4.1 Article

Motivations and obstacles for fashion renting: a cross-cultural comparison

期刊

JOURNAL OF FASHION MARKETING AND MANAGEMENT
卷 23, 期 4, 页码 519-536

出版社

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/JFMM-05-2019-0106

关键词

Perceived enjoyment; Attitudes; Perceived risks; Collaborative fashion consumption; Cross culture; Fashion renting

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify the influences of perceived enjoyment, perceived risks and attitude on the intention to rent fashion products for both Chinese and American consumers. Furthermore, this study is expected to empirically identify the differences between American and Chinese consumers in terms of motivations for and barriers to fashion renting. Design/methodology/approach Data were collected through online surveys in both the USA and China. Data cleaning generated 412 usable samples in the USA and 301 usable responses in China. A series of t-test analyses and structural equation modeling were conducted to test the proposed hypotheses. Findings Statistical results confirmed the positive influences of perceived enjoyment and attitude on fashion renting intention. In addition, the negative influences of perceived performance risk and social risk on attitude were also affirmed. Moreover, the results indicated that significant differences exist between American and Chinese consumers in terms of perceived risks and enjoyment of fashion renting, as well as attitude toward renting. Further, group comparison testing results discovered that differences existed in the factors influencing the intention to rent fashion products between American and Chinese consumers. Originality/value This study initiates the attempt to investigate the motivations and obstacles for fashion renting intention for both American and Chinese consumers. The cultural comparison between Chinese and American consumers also delivers a comprehensive understanding of the motivations and obstacles behind the intention of fashion renting.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据