Consumer Attitude

Towards Luxury Brands: An Empirical Study

Preeti Tak* and Ashish Pareek**

The buying pattern among Indian consumers has witnessed dramatic change over the past decade. Higher
income has enhanced consumer buying power. As a result, consumers are readily adopting global luxury
brands at a much faster pace. Indian consumers are attracted towards acquiring luxury brands and
purchasing these brands has become a prestige symbol. Luxury brands are helpful in communicating one's
uniqueness, fashion style and individuality in social circles. This study analyzes the impact of dimensions
of consumers’ need for uniqueness and fashion consciousness on the attitude towards luxury brands. A
structured questionnaire was used to collect the data. To test the hypotheses, correlation and regression
analyses were employed. The findings suggest that the dimensions of consumers’ need for uniqueness and
fashion consciousness positively influence their attitude towards luxury brands. The paper concludes with
a discussion on the future directions of study.

Introduction
The word ‘luxury’ is derived from the Latin word ‘luxus’ which means opulence,
exuberance and sumptuousness. The concept of luxury has been present in various forms
and at various levels since the beginning of civilization. Luxury is not new to India. During
the 1930s, 20% of Rolls Royce’s global sales were from India.
A dazzling array of luxury brands is now wooing Indian consumers. According to India
Luxury Review 2011, published by the Confederation of India Industry (CII) and A T
Kearney, luxury consumption is growing at 20% per annum, and is not confined only to
the big cities. The report also revealed that despite the high tariffs, the prices in India are
on a par with those of Singapore, thus making domestic luxury purchases more practical.
India’s luxury market was expected to reach $14.73 bn by 2015 from an estimated
$8.21 bn in 2011, with about 30% of the customers coming from smaller cities. The
portfolio of spending categories for the average Indian more than doubled during the
period from 1991 to 2007. In 1991, the average Indian spent on eight product categories,
whereas in 2007 the number of categories increased to 17, and included mobile handsets,
gifts and durables, among others.
* Assistant Professor, Banarsidas Chandiwala Institute of Professional Studies, New Delhi, India; and is the
corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
* * Associate Professor, Department of Management Studies, Maharshi Dayanand Saraswati University, Ajmer,
Rajasthan, India. E-mail: [email protected]

© 2016 IUP
Consumer . All Rights
Attitude Reserved.
Towards Luxury Brands: An Empirical Study 7
 Consumption patterns are different for people belonging to different sections of the
society. On the one hand, for poor people, goods of basic necessities are of priority. On
the other hand, for the middle class, besides spending on goods of basic necessities, they
also spend on education of their children and lifestyle goods. The rich class spends more
on lifestyle and luxury goods. Brands are a priority for them. As people acquire wealth, they
tend to spend more on luxury goods.
Interestingly, demand for some goods is not affected by their prices. Luxury brands are
expensive and thus are not only consumed for the product-related attributes, but are also
consumed due to non-product attributes.
Several studies have identified uniqueness traits and fashion consciousness as
important variables in luxury brand consumption (Dee and Eun Young, 2007; Bian and
Forsythe, 2012; and Chen and Kim, 2013). However, there is a dearth of research from
the Indian perspective. This research tries to examine the impact of consumer’s
uniqueness dimensions and fashion consciousness on their attitude towards luxury brands.
Since India is one of the emerging markets for luxury marketers, the current study is apt,
as it will help luxury retailers and marketers to understand the psyche of Indian
consumers.

Literature Review
Concept of Luxury Brands
Phau and Prendergast (2000) defined luxury product as “perceived to be the extreme end
of the prestige-brand category.” They identified the following characteristics of luxury
brands:
• They are exclusive.
• They have a well-known brand identity.
• Perceived quality is high and there exists increased brand awareness.
• Sales level and customer loyalty are retained.
Chadha and Husband (2006) defined luxury fashion products as “fashionable and high
quality consumer goods made by reputed luxury brands”. This definition is useful since it
encompasses a wide range of products including apparels and accessories, as these goods
are universally available and are recognized as luxury products (Ahmed et al., 2002).
Veblen (1899) was the first to discuss luxury consumption patterns by the ‘leisure class’
and concluded that consumers use luxury products to signal wealth and status, when
consumed conspicuously. These goods are used as a hallmark for being recognized as
belonging to the upper class of the society.

