seven completed questionnaires were returned by

October 1S82. Ihe pretest data were analyzed using princi­

ples cf scale construction to ascertain the validity and re­

liability of the selected measures in a nonKestern setting

(Kunnally, 1979). Descriptive statistics and correlations

were used to understand the general nature cf the data as

well as the magnitude and direction of the relationships be­

tween the selected variables.

Ihe findings for the pretest included that the fashion

process appeared to operate in India, and each segment of

the consumer market was justifiably represented. factor

analysis was used to test the validity and reliability of

the measures used in the instrument. The measures used were

found valid and reliable on the basis cf the acceptable

norms (heise and Bchrnstedt, 197C; Smith, 1974). Ihe sta­ tistics for construct validity rhc ( P) and reliability

(Ueise and Bohrnstedt*s omega n were calculated and were

as follows: 1) fashion Innovativeness Measure ( P = 1.J,Q

= .60) , 71

2) Opinicn leadership Measure ( P = 1.1, ft = .89), 3)

Media Exposure Measure ( P- 1.CG, ft =.89), 4) Social Par- ticipatior Measure (P- .97, ft = .99) , and 5) Attitude lo-

ward Change Measure ( P = 1.08, ft = .92). Smith (1974)

noted that construct validity can go over cne; however, re­

liability coetficiert ft ranges from 0 tc 1 (Heise and

Bchrnstedt, 1975) . Ihe findings revealed that the relation­ ships between and among the selected variables were consis­ tant with the informa tien found in the Western literature.

One obvious difference was found tc be in the rcle cf pa­ rents at the legitimation stage as an influential. Such a

finding was not reported in the fashicn literature ci the

western society.

On the basis of the results of pretest, a few changes were made in the sample and the instrument:

a) Sample was expanded to include first tc third year

students for the three year B.Sc. program and first to

fourth year students for the Fcur Year E.Sc. program

instead of only the two year students in each program.

Ihe basis for the change was that students have had tc

wear uniforms prior tc entering college. Ihe year of

entering the college is the first time fcr them tc se­

lect dress styles of their choice and use clothing for

self-expression. 72 b) in the section on stages of adoption, a separate cat­

egory was added for the parent's influence in deci­

sion-making. Several respondents mentioned parents in

the 'other category*.

c) In the Social Participation Measure, the future affil­

iation category was eliminated for offices held ic the

past, present and future. The response would have

been presumptory rather than realistic.

d) In the demographic section, a guestion was added re­

garding place of student's residence: hosteller (dor­

mitory) or nonhosteller. Basis for this inclusion was

to assess whether hosteller students were influenced

less by their parent in legitimizing their choices

about new fashion items than day scholars.

Data Collection

The final questionnaire (Appendix C) was duplicated, packaged and mailed (air mail) to five coordinators in India in December of 1982. A set of instruction was included re­ garding administration of the measures and their return to the researcher by air mail. In addition, a letter was in­ cluded to obtain general information about the colleges. A total of EDO questionnaires were sent to five colleges. The final data sample distribution sites were: 1) lady Irwin

College, lelhi (200) ; 2) I. C. College cf Heme Science, His- 73 sar (150); 3) College of Borne Science, Ludhiana (200); 4)

College of Home Science, Udaipur (200); Gargi College, Delhi

(50). Ihe coordinators were directed tc collect data by us­

ing lot system in making selection of the sections for each

class during the last two weeks cf January, 1983. It was

recommended that the instrument be administered in a class­

room situation. Ihe students whc did not wish tc partici­

pate were excluded from the study.

The follow up procedures included reminder letters

every five weeks and cne telegram after twenty weeks.

Data lÆaljÆis

The data were ceded and transferred to data cards for

computer analysis. Frequencies, means, percentages, stan­

dard deviations and correlations were used fcr the descrip­ tive purposes. Descriptive statistics were utilized to identify fashion innovators and fashicn opinion leaders on

tha basis of criteria suggested in the literature by Rogers

(1962) and Summers (1970).

Hypotheses I and 111 were tested by analysis of vari­ ance (ANCVA), stepwise multiple regression, and stepwise discriminant analysis using SPSS (Statistical Package for

Social Sciences), for the Analysis of Variance and discrim­

inant analysis, the dependent variables were media exposure, social participation and attitude toward change and the in­ 74 dependent variables were class of fashion innovativeness and class of fashion opinion leadership. However, for the mul­ tiple regression, the dependent variables were fashicn inno­ vativeness and fashicn opinion leadership and the predictor variables were media exposure, social participation and at­ titude toward change.

The Analysis cf Variance yielded information about the differences between the group means of the two subgroups each fcr the class of fashion innovativeness and the class of fashion opinion leadership. Stepwise multiple regression was executed to find the best linear prediction equation tc predict fashion innovativeness and fashion opinion leader­ ship. Ihe discriminant analysis verified the classification of fashion innovators and fashion ncninnovators, and fashion opinion leaders and fashion ncnopinicn leaders, and tested the differences between the group centroids cf the two ^ets of the identified subgroups. In addition, AKGVAS were com­ puted tc identify some of the detailed relationships cf in­ dividual items composing three cf the measures (Media Expo­ sure, Social Participation, and Attitude Toward Change).

Hypotheses 11 and IV were tested by Chi square contin­ gency table analysis. Chi square was employed tc test the statistical differences fcr the demographic variables be­ tween fashion inncvatcrs and fashicn ncninnovators and fa­ shion opinion leaders and fashicn ncncpinion leaders. 75 The level of significance to accept the hypotheses vas established at .05 level, for the interpretation of seme of the contextual questions included in the questionnaire, fre­ quencies and percentages were used. Bcliahility cf the measures was calculated using Heise and Eofainstedt's omega n (Heise and Bchrnstedt*s, 1970). Validity coefficient Eho

(p) was also calculated using following formula givsn by

Heise and Bchrnstedt (1970). CHAPIES IV

SAMPLE DESCfilFlICN AMD FEEIININABX CAIA ANALYSIS

Ihe sample is descrited in terms of distribution and response to questionnaires. Ihe demographic characteristics of respondents are described to provide an overall profile of the sanple. Ihe next section includes computation of the reliability and validity coefficients for the selected meas­ ures. finally, data from the measures were used to identify three subgroups (fashion inncvatcrs vs fashion noninncva- tors, fashion opinion leaders vs fashion ncncpinion leaders, and fashion innovative communicators vs fashion toninncva- tive communicators) which were the focus for hypothesis testing and subsequent analysis.

- 76 - 77 MSsegnse tg ^sestigsonire Of the 600 questionnaires which were mailed to the five coordinators in selected colleges in northwestern India, 727 were distributed and 517 were returned; 509 were useable

(lable 1). Ihe low response rate (24%) from lady Irvin Col­ lege was attributed to a student strike followed by a long vacation. fcr the remaining colleges, the return rate ranged from 72.6% to 99.7%.

Ihe letters and telegrams sect to coordinators, to re­ mind them of the time-frame and to inquire about problems, helped to expedite the process of obtaining completed ques­ tionnaires. However, the information requested from the co­ ordinators regarding enrollment and related information for the selected colleges was not returned. 7o

TABLE 1 DISTRIBUTION OF QUESTIONNAIRES AND PERCENTAGE OF RETURNS

Questionnaires Name of College Mailed Distributed Returned N N N %

College of Home 150 150 109 72.6 Science, HAU Hissar

College of Home 200 160 159 99.7 Science, PAU Ludhiana

College of Home 200 167 159 95.2 Science, Udaipur

Gargi College, 50 50 42 84.0 Delhi Lady Irwin 200 200 48 24.0 College, Delhi Total 800 727 517* 71.1 a Useable data = 509 (70.9%). 79

ÇeaograBàiÇ Characteristics of a@ÆEOB&@nlS The demographic irforsaticn vas tabulated to provide a general profile of the respcnderts and is presented in Table

2. The details about the educational program of the respon­ dents are presented in Table 3.

The age of the respondents ranged from 13 to 24 years with the majority {about 76%) of the subjects betveer 16 to

20 years. Nearly 82% of the respondents had from one to four brothers and sisters. Almost two thirds of the respon­ dents (65%) were the oldest cr second eldest child in the family.

The father's occupation, as identified by over one-half

(54%) of the respondents, vas in government service, whereas

33% were businessmen. Such a response would be typical to an open ended question on occupation in an Indian setting. A wide range of positions are included for the government-ser­ vice-related- jobs, such as clerical to executive, unskilled tc skilled to technical, and metrcpolital tc state to na­ tional level. fcr businesmen the range includes from a shopkeeper to a leading industrialist, from a trader of ne­ cessities to the dealer of luxuries. Cver 80% of the moth­ ers were reported to be housewives. TABLE 2 DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RESPONDENTS

Characteristic Number Percent

Age

13-14 2 0.4 15 11 2.2 16 56 11.0 17 91 17.8 18 158 31.1 19 110 21.5 20 59 11.6 21 9 1.8 22 23-24 2 0.4 No response 11 2.2 Total 509 100.0 Number of Brothers and Sisters

0 12 2.3 1 82 16.1 2 156 30.7 3 106 20.8 4 75 14.8 5 35 6.8 6 18 3.5 7 12 2.4 8 7 1.4 9 5 1.0 10 1 0.2 Total 509 100.0 Brothers and Sisters Older than Respondents

0 189 37.2 1 140 27.5 2 85 16.7 3 49 9.6 4 15 2.9 5 16 3.1 6 7 1.4 7 6 1.2 8 2 0.4 Total 509 100.0 81

TABLE 2 (Continued)

Characteristic Number Percent

Father's Occupation Government service 274 53.8 Businessman 167 32.8 Farmer/agriculturist 31 6.1 Expired 26 5.1 Retired 9 1.8 Private company employee 2 0.4 Total 509 100.0 Mother's Occupation Housewife 411 80.8 Teaching 72 14.2 Farming 23 4.5 Nursing 2 0.4 Business 1 0.2 Total 509 100.0 Father's Education Post graduate 174 34.2 Professional graduate 78 15.3 Grduate 151 29.6 High school/higher sec./intermediate 68 13.4 Middle 4 0.8 Primary 4 0.8 Illiterate 30 5.9 Total 509 100.0 Mother's Education Post graduate 69 13.6 Professional graduate 2 0.4 Graduate 149 29.3 High school/higher sec./intermediate 190 37.3 Middle 24 4.7 Primary 24 4.7 Illiterate 51 10.0

Total 509 100.0 02

TABLE 2 (Continued)

Characteristic Number Percent

Backqround of Father

Urban 315 61.9 Rural 173 34.6 No response 21 4.1 Total 509 100.0 Backqround of Mother

Urban 328 64.4 Rural 160 31.5 No response 21 4.1 Total 509 100.0 Family Income per Month

Rs 1501 & above 222 43.6 Rs 1251-1500/- 64 12.6 Rs 1001-1250/- 44 8.6 Rs 751-1000/- 28 5.5 Rs 501-750/- 16 3.1 Rs 251-500/- 7 1.4 Rs 250 and below 1 0.2 No response 127 24.8 Total 509 100.0 Parents travelled Abroad

No 301 59.1 Yes 158 31.1 No response 50 9.8 Total 509 100.0 83 The laloiity of the fathers (79%) had a formal educa­ tion of graduate or higher degree, 30% were high school/ higher secondary/ intermediate, and 8% were middle school or less. The mothers cf the respondents had less education than their fathars with 43% graduate cr higher, 37% high school/higher seccndaiy/internediate, and atcut 20% midole school and less.

The family income of ahout 95% cf the respondents who responded to income guesticn (75% of the sample) was more than one thousand rupees per iccth. In terms of foreign trips, only 31% of the parents (mainly fathers) had tra­ velled abroad.

Thus, the sample represented a mere urban and higher income group than would he found in the general population of India. Such a sample in a developing ccurtry would he a group which could afford tc buy the latest fashions and use a variety of sources to acquire information about fashion items.

As shown in Table 3, the participation from the two types cf college programs, three year and four year, was 40 and 58 percent respectively, for the total sample, the num­ ber of participants in the first three years cf college were quite evenly represented; there were fewer participants in the fourth year since all colleges did not have a four year 8U

TABLE 3 EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM AND RELATED INFORMATION REGARDING THE RESPONDENTS

Characteristic Number Percent

Program

Three year 297 58.3 Four year 207 40.7 No response 5 1.0 Total 509 100.0 Year in College

First 129 25.3 Second 147 28.9 Third 156 30.7 Fourth 70 13.7 No response 7 1.4 Total 509 100.0 Major

B.Sc. (Home Science) 456 89.5 B.Sc. (General) 42 8.3 No response 11 2.2 Total 509 100.0 Residential status

Day scholar 326 64.1 Hosteller 170 33.4 No response 13 2.5 Total 509 100.0 85 program. In regard tc major area cf study, 89% of the re­ spondents were home science majors.

In response to the guesticn on the residential status of the participants as day scholars/hostellers |whc lived in a dormitory), nearly two thirds (64%) cf the respondents represented day scholars. The remaining one third were re­ ported to be hostellers.

JÇiiâibiliti and JàUÛAïl Si 11>£ £sst£uaents

Used to jeaju^e the Selected lâSiâÈlSâ

The five measures (fashion innovativeness, fashion opinion leadership, media exposure, social participation and attitude toward change were tested for their reliability

(Heise and Bchrnstedt's Cmega f) ) and validity coeffi­ cients (rho, p ). Heise and Bohcnstedt*s Omega ( Q ) is the ratio of the differences between the sums of the items in the diagonal and sum of the ccmmunality scores to all en­ tries in the correlation matrix excluding diagonals sub­ tracted from unity (Heise and Eohrnstedt, 1970). It is a more conservative test of reliability than Cronbach's alpha

( a ) and Armor and Beaton's pi { n )• Estimate cf con­ struct validity rho ( P ) refers to the ratio between the sum of the factor loadings to the sguare root of all the en­ tries in the correlation matrix excluding diagonals (Heise 86 and Bohinstedt, 1970). Factor analysis vas computed to ob­ tain ccmmunalities and factor loadings and Product Moment

Correlation vas computed for the correlation.

All measures vere found to fce reliable and valid. ihe descriptive statistics, reliability, and validity cceffi- ceuts for all the measures are presented in Table 4; the re­ liability coefficients ( (1 ) ranged from .54 to .89 and va­ lidity coefficients ranged from 1.1 tc 1.4. The reliability coefficient for the Fashion Innovativeness Measure (with four items) vas 0.30; after dropping the item which did not meet the established criteria the three item measure in­ creased in reliability to .54. Scbranb (1974) did cot re­ port reliability of the measure; therefore, it could not be compared. Hovever, the Q of .54 vas low based on Mutual­ ly 's (1978) recommendations. For the Fashion Opinion Lead­ ership measure, A of .69 in the present study vas consis­ tent with reliability coefficient of .703 as reported by

Eoqers and Cartano (1962) who originally developed a six item self designating measure of opinion leadership. The

Cmega of .85 for the media exposure measure in the present study was in agreement with . a of .86 found by Morris

(1983). The Social Participation Measure yielded reliabili­ ty coefficient of .78. Gilbride (1980) did not report reli­ ability coefficient for the measure used in her research. 87 However, Gilbride adopted her measure from Chapin's measure and Chapic (1970) reported .89 which compared favorably to the one fcund for the present study. Ihe Attitude Toward

Change Measure (developed by the researcher) had a reliabil­ ity of .79 which, based on the preceding discussion is ac­ ceptable in the social science research.

Since the reliability coefficeint for the Fashion Inno­ vativeness Measure was low, the measure was reexamined using the principles of scale construction which included testing the data for range, skewness, normalcy, homoscadasticity and linearity tc assess the items on measure for the number of problems. The next step was the interpretation of the ma­ trix, based on the identified problems, and evaluation of factor analysis for scaling which included both definition of factors and reliability and validity cf the measure (Nun- nally, 1978}. Since all items (except item 1) were skewed, it was decided to use level of significance .01 cr greater.

The items which did not meet this criteria were dropped. A close examination of the correlation matrix revealed that item 3 cf the Fashion Innovativeness Measure ("I acquire a new fashion item only after talking ahout it with some one:

A l w a y s Sometimes Never") did not show significant correlation with two cf the remaining three items. There­ fore, item 3 was dropped from the measure before computing 68

TABLE 4 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR THE FIVE INSTRUMENTS AND THE RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY COEFFICIENTS

Instrument® Mean S.D. Reliability Validity Coefficient^ Coeff.c

Fashion Inno- , , vativeness (FI) 5.50 1.45 .54° 1.4° Fashion Opinion Leadership (FOL) 6.65 3.35 .69 1.3 Media Exposure (ME) 21.56 9.32 .85 1.1 Social Partici­ pation (SF) 20.87 8.27 .78 1.4 Attitude Toward Change (ATC) 7.99 2.99 .79 1.1

N = 509 a = Possible score range: FI 0-9; FOL 0-12; ME 0-52; SP 0-69; ATC 0-14 b - Heise and Eohrnstedt's Omega c = Rho d = Reliability and validity were computed for the three item measure of fashion innovativeness. 89 the cumulative score of the individuals. Ihe reliability coefficient improved from .30 for the four item measure to

.54 for the three item measure nhich was used for further computations in the present study. However, no change was observed in the value of construct validity after dropping item 3.

lâjifitifiçatlon of Fashion I n n o v ^ o f s , f a s M s n

Ofinion j-eaders and Fashign Innovative

communicators

Cumulative scores obtained from the Fashion innovative­ ness and Fashion Opinion leadership Measures were computed fcr frequency distributions. Eased on the criteria estab­ lished in the methodology section (p. 62-64), the respon­ dents were classified in three categories (Table 5). TABLE 5

CLASSIFICATION OF FASHION INNOVATORS, FASHION OPINION LEADERS, AND FASHION INNOVATIVE COMMUNICATORS

Category Number Percent

Fashion Innovators 30 5.9 Fashion Noninnovators 479 94.1

Fashion Opinion Leaders 180 35.4 Fashion Nonopinion Leaders 329 64.6 Fashion Innovative Communicators 22 4.3 Fashion Noninnovative Communicators 487 95.7

N = 509

vOO 91

Identification si iâshiss lDSSS3ê IhE xespcodents &ho scored 8 cr higher on the Fashion

Innovativeness Measure frange 0-9) were classified as

fashion innovators (n=30). Ihe subgroup cf fashion innova­

tors represented the top 5.S percent cf the respondents; the remaining 94.1 percent were categorized as fashion ncninno-

vators. Ihe percentage of 5.9 for the fashion innovators

was higher than the 2.5 percent of Eogers f1S62) whose work

was based on the findings from the research cn agricultural

practices. Thompson (1977) found that the acceptance pat­ tern in the fashion diffusion process was net the same as

fcr agricultural practices. Fashion innovations are accept­ ed more rapidly than agricultural practices. Ihus, the

findings were in agreement with the findings of Thompson's

(1977) research.

further assessment of the identification of the sub­ groups, fashion innovators and fashion ncninnovators, was determined on the basis of the number of fashion items owned by the respondents. Although the assessment was basad on

Schrank's (1970) concept that fashion innovators own mere fashion items than fashion ncninncvatcrs and acguire them early in the fashion cycle, cnly the number of fashion items 92 owned cculd te used. Ihe date cf acquisition of fashion

items cculd not be determined because a majority of the re­

spondents did not respond regarding the month and year of

the first acquisition of the items they owned. Response to

the number of garments owned was reviewed and two items

(bell bottom suit and full length maxi) were dropped from

the list cf tec garments because the majority of the respon­

dents either did net own them and those who did own acquired

them before 1973.

