See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235307755

Consumer likelihood of purchasing

organic cotton apparel: Influence of

attitudes and self-identify. J Fash

Marketing Manage

ARTICLE in JOURNAL OF FASHION MARKETING AND MANAGEMENT · FEBRUARY 2009

DOI: 10.1108/13612020910939879

CITATIONS

36

READS

214

2 AUTHORS:

Gwendolyn Hustvedt

Texas State University

32 PUBLICATIONS 180 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Marsha A. Dickson

University of Delaware

41 PUBLICATIONS 590 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate,

letting you access and read them immediately.

Available from: Gwendolyn Hustvedt

Retrieved on: 23 February 2016
ACADEMIC PAPER

Consumer likelihood of

purchasing organic cotton apparel

Influence of attitudes and self-identity

Gwendolyn Hustvedt

Department of Family and Consumer Sciences, Texas State University,

San Marcos, Texas, USA, and

Marsha A. Dickson

Department of Fashion and Apparel Studies, University of Delaware,

Newark, Delaware, USA

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to contribute to a better understanding of the organic apparel

consumer. Is the recent upsurge in organic cotton products another fashion trend or is there a segment

of consumers genuinely interested in purchasing organic cotton apparel based on the benefits of

organic agriculture to the environment?

Design/methodology/approach – Data were collected with a mail survey of US health and natural

foods consumers. Conjoint analysis revealed salient product attributes and cluster analysis identified

segments of consumers with different attribute preferences. Factor analysis uncovered latent variables

from among the large number of items and the clusters were examined for differences in their

psychographic profiles.

Findings – It was found that the 38 percent of consumers who found used organic cotton content

salient had positive attitudes toward organic and sustainable agriculture, preferred to “buy locally”

and had a strong self-identity as environmental, organic, and socially responsible consumers.

Research limitations/implications – The sample of US health and natural foods consumers

means that the results cannot be generalized too widely. Research is currently under way to relate the

self-reported purchase behavior of organic apparel consumers discussed here to actual purchase

behavior.

Practical implications – Survey respondents interested in purchasing organic cotton apparel

agreed that organic farming is good for the environment, suggesting that consumers would be

receptive to marketing messages that place an emphasis on the environmental benefits of purchasing

organic cotton apparel.

Originality/value – The paper provides insight into the attitudes and motivations of

environmentally concerned US consumers of organic apparel and provides information on focusing

marketing to these consumers.

Keywords United States of America, Social values, Attitudes, Consumer behaviour, Cotton, Clothing

Paper type Research paper

Introduction

The organic apparel market is growing every year as consumers, whose appetites have

been whetted with organic foods, are seeking to expand their organic lifestyle to

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1361-2026.htm

Purchasing

organic cotton

apparel

49

Received June 2007

Revised December 2007

Accepted April 2008

Journal of Fashion Marketing and

Management

Vol. 13 No. 1, 2009

pp. 49-65

q Emerald Group Publishing Limited

1361-2026

DOI 10.1108/13612020910939879
include apparel. Sales of products made from organic cotton, the most widely available

organic fiber, have jumped to $1.07 billion in 2006 and apparel manufacturers and

retailers, eager to capture a piece of this growing consumer segment, have been

producing organic textiles and apparel for every budget (Lipke, 2007). While the

demographics and motivations of organic food consumer have been examined in

academic research, little has been published on the psychology of organic apparel

consumers.

A study of consumers for blended organic cotton apparel, garments that contain

less than 100 percent organic cotton, found that consumers willing to consider

moderate percentage blends (45 percent-70 percent) in their purchase decisions did not

differ demographically from consumers for whom organic cotton content was not a

determinant attribute (Hustvedt and Dickson, forthcoming). The lack of relationship

between interest in organic apparel and demographics is not surprising, given that a

meta-analysis of 128 studies of environmental behavior found no significant

relationship between any of the socio-demographics variables and environmental

behavior (Hines et al., 1986). Other more recent studies have found that organic food

consumers are presently not much different from the general population in terms of

their demographics.