Consumers’ Need for Uniqueness

Snyder and Fromkin (1980) worked on the uniqueness theory and concluded that
individuals try to maintain moderate level of self-distinctiveness, since they perceive that

8 The IUP Journal of Brand Management, Vol. XIII, No. 1, 2016

extreme similarity or dissimilarity to the group is unpleasant. Snyder and Fromkin (1977)
suggested that in similar situations, different individuals exhibit varying levels of need for
uniqueness, which influences their purchase decisions. Tian et al. (2001, p. 52) defined
consumer need for uniqueness as:
…. the trait of pursuing differentness relative to others through the acquisition,
utilization, and disposition of consumer goods for the purpose of developing and
enhancing one’s self-image and social image.
This implies that Consumers’ Need for Uniqueness (CNFU) communicates the
enrichment process of self image and social image. These two images are embedded in each
other, and thus cannot be separated. These can be enriched with the consumption of
products which carry a symbolic meaning and which are also of symbolic public
importance.
Tian et al. (2001) divided consumers’ need for uniqueness into three types of consumer
behavior:
Creative Choice Counter-Conformity: It refers to consumer behavior that expresses
uniqueness, which is also acceptable to others. Lynn and Harris (1997) suggested that it
is the individual’s ability to create and convey personal style through material products,
thereby expressing self-image. Creative choice counter-conformity behavior involves
some risk. However, such consumers are viewed as unique, and this encourages positive
social evaluations for the consumer (Snyder and Fromkin, 1977; and Kron, 1983).
Consumers buy those brands which confer on them some distinguishing features, such as
prestige, unique attributes, etc. (Dee and Eun Young, 2007).
Unpopular Choice Counter-Conformity: It refers to consumption of such products which
deviate from social and group norms. The individuals risk social disapproval in order to
establish their uniqueness from the group. This behavior results in an increased level of
self-image and social image (Tian et al., 2001). They argued that such individuals often
possess strong characters and uniqueness seeking behaviors that enhance their self-image.
Heckert (1989) also mentioned that a norm-breaking consumption behavior which is
unpopular in present times, may gain social approval over a period of time, and the
consumer may be marked as an innovator or fashion leader.
Avoidance of Similarity: Avoidance of similarity refers to consumption of products that
are not too popular and which also helps in differentiating them from others. Simonson
and Nowlis (2000) observed that consumers opt for various strategies such as shopping
at exclusive boutiques, buying discontinued products and styles, or combining apparels in
unusual ways. Dee and Eun Young (2007) also supported this idea and mentioned that
consumers select these brands since they distinguish them from the others. Nwankwo
et al. (2014) also maintained that consumers are primarily motivated to purchase luxury
brands due to quality, uniqueness and exclusivity. They purchase luxury products to
differentiate themselves from the group they belong to.

Consumer Attitude Towards Luxury Brands: An Empirical Study 9

Fashion Consciousness
Fashion terminology is often perceived as complex and is associated with a long history
of which one is not fully aware (Lurie, 1992; and Barnard, 2002). Fashion has been
primarily associated with costume and adornment. However, fashion operates in many
diverse areas of life (Miller et al., 1993).
Solomon and Rabolt (2004) defined fashion as ‘a form of collective behavior, or a wave
of social conformity’. Fashion consciousness is an important factor that influences the
adoption of products, especially with regard to fashion clothing (Belleau et al., 2001; and
Khare and Rakesh, 2010). Nam et al. (2007) described fashion consciousness as “a person’s
degree of involvement with the styles or fashion of clothing.” Fashion clothing marketers
feel that fashion consciousness among consumers is convenient to them, as this pre-
existing interest in clothing may increase consumer receptivity to apparel product
promotions (Richards and Sturman, 1977; and Kaiser and Chandler, 1984).
Consumers need not be either a fashion opinion leader or a fashion innovator to
qualify as fashion conscious. ‘‘Rather, fashion consciousness relates to a person’s interest
in clothing and fashion and his appearance’’ (Summers, 1970; and Gutman and Mills,
1982). Crask and Reynolds (1978) found that individuals with high level of fashion
consciousness are more likely to be young and better educated as compared to non-fashion
conscious individuals.
Kim and Jang (2014) opined that young consumers are more open to new concepts of
luxury products as a means of self-expression and symbols of their desired lifestyle.