Composite scores for most of fashion items owned were

then utilized to compute hNCVA for testing whether fashion innovators (FI) owned significantly more fashion items then

fashion noninnovators (FMI). Iwc groups differed signifi­ cantly (FI X - 21.9; FNI x = 13.3; F = 7.96; p < .01).

Identification of Fashion Opinion leaders

Ihe criterion to identify fashion opinion leaders was based cn the findings of King and Summers (1970) and Summers

(1970) who reported that the top 281 of the respondents on tha fashion opinion leadership measure were fashioh opinion leaders for women's clothing. Ihe possible score range cf the Fashion Opinion leadership Measure was 0 to 12. All those who scored 9 or mere (n = 180) were identified as fashion opinion leaders (FCL) and comprised 35.4% of the 93 tctal sample. Ihe proportion of identified FCI compared favorably to the findings reported by Kings and Summers

(1970) and Summers (1570).

Identification gf fashion Innovative Communicators

Several researchers (Eaumgarter, 1975; King, 1965; and

Summers, 1971) noted the existence of innovative communica­

tors in the fashicn process. Ikerefore, a research question was posed to identify the fashion innovator communicators.

Ihe innovative communicator is an individual who is both an innovator and an opinion leader. Therefore, the individuals who scored 8 or more on the fashion innovativeness measure and 9 cr more on the fashion opinion leadership measure were recognized as fashicn innovative communicators (fIC); this subgroup (n = 22) constituted 4.3X cf the total sample. Al­ though the percent of FIG identified was relatively low as compared to Baumgarten's (1975) 12.IX, the discrepency could be attributed to the fact that Baumgarten used the early adopter category instead of the innovators category as was used in the present study. Ihecretically, early adopters represent the top 16X and innovators represent 2.5 X (ficg- ers, 1562). For the present study, 5.9 X of the representa­ tion was identified as fashion innovators versus Baumyar- 94 ten's (19*75) 16% eaxly adopters, thus there were fewer individuals who cculd qualify as fashion innovative ccsmuni- cators. The existence of fashicn innovative communicators in the fashion process was supported ty the correlation be­ tween fashion innovators and fashion opinion leadership (r =

.38). Summers (1971) and Eaumgarter (1975).reported similar correlation, r = .35 and r = .34 respectively. CHAPIES V

HYPOTHESES TESTING, SUESECUENT fINOlNGS, AND

DISCDSSICN

The results from testing the research hypotheses and additional findings from data analysis are presented in this chapter. As indicated in Chapter IV, the respondents were identified as fashion innovators or fashicn noninncvatcis, and fashicn opinion leaders or fashion ronopinicn leaders to test the hypotheses, following the testing of each of the three suhhypothesss for Hypotheses I and III, further analy­ ses were done to understand the components cf the measures which were most effective. Ihe findings are discussed under three subheadings: 1) fashion innovativeness, 2) fashion opinion leadership, and 3) additional findings.

- 95 - 96 fashion Innovativeness

Hypothesis I: Among college semen in northern India, the

variables of media exposure, social partici­

pation and attitude toward change can be used

to discriminate between fashion innovators

and fashicn ncninncvatcrs.

a) fashion innovators will have greater

media exposure than fashion coninnova-

tors.

b) fashion innovators will have greater

social participation than fashicn ncn­

innovators.

c) fashion innovators will have a more po­

sitive attitude toward change than fa­

shicn ncninncvatcrs.

Hypothesis I was tested using data from three instru­ ments. Ihe first measure. Media Exposure (fashion informa­ tion sources) consisted of 13 sources of fashicn informa­ tion; the freguency of use of all sources provided data to test Hypothesis I a (Part V of Questionnaire, Appendix C).

Ihe cumulative score of media exposure was computed for each individual based cn the freguency use of all the items in­ cluded in the measure. To further understand the use of fashion information sources as related tc the decision making process, media use during the awareness, comprehen- 97 siou and légitimation stages of adoption was examined. Bcb-

extson i1S71) recognized these three stages cf adoption as

psychosocial form of decision making process in which indi­ viduals show willingness tc conform tc new ideas, thoughts,

01 styles.

The second measure (Social Participation) included items regarding paraticipation in organizaticnal activities, office holdings in organization, and participation in indi­

vidual activities (Part VI and VII cf Questionnaire, Appen­

dix C). On the basis of the freguency of participation and number of offices held, a composite score was obtained to test the subhypothesis Ib. In addition, each item on the measure was tested to further understand the importance of individual events/activity in relation to the fashicn pro­ cess.

The third measure (Attitude Toward Change) was com­

prised cf 1U items, of which 13 were dichotcmoas. (Part

VIII of Questionnaire, Appendix C). The cumulative score for each respondent was calculated by totaling the scores for the fourteen items. Further, each individual item on the measure was tested to identify the items which were sig­ nificantly different for the fashion innovators and fashion

ncninnovators.

Hypothesis I was tested using Analysis of Variance

(ANOVA) , stepwise multiple regression, and stepwise descri- 98

minant analysis. The findings £xoe the analysis of the

three subhypotheses for the explanantory function are pre­ sented first and are followed by the predictive and discrim­

inative functions. Chi Sguare analysis was used tc test the

most important sources of fashion information used at aware­

ness, comprehension, and legitimation stages of adoption.

Besults are presented in the section cn explanatory function

of the variable media exposure.

3he Explanation of £haracteristi£s of fashion Innovators and fashicn Honinncvatcrs

Hypothesis la: Fashicn innovators will have greater media exposure than fashion ncninnovators.

The results of ANCVA indicated that the group means for media exposure (cumulative score) were significantly higher

(F = 13.27; p < .01) for fashion innovators (x = 27.50) than fashicn ncninnovators (x = 21.19) as presented in Table 6 and Table 34 (Appendix £). Thus, based on the cumulative scores, fashion innovators used the sources of fashicn in­ formation more freguently than fashion ncninnovators; hy­ pothesis la was accepted.

Further analysis of the measures are presented in rela­ tion to frequency of different fashion information sources used by the two subgroups. An analysis of variance was com­ puted. The findings indicated that fashicn innovators used seven of the ten impersonal sources (fashion shows, hcuti- TABLE 6

ANOVA; FASHION INFORMATION SOURCES (CUMULATIVE SCORE) BY CLASS OF FASHION INNOVATIVENESS

Variable Source of df Mean F-Ratio Variance Square

Sources of between group 1 1124.733 13.27** Fashion within group 507 84.757 Information

**p < .01

\ o \JD 100 ques, fashicn magazines, movie actozesses, window shopping,

fashicn advertisements, and pattern hocks) and two cf the

three personal sources (asking sales clerks and asking tai­

lors) mere freguently (p < .05 to p < .01) than fashicn non-

innovators lahle 35 (lable 7 and lahle 35 of Appendix £).

In terms cf the type of fashicn Infcrsaticn sources

used during two of the stages of adoption, comprehension and

legitimation (Figure 1, Chapter II, p. 31), fashion innova­

tors used fashion magazines significantly acre than fashion

ncninnovators. However, fashicn noninncvators observed

their friends clothing significantly more than fashion inno­

vators (Table 8, and Table 36, Appendix £). For the Most

Important Sources of fashion information used during the

awareness, comprehension and legitimation stages of adoption

(Figure 1, Chapter II, p. 31), Chi sguare analysis was com­

puted. The findings revealed that fashicn inncvators at­

tended fashion shews during the awareness stage; read

fashion magazines during the comprehension stage; and

read fashion magazines and watched movie and TV stars at the

legitimation stage significantly more than fashicn ncninno-

vators. However, fashicn ncninnovators observed their

friend's attire, a personal source, significantly more than

fashion innovators during the comprehension and legitimation stages (Table 9). Tc conclude, fashion innovators used im­

personal sources of fashion information more than fashion 101 TABLE 7 ANCVA; DIFFERENCES IN FREQUENCY USE OF FASHION INFORMATION SOURCES BY FASHION INNOVATORS AND FASHION NONINNOVATORS FOR EACH SOURCE

Types of Sources Source of df Mean F-Ratio and Sources used Variance Square

Impersonal Sources

Attend fashion between groups 1 24.641 32.77** shows within groups 507 0.752 Visit boutiques between groups 1 24.843 25.12** within groups 507 0.989 Fashion magazines between groups 1 17.365 9.66** within groups 507 1,797 Notice costumes of between groups 1 11.632 6.30** movie actresses within groups 507 1.846 Window Shopping between groups 1 7.149 5.83** within groups 507 1.227

Fashion ads in between groups 1 8.652 4.39* movies, posters within groups 507 1.970 or newspapers

Pattern books between groups 1 7.358 4.02* within groups 507 1.829 Notice costumes between groups 1 8.919 3.19 of TV performers within groups 507 2.799 Newspaper articles between groups 1 5.222 2.32 on fashion within groups 507 2.247 Indoor displays between groups 1 2.814 1.70 within groups 507 1.653 102 TABLE 7 (Continued)

Types of Sources Source of df Mean F-Ratio and Sources used Variance Square

Personal Sources Asking sales clerk between groups 1 19.723 17.53** of clothes shops within groups 507 1.125 Asking tailors between groups 1 10.650 8.19** within groups 507 1.300

Observe clothing between groups 1 4.237 2.76 in social gather- within groups 507 1.535 m g s

* p < .05 ** P < .01 103

TABLE 8 ANOVA: DIFFERENCES IN FASHION INFORMATION SOURCES USED BY FASHION INNOVATORS AND FASHION NONINNOVATORS DURING COMPREHENSION AND LEGITIMATION STAGES OF ADOPTION

Stages of Adoption Source of df Mean F-Ratio and sources used Variance Square

Comprehension Stage

Impersonal Sources Fashion magazines between groups 1 1.750 7.07** within groups 507 0.248 Fashing columns in between groups 1 0.514 2.83 newspaper within groups 507 0.182 Indoor displays between groups 1 0.094 0.94 within groups 507 0.215 Television between groups 1 0.060 0.41 within groups 507 0.146

Play or Drama between groups 1 0.015 0.15 within groups 507 0.100 Imported items between groups 1 0.000 0.01 within groups 507 0.071 Window displays between groups 1 0.000 0.00 within groups 507 0.178 Personal Sources Seeing my friends between groups 1 0.986 4.72* wear within groups 507 0.209

Discussion with between groups 1 0.962 3.18 friends within groups 507 0.303 ^0^

TABLE 8 (Continued)

Stages of Adoption Sources of df Mean F-Ratio and sources used Variance Square

Legitimation Stage Impersonal Sources Fashion magazines between groups 1 2.566 12.10** within groups 507 0.212 Fashion columns between groups 1 0.410 3.17 in newspaper within groups 507 0.129

Window displays between groups 1 0.305 2.60 within groups 507 0.117 Store displays between groups 1 0.050 0.41 within groups 507 0.120 Movies between groups 1 0.024 0.08 within groups 507 0.292 Personal Sources Seeing friends between groups 1 1.662 6.75** wear within groups 507 0.246 Family members' between groups 1 0.701 3.08 opinion within groups 507 0.228 Parents' opinion between groups 1 0.326 1.31 within groups 507 0.249 Discussion with between groups 1 0.000 0.00 friends within groups 507 0.310

* p < .05 * * p < .01 105 noninriovators while fashion nccinnovatczs used personal sources of fashion information for those stages of fashion adoption selected in the study.

Hypothesis Ib: fashion innovators will be higher in social participation thar fashion rcninnovators.

An analysis of variance was used to test the differences between group means for social participation

(based on cumulative scores) of the fashion innovators and fashion ncninncvators. Although fashion innovators (x =

22.20) scored higher than fashion rcninnovators (x - 20.75), the difference was not significant; therefore Hypothesis 1b was not accepted (lable 10 and lable 37 Appendix £).

To further understand the respondents' social partici­ pation in organizations, office holdings, and involvement in the individual activities, ANOVA was computed to examine the differences in group means of the individual items on the measures for the two subgroups. She findings indicated that fashion innovators participated significantly mere in social organizations such as athletic and cultural activities than fashion ncninncvators, whereas fashion noninncvators partic­ ipated significantly more in N.C.C. (National Cadet

Corp)/N.S.S.(National Social Service Scheme) and religious organizations (lable 11 and Table 38, Appendix £). In rela­ tion to office holdings in social organizations, fashion in­ novators did not differ significantly from fashion ncninno- 106

TABLE 9 CHI SQUARE ANALYSIS OF THE MOST IMPORTANT SOURCES OF FASHION INFORMATION USED BY FASHION INNOVATORS AND FASHION NONINNOVATORS DURING AWARENESS, COMPREHENSION AND LEGITIMATION STAGES OF FASHION ADOPTION

Stages of Adoption Percent of Chi Square and Sources Used Fashion Fashion Value Innovators Noninnovators

Awareness Stage Discussion with friends 13.3^ 12.1® 0.00 Fashion columns in 13.3 5.2 2.11 newspaper Window shopping 10.0 7.5 0.02 Indoor displays 3.3 4.6 0.00 Fashion magazines 39.0 22.1 0.60 Fashion shows 13.3 1.9 10.64** Watching movies 6.7 11.1 0.20 Others 0.0 0.6 0.00 Comprehension Stage Seeing friends wear 13.3 35.7 5.31* Discussion with friends 20.0 19.4 0.00 Fashion columns in 3.3 2.1 0.00 newspaper Window shopping 3.3 4.0 0.00 Indoor displays 3.3 7.3 0.21 Fashion magazines 50.0 16.5 18.88** Watching television 0.0 1.7 0.00 Watching play or drama 0.0 0.6 0.00 Imported items 0.0 1.5 0.00 Legitimation Stage Discussion with friends 6.7 10.2 0.10 Fashion columns in 0.0 1.5 0.00 newspaper Window displays 6.7 2.5 0.60 Indoor displays 0.0 3.5 0.28 Fashion magazines 30.0 8.8 11.86** Opinion of relatives 13.3 23.2 1.05 Opinion of parents 13.3 27.3 2.17 Movie and TV stars 6.7 0.8 3.99* Base 30 479 a Read 13.3% of fashion Innovators and 12.1% of fashion noninnovators * p < .05 p < .01 TABLE 10 ANOVA: SOCIAL PARTICIPATION (CUMULATIVE SCORE) BY CLASS OF FASHION INNOVATIVENESS

Variable Source of df Mean F-Ratio Variance Square

Social Partici­ between groups 1 56.298 0.82 pation within groups 507 68.485

o 108

TABLE 11 ANOVA; DIFFERENCE IN PARTICIPATION IN SOCIAL ORGANIZATIONS BY FASHION INNOVATORS AND FASHION NONINNOVATORS

Organization Source of df Mean F-Ratio Variance Square

N.C.C./N.S.S.l between groups 1 14.810 9.76** within groups 507 1.518 Athletic between groups 1 10.883 9.21** within groups 507 1.181

Religious between groups 1 9.494 7.89** within groups 507 1.203 Cultural between gorups 1 4.490 3.72* within groups 507 1.208 Team sports between groups 1 4.655 3.46 within groups 507 1.342 Social welfare between groups 1 3.745 3.36 within groups 507 1.114 Hostel between groups 1 1.030 0.86 within groups 507 1.203 Student Council between groups 1 0.444 0.37 within groups 507 1.188 Literary between groups 1 0.249 0.24 within groups 507 1.018

* p < .05 ** p < .01 N.C.C. (National Cadet Corp)/N.S.S. (National Social Service Scheme). 109 vators fer any of the nine organizations. Khen the individual social activities were examined to assess the difference between fashion innovators and fashion noninnova- toxs the differfences were significant for work on college publications, watching movies and attending parties (Table

11, Table 39, Appendix £).

To summarize, fashion innovators participated signifi­ cantly more in two of the nine social organizations, and three of the six individual activities than fashion ncninr.o- vators. Fashion noninncvators participated significantly more in two of the nine social organizations than fashion noninncvators. However, the two groups did net differ sig­ nificantly for the office holdings in nine organizations.

The overall social participation results indicated higher but nonsignificant differences in grcup mean score for fa­ shion innovators than fashion rcninnovators.

Hypothesis Ic; Fashion innovators will have a more positive attitude toward change than fashion noninncvators.

The results of ANCVA (Table 13 and Table 40, Appendix

£) to test differences in the twc subgroups indicated that fashion innovators (x = 8.92) did not differ significantly from fashion noninnovators (x = 7.93) for their attitude to­ ward change (F = 3.C7,> p 7.05). Therefore, Hypothesis ic was not accepted. 110

TABLE 12 ANOVA: PARTICIPATION IN INDIVIDUAL ACTIVITIES BY FASHION INNOVATORS AND FASHION NONINNOVATORS

Activity Source of df Mean F-Ratio Variance Square

Work on college between groups 1 12.503 14.92** publications within groups 507 0.838 Attend movies between groups 1 5.295 10.14** within groups 507 0.522

Attend parties between groups 1 2.204 3.77* within groups 507 0.584 Work on committees between groups 1 3.029 3.41 within groups 507 0.889 Host parties between groups 1 1.187 1.79 within groups 507 0.663 Athletic events between groups 1 1.365 1.43 within groups 507 0.953

* p < .05 ** p < .01 TABLE 13 ANOVA: ATTITUDE TOWARD CHANGE (CUMULATIVE SCORE) BY CLASS OF FASHION INNOVATIVENESS

Variable Source of df Mean F-Ratio Variance Square

Attitude toward between groups 1 27.471 3.07 change within groups 507 8.963 112

the ANOVA for the individual items in the measure for

attitude toward change revealed that fashicr innovators

scored significantly higher than fashion noninnovatcrs for

five (fashionatle hair style, mother's cpinior, trip abroad,

attending western sohocl, and ballet dance) of the fourteen

items in the measure (lable 1U and lable 41, Appendix E).