Standards for organic apparel products have been evolving over the past several

decades. Organic cotton, as opposed to conventionally produced cotton, has been

produced using methods that are free from most synthetic chemical inputs such as

pesticides, herbicides and chemical fertilizers (Myers and Stolton, 1999). Organic cotton

produced around the world can be certified under various standards, depending on the

needs of the producers and buyers. The International Federation of Organic

Agricultural Movements (IFOAM), founded in 1972, accredits organic certifiers who

inspect cotton crops around the world (Rundgren and Hagenfors, 1999). Cotton sold in

the United States as organic must be certified by inspectors registered with the US

Department of Agriculture (USDA) in order to use the USDA organic logo, regardless

of where the cotton is grown (Lackman, 2005). Unlike processed food products, the

USDA organic standard, however, does not cover the certification of fiber processed

into apparel products. Europe, Japan, India, and Australia all have organic standards

that cover the production of organic cotton, but over the decades to answer consumer

concerns, standards that cover organic processing of cotton into textiles and garments

have been created by a wide variety of organizations around the world (Lackman,

2005).

In an effort to reduce consumer and manufacturer confusion caused by a wide

variety of standards, a consortium of global organic experts and organizations was

formed in 2002 to develop the Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS). Participating

organizations in the International Working Group on Global Organic Textile Standard

(IWGGOTS) included the Organic Trade Association (OTA) in the United States, the

Soil Association in the United Kingdom, the International Association Natural Textile

Industry (IVN) in Germany, and the Japan Organic Cotton Association. Each of these

organizations already had voluntary standards that defined organic textiles and

organic apparel created from organic fibers and worked closely with the International

Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements (IFOAM) to develop a standard that

harmonized with IFOAM standards (IGGWOTS, 2006). The first version of GOTS,

completed in 2005, covers every step of apparel production, from fiber to finished

JFMM

13,1

50
product and includes social responsibility criteria along with the environmental

criteria (IWGGOTS, 2005, 2006). GOTS also includes a number of exceptions to the

standards, such as an increase in allowed spandex content, specifically for products

marketed in the United States. in order to satisfy the concerns of US retailers.

GOTS does not allow the blending of conventional and organic fibers of the same

fiber type. For this reason, blended organic products are not certifiable under GOTS.

The organization Organic Exchange, formed with the long term goal of increasing

organic land used for fiber production by 50 percent every year, has recently drafted a

standard for blended organic cotton products which they define as “any combination of

organic cotton and natural or conventional fibers” (Organic Exchange, 2007).

Companies that produce a large amount of cotton apparel are blending small amounts

of organic cotton (3-10 percent) with conventional cotton to deal with supply challenges

organic cotton market. Blending allows the available quantity of organic fiber to be

spread thinly across all products and allows a more gradual and predictable expansion

in organic cotton use without commitment to 100 percent organic cotton products

(Boone, 1999).

The purpose of this study was to further understanding of consumers who may be

interested in purchasing apparel products made with a percentage of organic cotton by

creating a profile of their attitudes, beliefs, and self-identity. An understanding of the

attitudes and beliefs of organic cotton apparel consumers can help both apparel

manufacturers and organizations that advocate for organic farming to target their

marketing and create communication about organic apparel that connects with these

consumers.

Literature review

Organic food consumers

The attitudes and opinions of organic food consumers have been more extensively

examined than those of organic apparel consumers. According to Allen and Kovach

(2000) organic food production is part of the “green consumerism” movement that

began in the 1980s. Organizations and consumers promoting green consumerism hope

to use market forces to reduce the environmental damage created by the growing level

of global consumption. A survey of British consumers, however, revealed that a vast

majority (93 percent) of organic food consumers surveyed are motivated by “health

reasons” and/or because organic food is “better for the children” (Hutchins and

Greenhalgh, 1997). A minority (30 percent) cited environmental concern as a reason for

organic food purchase. The USDA characterizes organic food as being “produced by

farmers who emphasize the use of renewable resources and the conservation of soil and

water to enhance environmental quality for future generations” (United States

Department of Agriculture, 2002). A survey of organic food consumers revealed that

many have concerns about farming production processes that are broader than

pesticide use (Conner, 2004). Many respondents stated they were opposed to corporate

based food production and were interested in supporting “sustainable” agriculture.

Studies of organic food consumers have identified attitudes and motivations related to

reducing pesticide use, improving environmental quality and food safety (Hearne and

Volcan, 2006; Loureiro et al., 2001; Reicks et al., 1999; Roosen et al., 1998). Hearne and

Volcan (2006) found that 84 percent of Costa Rican consumers in their survey were

willing to pay more for vegetables to protect the environment. Roosen et al. (1998)

Purchasing

organic cotton

apparel

51
found that nearly 50 percent of consumers in their study had a high degree of concern

about pesticide use.