Hypotheses Development
From the discussion of the related literature, there seems to be an association between
fashion consciousness and attitude towards luxury brands. Whether such associations are
true or applicable in the Indian context is examined through the following hypotheses:
H1: Creative choice counter-conformity positively influences attitude towards luxury brands.
H2: Unpopular choice counter-conformity is positively related to attitude to luxury brands.
H3: Avoidance of similarity positively impacts attitude towards luxury brands.
H4: Fashion consciousness positively influences attitude towards luxury brands.

Data and Methodology

To test the hypotheses, a structured questionnaire was developed. The questionnaire
consisted of three sections. The first part dealt with demographic details of the
respondent. The second part measured consumers’ need for uniqueness and fashion
consciousness, while the third part measured consumers’ attitude towards luxury brands
(see Appendix).
This study used items relating to consumer attitude towards luxury from Dubois and
Laurent (1994), consumers’ need for uniqueness from Ruvio et al. (2008) and fashion

10 The IUP Journal of Brand Management, Vol. XIII, No. 1, 2016

consciousness from Bruner and Hensel (1998). Each statement was presented on a 5-point
Likert scale question, where 1 stood for ‘strongly disagree’ and 5 stood for ‘strongly agree’.
The questionnaire was administered to the respondents in shopping malls which had
outlets of luxury fashion brands in the State of Rajasthan in India. A total of 336 filled
questionnaires were received, and after data cleaning, 315 filled questionnaires were found
eligible for data analysis. Table 1 exhibits the profile of the respondents.
The collected data was analyzed using SPSS 20. Cronbach’s alpha was used to confirm
reliability of the data, after which Pearson correlation and regression analysis were adopted
to test the hypotheses.
Reliability analysis was conducted to assess the internal consistency of each latent
variable. Table 2 presents the Cronbach’s alpha for the four variables/constructs and
attitude towards luxury brands, which ranged from 0.638 to 0.897. All the values are above
0.6, as recommended by Cavana et al. (2001).

Table 1: Respondent Profile

Demographics Frequency %
Gender Male 168 53
Female 147 47
Total 315 100
Age (years) Below 20 13 4
20-30 122 39
30-40 106 34
40-50 34 11
50-60 24 8
60 and Above 16 5
Total 315 100
Education Graduation 76 24
Postgraduation 103 33
Professional and Others 136 43
Total 315 100
Annual Family Income ( ) Below 5 lakh 22 7
5-10 lakh 127 40
10-15 lakh 113 36
15 lakh and Above 53 17
Total 315 100

Consumer Attitude Towards Luxury Brands: An Empirical Study 11

 Table 2: Cronbach’s Alpha
Construct Cronbach’s Alpha
Creative Choice Counter-Conformity (CC) 0.729
Unpopular Choice Counter-Conformity (UC) 0.638
Avoidance of Similarity (SA) 0.781
Fashion Consciousness (FC) 0.897
Attitude Towards Luxury Brands 0.653

Results and Discussion

Table 3 shows the Pearson correlation coefficients between consumers’ attitude towards
luxury brands and dimensions of consumers’ need for uniqueness and fashion
consciousness. All the four correlations were found to be significant at 0.01 level.
Therefore, the results indicate that consumers’ need for uniqueness dimensions and
fashion consciousness significantly influence their attitude towards luxury brands.

Table 3: Correlation Between Attitude Towards Luxury Brands and Consumers;

Need for Uniqueness Dimensions and Fashion Consciousness
Creative Unpopular Avoidance of Fashion
Choice Counter- Choice Counter- Similarity Consciousness
Conformity Conformity
Attitude Pearson
0.623** 0.448** 0.856** 0.804**
Towards Correlation
Luxury Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Brands
N 315 315 315 315
Note: ** Correlation is significant at 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 4 presents the summarized results of regression analysis. The multiple R for the
relationship between the set of independent variables (dimensions of consumers’ need for
uniqueness and fashion consciousness) and the dependent variable (attitude towards
luxury) is 0.893. The adjusted R-square value tells us that the model accounts for 79.5%
of variance in the attitude towards luxury brands. Thus, it may be concluded that
consumers’ need for uniqueness dimensions and fashion consciousness have a significant
positive impact on attitude towards luxury brands.