IhS £lSiis£ios of FashiQS Innovativeness. Media Expo­ sure was the first variable selected in the stepwise multi­

ple regression analysis and therefore, was the most signifi­ cant variable to predict fashion innovativeness. Media exposure (sources of fashion information) accounted for 10.8 percent of the variance (lable 15). Social Eartioipation was the second variable to enter the equation (E = 3.28, p <

.05) and oontributed only 0.6 percent to the explained vari­ ance. Ihe third variable to enter the eguation was attitude toward change and did not explain any additional variance. However, the overall F was significant for all the three predictors.

lo summarize, the results of stepwise multiple regres­ sion lend themselves to suggest that individuals with high media exposure will tend to be fashion innovators. However, social participation and attitude toward change were not in­ dicated to be good predictors of fashion innovativeness. TABLE 14 113

ANOVA: DIFFERENCES IN ELEMENTS OF ATTITUDE TOWARD CHANGE BY CLASS OF FASHION INNOVATIVENESS FOR EACH ITEM

Variable Source of df Mean F-Ratio Variance Square

Fashionable between groups 1 4.266 17.91** hairstyle within groups 507 0.238 Mother's opinion between groups 1 1.022 4.78* within groups 507 0.214 Trip abroad between groups 1 1.001 4.28* within groups 507 0.234 Attending western between groups 1 1.026 4.13* school within groups 507 0.249 Ballet between groups 1 0.667 3.88* within groups 507 0.172 Modern Home between groups 1 0.416 2.23 within groups 507 0.186 Be working between groups 1 0.464 1.86 woman within groups 507 0.250 Mixed trousseau between groups 1 0.275 1.23 within groups 507 0.224 Believer of family between groups 1 0.112 0.72 planning within groups 507 0.156 Pro women's between groups 1 0.045 0.38 education within groups 507 0.119

Modern wedding between groups 1 0.048 0.22 within groups 507 0.220 Photograph of between groups 1 0.008 0.05 temple within groups 507 0.170

End of dowry between groups 1 0.006 0.04 system within groups 507 0.130 Clothing styles between groups 1 0.001 0.00 within groups 507 0.228 * p < .05 ** p < .01 TABLE 15

MULTIPLE REGRESSION: PREDICTION OF FASHION INNOVATIVENESS WITH MEDIA EXPOSURE, SOCIAL PARTICIPATION AND ATTITUDE TOWARD CHANGE

Step Variable r 2 Increase Overall F-Ratio B in R^ F

1 Media Exposure 61.65** 0.047 0.108 0.108 61.65**

2 Social 3.28* 0.014 0.114 0.006 32.60** Participation 3 Attitude toward 0.06 0.005 0.114 0.000 21.72** Change Constant 4.16

* p < .05 ** p < .01 115 Discrimination letvjen Fanion Innovators and iaghicn Nonin­ ncvators. Stepwise discriminant analysis was employed to find out the discriminant function cf the selected variables in the present study. Ihe cumulative score of media expo­ sure, social participation, and attitude toward change were used to find out the most discriminating variable for two subgroups.

Ihe findings of the discriminant ana lysis are reported in lable 16. A comparison of the variables selected in stepwise discriminant analysis to those selected in stepwise regression (lable 15) showed similarity. Ihree steps were performed, and the final discriminant function was composed of media exposure. Ihe maximum discrimination by media ex­ posure was indicated by F-ratio (F = 13.27,p < .01). Ibis finding compared favorably to the results from regression analysis which revealed that media exposure was the variable which contributed the most to explain the variance for fa­ shion innovativeness. However, the contribution of social participation was deleted completely. Discrimination func­ tion was also indicated by the value of group centroids for two subgroups, .65 and -.04. Eased on Chi square, the two 2 groups were found to be discriminated significantly ( X -

13.09, p< .01).

A classification matrix was computed using discriminant functions of fashion innovators and fashion noninncvators TABLE 16

COMPARISON OF FASHION INNOVATORS (FI) AND FASHION NONINNOVATORS (FNI) USING DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS

Discriminant Group Means for Group Step Variable F-Ratio Function Each Variable Centroids Coefficient FI FNI FI NFI

1 Media Exposure 13.27** 1.00 27.50 21.19

2 Social Participation 22.20 20.79 3 Attitude Toward Change - - 8.92 7.93 Discrimination between groups = 13.09**b .65 - .04 a F-Ratio based on Rao's V analysis 2 b The differences are statistically significant based on X analysis ** p < .01 117

(lable 17). Ihe findings indicated that 76.7 percent of the fashion innovators and 61.6 percent cf the fashion ncninno- vators were classified correctly with a grouped percentage of correctly classified as 62.5. Ihe classification ty chance alone would have allowed for fifty percent of each group that classified correctly. TABLE 17 CLASSIFICATION MATRIX USING DISCRIMINANT FUNCTIONS FOR FASHION INNOVATORS AND FASHION NONINNOVATORS

Correct Incorrect Segment Group Classification Classification Size

Fashion Innovators 23 7 30 (76.7%) (23.3%) Fashion Noninnovators 184 295 479 (38.4%) (61.6%) Grouped percentage of correctly classified 62.48% 119

SJHiiâijr Hypothesis la was accepted, that is, for the sasple of college women in Northern India, fashion innovators tad

greater media exposure than fashion ncninncvators. However,

Hypothesis Ib regarding differences in social participation and Hypothesis Ic regarding differences between fashion in­

novators and noninncvators for attitude toward change were net supported hy the research findings. Media exposure was found to he the largest contributor in explaining the vari­ ance and the sole discriminator to differentiate between fa­ shion innovators and fashion ncninncvators.

The acceptance of Hypothesis la is consistent with the research reported in the Western literature (Eaumgarten,

1975; Eehal, 1977; Kaigler, 1975; King, 1963; Fcbertscn,

1971; Rogers, 1962; Rogers and Shoemaker, 1971; Sprcles,

1983, Sprcles, 1981; and Turnbull and Meenaghan, 1980).

Fashion innovators used fashion magazines more than fashion noninnovatcrs in both the comprehension and legiti­ mation stages. In addition, they attended fashion shows, visited bcutigues, watched movie actresses, and asked tai­ lors and salesclerks more often than fashion noninncva- tcrs. However, fashion ncninncvators see what their friends wear more than fashion innovators which reaffirm the 120 findings that fashion noninnovatcrs relied on others to make

their choices. Attending fashion shows, visiting fcoutigues

and watching movie actoresses arc the choices specific to

individuals with very high clothing interest. less use of

such sources hy fashion ncninncvators is self explanatory.

Similarly, asking tailors and salesclerks atcut latest

styles rather than accepting what is readily available is

also indicative of the leadership quality. However, results

fcr the sccial participation and attitude toward change were

in contrast to the literature cn fashion innovativeness in

the Western societies. Several researchers (Gilhride, 1980,

Katz and lazarsfeld, 1955; King, 1963; Ostlund, 1974; Rob­

ertson and Myers, 1969;, Rogers, 1962; Rogers and Shoemak­

er, 1971; Sproles, 1981; and Turnbull and Meenaghan,

1S80) advocated that fashion innovators have greater social

participation than fashion noninncvators.

Subsequent analysis of the each item on the social par­

ticipation measure indicated that even though general index

results were nonsignificant, innovators and noninnovatcrs

were different in using kind of sccial activities. Fashion

innovators participated more in cultural activities and ath­

letic cluts, and watching movies, attending parties, and

working cn college publications. All these events help in­ novators exhibit their individuality. However, fashion ncn-

innovatcrs participated more in N.C.C./N.S.S. and religious 121 activities than fashion innovators. Ihe former is geared more toward attaining uniformity ahich is in contrast to the tasic nature of innovators. Ihe latter is associated with tradition thus seldom attract fashion innovators.

Similarly, fashion innovators have been purported to have more positive attitude toward change than fashion non- innovators (Kim and Schrank, 1958; Eogers, 1962; Rogers and

Shoemaker, 1971; Schrank, Sugawara and Kim, 1982; lurntull and Meenaghan, 1980). fashion innovators differed signifi­ cantly for their opinion about foreign trip, attending west­ ern school, agreeing with the mother who likes to discuss aiout fashions, and wearing fashionable hairstyles. All such viewpoints make them appear different than noninnova­ tors and being deviant is important to innovators. Ihe two groups did not differ on items such as being a working wo­ man, believe in family planning, and end of dowry system which for a group of women in higher education will not of­ fer much variation thus indicate similarities. Ihe incon­ sistency in the present findings may be attributed to the sample that it was drawn from an educated, urban grcup with­ in a high income segment of the population. Iherefore, the respondents were somewhat similar in extent cf sccial par­ ticipation and attitude toward change. India is a develop­ ing country where the environment is such that each individ­ ual in general has a positive attitude toward change. Since 122 innovators do not care if ethers would follow them or not, they did not indicate to have more positive attitude toward change. Another possible reason ascribed to this inconsis­ tency may include the low reliability of the fashion Innova­ tiveness Keasure used to identify the fashion innovators. 2 Ihe cumulative B cf a mere .114 indicated that about 88 percent of the variance was not explained by-the variables used for the present research. lurnbull and Meenaghan

(1880) emphasized the need to consider personality and atti- tudinal characteristics. However, Bobertson and Myers

(1969) reported that in the overall personality profile clothing-related-perscnality characteristics explain only 4 percent of the variance. Cstlund (1974) too noted that per­ sonality characteristics account for less variance than variables related tc perceived innovative attributes (rela­ tive advantages, compatibility, complexity, trialability and risk propensity). Thus, findings did not indicate agree­ ment.

Hypothesis II: Among the college women in northern India fashion innovators will differ from fashion innovators for selected demographic charac­ teristics.

a) fashion innovators will come from higher income segment of the society than fashion noninncvators.

b) fashion innovators will more frequent­ ly come from families with urban back­ ground than fashion noninnovators. 123 c) fashion innovators «ill belong to more eduoataed families than fashion nonin­ novators.

7he three subhypotheses were tested using Chi Sguare contingency table analysis liable 16) .

Hypothesis Ila : Fashion innovators will come from higher income segment of the society than fashion noninnovators.

The findings revealed that based cn the X'^ analysis, variable family income was not related to the class cf fashion innovativeness. Thus, the subhypothesis that fa­ shion innovators will come from the higher income segment than fashion noninnovators was not accepted.

Hypothesis Ilh: Fashion innovators will more freguently come from urban background than fashion non- innovators.

The results indicated that the background of parents was not dependent on the class of fashion innovativeness

(Table 18). The percentage of rural and urban parents which appeared to be more urban for fashion innovators than nonin- 2 novators, did not differ significantly on the basis of X .

Therefore, subhypothesis lit was not accepted.

Hypothesis lie: Fashion innovators will belong to more educated families than fashion noninnova­ tors.

Eased on Chi square analysis, father's education was found to be higher for fashion noninncvators than fashion innovators. However, mother's education was indicated to be nonsignificant. Therefore, the results did not lend them­ selves to accept the subhypothesis lie. 124

TABLE 18 CHI SQUARE ANALYSIS OF SELECTED DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS BY CLASS OF FASHION INNOVATIVENESS

Characteristic Percent of Chi Square Fashion Fashion Value Innovators Noninnovators

Income 2.71

Below 250/- - _ Rs 251-500/- 0.0® 1.7® Rs 501-750/- 6.7 2.9 Rs 751-1000/- 3.3 5.6 Rs 1001-1250/- 10.0 8.6 Rs 1251-1500/- 16.7 12.1 Rs 1501 & above 40.0 43.6 Background of Father 4.91 Rural 16.7 35.5 Urban 80.0 59.9 Background of Mother 5.61 Rural 13.3 33.4 Urban 83.3 62.2 Education of Father 12.62* Illiterate 20.0 5.6 Primary 0.0 0.6 Middle 0.0 0.8 High School/Higher Sec./Intermediate 10.0 13.6 Graduate 23.3 29.9 Professional graduate 23.3 14.6 Postgraduate 23.3 34.9 Education of Mother 5.12 Illiterate 13.3 10.2 Primary 0.0 5.0 Middle 10.0 4.4 High School/Higher Sec./Intermediate 36.7 37.4 Graduate 33.3 28.6 Professional graduate 0.0 0.4 Post-graduate 6.7 14.0 Base 30 479 Read 0.0 percent of fashion innovators and 1.7 percent of fashion noninnovators. p < .05 125 The findings were not in agreement with the reports in

Western literature. The unlike rature of the findings nay he ascribed to the sample which was drawn from a population of college women students in northern India who generally came from well educated, high income and urban families.

About 62 percent of the fathers and 64 percent of the moth­ ers came from urban background (Table 2) which is higher than the 21.9 percent of urban population for both seres at the National level as shown in Demographics Year Book: 1981

(1983).

fashion Opinion leadership

Hypothesis III: Among college women in northern India,

the variables of media exposure, social par­

ticipation, and attitude toward change can

be used to discriminate between fashion

opinion leaders and fashion noropinion lead­

ers.

a) fashion opinion leaders will have

greater media exposure than fashion

nonopinion leaders.

b) fashion opinion leaders will have

greater social participation than fa­

shion nonopinion leaders. 126 c) fashion opinion leaders will have more

positive attitude toward ofaange than

fashion rcccpinion leaders.

Hypothesis 111 was tested using three instruments: Me­

dia Exposure Measure, Social Participation Measure, and At­

titude loward Change Measure. ihe data from measures were

obtained as described in the section on fashion Innova­

tiveness (p. 95-97). Additional assessing was done for the

individual items cf all the measures to identify the most

effective components cf the measure. Ic understand the type

of fashion information sources used during comprehension and

legitimation stages and the most important fashion in­

formation sources used at awareness, comprehennsicn and le­

gitimation stages were also tested.

Hypothesis III was tested using AHCVA, stepwise multi­

ple regression, and stepwise discriminant analysis. The

findings from the analysis of the three suhhypotheses for the explanatory function are presented first and are fol­

lowed by predictive and discriminative functions. I

IhÊ Jxfianantifin o| Ç^façteristiçg gf fgghiog Opinion lead­ ers and fashion Honoginion leaders Hypothesis Ilia: Fashion opinion leaders will have greater media exposure than fashion noropinion lead­ ers.

Ihe results of ANOVA indicated that the group means based on cumulative scores for freguenoy of use of various 127 fashion sources were significantly higher if = 48.97, p<.01} for fashion opinion leaders (x - 25.29) than for fashion no- nopinicn leaders

lo determine whether the frequency of each of the 13 fashion information sources differed fcr the two subgroups,

ANOVA was computed. The findings revealed that fashion opinion leaders used nine of the ten impersonal sources

(fashion magazines, boutiques, fashion shows, newspaper ar­ ticles, indoor displays, window shopping, fashion ads, pat­ tern hook, and watching movie actoresses) and all three of the personal sources (asking sales clerks, observing cloth­ ing at social gathering and asking tailors) more freguently than fashion nonopinicn leaders (p<.OS to p<.01) as shown in

Table 20 and Table 43, Appendix £.

At the comprehension stage, an individual learns infor­ mation about the characteristics and functions of the prod­ uct he/she became aware of during the awareness stage.

Findings revealed that fashion opinion leaders used four of the eight sources of fashion information significantly more than the fashion nonopinion leaders, including use of fa­ shion magazines and fashion columns in newspapers, watching drama or play, and discussion with friends (Table 21, Tatle TABLE 19 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE: SOURCES OF FASHION INFORMATION (CUMULATIVE SCORE) BY CLASS OF FASHION OPINION LEADERSHIP

Variable Source of df Mean F-Ratio Variance Square

Sources of between groups 1 3883.76 48.97** fashion info. within groups 507 79.32

** p < .01

tsj CD 129

TABLE 20 ANOVA; DIFFERENCES IN FREQUENCY USE OF SOURCES OF FASHION INFORMATION BY FASHION OPINION LEADERS AND FASHION NONLEADERS FOR EACH SOURCE

Type of sources Source of df Mean F-Ratio and sources used Variance Square

Impersonal Sources Fashion magazines between groups 1 65.182 32.65** within groups 507 1.721 Visit boutiques between groups 1 28.814 29.37** within groups 507 0.981 Fashion shows between groups I 20.849 27.46** within gorups 507 0.759 Newspaper articles between groups 1 57.580 26.86** on fashion within groups 507 2.144 Indoor displays between groups 1 32.489 20.38** within groups 507 1.594 Window shopping between groups 1 22.565 18.86** within groups 507 1.197 Fashion ads in between groups 1 34.955 18.23** newspapers, movies within groups 507 1.918 or posters Pattern books between groups 1 31.435 17.64** within groups 507 1.782 Notice costumes of between groups 1 20.411 11.16** movie actresses within groups 507 1.828

Notice costumes between groups 1 3.035 1.08 of TV performers within groups 507 2.811 130

TABLE 20 (Continued)

Type of sources Source of df Mean F-Ratio and sources used Variance Square

Personal Sources

Asking sales clerk between groups 1 24.678 22.13** of clothes shops within groups 507 1.115

Observe clothing between groups 1 8.060 5.28* in social gather­ within groups 507 1.528 ings

Asking tailors between groups 1 6.757 5.17* within groups 507 1.308

* p < .05 ** p < .01 131 43, Appendix £). Seeing what fxiends wore was used by fa­ shion ncncpinicn leaders more than fashion opinion leaders.

At the legitimation stage of adoption, that is, when seeking more information atcut the object that was evaluated favora­ bly before actually trying; fashion opinion leaders used fa­ shion magazines, window displays, fashion columns in newspa­ per and discussion with friends acre than fashion nonopinion leaders (lable 21, lafle 44, Appendix I).

Ihe most important sources of fashion information dur­ ing each of the three stages of fashion adoption, awareness, comprehenrsion and legitimation were tested using Chi sguare. ihe findings revealed that fashion magazines were the most important source for all three stages for fashion opinion leaders (p <.C1). However, seeing what friends wear was found to be a most important source (p < .01) for fa­ shion ncncpinicn leaders at the comprehension stage (Table

22) . Hypothesis lilb: Fashion opinion leaders will have greater social participation than fashion ncnopinion leaders.

Eased on the cumulative score cf respondents, ANCVA was computed to test the differences between the group means of the two subgroups. The findings revealed that fashion opin­ ion leaders (x = 23.13) had significantly higher group means

(F = 21.(4, p<.01) than fashion ncncpinicn leaders (x =

19.64) as presented in Table 23 and Table 45, Appendix E.

