Female Consumers' Attitudes and Purchase Intentions toward Intimate Apparel Brands

  • Rose, Jennifer (School of Human Environmental Sciences, University of Arkansas) ;
  • Cho, Eunjoo (School of Human Environmental Sciences, University of Arkansas) ;
  • Smith, Kathleen R. (School of Human Environmental Sciences, University of Arkansas)
  • Received : 2016.10.10
  • Accepted : 2016.12.12
  • Published : 2016.12.30


The purpose of this study was to examine female consumers' attitudes and purchase intentions toward intimate apparel brands. To understand female consumers' shopping behaviors for intimate apparel products, this study examined interrelationships among brand familiarity, perceived risk, attitudes, and purchase intentions toward intimate apparel brands. A conceptual model was developed by adopting perceived risk theory (Cox, 1967) and theory of reasoned action (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). A pre-survey using a paper and pencil was conducted to identify the most familiar intimate apparel brand to young female consumers. The majority of pre-survey respondents (66 female college students) indicated Victoria's Secret as the most prominent intimate apparel brand. Therefore, Victoria's Secret was used to examine possible effects of brand familiarity on perceived risk and attitudinal and behavioral responses toward the brand. Using a web-based survey, 384 complete responses were collected from young female college students between the ages of 18-29 at a Mid-southern U.S. university. A structural equation modeling was employed to test the proposed research model and hypotheses. Results showed positive, statistically significant associations among the four variables (e.g., brand familiarity, perceived risk, attitudes, and purchase intentions). The findings suggested that young female consumers who are familiar with a particular intimate apparel brand are likely to perceive a low level of risk, leading to positive, strong attitudes with purchase intentions toward that particular intimate apparel brand. This suggests establishing brand familiarity through integrated marketing communication is crucial for risk reduction strategy in intimate apparel shopping.