Table 4: Summarized Results of Regression Analysis

Model R R-Square Adjusted R-Square Std. Error of the Estimate
1 0.893 a
0.798 0.795 0.296
Note: a
Predictors: (Constant), FASH, UC, CC, SA.

Table 5 reports the results of ANOVA, which assesses the overall significance of the
model. As p < 0.001, the model is significant and supports the research hypothesis that

12 The IUP Journal of Brand Management, Vol. XIII, No. 1, 2016

there is a statistically significant relationship between the set of independent variables—
creative choice counter-conformity (CC), unpopular choice counter-conformity (UC)
and avoidance of similarity (SA) and fashion consciousness (FASH)—and the dependent
variable, attitude towards luxury brands.
Table 5: ANOVA Results
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Regression 106.690 4 26.673 305.250 0.000a
Residual 27.088 310 0 .087
Total 133.778 314
Note: a
Predictors: (Constant), FASH, UC, CC, SA; and Dependent Variable: Attitude towards luxury
brands.

Table 6 presents the values of coefficients in the regression model. The t-values and
the significance values for the constant and the coefficients (which are all below 0.05)
helps us to conclude that there is statistically significant relationship between the
dimensions of consumers’ need for uniqueness and fashion consciousness, and the attitude
towards luxury brands.
Table 6: Regression Coefficients
Unstandardized Standardized
Model Coefficients Coefficients t-Value Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1 Constant 0.536 0.106 – 5.050 0.000
CC 0.081 0.035 0.090 2.302 0.022
UC 0.108 0.032 0.115 3.349 0.001
SA 0.432 0.044 0.464 9.773 0.000
FASH 0.288 0.034 0.364 8.431 0.000
Note: Dependent Variable – Attitude towards luxury brands.

On the basis of the above analysis, H1, H2, H3 and H4 are all supported, suggesting that
the three dimensions of needs for uniqueness (avoidance of similarity, unpopular choice,
and creative choice) and fashion consciousness play an important role in influencing
consumers’ attitude towards luxury brands.

Conclusion
The study examined the relationship between consumers’ need for uniqueness dimensions,
fashion consciousness and consumers’ attitude towards luxury brands through an
empirical study in Rajasthan. The findings suggest that the three dimensions of
consumers’ need for uniqueness and fashion consciousness are positively related to
consumers’ attitude towards luxury brands. Thus, respondents like to express their
individuality by adopting new fashion brands and styles.

Consumer Attitude Towards Luxury Brands: An Empirical Study 13

 The findings confirmed the arguments presented by Simonson and Nowlis (2000) and
Dee and Eun (2007), who showed that consumers shop at exclusive stores and try to
differentiate themselves from the rest. This finding has an important marketing
implication, as it suggests that marketers could devise a suitable strategy to communicate
the uniqueness of their products. For instance, a novel message could be conveyed in an
advertisement, since consumers have higher need for uniqueness. Limited availability and
exclusivity may also be an effective marketing strategy for luxury goods as this may satisfy
consumers’ high need for uniqueness and avoid conformity by using luxury brands.
The results also support the probable link between fashion consciousness and attitude
towards luxury brands. The research suggests that luxury brands should project themselves
as unique, since consumers purchase these products for their individual and social value.
Fashion innovators could also be targeted, which would help in accelerating the
consumption of luxury brands.
The subject of luxury brand consumption has been studied widely, though it lacks
investigation in specific cultures. Recent studies have found that culture may affect
attitude towards consumption of luxury brands. Collectivist and individualistic cultures
may impact the behavior of consumers differently. Also, future studies may be conducted
to investigate the role of self-expressive behavior and materialism as moderators for luxury
brand consumption.