Hypothesis lllb was accepted. 132

TABLE 21

ANOVA: DIFFERENCES IN THE FASHION INFORMATION SOURCES USED BY FASHION OPINION LEADERS AND NONOPINION LEADERS DURING COMPREHENSION AND LEGITIMATION STAGES OF ADOPTION

Stages of Source of df Mean F-Ratio Adoption and Variance Square Sources Used

Comprehension State Impersonal Sources Fashion magazines between groups 1 6.824 28.73** within groups 507 0.238 Fashion columns between groups 1 2.741 15.44** in newspaper within groups 507 0.178

Watch play or between groups 1 0.833 8.48** drama within groups 507 0.098 In a store between groups 1 0.639 3.62 window within groups 507 0.176 On display in between groups 1 0.661 3.09 a store within groups 507 0.214 Imported items between groups 1 0.189 2.67 within groups 507 0.071 On television between groups 1 0.041 0.28 within groups 507 0.146

Personal Sources Discussion with between groups 1 1.867 6.20** friends within groups 507 0.301 Seeing my friends between groups 1 0.802 3.83* wear within groups 507 0.209 133 TABLE 21 (Continued)

Stages of Source of df Mean F-Ratio Adoption and Variance Square Sources Used

Legitimation Stage Impersonal Sources Fashion magazines between groups 1 8.290 41.32** within groups 507 0.201

Window displays between groups 1 0.966 8.34** within groups 507 0.116

Fashion columns between groups 1 0.609 4.72* in newspaper within groups 507 0.129 On display in between groups 1 0.298 2.49 a store within groups 507 0.120 Personal Sources Discussion with between groups 1 1.980 6.46** friends within groups 507 0.306 Seeing friends between groups 1 0.564 2.27 wear within groups 507 0.248 Family members' between groups 1 0.063 0.27 opinion within groups 507 0.229

Parents' opinion between groups 1 0.041 0.17 within groups 507 0.250

* p < .05 ** p < .01 134

TABLE 22 CHI SQUARE ANALYSIS OF THE MOST IMPORTANT SOURCES OF FASHION INFORMATION USED BY FASHION OPINION LEADERS AND FASHION NONOPINION LEADERS AT AWARENESS, COMPREHENSION AND LEGITIMATION STAGES OF FASHION ADOPTION

Stages of Adoption Percent of Chi Square and Sources Used Fashion Fashion Value Opinion NonOpin. Leaders Leaders

Awareness Stage Discussion with friends 15.6' 10.3' 2.50 Fashion columns in 5.6 5.8 0.00 newspaper Window shopping 7. 8 7.6 0.00 Indoor displays 5.0 4.3 0.03 Fashion magazines 33.3 16.7 17.43** Fashion shows 4. 4 1.5 2.91 Watching movies 10.6 10.9 0.00 Others 1.1 0.3 0.28 Comprehension Stage Seeing what friends wear 25.6 39, 9.02** Discussion with friends 19.4 19, 0.00

Fashion columns in 2.2 2 , 0.00 newspaper Window shopping 2. 8 4, 0.56 Indoor displays 5.6 7, 0.65 Fashion magazines 28.3 13.1 17.00** Watching television 1.7 1.5 0.00 Watching play or drama 0.6 0.6 0.00 Imported items 1.1 1.5 0.00 Legitimation Stage

Discussion with friends 11.7 9.1 0.58 Fashion columns in 1.7 1.2 0.00 newspaper

Window displays 3.3 2 , 0.10 Indoor displays 1.7 4, 1.68 Fashion magazines 15.6 7, 8.54** Opinion of family members 17.8 25, 3.28 135

TABLE 22 (Continued)

Stages of Adoption Percent of Chi Square and Sources Used Fashion Fashion Value Opinion NonOpin. Leaders Leaders

Opinion of parents 24.4 27.7 0.46 Movie and TV stars 2.2 0.6 1.40 Base 180 329 a Read 15.6% of fashion opinion leaders and 10.3% of fashion nonopinion leaders

** p < .01 TABLE 23 ANOVA: SOCIAL PARTICIPATION (CUMULATIVE SCORE) BY CLASS OF FASHION OPINION LEADERSHIP

Variable Source of df Mean F-Ratio Variance Square

Social between groups 1 1423.787 21.64** Participation within groups 507 65.788

** p < . 01

W cr\ 137

To further understand the social participation in or­

ganizations, office holdings, ard icvclveoent in the indi­

vidual activities, ANCVA vas computed to test the differenc­

es in group means cf the individual items in the measures

for two subgroups. Ihe findings revealed that fashion opin­

ion leaders participated significantly more (p<.01) in lit­

erary, athletic, social welfare, cultural and student coun­

cil organizations than fashion ncnopinion leaders (Table 2U

and Table 46, Appendix £). In relation to office holdings

in such organizations, differences between the two groups

were not significant. For participation in the individual

levai social activities, fashion opinion leaders participat­ ed significantly more than fashion nonopinion leaders for

five (attend parties, host parties, work on college commit­

tees, wcrk on college publications, attend athletic events) of the six activities (Table 25, Table 47, Appendix £).

To summarize, fashion opinion leaders participated sig­ nificantly more in five of the nine social organizations and

five cut cf six individual activities. However, the two groups did not differ significantly for the office holdings in social organizations and had guite low mean scores for office holdings. hypothesis lllc: Fashion opinion leaders will have mere positive attitude toward change than fa­ shion norcpinion leaders. 138

TABLE 24 ANOVA: DIFFERENCE IN PARTICIPATION IN SOCIAL ORGANIZATIONS BY FASHION OPINION LEADERS AND FASHION NONOPINION LEADERS

Organization Source of df Mean F-Ratio Variance Square

Literary between groups 1 13.007 13.10** within groups 507 0.993 Athletic between groups 1 11.876 10.07** within groups 507 1.179 Social welfare between groups 1 9.760 8:86** within groups 507 1.102 Cultural between groups 1 10.264 8.58** within groups 507 1.197 Student Council between groups 1 6.861 5.84** within groups 507 1.175 Team sports between groups 1 3.712 2.76 within groups 507 1.344 N.C.C./ between groups 1 2.287 1.48 N.S.S. within groups 507 1.543 Religious between groups 1 0.997 0.82 within groups 507 1.220 Hostel between groups 1 0.060 0.05 within groups 507 1.205

* * p < .01 139

TABLE 25 ANOVA: PARTICIPATION IN INDIVIDUAL ACTIVITIES BY FASHION OPINION LEADERS AND FASHION NONOPINION LEADERS

Activity Source of df Mean F-Ratio Variance Square

Attend parties between groups 1 12.627 22.41** within groups 507 0.563 Host parties between groups 1 10.365 16.07** within groups 507 0.645 Working on between groups 1 8.520 9.79** college committees within groups 507 9.879 Working on between groups 1 8.115 9.58** college publica­ within groups 507 0.847 tions

Attend athletic between groups 1 5.480 5.80* events within groups 507 0.945 Watch movies between groups 1 0.600 1.13 within groups 507 0.532

* p < .05 ** p < .01 140 Ih€ results cf ANCVA (Table 26 and Table 48, Appendix

£) revealed that fashion opinion leaders (x = 8.92) had sig­ nificantly more positive attitude toward charge (F = 28.26, p < .01) than fashion ncnopinion leaders (x = 7.48). Thus,

Hypothesis lllc was accepted.

The ANCVA for individual items of the measure for Atti­ tude Toward Change indicated that fashion opinion leaders scored significantly higher than fashion norcpinion leader for eight (mother's opinion, fashionable hairstyle, modern homo, mixed trousseau, latest clothing styles, ballet, trip abroad, ard going tc western schccls) of the fourteen items in the measure (Table 27 and Table 49, Appendix £). The mean score for the items for which the two groups did rot differ significantly was higher for fashion opinion leaders than fashion norcpinion leaders.

Ihe prediction of Fashion Cfini^n leadership. Stepwise multiple regression was used to assess the contribution of the three variables (media exposure, social participation, and attitude toward change) in the prediction of fashion opinion leadership. Media exposure was the first variable selected in the equation; therefore was the meet significant variable (F = 109.77, p< .01) and explained 17.8 percent of the variance (Table 28) . Attitude toward the change was the second variable tc enter the equation (F - 15.36, p < .01) TABLE 26 ANOVA: ATTITUDE TOWARD CHANGE (CUMULATIVE SCORE) BY CLASS OF FASHION OPINION LEADERSHIP

Variable Source of df Mean F-Ratio Variance Square

Attitude toward between groups 1 241.401 28.26** change within groups 507 8.541

** P < .01 H2 TAEiLE 27 ANOVA; DIFFERENCES IN ATTITUDE TOWARD CHANGE BY CLASS OF FASHION OPINION LEADERSHIP FOR EACH ITEM

Variable Source of df Mean F-Ratio Variance Square

Mother's opinion between groups 1 6.849 33.88** within groups 507 0.202 Fashionable between groups 1 4.102 17.20** hair style within groups 507 0.033 Modern home between groups 1 2.960 16.34** within groups 507 0.181 Mixed between groups 1 3.337 15.31** trousseau within groups 507 0.218 Latest clothing between groups 1 3.151 14.22** styles within groups 507 0.222 Ballet between groups 1 1.694 9.96** within groups 507 0.170

Trip abroad between groups 1 2.172 9.38** within groups 507 0.018

Going to between groups 1 1.300 5.24* western school within groups 507 0.248 Be working woman between groups 1 0.590 2.36 within groups 507 0.249

Believer of family between groups 1 0.186 1.20 planning within groups 507 0.156 End of dowry between groups 1 0.022 0.17 system within groups 507 0.130 Modern wedding between groups 1 0.033 0.15 within groups 507 0.220 Photograph of between groups 1 0.010 0.06 temple within groups 507 0.170

Pro women's oetween groups 1 0.005 0.04 education within groups 507 0.119 * p < .05 ** p < .01 143 and contributed 2.5 percent to the explained variance. ihe third variable to enter the equation was social participa­ tion (F = 2.87, p < .05), and only 0.4 percent of the total variance explained fcy three variables.

lo summarize, fashion Opinion leader is one who make use of fashion information sources, have positive attitude toward change, and use variety of social acts. The group of college women will tend to have positive attitude toward change irrespective of their category of leadership, and will participate in similar kind of social activities, aiscfimination between Fashion Cjinign leaders jyid Fashion

Nonopinior. Leaders. Stepwise discriminant analysis was em­ ployed to find out the discriminant function of the se­ lected variables in the present study. The cumulative scores of media exposure, social participation, and attitude toward change wsre used to find out the most discriminating variable for two subgroups.

The findings of discriminant analysis are presented in

Table 29. & comparison of the variables selected in step­ wise discriminant analysis to those selected in stepwise re­ gression (Table 28) showed similarity. Three steps were performed, and the final discrimination function was com­ posed of media exposure, attitude toward change and social participation, with discriminant function coefficients of

.64, .45, and .34 respectively. Eased on F-ratio, the order TABLE 28

MULTIPLE REGRESSION: PREDICTION OF FASHION OPINION LEADERSHIP WITH MEDIA EXPOSURE, ATTITUDE TOWARD CHANGE AND SOCIAL PARTICIPATION

Increase Overall Step Variable F-Ratio B r 2 in r 2 F

1 Media Exposure 109.77** 0.128 0.178 0.178 109.77** 2 Attitude toward 15.76** 0.178 0.203 0.025 64.36** change 3 Social Partiel- 2.87* 0.029 0.207 0.004 44.02** pation

Constant 1.864

* P < .05 ** p < .01 TABLE 29 COMPARISON OF FASHION OPINION LEADER (FOL) AND FASHION NONOPINION LEADERS (FNOL) USING DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS

Discriminant Group Means for Group Step Variable F-Ratio^ Function Each Variable Centroids Coefficients FOL FNOL FOL FNOL

1 Media Exposure 48.97** .638 25.29 19.52 2 Social Participation 31.93** .342 23.13 19.64 3 Attitude Toward 23.85** .454 8.92 7.48 Change Discrimination between groups = 66.97**^ .51 -.28 a F-Ratio based on Rao's V analysis 2 b The differences are statistically different using X analysis

** p < .01

U1 146 read as media exposure (F = 48.£7, p < .01), social partici­ pation |F = 3.93, p < .01), and attitude toward change (f =

23.65, p < .01). On the basis cf discriminant function coefficients, findings compared favorably tc the results cf regression analysis which revealed that the variable of me­ dia exposure explained maximum variance and was followed by attitude toward change and social participation. Discrimi­ native function was also indicated by the values cf group centroids for fashicn opinion leaders (C.51) and fashion no­ nopinion leaders (-C.28) which differed significantly when tested by value ( X^= 66.97 , p < .01).

A classification matrix was computed using the discrim­ inant functions of fashion opinion leaders and fashion ncno­ pinion leaders (Table 30). The findings indicated that 66.9 percent of the fashion opinion leaders and 62.9 percent of the fashion ncnopinion leaders were classified correctly.

Grouped percentage of correctly classified was 65.03. The classification by chance alcne would have allowed for fifty percent of each group that classified correctly. TABLE 30 CLASSIFICATION MATRIX USING DISCRIMINANT FUNCTIONS FOR FASHION OPINION LEADERS AND FASHION NONOPINION LEADERS

Correct Incorrect Segment Group Classification Classification Size

Fashion Opinion 124 56 180 Leaders (68.9%) (31.1%) Fashion Nonopinion 122 207 329 Leaders (37.1%) (62.9%) Grouped percentage of correctly classified 65.03% ma

The three sukhypotheses were accepted that fashion opinion leaders had greater media exposure, more positive attitude toward change and greater social participation than fashicn ncnopinion leaders. Kedia exposure, as measured by use of fashion information sources, was found to he the largest contributor in explaining the variance and the most discriminating variable. It was followed by attitude toward change and social participation for their preditive and dis­ criminative functions.

The findings that fashion opinion leaders use more fa­ shion information sources than do fashicn ncncpinicn leaders was in agreement with the research reported in the Western literature (Polegato and Nall, 1S8Û; Sogers and Shoemaker,

1S71; Summers, 1S70; Turnbull and Meenaghan, 1980). Cf thirteen fashicn information sources, fashicn opinion lead­ ers used twelve of them mere frequently than fashicn ncno­ pinion leaders.

Further analysis of the items on the measure in regard tc tjjge of sources used during the comprehension and legiti­ mation stages of fashion adoption indicated that fashion opinion leaders used fashicn magazines, fashicn columns in newspaper, window displays and discussion with friends more 149 than the fashion nocopinioo leaders. Ihe high concentration of fashior opinion leaders to the first three items support­ ed the previous research on fashion opinion leadership which suggested that fashion opinion leaders use more of mass me­ dia in general and media in their area of influence in spe­ cific which in this case was fashion magazines, fashion col­ umns in newspapers and window display of fashicn items.

Ihe two subgroups did not differ in their use cf tele­ vision, parents and family members as sources of fashion in­ formation. In India, television is used for general purpos­ es and telecasts are generally made during the evening hours except for selected educational programs for children in the mornings. The television program time of 6 - 7 hours in­ cludes feature films, news, talk about agriculture practices and issues, plays and other such programs. Specific infor­ mation on fashion or fashion-oriented advertisements are not featured very freguently. Parents and family members have been used as sources of information to legitimize individu­ al's choices. It appears like a cultural phenomenon and may be attributed to the economic dependence of college women on their parents.

The results in terms of greater social participation of fashion opinion leaders compared favorably to the findings of several researchers (Gilbride, 1980, Katz C lazarsfeld,

1955; fiobertson and Myers, 1956; Eogers and Shoemaker, 1971; 150 and Summer 1970). fashion opinicr leaders participated mere actively in literary and debating societies, cultural socie­ ties, athletic and social welfare organizations than fashion nonopinion leaders. for these organizations, individuals nesd to te articulate and have the ability to communicate effectively with their audiences. In addition, fashion opinion leaders attended and hosted more parties and worked mors on college committees and for college publications, than fashion nonopinicn leaders. Ihe previously listed in­ dividual activities are ones which give opportunities to leaders to show their influence on followers or ncnopinion leaders, in this particular case. However, the two sub­ groups did not differ in their participation in team sports,

N.C.C.(National Cadet Corp)/ N.S.S. (National Social Service

Scheme) , and hostel activities which are highly structured organizations and do not offer much flexibility for an indi­ vidual to deviate.

Similarly, the finding that fashion opinion leaders have more positive attitude toward change than fashior ncno­ pinion leaders was consistent with the findings of (King,

1963; Rogers, 1962; Rogers and Shoemaker, 1971; Schrank, Su- gawara and Kim, 1982). fashicn opinion leaders opted more for a modern home, foreign travel, fashionable hair style, attending western school, ballet, agreeing with another who likes tc talk about fashion, wearing the latest clothing 151 styles, and including a variety o£ clothing items in their trousseau than fashion norcpinion leaders. All these items involve risk-taking which leaders tend to have. However, the two subgroups did not differ in their opinions about be­ ing a working woman, believer of family planning, pro wo­ men's education, and opposer of dowry system. fci a groups of college women who are in higher education such responses are logical irrespective of the leadership group tc which they belong. 2 Ihe B of .2C7 suggested that variables in the egua- tion explains 20.7 percent of the teal variance. Ihe se­ lected three variables (media exposure, social participa­ tion, and attitude toward change) performed predictive and discriminative functions.

Hypothesis IV: Among the college women in northern India,

fashicn opinion leaders will differ from fa­

shion nonopinion leaders according to se­

lected demographic characteristics.

a) fashicn opinion leaders will come from

higher income segment cf the society

than fashion nonopinion leaders.

b) fashion opinion leaders will belong tc

more educated families than fashion

nonopinicn leaders. 152 Ihe two subhypotheses were tested using Chi sguare analysis liable 31). Each hypothesis is reported.

Hypothesis IVa: Fashicn opinion leaders will cose fros higher income segment cf the society than fashion nonopinior leaders.

Ihe findings revealed than two subgroups did not differ significantly in terms of the income variable. Therefore, hypothesis IVa was not accepted.

Hypothesis ivb: Fashion opinion leaders will belong to more educated families than fashicn norcpinion leaders.

Ihe results indicated that fashion opinion leaders did not differ significantly from fashion nonopinion leaders in relation to the parent's education variable. Hypothesis IVh was not supported by the finding and thus was not accepted.

Ihe findings were not consistent with the information reported in the Western literature. However, in a develop­ ing country, college women generally come from high inccme and well educated families. Since parents support their children for their education they have to have enough money to be able to afford the college expenses. Similarly, in a broader context, educated families tend to be more in favor of women's education than the uneducated families. 153

TABLE 31 SELECTED DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS BY FASHION OPINION LEADERSHIP

Characteristic Percent of Chi Square Fashion Fashion Value Opinion Nonopinion Characteristic Leaders Leaders

Income 5.13 ns Below 250/- Rs 251-500/- 1.7' 1.5' Rs 501-750/- 2.2 3.6 Rs 751-1000/- 5.0 5.8 Rs 1001-1250/- 8.9 8.5 Rs 1251-1500/- 16.1 10.3 Rs 1501 & above 43.9 43.2 Education of Father 6.13 ns

Illiterate 5.6 7.0 Primary 0.6 0.6 Middle 1.1 0.6 High School/Higher Sec./Intermediate 8.9 15.8 Graduate 30.0 29.2 Profess, grad. 16.7 14.3 Postgraduate 37.2 32.5 Education of Mother 9.22 ns

Illiterate 7, 1 1 ,

Primary 2 , 5,

Middle 6 , 3, High School/Higher Sec./Intermediate 34, 38.9 Graduate 31, 27.4

Profess, grad. 0 , 0.3 Post-graduate 16.1 12.2 Base 180 329

KeaaRead 1.7 percent of fashion opinion leaders and 1.5 percent of fashion nonopinion leaders. ns = not significant 154

liodifijs lo further understand the forces behind the fashion process as it operates among college women in North India, additional analysis were performed to provide context for the findings reported in the preceding sections. This sec­ tion includes information on 1) selected background charac­ teristics of fashion innovators/fashion ncninnovators, and fashion opinion leaders/fashion nonopinion leaders; and 2) contextual information regarding sources of learning about fashions for the total sample (n = 50S). selected Eackarcund Characteristics of fashion Innovators^ fashion Nçninnçvajbçrs and Fashion 0£l.niçç l€M§£S/lashion

NÇÇOfiniçn leaders

Eased on analysis, demographic variables were tested for the categories of fashion innovators and fashion opinion leaders for their independence (lahle 32). Ihe findings re­ vealed that fashion innovators differed significantly from fashion ncninnovators in terms cf number of brothers and sisters, siblings older than respondents, and year in college. The fashion innovators tended to be the eldest or second eldest in relation to their position in the family.