  1. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  2. Alba, J. W., & Hutchinson, J. W. (1987). Dimensions of consumer expertise. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(4), 411-454. doi: 10.1086/209080
  3. Bagozzi, R. P., Wong, N., Abe, S., & Bergami, M. (2000). Cultural and situational contingencies and the theory of reasoned action: Application to fast food restaurant consumption. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9(2), 97-106. doi: 10.1207/S15327663JCP0902_4
  4. Bauer, R. A. (1960). Consumer behavior as risk taking. In R. S. Hancock (Ed.), Dynamic marketing for a changing world (pp.389-398). Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association.
  5. Belleau, B. D., Summers, T. A., Xu, Y., & Pinel, R. (2007). Theory of reasoned action purchase intention of young consumers. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 25(3), 244-257. doi: 10.1177/0887302X07302768
  6. Campbell, M. C., & Keller, K. L. (2003). Brand familiarity and advertising repetition effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(2), 292-304. doi: 10.1086/376800
  7. Chen, K. J., & Liu, C. M. (2004). Positive brand extension trial and choice of parent brand. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 13(1), 25-36. doi: 10.1108/10610420410523821
  8. Choi, J., & Lee, K. H. (2003). Risk perception and e-shopping: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 7(1), 49-64. doi: 10.1108/13612020310464368
  9. Colombo, R. A., & Morrison, D. G. (1989). A Brand switching model with implications for marketing strategies. Marketing Science, 8(1), 89-99. doi: 10.1287/mksc.8.1.89
  10. Cox, D. F. (1967). Risk taking and information handling in consumer behavior. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
  11. Featherman, M. S., & Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Predicting e-services adoption: A perceived risk facets perspective. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59(4), 451-474. doi: 10.1016/s1071-5819(03)00111-3
  12. Filipe, A. B., Montagna, G., & Carvalho, C. (2011). Lingerie product image in Portuguese underwear market: From brand to consumer, a perceived lingerie image. International Journal of the Image, 1(2), 51-68.
  13. Forsythe, S., Liu, C., Shannon, D., & Gardner, L. C. (2006). Development of a scale to measure the perceived benefits and risks of online shopping. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 20(2), 55-75. doi: 10.1002/dir.20061
  14. Gaal, B., & Burns, L. D. (2001). Apparel descriptions in catalogs and perceived risk associated with catalog purchases. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 19(1), 22-30. doi: 10.1177/0887302x0101900103
  15. Han, T.-I., & Chung, J.-E. (2014). Korean consumers' motivations and perceived risks toward the purchase of organic cotton apparel. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 32(4), 235-250. doi: 10.1177/0887302x14538116
  16. Hart, C., & Dewsnap, B. (2001). An exploratory study of the consumer decision process for intimate apparel. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 5(2), 108-119. doi: 10.1108/eum0000000007282
  17. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55.
  18. Hume, M., & Mills, M. (2013). Uncovering Victoria's Secret: Exploring women's luxury perceptions of intimate apparel and purchasing behaviour. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 17(4), 460-485. doi: 10.1108/JFMM-03-2013-0020
  19. Jin, B., & Koh, A. (1999). Differences between South Korean male and female consumers in the clothing brand loyalty formation process: Model testing. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 17(3), 117-127. doi: 10.1177/0887302x9901700302
  20. Kang, J., & Kim, S.-H. (2013). What are consumers afraid of? Understanding perceived risk toward the consumption of environmentally sustainable apparel. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 41(3), 267-283. doi:10.1111/fcsr.12013
  21. Kent, R. J., & Allen, C. T. (1994). Competitive interference effects in consumer memory for advertising: The role of brand familiarity. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 97-105. doi: 10.2307/1252313
  22. Kim, M., & Lennon, S. J. (2000). Television shopping for apparel in the United States: Effects of perceived amount of information on perceived risks and purchase intentions. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 28(3), 301-331. doi: 10.1177/1077727x00283002
  23. Laroche, M., Kim, C., & Zhou, L. (1996). Brand familiarity and confidence as determinants of purchase intention: An empirical test in a multiple brand context. Journal of Business Research, 37(2), 115-120. doi: 10.1016/0148-2963(96)00056-2
  24. Lee, H.-H., Fiore, A. M., & Kim, J. (2006). The role of the technology acceptance model in explaining effects of image interactivity technology on consumer responses. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 34(8), 621-644. doi: 10.1108/09590550610675949
  25. Lee, H.-H., Kim, J., & Fiore, A. M. (2010). Affective and cognitive online shopping experience: Effects of image interactivity technology and experimenting with appearance. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 28(2), 140-154. doi: 10.1177/0887302x09341586
  26. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
  27. Park, J., & Kim, J. (2007). The importance of perceived consumption delay in Internet shopping: Time-related information, time risk, attitude, and purchase intention. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 25(1), 24-41. doi: 10.1177/0887302x06296869
  28. Park, J., Lennon, S. J., & Stoel, L. (2005). On-line product presentation: Effects on mood, perceived risk, and purchase intention. Psychology and Marketing, 22(9), 695-719. doi: 10.1002/mar.20080
  29. Park, J., & Stoel, L. (2005). Effect of brand familiarity, experience and information on online apparel purchase. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 33(2), 148-160. doi: 10.1108/09590550510581476
  30. Park, M., & Lennon, S. J. (2009). Brand name and promotion in online shopping contexts. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 13(2), 149-160. doi: 10.1108/13612020910957680
  31. Verhagen, T., Meents, S., & Tan, Y.-H. (2006). Perceived risk and trust associated with purchasing at electronic marketplaces. European Journal of Information Systems, 15(6), 542-555. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000644
  32. Yoh, E., Damhorst, M. L., Sapp, S., & Laczniak, R. (2003). Consumer adoption of the Internet: The case of apparel shopping. Psychology and Marketing, 20(12), 1095-1118. doi: 10.1002/mar.10110
  33. Yu, U.-J., Lee, H.-H., & Damhorst, M. L. (2012). Exploring multidimensions of product performance risk in the online apparel shopping context: Visual, tactile, and trial risks. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 30(4), 251-266. doi: 10.1177/0887302x12462059