References
1. Ahmed A U, Johnson J P, Ling C P et al. (2002), “Country-of-Origin and Brand
Effects on Consumers’ Evaluation of Cruise Lines”, International Marketing Review,
Vol. 19, Nos. 2/3, pp. 279-302.
2. Barnard M (2002), Fashion as Communication, 2nd Edition, Routledge, London.
3. Belleau B D, Nowlin K, Summers T A and Jiao Xu J (2001), “Fashion Leaders’ and
Followers’ Attitudes Towards Exotic Leather Apparel Products”, Journal of Fashion
Marketing and Management, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 133-144.
4. Bian Q and Forsythe S (2012), “Purchase Intention for Luxury Brands: A Cross
Cultural Comparison”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 65, No. 10, pp. 1443-1451.
5. Bruner G and Hensel P (1998), Marketing Scales Handbook: A Compilation of Multi-
Measures, Vol. 2, American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL.
6. Cavana R Y, Delahaye B L and Sekaran U (2001), Applied Business Research: Qualitative
and Quantitative Methods, John Wiley and Sons, Australia.
7. Chadha R and Husband P (2006), The Cult of Luxury Brand: Inside Asia’s Love Affair
with Luxury, Nicholas Brealey International, London.
8. Chen J and Kim S (2013), “A Comparison of Chinese Consumers’ Intentions to
Purchase Luxury Fashion Brands for Self-Use and for Gifts”, Journal of International
Consumer Marketing, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 29-44.

14 The IUP Journal of Brand Management, Vol. XIII, No. 1, 2016

 9. Confederation of Indian Industry and A T Kearney Limited (2011), Luxury Brand
Review 2011, India. Retrieved on February 15, 2015 from http://www.atkearney.in/
images/india/pdf/India-Luxury-Review-2011-CII-AT-Kearney-Report.pdf
10. Crask M R and Reynolds F D (1978), “An In-Depth Profile of the Department Store
Shopper”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 54, No. 2, pp. 23-32.
11. Dee K K and Eun Young K (2007), “Japanese Consumers’ Need for Uniqueness: Effects
on Brand Perceptions and Purchase Intention”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and
Management, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 270-280.
12. Dubois B and Laurent G (1994), “Attitudes Toward the Concept of Luxury: An
Exploratory Analysis”, Asia-Pacific Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 1, No. 2,
pp. 273-278.
13. Gutman J and Mills M K (1982), “Fashion Life-Style, Self-Concept, Shopping
Orientation and Store Patronage – An Integrative Analysis”, Journal of Retailing,
Vol. 58, No. 2, pp. 64-86.
14. Heckert D M (1989), “The Relativity of Positive Deviance: The Case of the French
Impressionists”, Deviant Behavior, Vol. 10, pp. 131-144.
15. Kaiser S B and Chandler J L (1984), “Fashion Alienation: Older Adults and the Mass
Media”, The International Journal of Aging and Human Development, Vol. 19, No. 3,
pp. 203-221.
16. Khare A and Rakesh S (2010), “Predictors of Fashion Clothing Involvement Among
Indian Youth”, Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, Vol. 18,
No. 3, pp. 209-220.
17. Kim D and Jang S S (2014), “Motivational Drivers for Status Consumption: A Study
of Generation Y Consumers”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 38,
pp. 39-47.
18. Kron J (1983), Home-Psych: The Social Psychology of Home and Decoration, Potter,
New York.
19. Lurie A (1992), The Language of Clothes, Bloomsbury, London.
20. Lynn M and Harris J (1997), “Individual Differences in the Pursuit of Self-Uniqueness
Through Consumption”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 27, No. 21,
pp. 1861-83.
21. Miller C M, McIntyre S H and Mantrala M K (1993), “Toward Formalizing Fashion
Theory”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 142-157.
22. Nam J, Hamlin R, Gam H J et al. (2007), “The Fashion Conscious Behaviours of
Mature Female Consumers”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 31, No. 1,
pp. 102-108.