In addition, fashion innovators appeared to be in the first two years of the college program. However, no definite pat­ 155 tern was observed while looking at the data for number of brothers and sisters and respondent's position in the fami­ ly. The fashion opinion leaders differed signifioantly from fashion nonopinion leaders in terms of year in college, res­ idential status of students and parents' foreign travel, fashion opinion leaders tended to be from the first two years of the college like fashion innovators, however, dis­ tinction was more obvious for opinion leaders than for the innovators. fashion opinion leaders were found to be days- cholars more so than fashion ncnopinion leaders. Finally, more parents of fashion opinion leaders had travelled abroad than fashion ncnopinion leaders.

lo summarize, the fashion innovators appeared to be the eldest or second eldest in relation to their position in the family. Shis finding may be explained by the fact that pa­ rents generally show more control toward the first child who either becomes very traditional or innovative. However, the second sibling may become innovative in order to develop his identity in the family. A majority of fashion innovators and fashion opinion leaders belonged to the first or second year of college program more sc than fashicr ncninnovators and fashion ncnopinion leaders. This finding could be at­ tributed to fact that students wear uniforms in school until they enter the college. Therefore, entering college gives TABLE 32

CHI SQUARE ANALYSIS OF BACKGROUND CHARACTERISTICS FOR THE SUBGROUPS: FASHION INNOVATORS/NONINNOVATORS AND FASHION OPINION LEADERS/NONOPINION LEADERS

Percent of Percent of Fashion Fashion Chi- Opinion Nonopinion Chi Characteristic Innovators Noninnovators Square Leader Leader Square

Father's occupation 6.19 7.26 Government service 53.3= 53.4= 55.6' 52.3' Businessman- 33.3 32.8 32.2 33.1 Farmer 0.0 6.5 2.8 7.9 Expired 13.3 5.0 6.1 5.2 Retired 0.0 1.9 2.8 1.2 Private from employee 0.0 0.4 0.6 0.3 2.30 Mother's occupation 10.49

Housewife 73.3 50.8 13.9 14.3 Teaching 10.0 14.4 13.9 14.3 Nursing 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.6 0.3 Farming 0.0 0.2 0.0 Business 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.3

u i (T TABLE 32 (Continued)

Percent of Percent of Fashion Fashion Chi- Opinion Nonopinion Chi Characteristic Innovators Non innovators Square Leader Leader Square

Age 5.79 10.87 13 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.3 14 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.3 15 3.3 2.1 3.3 1.5 16 13.3 10.9 12.2 10.3 17 26.7 16.7 22.2 14.6 18 23.3 31.5 27.2 33.1 19 16.7 21.9 20.6 22.2 20 8.7 11.5 10.6 11.9 21 3.3 1.7 1.7 1.8 22 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.3 23 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.3 Number of Brothers and Sisters 21.39* 8.56 0 6.7 2.9 1.7 4.0 1 10.0 16.5 18.3 14.9 2 33.3 29.9 33.9 28.3 3 16.7 20.7 17.8 21.9 4 16.7 14.6 13.3 15.5 5 3.3 7.1 7.2 6.7 6 3.3 3.5 2.8 4.0 7 3.3 2.3 2.2 2.4 8 0.0 1.5 1.1 1.5 9 3.3 0.8 1.1 0.9 TABLE 32 (Continued)

Percent of Percent of Fashion Fashion Chi- Opinion Nonopinion Chi Characteristic Innovators Noninnovators Square Leader Leader Square

Siblings older than Respondent 38.12* 12.65

0 43.3 36.7 38.3 36.5 1 26.6 27.8 33.1 24.6 2 3.3 17.3 13.3 18.2 3 13.3 9.4 8.3 10.3 4 3.3 2.9 2.2 3.3 5 3.3 2.9 1.1 4.0 6 0.0 1.5 1.1 1.5 7 3.3 1.0 1.7 1.2 8 0.0 0.4 0.6 0.3 Program 5.87 6.23

Three Year 20.0 41.5 37.8 41.6 Four Year 76.7 56.8 62.2 55.6 Year in College 19.23*' 14.49*

First 20.0 25.3 28.9 22.8 Second 56.6 27.1 32.2 26.4 Third 16.7 31.5 22.8 35.0 Fourth 3.3 14.4 15.6 12.8

in 0 0 TABLE 32 (Continued)

Percent of Percent of Fashion Fashion Chi- Opinion Nonopinion Chi Characteristic Innovators Noninnovators Square Leader Leader Square

Background of Father 4.91 5.14 Rural 16.7 35.5 31.1 36.2 Urban 80.0 59.9 66.2 58.7 Background of Mothers 5.61 2.47

Rural 13.3 33.4 30.0 33.4 Urban 83.3 59.9 66.7 61.7 Parent's travel 2.42 14.23** Yes 43.3 30.7 41.1 25.5 No 46.7 59.1 51.1 62.3 Major 4.73 3.12 Home Science 93.3 89.1 91.7 88.1 Non Home Science 6.7 10.7 7.2 8.2

in \ o TABLE 32 (Continued)

Percent of Percent of Fashion Fashion Chi- Opinion Nonopinion Chi Characteristic Innovators Non innovators Square Leader Leader Square

Residential Status 2.53 9.47** Hosteller 20.0 34.0 27.2 36.5 Day Scholar 76.7 62.8 71.7 59.3 Base 30 479 180 329

a. Read 53.3 percent of fashion innovators and 53.4 percent of fashion non- innovators. b. Read 55.6 percent of fashion opinion leaders and 52.3 percent of fashion nonopinion leaders. * P < .05 •iV*sV* p < . 01 161 them the first opportunity to eipress their self through clothes. However, the immediate shift from uiifcrm to casu­ al dress needs seme courage and positive attitude toward change, therefore, leaders will tend to change earlier than the ncnleaders. Ihis finding is consistent with the basis used by Rim and Schrank (1982) for fashion researoh in Ko­ rea.

The finding that fashion opinion leaders were more likely to be dayschclars than hostellers could not be ex­ plained. It was anticipated that they would likely be hos­ tellers and thereby be out of parent's restrictions. How­ ever, this needs further clarification. Besult that parents cf leaders will more likely to have travelled abroad than ncnleaders. The finding was consistent with the basis es­ tablished in the review of literature chapter that leaders will have more positive attitude toward change than nonlead­ ers. Travelling abroad provides opportunity for an individ­ ual to broaden his/her outlook, and is an indicator of atti­ tude toward change.

contextual Information

This section includes data from the Eart Vill of the final questionnaire (Appendix C, items 1, 2, 3, 4a, and 8) for the first part cf discussion. The responses from the fashion information sources used during the legitimation stages of Î62 fashion adoption (Eart IVc, iters 7 and 8) are included for the second part of discussion. The third section includes discussion on the fashion items owned by the respondents.

The findings and discussion are based on the total sacple as one unit and are presented in two parts: 1) contextual in­ formation on learning aoout clothing fashions (Table 33), 2) influence of family members in the legitimation stage of fa­ shion adoption, and 3) variety cf fashion items owned.

Ççntextual Information on learninj about Clothing fashions.

Of the respondents (52%) who learned about clothing fashions from their family members, about 35 percent provided specif­ ic information on what they learned from grand mother (3%) and what they learned from mothers (32%). The content of learning included ways to dress up, wearing socially accep­ table clothes, information on latest fashions, stitching, net to waste money on fashion and not to imitate others.

The influential sources of fashion information, from most important to least important were school teachers, the press, friends, relatives, magazines, and political leaders.

The findings are consistent with the results discussed be­ fore except that school teachers and political leaders were net used as sources of fashion information on the measure.

In terms of what had changed the most in the last rive years, style of garment was ranked first and was followed by design detail, type of outfit, material and color. Since 163

TABLE 33 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF THE CONTEXTUAL INFORMATION FOR THE TOTAL SAMPLE

Variable Frequency Percent

Learned about fashions from family members Yes 265 52.1 No 225 44.2 Learned about fashions from grandmothers To live in a simple way 10 2.0 To embroider 3 0.6 To dress up in an acceptable way 1 0.2 Learned about fashions from mother: Way to dress up 52 1 0 , To wear socially acceptable clothes 50 9,

To know about latest fashions 31 6 , To stitch (clothes) 24 4, Not to waste money on fashions 3 0. Not to imitate others 1 0 . Who were influential sources of fashion information School teachers 151 29.0 Press 130 25.5 Friends 70 13.8 Relatives 63 12.4 Magazines 33 6.5 Political leaders 27 5.3 What aspect of clothing/fashion has changed the most in last five years Style 241 47.4 Design detail 102 20.0 Type of outfit 71 14.0 Material 49 9.6 Colour 12 2.4 What is your opinion about use of technological innovation Prefer to use as early as possible 262 51.5 Take them for granted 188 36.9 Become excited 106 20.8 Prefer not to have them 37 7.3 16i»

TABLE 33 (Continued)

Variable Frequency Percent

Do you have a relative in fashion- related job Yes 34 6.7 No 475 93.3 Relation Cousin 18 3.5 Aunt 6 1.2 Brother 4 0.8 Uncle 3 0.6 Sister 2 0.4 Nature of job Fashion designer 13 2.6 Exporter/importer of readymade garments 6 1.2 Boutique owner 6 1.2 Beauty salon owner 3 0.6 Fashion coordinator 3 0.6 165 nearly half of the respondents indicated that styles bad changes in the last five years, further support was provided to the relevance of a fashion study in a developing country like India.

In regard to their opinion ahout technological innova­ tions, atout 52 percent responded that they try the techni­ cal innovation as early as possible, followed by the re­ sponse categories, such as take then fcr granted <371t), get excited (20.8%), and prefer not to have them (7%). Ihis finding further supports the concept that a sajority cf the respondents came from the higher income group and had either used or seen the technological innovation. Cnly seven per­ cent cf the respondents had relatives in fashion-related

-jobs which included aunts, brothers, cousins, sisters and uncles. Ihe jobs were identified as fashion designer, ex­ porter/importer of garments, owner cf bcutigue or beauty sa­ loons, and fashion coordinators.

Ihe findings cf the contextual section were consistent with the empirical findings discussed previously. Ihe in­ fluential sources of fashion information also inoluded school teachers and political leaders, and may be included in furtuxe research. Overall, group of the respondents was well informed about the technological innovations, and was sentitive to the changes which had taken place in clothing/ fashion during the past five years. 166

Influence of lajilj; NJibeis ic the legitimation Sta^e

of Fashiot Adoption process. Ihe family members and parents

in an Indian cultural setting were found to he sources of

fashion information, as indicated in the preceding tables

(p. ICO, and p. 128). further support was found in examining the data for the total sample (n = 5C9). About two thirds

of the respondents reported family members and parents as infiuentials in decision making to legitimize their purchase

of new fashion items. The findings may be attributed to the reason that parents in India are the sole supporters of their children's eduction. In contrast, many college stu­ dents in the Western societies support themselves either completely or partially. Thus, economic dependence of the

Indian college students could be the strong reason fcr using parents as source of fashion information to legitimize their choices. This reason may also he ascribed tc the cultural differences which exist between the oriental and Western so­ cieties. Head (1S70) noted that in prefigurative cultures

(most of the Western countries) elders are isolated and cut- modâd; however, peer influence continues tc he important.

To the contrary, in postfigurative and cofigurative cultures

(India may be identified as combination of both types of cultures) elders are respected and dominant. In cofigura- tive cultures, peer influence beccmes important while in the prafiqurative culture the peer influence does not exist 167 since values and patterns of living are traditional. The

empirical evidence discussed tefore indicated that peers

(discussion with friends and seeing what friends wear) pa­

rents and family members contributed toward influencing the

fashion choices of the respondents.

Variety of ±he fashion Items Caned. The respondents

owned a variety of the fashion items listed in Eart I cf the

questionnaire (Appendix C). The findings revealed that 90%

cf the respondents had the salwar, kameez and dupatta out­

fits; other outfits were the churridar pyjama, kurta and du­

patta (84%); churridar pyjama and kurta (68%); middy dress

(53%); jeans and shirt (47%); maxi (46%); saree (46%); bell

bottom suit (32%); churridar pyjama, kurta and vest (28%)

and jeans and jacket (20%).

Ihe most striking result was that 54% of the respon­

dents didnot own even one saree although it is a national

costume. The finding that over one-half of the college wo­

men didnot own a sari could be ascribed to three reasons,

hirst, the sample was college women and not Indian women in

general. Indian women do wean the saree more often after marriage than the college women in higher education. In

particular, the saree is worn by Indian women fcr most of the rituals. Second, when a college woman needs a saree for some rituals in the family or other such functions, one can 168 te borrowed from mother, sister, friends, or relatives.

Third, seme of the coapulsary college activities, such as

M.C.C. (National Cadet Corp), N.E.S. (National Social Ser­ vice Scheme), and sports cannot he performed well in sarees.

Therefore, the bifurcated garments such as salwar or cturri-

dar pyjama are preferred for functional reasons.

Tc many foreigners, the saree is perceived as the cnly costume worn by the Indian women. This misconception may be attributed to the fact that the majority of foreign offi­ cials who visit India do not come in contact with the col­ lege students but may meet the wives cf the high officials.

At such functions the women are attired in the saree.

The influence of the West was reflected by the use of jeans and dresses; these items of apparel were not commonly included in the wardrobes of the college women in northwest­ ern. India before 1980. Although jeans like salwar and chur­ ridar pyjama are bifurcated garments, their fit and appear­ ance are very different. Jeans are more revealing than the salwar churridars, thus have not been acceptable in an Indi­ an setting. The increasing acceptance of jeans may reflect social changes which are occurring in India.

The hypotheses testing and subseguent analysis provided sufficient evidence tc believe that the fashion process op­ erated in India in a manner similar tc Western countries.

However, some cultural differences were also evident in re­ 169 lation to the characteristics cf respondents in general and fashion innovators/fashion roninncvatcrs, and fashicr. opin­ ion leadors/fashion nonopinicn leaders in particular. To conclude, the concept of fashion process was found to he a viable area of research in an Indian content. CHAPIEB VI

SUKHAfiY AMD 1Cfl1CA7ICNS

Ihe fashion process is a key concept to understand the penetration of new styles in a society, and to comprehend the adoption process used by an individual. Usefulness of the concept of fashion process can le extended to the fa­ shion industry for the forecasting cf new styles, fashion researchers for understanding the concept, to consumers in the decision making process regarding fashion choices, and to the field of textiles and clothing for increasing its visibility in the business community.

Fashion is generally associated with the Western socie­ ties. However, sufficient support tc investigate fashion study in an Indian setting was provided ty historical evi­ dence from Indian writings, current events which reflect many social and economic changes, and fashion research in the Western literature. Ihe relevance cf a study cf fashion in India was further supported by increase in number cf stu­ dents in higher education (India Eulleltin, 1982, Statisti-

- 170 - 171 cal Year Eook: 1983) , increase in nuitber ci media such as newspapers, magazines, radio and television (Eaghavan, 1981;

Statistical Year £cck: 1981, 1983), increased urbanization

(Demographic Year books, 1981, 1983) efforts to provide pro­ fessional identity tc home scientists in India increasea em­ phasis cn graduate research in India which has direct appli­ cation in industry, and improvement in the living standards of the India people (Stevens, 1984). Ihe importance cf fa­ shion is also provided by the increase cf 6.4 percent in the export cf ready made garments during 1981-1982 (India Bulle­ tin, 1983).

A brief overview of the investigation, discussion of implications, and suggestions for future research are pre­ sented in this chapter. Ike summary includes the purpose, methodology, results and conclusions. Ihe impliclaticns section deals with testing of conceptual framework, and the last section suggest some areas of future research in the realm of fashion process in general and for India in specif­ ic.

Summary

Based on the review of literature, the key consumers in the fashion process are fashion innovators, fashion opinion leaders, and fashion innovative communicators. They are considered to be the infiuentials. Iherefore, the research was focused on the fashion process to gain insight as to how 172 it operated it India. Differences between fashion innova­ tors and noninnovators and between fashion opinion leaders and nonleaders were examined in relation to their media ex­ posure, social partioiipation, attitude toward change, and selected demographic characteristics. The specific objec­ tives of the study were:

a) lo identify fashion innovators, fashion ncninnovators,

fashion opinion leaders and fashion nonopinion leaders

in a selected segment of population.

b) lo determine the extent of nedia exposure, social par­

ticipation and attitude toward change for the identi­

fied groups of individuals.

c) lo assess selected demographic characteristics of the

fashion innovators, fashicn ncninnovators, fashion

opinion leaders and fashicn ncnopinion leaders.

d) ic identify fashion innovative communicators.

Ihe concepltual framework of the research was based on the diffusion and adoption of innovations as reported by

Robertson (1971), Rogers (1962), and Rogers and Shoemaker

(1971). Ihe theoretical basis of diffusion process involves spread of innovations through communication channels over a period cf time in a social system (Rogers, 1962 and Rogers and Shoemaker, 1971). The adoption process model recognizes the steps an individual follows before accepting or reject­ ing an innovation. Various stages of the adoption process 173 involve psychosocial and/or impulse forms cf decisicn mak­ ing. An individual seeks information from external sources (mass media and personal) tc understand information and leg­ itimize the acceptance or rejection of newly introduced item

(Ecbertson, 1971) .

A separate sample pretest-pcsttest research design

(Campbell and Stanley, 1963: 40} was used . female college students in northwestern India were identified as the popu­ lation since college age women are more fashicn conscious than older groups (Katz and lazarsfeld, 1955; Khanna and

Vexghese, 1978). High school students in India wear uni­ forms; therefore, they were net considered. Ihe sample was obtained from five colleges in three states (Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan) and a union territory, Delhi. Ihe area of northwestern India was selected fcr three reasons: diversi­ ty of seasons, adaptable nature cf residents as a result of their exposure to several foreign invasions over time; and the presence of visible diversity in their mode cf dressing.

Four measures were identified and adapted to obtain data from an Indian population cn the basis of the responses to a preliminary survey, review cf western literature to identify pertinent concepts and their relationship tc se­ lected variables, review of Indian literature, and inter­ views with visitors from India ic Columbus. In addition, the researcher developed two measure (Attitude Toward Change 174 Measure ard fiackgicurd Information Sheet). A pretest was conducted in India to determine the reliability and validity of the selected and developed measures. A coordinator in each of the five colleges served as the contact person to administer the measures and return the questionnaires to the researcher. Cf the 800 sailed questionnaires, 727 were dis­ tributed and a useable sample cf 5C9 (70%) respondents was obtained.

Heise and Eohrnstedt's Omega ] ) was used to test the reliability and rho ( p ) was used tc test the validity of the measures used in the study. Ihe reliability coeffi­ cients for the five measures ranged from .54 to .85, and va­ lidity coefficients ranged from 1.1 to 1.4. Hescriptive statistics were used to provide an overview of the back­ ground of the respondents, to assess the contextual informa­ tion, and to identify the fashicn innovators/ fashion ncnin­ novators and fashion opinion leaders/fashion ncnopinion leaders. Ihe four hypotheses were tested using Analysis of

Variance (ANOVA), Stepwise Multiple fegressicn. Stepwise

Discriminant Analysis, and Chi Square Contingency lable

Analysis. The level of significance to accept or reject the hypotheses was established at .05.

Descriptive statistics for the total sample indicated that the respondents represented an educated, urban, and higher income segment cf the population than would be found 175 ir the geieral population cf India. A majority of the re­ spondents made use of technological advancements. Tie most influential sources in acquiring fashion information were school teachers, fcllcwed iy parents, relatives, friends and press. About half of the respondents believed that changes during the past five years in clctbing were most evident in terms of style rather than design detail, type cf cutfit, colour and fabrics. The importance placed on changes in styles provided further support to the relevance of fashion research in a developing country such as India. About seven percent of the subjects had relatives involved in fashion- related jobs such as fashion designer, fashion coordinator, exporter/importer of ready-to-wear and owners of boutigues or beauty saloons.

Of the sample (n = 505), 5.9 percent

35.4 percent jn = 16C) of the total sample and fashion ncno­ pinion leaders represented 64.7 percent (n = 329). Fashicn 176 innovative communicators described 4.3 percent I n = 22) of the respondents, thus the concept of innovative communicator is similar to that in Hestern literature.

The hypothesis that fashicn innovators would have greater media expcssure, higher social participation, and more positive attitude toward change than fashion noninncva- tors was accepted for one variable: media exposure. The findings did net provide support for the remaining two vari­ ables. The hypothesis that fashion innovators would come from higher income, more urban, and higher educated families than fashicn ncninnovators was not accepted.

The hypothesis was accepted that fashion opinion lead­ ers would have greater media exposure, higher social partic­ ipation, and more positive attitude toward change than fa­ shion noncpinion leaders. However, the hypothesis that fashicn opinion leaders would come from higher income and more educated families than fasion ncnopinion leaders was not accepted for the two subgroups.

Overall, the results supported the hypothesized impor­ tance of media exposure, social participation, and attitude toward change to discriminate fashion opinion leaders from ncnleaders. Also, the importance of media exposure was sup­ ported for fashion innovators and noninnovators. Eased on the cumulative score (general index) for social participa­ tion and attitude toward change, results failed to differen­ 177 tiate fashion innovators and fashicn ncninnovators although two subgroups differed on types cf social activities ard on specific items included in the attitude toward change meas­ ure. Selected demographic characteristics were neither aso- ciated with fashion innovativeness nor with fashion opinion leadership.

lo further understand the fashion process, items cn the three meas ures, were examined tc find out which were most effective in explaining the differences between the identi­ fied subgroups. Ihe findings revealed that activities and ideas which were individualistic were used mere by fashion influantials (innovators and opinion leaders) than by these who are influenced, ihereas, the activities and ideas which involved group efforts (i.e. participation in religious or­ ganizations, N.C.C./K.S.S.) were aore often identified by ncninfluentials than fashion infiuentials. A high nuaber of respondents used parents and relatives as important sources of fashion information which was ic contrast with the west­ ern culture in which peer influence is important. fashion

Infiuentials used fashion magazines and other impersonal sources of fashion information tore than influencials who used seeing what their friends wore more than the infiuen­ tials. for attitude toward change, both fashion innovators and fashicn opinion leaders opted for wearing fashionable hair style, attending western school, foreign trip, and 178 agreeing vith the mother who likes to discuss ahout fashions more so than the fashion rcninncvators and fashion ncnopin- icn leaders. Fashion opinion leaders also responded mere positively for owning a modern home, attending ballet, wear­ ing latest clothing styles and having mixed trousseau mere than the fashion ncnopinicn leaders.

lo conclude, hypotheses testing and subseguent analyses provided sufficient evidence to conclude that the fashion process operated in India in a manner similar tc that in

Western society. However, some cultural differences were evident. The concept of fashion opinion leadership appeared to be more effective than that of fashion innovativeness when the selected variables for the present study were exam­ ined (media exposure, social participation and attitude to­ ward change). A possible reason for the fashicn innovative­ ness concept to be less effective was the low reliability of the Fashicn Innovativeness Measure. Therefore, the fashion

Innovativeness Measure may he reexamined and expanded tc in­ clude pertinent aspects related tc fashion innovativeness. 179 llJilcatiens

Implications of the present research are discussed in

two section: 1) testing conceptual frameworks cf adoption

and diffusion cf innvations (Robertson, 1971, Rogers, 1962,

Rogers and Shoemaker, 1971), and 2) application of the

framework tc characterize the selected adopter categories in the clothing fashions.

Conceptual Framework Testing

The diffusion model of Rogers (1962) and adoption model of Robertson (1971) provided theoretical structure for the investigation. These two models have teen extensively used by fashion researchers in the Kestern society. Roger's mod­ el included the concepts of innovators, early adopters, ear­ ly majority, late majority and laggards; in addition, Rogers recognized the contribution of the opinion leader as an in­ fluential person in bringing about the charge. Sproles

(1979) identified five adopter categories corresponding to

Roger's (1962): fashion innovators, fashion opinion leaders, mass market consumers, fashicn followers, and fashicn lag­ gards. Fashion researchers have identified the influentlals in various ways: innovator (Easnak, 1968; Robertson and

Myers, 1969; Schrank, 1970: Schrank, Sugawara and Kim,

1982); early adcpters/early buyers including innovators

(Eaumqarten, 1975; King, 1963). Thus, there is some inccn- 180 sisrency in the use of terms. The results cf hypotheses testing, subsdeguent analyses and additional findings on the contextual section provided a base for the usefulness of the concepts to an Indian setting.

Ihe group identifiad as innovators comprised the top

5.90 percent as opposed to top 2.5 percent as suggested by

Rogers (1S62). Ihis discrepancy could be attributed to the reason that changes in clothing fashion move faster than the changes in agricultural practices (Ihcopscn, 1977). For the opinion leadership category, Rogers (1962) did not assign a specific percentage; however he suggested that opinion lead­ ers could come frcm the categories of innovators, early adopters and early majority. Rogers' measure to identify opinion leaders was reported to he used in several settings both for agricultural practices and fashion research. Ihe

35.U percent representation of fashion opinion leaders in the present research compared favorably to 28 percent re­ ported by Summers (1970) and 27.7 percent by Baumgarten

(1975). Ihe correlation between fashion innovativeness and fashion opinion leadership ( r = .36) was in agreement with that by Summers (1971) and Baumgarten (1975), ^ = .35 and

.34 respectively. Further support was provided by the pres­ ent research for the existence of fashion innovative commu­ nicators. Ihe use of different sources of fashion informa­ tion during various stages of adoption (Robertson, 1971) for 181

irfluentials and the influenced was supported by the present

reserach.

1 0 conclude, findings of the present study provided

support for the relevance of the conceptual model cf adop­

tion and diffusion cf innovations on in a nonWestern country

such as India for use in the study of fashion.

A&Elication of the Iiaaewc£k tg the

Characteristics of fashion Influgatials/

Woninfluentials

Ihe findings cf the present study indicated that the influentials (fashion innovators and fashicn opinion lead­ ers) and noninfluentials (fashicn noninnovators and fashion ncnopinicn leaders) differed in selected variables: use of

media exposure, extent of social participation and degree of attitude toward change. Ihis finding implies an obvious

usefulness for both manufacturers in the apparel industry as

well as retailers in India to help them in the identifica­ tion of their target market for the introduction and accep­ tance of fashion items. Bole of family members and parents as influentials in the legitimation of taking fashion choic­ es by the college women should be given due consideration.

The characteristics of leaders and nonleaders revealed both similarities and differences when compared with the western research. The greater media exposure of fashion in­ novators was consistent with the findings in the Western 182 literature (Behai* 1977; Kaigler, 1975; Bogers and shoemak­ er, 1971; Turnbull and Heenaghar, 1980). However, since fa­ shion innovators in the sample cf Indian subjects did not have greater social participation than fashion noninnova- tcrs. The finding was inconsistent with the Hestern re­ search as reported by (King, 1965, Bcgers and Shoemaker,

1971). Similarly, a disagreement was revealed when findings indicated that fashion innovators did net have more positive attitude toward change than ncninncvatcrs (Kim and Schrank,

1982, King, 196J; Bogers, 1962; Bogers and Shoemaker, 1971;

Schrank, Sugawara and Kim, 1982). The inconsistency was at­ tributed to the population frcm which sample was drawn, changing environment in India and low reliability yielded by the Fashicn Innovativeness Measure.

Eespcnses by fashion opinion leaders versus various ncnopinicn leaders in the present study were similar tc that found in the Western literature. Fashion opinion leaders had greater media exposure (King and Summers, 1970; Pclegato and Wall, 1980; Summers, 1970; and Turnbull and Meenaghan,

1980); higher social participation (Gilbride, 1980; Katz and

Lazarsfeld, 1955; King, 1965; Summers, 1970); and mere posi­ tive attitude toward change (Kim and Schrank, 1982; King,

1965; Bcgers, 1962; Rogers and Shoemaker, 1971, Schrank, Su­ gawara and Kim, 1982) than fashion rocopinion leaders. Both fashion innovatcrs/fashicn ncninncvatcrs and fashion opinion 183 leaders/fashion Dcaopinion leaders cane from families with

higher incoma, more education, and urhan tackground than found in the Indian population in general. Thus, the sub­

groups could not be differentiated on the basis cf selected

demographic characteristics.

A distinct cultural difference was indicated in the

present research which included role of parents and family

memners ir legitimizing the fashion choices cf respondents.

Ike difference was attributed tc economic dependence cf re­

spondents on their parents as well as respect for and domi­

nance of elders. Such characteristics are attributed to

cultures which are postfigureative and cofigureative (Kead,

1970}. However, in ccfigureative cultures, peer influence

begins to be of mere importance than in the postfigureative

cultures. No parallel study regarding the rcle of parents

and family members was found in the Western literature.

Based on bead's classification (1970), western countries are

classified as prefigureative culture which continue to value

peer influence more than elder's dominance.

Ihe present study dealt with selected attitudinal and

demographic variables in relation to fashion process and may

be extended to personality and other attitudinal and cogni­ tion characteristics such as knowledgeability, achievement

motivation, and perceived risk in regard to fashion innova­

tiveness and fashion opinion leadership (Morris, 1983; lurn- 18U tull and Beenaghan, 1S60). Cstlund (1974) octed that per­ ceived attributes of innovativeness such as relative advan­ tage, cospatability, complexity, degree of cosBittnect, and ccmmunicahility of innovations are tetter predictors of in­ novativeness than personality characteristics. Borxis

(19B3) used Cstlund's concept and found relative advantage, fashion interest and perceived risk as main predictors of fashion innovativeness. Ihus, conflicting viewpoints are reported in terms of the predictive power of personality versus perceived attributes, and need further clarification.

lo conclude, findings revealed that the conceptual framework could be successfully applied to characterize the selected adopter categories and provided support for empiri­ cal evidence' in the Western literature. Ihe results pro­ vided evidence to consider fashion as a viable area of re­ search and implied that to further understand the fashion process in India, it would be relevant to consider perspec­ tives net included in the present research.

Suggestions for future ieseajpcfa

Eased on the results of present study, the following suggestions are offered for further research.

a) Ihe questionnaire may be further administered in the

northeastern, southeastern, and southwestern quadrants

of India to further understand the similarities or 185 differences tetween fashicn influentials and ncnin-

flucntials in a diverse country such as India.

b) The present research focused cn fashicn process as sc-

cio-psychological phenomena and may be extended tc an­

thropological perspective. fashion research fro* an­

thropological perspective could include tracing rack

diffusion of single fashion ite* from its introduction

tc obsolescence, or examining various design details

for each ite* to identify cyclical nature cf fashion

over a period of time.

c) The present study dealt with college women for select­

ed variables; other variables which influence the op­

eration cf fashicn process may be considered in future

research. The variables nay include achievement acti­

vation; knowledgeability; perceived risk; relatiave

advantage, complexity, ccmpatability, and ccmmlunica-

bility of new products. The ability of such variables

could be examined as to their explanation, prediction

and discrimination of the differences between the fa­

shicn innovators/noninncvatcrs, fashicn opinion lead-

ers/nonopinicn leaders. d) Sample may include wives of businessmen who have mere

mcney, and leisure time tc spend than the college wo­

men students. Such a study would help apparel manu­

facturers tc identify the consumer market for a vari­

ety of their speciality products. 186 e) FashicQ magazines were found to te the influential

source of fashicn information for leaders. It may be

useful to extend this concept of use cf specific fa­

shicn magazines by fashion leaders and nonleaders dur­

ing different stages of fashion adoption fez further

understanding of the differences in the two subgroups. f) The measure of Attitude toward Change, which was de­

veloped cy the researcher, may be further used at dif­

ferent sites in India for fashicn research, cr as part

cf ether research that is designed to examine the im­

pact of social change cn women in an Indian setting.

The measure may also be adapted for use in ether de­

veloping countries, based cn the history and culture

cf the nation. g) The importance of values tc determine the underlying

reasons for making the decision tc buy cr net tc buy a

fashion item by various adopter categories may he in­

vestigated. h) The research investigation may be extended to include

ether adopter categories to further understand the fa­

shicn process. Such categories may include innovative

communicators, early adopters, early majority, late

majority and laggards. i) Fashion may be studied as an object ever time in re­

gard to color, fabric, texture and other details. 187 ether aspects of fashicn which could he studied are types of prints for fashion fairies (geometric versus natural motifs such as floral, animal, hirds) in rela­ tion to socioeconomic group, or, types of colors used by various sociceconcmic groups. BlfillOGflFHT

Abrol, U. Adaptation of JA^ ÜÇDEFN PAIIEBl! £f 05 centimetres bus^ for basic blouse Jto different stales of jackets. Unpublished Master's Ihesis, M.S. University, Baroda, India, 1974.

Anwar, £. A. A note cn the impact cf UK's accession to EEC on IKDC-UK trade flows. The Indian Journal cf Economics, 1981, 62 169, 244.

Asher, 0. B. Causal Modeling. London: Sage Eublicaticns, 1961.

Asthana, E. Woman's Movement in India. Delhi: Vikas Publishing House Pvt. Ltd., 1974.

Baiq, T. A. India * s Women Power. New Delhi: S. Chang & Co., 1976.

Barber, B . and ioebel, i. S. fashion ir women's clothes and the American social system. Sccial Forces. 1952, 32, 124-131.

Eaumqarten, S. A. The innovative communicator in the diffusion process. Journal of Marketing Research. 1975, i2, 12-18.

Beal, G. (f. and Bcgers, £. K. Informational sources in the adcpticn process of new fabrics. Journal cf Home Economics, 1957, 49, 630-634.

Bedi, S. E. F clklcre of the Punjab. New Delhi: National Bock Txust^ 1980. ~ ~

Behai, P. A. An analjL§is of innovative jn^jcjs as predictors of fashion behavior. Unpublished Master's Thesis, University of Nevada, 1977.

Beltran, £., Luis Bamiro, Cardona, E., Cardona, F. D. Hass media and cultural domination. Prospects. 1980, 10 (1), 76-79.

- 188 - 189

Berry# J. W. 1 Social and Cultural Change.I In H. C. Iriandis# and J. U. Berry# (£d.)# Handbook pf Crosscultural isxçhsisaii Methodology. Boston: Allyn and Oaoon Inc.# 1980.

Bushan# J. E. Ihe Costumeg ajgd %exiilgs India. Bombay: Tarapcrevala*s Treasure House of Books# 1956.

Biqoness# W. J. and Perrault# N. £.# Jr. A conceptual paradigm and approach for the study of innovations. Academy cf Management Journal. 1981, 24 (1)# 26-82. filumer# H. Sociological analysis gt fashion. Berkeley: University of California, 1966.

Blumer# H. Fashion: from class differentiation to collective selection. Sociological Quarterly, 1969# 10. 275-291.

Borgotta# E. F. Sociological Methodology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers, 1969# 38-73.

Erenninkmeyer# I. The Sociology of Fashion. Paris: Westdenstcher Verlag# 1963.

Brett# J.E. and Kernaleguen# A. Perceptual and personality variables related to opinion leadership in fashion. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1975# 40# 775-779.

Burkhardt# Robert E. India: Demographic migration# 1901-1976. The National Geographic Journal of India. 1978, 24 (1-2)7 l-Ts.

Campbell# D. I. and Stanley# J. C. Experimental and Cuasi- Experimental Designs f_gi Research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company# 1963.

Carman# J. M. The fate of fashion cycles in cur modern society. American Karketiiig Association fxoceedings# 1966# 722-737.

Chapin# F. S. f Sccial Participation J In B. C. Miller (Ed.) Handbook of Research ^ s j g n and Social Measurement. New York: [avid HcKncy Company# Inc.# 1970.

Chaturvedi# P. Rapid advances in communication. Indian and foreign Review, 19 82, J9 (7), 16-24.

Chopra# S. M. India. . . An Area Study. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House Pvt. ltd.# 1977. 190

Dardan, M . B. and Baynolds, F. c . Eredictiog opinion leadership fer men's apparel fashions. Journal of faiAsiiaa fsssâisà» i9?2, i i2e-328.

cardia, B. The Power of Fashion. UçsjedifisS Ijefilljth hËLMÀ ÜSniàiSS£S 9Î lk§ ££ües

ÿ£S£9£â£Jbi£ iJâl £££Ji: 1SJ1* New York; United Mations Publishing Service, 1983

Cesouza, A. VÿSSE ÀE SSEtêEESEâll lEÉia: Traditional iliass âfid Chajaina Boles. Delhi: Indian Social Institute, 1975.

Dhasija, J. Wcron and handicrafts: Myth and reality. JSiSia. No. U, 1581.

Char, Somnath. Cinema and social development. Indian and iSZflgn Review, 1981, J8 (1), 21.

Evartt, J. M. Women and Sccial Change in India. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1975.

Facts about India. New Delhi: The Publication Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government cf India, 1953.

Fallers, I. A. A note on the trickle effect. Ihe Public Opinion Quarterly. 1954, J8 (3), 3 34-322.

Femina: an Indian magazine. March 8-22, 1982.

Field, G. A. The Status float phenomenon: the upward diffusion of innovation. Business Horizons, 1970, 13 45-52.

Gaur, Albertine Women in India. London: The British library, 1579.

Gedqe, E. C. and Choksi, M. Women jn Modern India. Bombay: D. B. Taraporevala Sons 6 CcT, 1576. (GeprintT.

Ghurye, G. S. Indian Costume. Bombay: The Popular Bock Depot, 1951. "

Ghurye, G. S. Indian Costume. Bombay: Popular Prakashan, 1566. 191 Gilbride, Martha, leadership characteristics and clcthing- fglated behajiçi of a jjo^f SÂ bi^h sÇhÇÇi sjgaigrs. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, The Ohio State University, 1980.

Goldstein, R. 1. Indian Women in Transition: A fanglore Case Studjf. Metuclen; The Scarecrow Press, 1972.