Consumer Attitude Towards Luxury Brands: An Empirical Study 15

23. Nwankwo S, Hamelin N and Khaled M (2014), “Consumer Values, Motivation and
Purchase Intention for Luxury Goods”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services,
Vol. 21, No. 5, pp. 735-744.
24. Phau I and Prendergast G (2000), “Consuming Luxury Brands: Relevance of the
Rarity Principle”, Brand Management, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 122-138.
25. Richards E A and Sturman S S (1977), “Life-Style Segmentation in Apparel
Marketing”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 89-91.
26. Ruvio A, Shoham A and Brencic M M (2008), “Consumers’ Need for Uniqueness:
Short-Form Scale Development and Cross-Cultural Validation”, International Marketing
Review, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 33-53.
27. Simonson I and Nowlis S M (2000), “The Role of Explanations and Need for
Uniqueness in Consumer Decision Making: Unconventional Choices Based on
Reasons”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 49-68.
28. Snyder C R and Fromkin H L (1977), “Abnormality as a Positive Characteristic: The
Development and Validation of a Scale Measuring Need for Uniqueness”, Journal of
Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 86, No. 5, pp. 518-27.
29. Snyder C R and Fromkin H L (1980), Uniqueness: The Human Pursuit of Difference,
Plenum, New York.
30. Solomon M R and Rabolt N J (2004), Consumer Behaviour in Fashion, Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliff, New Jersey.
31. Summers J O (1970), “The Identity of Women’s Clothing Fashion Opinion Leaders”,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 178-185.
32. Tian K T, Bearden W O and Hunter G L (2001), “Consumers’ Need for Uniqueness:
Scale Development and Validation”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 28, No. 1,
pp. 50-66.
33. Veblen T (1899), Theory of the Leisure Class, Reprint 1965, MacMillan, New York.

16 The IUP Journal of Brand Management, Vol. XIII, No. 1, 2016

 Appendix
Questionnaire
Respected Sir/Madam,
This survey is a part of our research work. This survey will take only 10 min. We want
to reassure you that all your details will be kept confidential and only group results will
be considered. For any query you can mail us at [email protected]
Part I (Information related to Demographics)

• Gender

• Age

• Education

Graduation Postgraduation Other (Please specify)

• Occupation

Student Full Time Self-employed

Unemployed Homemaker Part-time

Others (Please Specify)

• Annual Family Income ( )

Below 5 lakh 5-10 lakh

10-15 lakh 15 lakh and Above

• Where do you live?

Ajmer Bikaner Jaipur

Jodhpur Kota Udaipur

Others (Please Specify)

• How often do you purchase luxury branded products?

Never Every Month Every Three Months

Every Six Months Every Nine Months Once a Year

Consumer Attitude Towards Luxury Brands: An Empirical Study 17

 Appendix (Cont.)

Part II
Tick on any one of the options against each statement below, which best represents
your attitude towards luxury brands.

Disagree
Disagree
Strongly

Strongly
Agree
Neutral

Agree
Consumer Attitude Towards Luxury Brands

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

I almost never buy luxury products.
One buys luxury goods primarily for one’s pleasure.
For the most part, luxury goods are to be offered as gifts.
The luxury products we buy reveal a little bit about who we are.
Today, everyone should have access to luxury goods.

Part III
Tick on any one of the boxes against each statement below to show your attitude
towards luxury brands and uniqueness behavior.
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly

Strongly
Agree
Neutral

Agree
Scale Item

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

I often buy those luxury products which communicate my
uniqueness.
I look for one-of-a-kind products or brands so that I create a
style that is all my own.
I have sometimes purchased unusual brands or products to create
a more distinctive personal image.
I prefer those products and brands which express my
individuality.
When dressing, I have sometimes dared to be different in ways
that my friends are likely to disapprove.
I often dress unconventionally even when it is likely to offend
others.
I enjoy challenging the prevailing taste of people I know, by
buying something they wouldn’t seem to accept.
When it comes to the products I buy and the situations in
which I use them, I have often broken customs and rules.

18 The IUP Journal of Brand Management, Vol. XIII, No. 1, 2016

 Appendix (Cont.)

Disagree
Disagree
Strongly

Strongly
Agree
Neutral

Agree
Scale Item

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

When products or brands I like become extremely popular, I lose
interest in them.
When a product I own becomes popular among the general
population, I begin using it less.
I dislike brands or products that are customarily bought by
everyone.
The more commonplace a product or brand is among the
general population, the less interested I am in buying it.
When a style of clothing I own becomes too common, I usually
quit wearing it.

Part IV
Tick on any one of the boxes below to indicate your attitude towards luxury brands and
fashion consciousness.
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly

Neutral

Strongly
Agree

Agree
Scale Item
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
I usually have one or more outfits that are of the latest style and
brand.
When I choose between two luxury brands, I dress for fashion,
not for comfort.
An important part of my life and activities is dressing smartly.
It is important to me that my clothes be of the latest style.
A person should try to dress in style.

Reference # 25J-2016-03-01-01

Consumer Attitude Towards Luxury Brands: An Empirical Study 19

Copyright of IUP Journal of Brand Management is the property of IUP Publications and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.