Gregory, Eaul H. The deformed thief. The Anticch Review. 1947-46, 519-540.

Grindereng, H. P. fashion Diffusion. Journal of Home Economics, 1S67, 59 171-174.

Grindereng, H. F. £ The trouble with fashion is, , , ,2 In G. B. Sproles (Ed 6 trans.) Perspectives cf Fashicn. Minneapolis: Burgess Publishing Company, 1981, 130-32.

Gupta, S. B. fighting poverty and unemployment. Indian and foreign Review, 1982, J9 (7), 19-20.

Guttman, J. and Mills, M. R. fashicn life style, self- concept, shopping orientation, and store patronage: an integrative analysis. Journal of Retailing. 1982, 58 (2), 64-86.

Harrison, E. 7. Clothing selection practices, interest, knowledge, and perception for a group of educated wcmen consumer in India. Unpublished doctoral Dissertation, Pennsylvania State University, 1969,

Heise, £. R., and Echenstedt, G. H. I Validity, invalidity, and reliability I in £,F. Borgcta and G. W. Echenstedt (Edited) Sociological Methodology San Francisco: Jcssey- Bass, 1970.

Higgins, f. E. E. t Awareness requisite to fashicn,3 In G. E. Sproles (Ed. 6 trans.). Perspectives of Fashion, Minneapolis: Burgess Publishing Company, 1981, 127-129.

Hcpkins, R. D. And Glass,. D, V. Basic Statistics for the Experinental Sciences. New Jersey: Prentice ball Inc. , 1978.

India: A Democracy cn Move. Washington D, C.: Embassy of India,“ 19817"

India: A Reference Manual. 1980. Publications Division: Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government cf India.

India JulJetin 1982 20 (6), 12 192 JJljâiâ pulletip. 1983 2j (3), 6.

Ir.dia*s federal structure. Indian and Foreign JBeview. 1982 J9. (1S), 4.

India's physical features. I^dij^ M d loreigr Feview. 1982, J9, (16), 4.

India News (a) New York: Consulate General of India. Octoter 14, 1983.

India News (b) New York: Consulate General of India. October 28, 1983.

India: Ihe turning £çint. Washington, I. C.: Ihe Embassy of India, 1982.

Inkeles, A. and Smith, D. C. Becoming Modern. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1974.

Iqbal, E. A. Problems of urbanization. Indian and foreign Review. 1981, J9 (2), 24-25.

Jain, D. Indian Women. New Delhi: Ihe Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, 1975.

Kahl, J. A. The Measurement of Modernism: A Study of Values in Brazil and Mexico. Austin: The University of Texas Press, 1968.

Kaiqiar-Evans, K. Eerceived similarity of sources and receivers' innovativeness: facilitators of transmission of information about fashion. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 1979, 49 (1), 243-246.

Kaigler, K. L. Fanion information: Source effects in interpersonal communication. Unpublished doctoral Dissertation, The Chio State University, 1975.

Katz, E. and lazarsfeld, P. Fashion leaders: Personal Influence. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1955.

Kennedy, J. J. ^ Introduction to Design and Analysis of Experiments in Education and Psiçhologj. Sashington, D. C.: University Press of America, 1978.

Khanna, G. and Verghese, M. A. Indian Homen today. Bombay: Vikas Publishing House Pvt. Ltd., 1978. 193 Kim, J. C. and Kohout, F. J. r Analysis of Variance and Covariance: Subprograms ANCVA and Cneway.3 In H. H. Nie, J. G. Jenkins, K. Stenbxennex and C. H. Bent (ed) SPSS: Statistical Package fo^ tj^ Social Sciences, New York: McGraw-Hill Bock company, 1975

Kim, J. 0. and Kohout, F. j, i Multiple Regression Analysis: Subprogram Regression.1 In N. H. Nie, G. H. Hull, J. G. Jenkins, K. Steinbrenner and C. C. Bent (Ed.) SPSS: Statistic^ Package for ihe Sgciai Sciences, New York: McGraw Hill Bock Company, 1975.

Kim, K. and Schrank, H. Fashicn leadership among Korean • women. Home Economics iesea%ch Jgujçnal# ^982, JO (3), 227-234.

King, C. K. Fashion Adoption: A Rebuttal to the "Trickle Down" Theory Toward Scientific Marketing, Seven A Greysex, editor. Proceedings cf the Winter Conference of the American Marketing Association, 1963. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 1963, 108-125.

King, C. k. The innovator in the fashion adoption process. Reflections on Progress in Marketing Proceedings gf the American Marketing Association. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 1965, 324-339

King, C. k. and Sprcles, G. B. Predictive efficacy of psychopersonality characteristics in fashion change agent identification. Proceedings 81st Annual Convention. APA. 1973, 641-42.

King, c. k. and Summers, J. 0. Overlap of opinion leadership across consumer product categories. Jourral of Marketing Research. 1970, J, 43-50.

Klecka, W. B. t Discriminant Analysis.3 In N. H. Nie, C . H. Hull, J. G. Jenkins, K. Steinbrenner and D. H. Bent (Ed.) SPSS - Statistical Package for the Sccial Sciences. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, 1975.

Kosambi, C. D. ijncienj India: A Histojjf of Itg fiulture and Civilization. New York: Pantheon Bocks, 1965.

Lamb, B. E. India— A World in Transition. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1975.

Lauer, £. H. and Handel, W. H. Sccial Psychology: the Theory and Agglicatign of Sjfmbclic I nt e% ac t ion is m. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1977. 191» leiter, K. A. A ilisjr on Ethpomctjiodploqy, Kew York: Oxford University Press, 1980.

Lerner, 0. The empathetic personality and modernization. The Passing of Traditional Society. New York: File Press, 1962. lewis, C. Village life in Northern Ijgdia. Urbana: University cf Illinois Press, 1958.

Mead, M. Culture and Commitment: A S±udj( of the Generation Gap. Kew York: Natural History Press, 197C.

Mertes, John E. Fashion: a prod toward progress. Jusiness and Economic Dimensions. 1970, 6 (6), 12-18-

Miller, D. C. Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement. New York: David Rckeny Company, Inc., 1970.

Mishra, £. N. Cn simulating spatial diffusion of novel cultural elements. The National Geographic Journal cf India, 1972, J8, 121-147.

Mohammad, Moor. Impact of social factors cn diffusion of agricultural innovations in central Transghagra plan. The National Gecqeranhic Journal gf India. 1978, 24 (1-2TT” 36-46.

Montagu, Askley. Culture and Juman Development; Insights into Growing Human. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc., 1974.

Morris, N. A. Fashion innovativeness predictors; perceived innovation attributes and psvctograchics. Unplublished doctoral dissertation. The Chic State University, 1983.

Naik, J. Education and social change. Indian agd Foreign Review. 1982, J9 (7), 20-21.

Naipaul, P. India: A Hounded ^iyiiigation. New York: Alfred A. Kncff, 1977.

Nunnally, J. C. Psychometric Thecrv. New York: McGraw Hill Bock Company, 1978.

G'Brian, Pita Cruise. Mass media, education and transmission of values. Prospects. 1980, JO (1), 61-67.

Cstlund, I. £. Perceived Innovation Attributes as predictors of Innovativeness. Journal of Consumer Research. 1974, 23-29. 195 Pasnak, a, F. D. Fashion innovators compared vitb jpgn- iaaavators and clothiiig altitudes, self-actualization, and tolerance of ambiguity. Dcpublished doctoral dissertation, Pennsylvania State University, 1968.

Pclegato, R. and Wall, M. Information seeking by fashion opinion leaders and followers. Ecme Economics Research Journal. 1980, 8 (5), 127-339.

Raghavan, G. N. S. Ihe contemporary relevance cf India's traditional media. Indian Horizons. 1981, 30 |1), 11-20.

Raman, 1. A. India. Michigan: The lideler Company, 1980.

Bau, Santha Rama. This is India. Kew York: Earper and Brothers, 1954, 84-97.

Recognizing the llnyisible^ Woman in feyelojgment: The World Bank»s Experience. Washington, C. C.: World Bank, 1979.

Reynolds, F. B. and Darden, W. B. Why the midi failed. Journal of Advertising Research. 1972, J2, 39-44.

Bichstad, Jim. Seme observations on television in Indonesia. New Perspectives in International Communication. Honolulu: East West Centre, 1979.

Boach, M. E. and Eicher, J. B. Cress. Adornment and Social Order. Naw York: John Wiley 6 Sens, Inc., 1965.

Bohenstine, C. and Kelley, £. Relating fashion to social change: A methodological approach. Home Economics Research Journal. 1981, JO (1), 78-87.

Rcbertscn, I. S. Innovative Behavior and Communications. New York: holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1971.

Rcbertscn, I. S. and Beyers, J. H. Personality correlates of opinion leadership and innovative buying kehavicr. lîfiujl'âi of Marketing Research. 1969, 6, 164-168.

Rogers, E. M. Diffusion of Innovations. New Ycrk: The Free Press, 1962.

Bcgers, E. M. New approaches to development/ the rise and fall of the dominant paradigm. Journal gf cgmmunicatigns, 1978, 28 (1), €4-69.

Rogers, £. M. and Cartano, £. G. Methods cf measuring opinion leadership. Putjic Cfinign fugite^iy, 1962, 2g, 435-44 1. 196 Bogers, E. M. and shoemaker, f. F. communication of * Çro5 S2£ultural j^projch New ïork; The Free Press, 1970.

Boncaglicio, fi. and Janus, M. Z. Transitional advertising, the media and education in the developing countries, fpogpegte, 1900, JÇ (1), 68-75.

Rostov, K. «. The &tajeg £f Economic New York: Cambridge University Press, I960.

Bummal, J . Applied Factor Analysis. Evanston: Northwestern Universitsy Press,"l970.

Schrank, E. L. Fashion innovativeness and fashion opinion lâaJ«Ç£hi£ às related to social insecuritj;, attitudes toward ccnfoamitj, clothing interest and sççigeçgngmiç level. Unpublished doctoral Dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1970.

Schrank, 0. L. and Gilmore, L. C. Correlates cf Fashion Leadership : Implications for fasion process theory. The ^Çiclçgjy Quarterly, 1973, J4, 534-42

Schrank, fi. i., Sugawara, A. and Kim, H. Comparison of Korean and American fashion leaders. Heme Economics Research Journal, 1982 JO (3), 235-240.

Schulberg, L. Historic India. New York: Time-life Books, 1968.

Sharma, U. Women, Work and Piofertj in No[th-Wgst India., London: Tavistock Publications, 1980.

Simmel, G. Fashion. International Quarterly. 1904, 10. 130-155.

Singh, £. P., Fleming, J. S. and Sinah, R. H. Democratic socialization in India and four Western democracies: A comparative study. Indian Journal of Political Science. 1980, 4J, (1), 15-52.

Singh, J. A. Modern draped sari replaces traditional costumes of educated Indian woman and the relatlion of the change to the development cf education and communication in India. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Pennsylvania State University, 1966.

Singh, K. India's message to the world. Indian Horizons, 1981, 30 (2) , 5-10. 197 Singh, B. Indian marriage a'la mode. Asia, February 1982, 10-14.

Smith, K. farming composite scales and estimating their validity through factor analysis, Sccial forces, 1974, 53 (2) , 168-80.

Smith K. Cn estimating the reliability cf composite indixes through factor analysis, ggciolcoical Methods and Research, 1974, (4), 485-510“

Society, September, 1982.

Spear, F. India; A Modern History. Ann Arbor; Ihe University of Michigan Press, 1961.

Sproles, C. B. A Profile Analj^s cf the luratle Press Clothing Information Communicator. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Purdue University, 1968.

Sproles, G. D. Analyzing fashion cycle. . . principles and perspectives. Journal of Marketing, 1981, 45, 116-124.

Sproles, G. B. Consumer research cn fashicn. Perspectives of Fashion. Minneapolis: Burgess Publishing Company, 1931, 132-139.

Sreenivasan, K. N, The problems and prospects cf India. I ^tile Institute and Industry, 1978, U (7), 196-199.

Statistical Year Bock; 1981. New Ycrk; United Nations Publishing Service, 1983.

Stevens, K. K. India's forced march to modernity. Ihe New York Times Magazine, January 22, 1984; 28-29, 34-38, 40-41.

Summers, J, c. Generalized Change Agents and innovativeness. Journal of Marketing Basearch, 1971, 8, 31-316,

Summers, J. 0. Ihe identity of women's clothing fashion opinion leaders. Journal of Marketing Eesearch, 1970, J, 178-185.

The Illustrated Weekly of India. April 4-10, 1982, £111 (12). 40, 48.

Ihe Illustrated Weekly of India. May 23-29, 1982, ÇII1 (19), Cover page and back page.

Ihe Illustrated Weekly of India. May 30-June 5, 1982, CIII (20), 48. 198

Thompson, N. i. ijn analysis of the fashî£n JBIficess çf the jaijent as shown in fashign futlisations. Unpunished Master's Thesis. Michigan State University, 1977.

Triandis, H. C. and Berry, J. N. Hagdtcok cf Cgoss-Cgltural Psychology: Methcdclogy. Boston: Allyn and Eaccn, Inc., 1980.

Iriandis, H. C. and Erislin, B. K. Handbcçk çf Crcss- Çultural Psychology: Social Psychology. Ecston: Allyn and Eaccn, Inc., 1S80.

Turnbull, P. K. and Meenaghan, A. Eiffusicn cf innovation and opinion leadership and review. European Journal of Marketing, 1980, 1U, 3-33.

Uhl, K. Andrus, B. and Poulson, I. Bow are laggards different? an empirical inquiry. Journal of Marketing Basearch. 1970, 7 51-54.

Venkateswara, £. V. Indian Culture Through the Ages. Vol. I: Education and Propagation of Culture. New York: Longman's Green and Co., 1928.

Venkatraman, E. The world economic development challenge cf the eightess. Ihe Indian and foreign Beview, 1981, J_S (4), 13-15.

Wasson, C. B. How predictable are fashicn and other product life cycles? Journal gj Marketing. 1968, 32, 36-43.

Wheeler, K. Textiles and Ornaments of India. New York: Ihe Museum of Modern Art, 1956.

Wclpert, S. A New History of India. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982.

Women in the Indian labour force: papers and proceedings cf a workshop. Bangkok: Asian Employment Programme, 1981.

Year Bock of labor Statistics; 1981. Geneva: International Labor Office, 1981. AFFEHOIIZS

- 199 - Appeodii A PBELlfllBABT 50B?£1 CDESIIONBAIBE

- 200 - 201

Dear Participant:

I am beginning to work on my Ph.£ Dissertation which will he a comparative study of fashions in India and the United States. I would appreciate your help ir answering the enclosed guesticns as freely and detailed as you choose or like.

Shank you

(JsKa

Usha Chowdhary Graduate Student, Textiles and Clothing School cf Heme Economics She Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio 202

iLSIillONNAIBJ 1. Do you enjoy following the latest fashions? If sc, why?

2. Dascrile the last outfit or garment you purchased.

3. Why did you tuy that particular outfit or garment?

<4. Did you tuy your outfit or garment hy yourself? Yes No___ a. If 'Yes*, where did you tuy it?

b. If *Nc" i. Was someone with you whan you bought the outfit or garment? cr ii. Did someone else tuy it for you? Who was it?

5. a. Who told you atout the availability of the outfit or garment you opted to tuy?

b. Cr wore you only 'window shopping' at the time cf 203 purchase?

6 . In general, how do you find cut about fashion trends? list the sources you use (be specific).

7. What criteria did you use in choosing the outfit or garment? Ihat is, why did you chocse that cne over others?

8. In general, do you like to talk about women's clothes with ycur friends? If so, what do you talk about?

9. Would you say that you like to give information on women's clothing tc your friends? If sc, how much?

10. During the past six months, have you discussed new styles for women with anyone? If yes, were they friends, family or close neighbors.

11. Compared with your circle of friends are you more likely to be asked for advice, or more likely tc be 2014 advised aiout women's clothes?

12. In discussions between you and your friends, do you like to listen to your friends' ideas, or do you like to suggest your ideas?

13. Hew often do you talk about clothes with ycur friends?

114. How often are you told about clothes by ycur friends?

15. Are you regarded as a good source of information anout your clothes by ycur neighbors and friends? If so, 01 which type of clothes? Appendix B

PfiEIESI BAIL COESIIOBNAIBE

- 205 - 206

Cover letter for respondents

Dear Participant, I am a graduate student in the Department of Textiles and Clothing, School of Home Economics, The Ohio State University, Columbus. Presently, I am working on my dissertation research which is a study of fashion process in India among college women. Since limited work has been done in India on this topic, you can make a valuable contribution to the study by your cooperation. Your response to this attached questionnaire will he appreciated. You may need about 30-40 minutes to complete the questions ; however, I believe that you will enjoy it. There are no right and wrong answers. Your honest opinion will be the best answer to the questions of the questionnaire. Please answer all the questions. Your cooperation will be highly appreciated. Your responses will be kept in strict confidence. In case you do not want to fill out the questionnaire, please let your coordinator know about your intentions. Thank you very much for your cooperation.

U ^ K ol C LfWJolAQys Usha Chowdhary, Ph.D. Student Textiles and Clothing The Ohio State University PLEASE NOTE:

Copyrighted m aterials in this document have not been filmed at the request of the author. They are available for consultation, however, in the author's university library.

These consist of pages:

207-214

217-224

University M icrofilm s International 300 N. 2E E B RD., A N N AR B O R , Ml 48106 (313) 761-4700 Ippendix C flNII BAIl QOESllONNilfiE

215 The Ohio State University Department cl 2 1 6 Textiles and Clothing 262 Campbell Hall 1787 Nell Avenue Columbus, Ohio 43210-1295 Phone 614 422-8063

Dear Participant,

Presently, I am working on my dissertation research which is a study of the fashion process among college women in India. Since limited work has been done in India on this topic, you can make a valuable contribution to the study by your cooperation. I am enclosing a questionnaire for your response. You may need about 30 minutes to complete the questions; however, I believe that you will enjoy it I There are no right and wrong answers to the questions. Your honest opinion will be the best answer to the statements in the questionnaire. Please answer all the questions. Your cooperation will be highly appreciated. Your response will be kept in strict confidence. In case you do not want to fill out the questionnaire, please let your coordinator know about your intentions. Thank you very much for your cooperation.

Usha Chowdhary Ph.D. Student

School of Home Economics Appendix D

IHSTBOCllOB SBiEl FOB COCBDIHAIOES

- 225 - The Ohio State University Department of Textiies and Ciothing 2 2 6 262 Campbell Hall 1787 Nell Avenue Columbus. Ohio 43210-1295 Phone 614 422-8063

Date :

Dear

I do appreciate your willingness to help me with data collection for my dissertation. I have a few comments regarding the administra­ tion of the questionnaires. 1. The questionnaire is designed to study the fashion process in India. 2. Since the questionnaires will be distributed at five different locations in India, it is important to make selection of subjects in the same manner at al1 the sites. Please collect sample from 1st to 3rd year students of the three year B.Sc. program, and 1st year to 4th year students of the four year B.Sc. program. Suppose there are six sections for each yeai— select two or three by lot system and distribute questionnaires to all the students of the selected sections. 3. Please fill in the format the lower part of this page. 4. I am enclosing a cheque of R$ for the mail expense to return the questionnaires to me. In case the money will run short, please let me know. I will send the same immediately. 5. Please collect your data in the last two weeks of January, 1983-

Thank you very much for your willing cooperation.

Sincerely yours,

Usha Chowdhary

Form for the Coordinator

1. Name of the coordinator:

2. Name and Address of the College:

3. Total enrollment of the College:

4. Number of Questionnaires Distributed:

5. Number of Questionnaires Returned:

School of Home Economics - LZZ -

SITfffI

3 x-cpaadd? TABLE 34 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF FASHION INFORMATION SOURCES (CUMULATIVE SCORE) FOR FASHION INNOVATORS AND FASHION NONINNOVATORS

Fashion Fashion class Innovators Noninnovators Total (n = 30) (n = 479) (n = 509)

Group Means 27.50 21.19 21.56 Group SD's 11.83 9.02 9.32

K) ro OD 229

TABLE 35

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE FREQUENCY OF USE OF FASHION INFORMATION SOURCES BY FASHION INNOVATORS AND FASHION NONINNOVATORS

Fashion Fashion Class Innovators Noninnovators Total (n = 30) (n = 479) (n = 509)

Impersonal Attend fashion shows Group Means 1.50 0.57 0.62 Group SD's 1.17 0.85 0.87 Visit boutiques Group Means 1.67 0.73 0.78 Group SD's 1.35 0.97 0.99 Fashion magazines Group Means 3.33 2.55 2.60 Group SD's 1.21 1.35 1.35

Notice costumes of movie actresses Group Means 2.53 1.89 1.93 Group SD's 1.50 1.35 1.36 Window Shopping Group Means 1.97 1.46 1.49 Group SD's 1.27 1.10 1.11 Fashion ads in movies, posters or newspapers Group Means 2.83 2.28 2.31 Group SD's 1.37 1.41 1.40 Pattern books Group Means 2.47 1.96 1.99 Group SD's 1.36 1.35 1.35 Notice costumes of TV performers Group Means 1.23 1.80 1.76 Group SD's 1.59 1.68 1.67

Newspaper articles on fashion Group Means 3.00 2.57 2.60 Group SD's 1.51 1.50 1.50 230

TABLE 35 (Continued)

Fashion Fashion Class Innovators Noninnovators Total (n = 30) (n = 479) (n = 509)

Indoor displays Group Means 1.77 1.45 1.47 Group SD's 1.33 1.28 1.29 Personal Asking sales clerks of clothes shop Group Means 1.63 0.80 0.85 Group SD's 1.38 1.04 1.06 Asking tailors Group Means 1.80 1.19 1.22 Group SD's 1.40 1.12 1.14 Observe clothing in social gatherings Group Means 2.43 2.05 2.07 Group SD's 1.41 1.23 1.23 231

TABLE 36

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE VARIETY OF FASHION INFORMATION SOURCES USED DURING COMPREHENSION LEGITIMATION STAGES OF FASHION ADOPTION BY FASHION INNOVATORS AND FASHION NONINNOVATORS

Stages of Fashion Fashion Adoption and Innovators Non innovators Total Sources Used (n = 30) (n = 479) (n = 509)

Comprehension Stage Impersonal Sources Fashion Magazines Group Means .73 .48 .50 Group SD's .45 .50 .50 Fashion columns in Newspaper Group Means .37 .23 .24 Group SD's .49 .42 .43 Indoor Displays Group Means .37 .31 .31 Group SD's .49 .46 .46 Television Group Means .13 .18 .18 Group SD's .35 .38 .38 Play or Drama Group Means .13 .11 .11 Group SD's .35 .31 .32 Window Displays Group Means .23 .23 .23 Group SD's .43 .42 .42 Personal Sources Seeing What Friends Wear Group Means .53 .72 .71 Group SD's .57 .45 .46 Discussion with Friends Group Means .40 .58 .57 Group SD's .50 .55 .55 232 TABLE 36 (Continued)

Stages of Fashion Fashion Adoption and Innovators Noninnovators Total Sources Used (n = 30) (n = 479) (n = 509)

Legitimation Stage Impersonal Sources Fashion Magazines Group Means .60 ,30 .32 Group SD's .50 ,46 .46 Indoor Displays Group Means .22 25 .25 Group SD's .43 43 .43 Fashion Columns in Newspaper Group Means 27 ,15 .15 Group SD's 45 ,35 .36 Window Displays Group Means .23 13 .14 Group SD's ,43 34 .34 Store Displays Group Means ,10 ,14 .14 Group SD's ,31 ,35 .35 Mov ies Group Means ,10 .07 .07 Group SD's ,31 .55 .54 Personal Sources Seeing What Friends Wear Group Means .23 ,48 .46 Group SD's .43 ,50 .50 Family Members' Opinion

Group Means .50 , 66 .65 Group SD's .51 ,48 .48 Parents' Opinion Group Means .43 .54 .53 Group SD's .50 .50 .50 233 TABLE 36 (Continued)

Stages of Fashion Fashion Adoption and Innovators Noninnovators Total Sources Used (n = 30) (n = 479) (n = 509)

Discussion with Friends Group Means .50 .50 .50 Group SD's .51 .56 .56 TABLE 37

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF SOCIAL PARTICIPATION (CUMULATIVE SCORE) BY CLASS OF FASHION INNOVATORS

Fashion Fashion Class Innovators Noninnovators Total (n = 30) (n = 479) (n = 509)

Group Means 22.20 20.79 20.87 Group SD's 10.25 8.14 8.27

U) 235

TABLE 38 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF PARTICIPATION IN SOCIAL ORGANIZATION BY CLASS OF FASHION INNOVATIVENESS

Fashion Fashion Organization Innovators Noninnovators Total (n = 30) (n = 479) (n = 509)

N.C.C./N.S.S. Group Means 0.93 1.66 1.61 Group SD's 1.11 1.24 1.23 Athletic Group Means 1.60 0.98 1.02 Group SD's 1.19 1.08 1.09 Religious Group Means 0.77 1.35 1.31 Group SD's 0.94 1.11 1.10 Cultural Group Means 1.97 1.57 1.59 Group SD's 1.03 1.10 1.10 Team Sports Group Means 1.50 1.09 1.12 Group SD's 1.14 1.16 1.16 Social Welfare Group Means 1.53 1.17 1.19 Group SD's 1.01 1.06 1.06 Hostel Group Means 0.50 0.69 0.68 Group SD's 0.94 1.11 1.10 Student Council Group Means 0.90 0.77 0.78 Group SD's 1.06 1.09 1.09 Literary Group Means 1.03 0.94 0.95 Group SD's 1.00 1.01 1.01 236

TABLE 39 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF PARTICIPATION IN INDIVIDUAL ACTIVITIES BÏ CLASS OF FASHION INNOVATIVENESS

Fashion Fashion Activity Innovators Noninnovators Total (n = 30) (n = 479) (n = 509)

Work on College Publications Group Means 1.23 0.57 0.61 Group SD's 1.04 0.91 0.92 Attend Movies Group Means 2.57 2.13 2.16 Group SD's 0.73 0.72 0.72 Attend Parties Group Means 2.17 1.89 1.90 Group SD's 0.91 0.75 0.76 Work on Committees Group Means 1.10 0.77 0.79 Group SD's 0.92 0.94 0.94 Host Parties Group Means 1.80 1.60 1.61 Group SD's 0.92 0.81 0.81 Athletic Events Group Means 1.67 1.45 1.46 Group SD's 0.92 0.98 0.98 TABLE 40

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF ATTITUDE TOWARD CHANGE (CUMULATIVE SCORE) BY CLASS OF FASHION INNOVATIVENESS

Fashion Fashion Class Innovators Noninnovators Total (n = 30) (n = 479) (n = 509)

Group Means 8.92 7.93 7.99 Group SD's 3.24 2.98 3.00

KJ Lu 236

TABLE 41

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF ELEMENTS OF THE ATTITUDE TOWARD CHANGE BY CLASS OF FASHION INNOVATIVENESS

Fashion Fashion Variable Innovators Noninnovators Total (n = 30) (n = 479) (n = 509)

Fashionable hairstyle Group Means .80 .41 .43 Group SD's .41 .49 .49 Mother's Opinion Group Means .87 .68 .69 Group SD's .35 .47 .46 Trip Abroad Group Means .80 .61 .62 Group SD's .41 .49 .48 Attending Western School Group Means .67 .48 .49 Group SD's .48 .50 .50 Ballet Group Means .37 .21 .22 Group SD's .49 .41 .41 Modern Home Modern Home Group Means .87 .75 .75 Group SD's .35 .44 .43 Be Working Woman Group Means .40 .53 .52 Group SD's .50 .50 .50 Mixed Trousseau Group Means .77 .67 .67 Group SD's .43 .48 .47 Believer of Family Planning Group Means .87 .80 .81 Group SD's .35 .40 .40 239

TABLE 41 (Continued)

Fashion Fashion Variable Innovators Noninnovators Total (n = 30) (n = 479) (n = 509)

Pro Women's Education Group Means .90 .86 .86 Group SD's .31 .35 .35 Modern Wedding Group Means .33 .29 .29 Group SD's .47 .47 .47 Photograph of Temple Group Means .20 .22 .22 Group SD's .41 .41 .41 End of Dowry System Group Means .83 .85 .85 Group SD's .38 .36 .36 Clothing Styles Group Means .61 .62 .61 Group SD's .19 .49 .48 TABLE 42 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF FASHION INFORMATION SOURCES (CUMULATIVE SCORE) BY FASHION OPINION LEADERS AND FASHION NONOPINION LEADERS

Fashion Fashion Class Innovators Noninnovators Total (n = 180) (n = 329) (n = 509)

Group Means 25.29 19.52 21.56

Group SD's 7.85 9.43 9.31 TABLE 43 241

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE FREQUENCY USE OF FASHION INFORMATION SOURCES BY CLASS OF FASHION OPINION LEADERSHIP

Fashion Fashion Type of Opinion Nonopinion Total Sources and Leaders Leaders Sources Used (n = 180) (n = 329) (n = 509)

Impersonal Sources

Fashion Magazines Group Means 3.04 2.35 2.60 Group SD's 1.18 1.38 1.31

Visiting Boutiques Group Means 1.10 0.61 0.78 Group SD's 1.06 0.95 0.99 Fashion Shows Group Means 0.89 0.47 0.62 Group SD's 0.99 0.80 0.87

Newspaper Articles on Fashion Group Means 3.05 2.35 2.59 Group SD's 1.23 1.57 1.46

Indoor Displays Group Means 1.81 1.28 1.47 Group SD's 1.26 1.26 1.26

Window Shopping Group Means 1.78 1.34 1.49 Group SD's 1.10 1.09 1.09 Fashion Ads in Movies, Posters or Newspapers Group Means 2.67 2.12 2.31 Group SD's 1.25 1.46 1.38

Pattern books Group Means 2.32 1.80 1.99 Group SD's 1.25 1.38 1.33

Notice Costumes of Movie Actresses Group Means 2.20 1.78 1.92 Group SD's 1.23 1.41 1.35 242

TABLE 43 (Continued)

Fashion Fashion Type of Opinion Nonopinion Total Sources and Leaders Leaders Sources Used (n = 180) (n = 329) (n = 509)

Notice costumes of TV performers Group Means 1.87 1.71 1.76 Group SD's 1.64 1.70 1.68 Personal Sources Asking Sales Clerks of Clothing Shops Group Means 1.14 0.68 0.85 Group SD's 1.18 0.98 1.06

Observe Clothing at Social Gatherings Group Means 2.24 1.98 2.07 Group SD's 1.19 1.26 1.24 Asking Tailors Group Means 1.38 1.14 1.23 Group SD's 1.19 1.12 1.14 243

TABLE 44

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE VARIETY OF FASHION INFORMATION SOURCES USED DURING COMPREHENSION AND LEGITIMATION STAGES OF FASHION ADOPTION BY CLASS OF FASHION OPINION LEADERSHIP

Stages of Fashion Fashion Adoption and Opinion Nonopinion Total Sources Used Leaders Leaders (n = 180) (n = 329) (n = 509)

Comprehension Stage Impersonal Sources Fashion Magazines Group Means .66 .41 .50 Group SD's .48 .49 .49 Fashion columns in 'Newspaper Group Means .34 .19 .24 Group SD's .47 .39 .42 Watch Play or Drama Group Means .17 .08 .11 Group SD's .37 .27 .31

In a Store Window Group Means .28 .20 .23 Group SD's .45 .40 .42 On Display in a Store Group Means .36 .29 .31 Group SD's .48 .45 .46 Imported Items Group Means .09 .05 .06 Group SD's .30 .24 .27

On Television Group Means .19 .17 .18 Group SD's .39 .38 .38 Personal Sources

Discussion with Friends Group Means .66 .53 .57 Group SD's .63 .50 .55 244

TABLE 44 (Continued)

Stages of Fashion Fashion Adoption and Opinion Nonopinion Total Sources Used Leaders Leaders (n = 180) (n = 329) (n = 509) Seeing Friends Wear Group Means .66 .74 .71 Group SD's .48 .45 .46 Legitimation Stage Impersonal Sources Fashion Magazines Group Means .49 .22 .32 Group SD's .50 .42 .47 Window Displays Group Means .19 .10 .14 Group SD's .40 .30 .34 Fashion Columns in Newspaper Group Means .20 .13 .15 Group SD's .40 .33 .36

Movies Group Means .14 .64 .67 Group SD's .66 .46 .54

Indoor Store Display s Group Means .17 .12 .14 Group SD's .38 .33 .35 Personal Sources Discussion with Friends Group Means .44 .58 .50 Group SD's .56 .64 .50

Seeing What Friends Wear Group Means .42 .49 .46 Group SD's .49 .50 .49

Family Members' Opinion Group Means .66 .63 .65 Group SD's .48 .48 .48 Parents' Opinion Group Means .52 .54 .53 Group SD's .50 .50 .50 TABLE 45

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF SOCIAL PARTICIPATION (CUMULATIVE SCORE) BY CLASS OF FASHION OPINION LEADERSHIP

Fashion Fashion Class Opinion Nonopinion Total Leaders Leaders (n = 180) (n = 329) (n = 509)

Group Means 23.13 19.64 20.87 Group SD's 7.75 8.30 8.27

tsj 45 cn 246

TABLE 46 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF PARTICIPATION IN SOCIAL ORGANIZATION BY CLASS OF FASHION OPINION LEADERSHIP

Fashion Fashion Organization Opinion Nonopinion Total Leaders Leaders (n = 180) (n = 329) (n = 509)

Literary Group Means 1.16 0.83 0.95 Group SD's 0.95 1.02 1.00 Athletic Group Means 1.22 0.90 1.02 Group SD's 1.13 1.06 1.10

Social Welfare Group Means 1.38 1.08 1.19 Group SD's 1.00 1.07 1.06 Cultural Group Means 1.78 1.49 1.59 Group SD's 1.02 1.13 1.09 Student Council Group Means 0.94 0.70 0.78 Group SD's 1.11 1.07 1.08 Team Sports Group Means 1.23 1.05 1.12 Group SD's 1.15 1.16 1.16

N.C.C./N.S.S. Group Means 1.71 1.57 1.61 Group SD's 1.17 1.28 1.24 Religious Group Means 1.37 1.28 1.31 Group SD's 1.20 1.05 1.10 Hostel Group Means 0.69 0.67 0.68 Group SD's 1.09 1.10 1.10 247

TABLE 47

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF PARTICIPATION IN INDIVIDUAL ACTIVITIES BY CLASS OF FASHION OPINION LEADERSHIP

Fashion Fashion Activity Opinion Nonopinion Total Leaders Leaders (n = 180) (n = 329) (n = 509)

Attend Parties Group Means 2.12 1.79 1.90 Group SD's 0.65 0.80 0.77 Host Parties Group Means 1.80 1.50 1.61 Group SD's 0.74 0.83 0.82 Working on College Committees Group Means 0.97 0.70 0.79 Group SD's 0.95 0.93 0.95 Working on College Publications Group Means 0.78 0.51 0.61 Group SD's 0.93 0.91 0.93 Attend Athletic Events Group Means 1.60 1.38 1.46 Group SD's 0.91 1.00 0.98 Watch Movies Group Means 2.20 2.13 2.16 Group SD's 0.71 0.74 0.73 TABLE 48

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF ATTITUDE TOWARD CHANGE (CUMULATIVE SCORE) BY CLASS OF FASHION OPINION LEADERSHIP

Fashion Fashion Class Opinion Nonopinion Total Leaders Leaders (n = 180) (n = 329) (N = 509)

Group Means 8.92 7.48 7.99 Group SD's 2.85 2.96 3.00

M ■e CD 249

TABLE 49

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF ATTITUDE TOWARD CHANGE BY CLASS OF FASHION OPINION LEADERSHIP

Fashion Fashion Variable Opinion Nonopinion Total Leaders Leaders (n = 180) (n = 329) (n = 509)

Mother's Opinion Group Means .84 .60 .69 Group SD's .36 .49 .45 Fashion hairstyle Group Means .56 .37 .43 Group SD's .50 .48 .49 Modern home Group Means .86 .70 .75 Group SD's .35 .46 .43 Mixed Trousseau Group Means .78 .61 .68 Group SD's .41 .49 .47

Clothing Styles Group Means .72 .56 . 61 Group SD's .71 .25 .47

Ballet Group Means .30 .18 .22 Group SD's .46 .38 .41 Trip Abroad Group Means .71 .57 .62 Group SD's .45 .50 . 48

Attending Western School Group Means .56 .45 .49 Group SD's .50 .50 .50 Be Working Woman Group Means .57 .50 .52 Group SD's .50 .50 .50 250

TABLE 49 (Continued)

Fashion Fashion Variable Opinion Nonopinion Total Leaders Leaders (n = 180) (n = 329) (n = 509)

Believer of Family Planning Group Means .83 .79 .81 Group SD's .37 .41 .39 End of Dowry System Group Means .86 .84 .85 Group SD's .35 .37 .36 Modern Wedding Group Means .31 .29 .29 Group SD's .46 .47 .47 Photograph of Temple Group Means .22 .21 .22 Group SD's .42 .41 .41

Pro Women's Education Group Means .87 .86 .86 Group SD's .34 .35 .35 Appendix I

SKEICH CP INDIAK FASfalCN HEMS LISIED

IN IPE PASHION INNOVAIIVPNPSS MEASURE

251 - 252

1

FiSure 3 Figure 4- Churridar Pyjama, Churr:i dar Pyjama, Karla and Dupatta Kurta and Vest 253

Figure 5 Figure i-

Churridar lyjama Jeans and SliirL and Kurta 254

Figure 7 Figure 3 Jeanc;, 8bir1, and Jacket Salwar, Kameez and Dupatta 255

Fiç[;uro 9

Fell Bottom Soit

?ii,ure ] 0

K'jdd;y Drooi 256 r

Figure 11 Full Lengili Maxi