Unlike the organic food consumer, the organic apparel consumer has not been

examined in previously published research. Because the issues of concern to organic

consumers may include other issues, a brief review of studies in the area of

environmentally or socially responsible consumer behavior was conducted.

Environmentally and socially responsible consumer behavior

Consumers of organic cotton apparel also labelled for social and processing claims may

be influenced by a variety of beliefs and attitudes. If organic apparel is framed as an

environmental issue, than concern for the environment may be an important

psychographic variable. Environmental concern is one of the most commonly studied

variables related to environmental consumer behavior. It can be defined most simply

as the possession of a concern for the ecosphere itself or over the degradation of the

ecosphere created by human beings (Dunlap and Jones, 2002). Dunlap and Jones (2002,

p. 485), researchers in the field of environmental sociology define it thusly:

“Environmental concern refers to the degree to which people are aware of problems

regarding the environment and support efforts to solve them and/or indicate a

willingness to contribute personally to their solution”. Concern for the environment can

be measured at the most general (least specific) levels, where it resembles an ideology

or worldview.

Studies of environmental concern related to apparel consumers have examined

several different phases of the apparel lifecycle, from advertising to clothing

disposal/recycling (Butler and Francis, 1997; Kim et al., 1997; Kim and Damhorst, 1998;

Shim, 1995). Butler and Francis (1997) used 11 of the 40 items used the Socially

Responsible Consumption Behavior scale (Antil and Bennett, 1979) to measure

environmental attitudes. One of the three factors in this measure, proenvironmental

regulation had a significantly positive relationship (b 1⁄4 0:26) with environmental

purchasing behavior related to clothing. A study by Kim and Damhorst (1998) showed

that environmental concern, measured by the New Environmental Paradigm (Dunlap

and Van Liere, 1978), was not directly related to environmental apparel behavior.

However, it did predict general environmental behavior (b 1⁄4 0:39), which in turn

predicted the apparel specific environmental behavior (b 1⁄4 0:67).

Measuring generalized environmental attitudes or values may be helpful for

understanding the psychology of environmental consumers, but when studying

specific behavior, generalized attitudes are not as useful as specific, behavior-related

attitudes. In their review of the conceptualization and measurement of environmental

concern, Fransson and Garling (1999) point out that only recent studies of the

relationship between environmental attitudes and behavior have been careful to

measure attitude at the same level of specificity as the behavior. Based on the stronger

relationships seen with more specific measures, this study focused on apparel specific

environmental attitudes relating to fiber and apparel production or the role of the

apparel industry and apparel consumers in environmental protection.

Many studies of environmental consumer behavior have identified a significant

relationship between altruistic values and environmental behavior (Dietz et al., 2002;

Nordlund and Garvill, 2002, 2003; Stern et al., 1993; Stern et al., 1999). Two apparel

related studies have focused on altruism as value related to socially responsible

JFMM

13,1

52
(ethical) apparel consumer behavior (Dickson and Littrell, 1997; Dickson, 2000).

Dickson and Littrell (1977) measured altruistic attitudes in relation to purchases of

clothing from an alternative trading organization (ATO). Multiple discriminant

analysis between three groups, respondents who made ATO clothing purchases, those

who made other ATO purchases, and those who received an ATO catalog but made no

purchases, found that the three groups did not differ in terms of these altruistic items.

Dickson and Littrell (1997) concluded that altruism does not appear to lessen the

demand for high-quality products. Dickson (2000, p. 25) measured altruistic attitudes

related to apparel purchases from socially responsible businesses, apparel businesses

that had taken steps to meet high ethical or environmental standards. Measures

included, “I would buy clothing from a socially responsible business just to help

support their business practices” and “I would settle for a lower quality garment in

order to buy something from a socially responsible clothing business”. By posing

situations in which the respondents would either not gain or actually lose benefit by

taking an action, the two items used in this measure seem to capture the essential

definition of altruism, which involves “self-sacrificial acts intended to benefit others

regardless of material or social outcomes for the actor” (Schwartz and Howard, 1984, p.

229). Dickson (2000) did not find this measure of altruism to be a significant predictor

of support for or intention to buy from socially responsible apparel business.

The items used to measure altruistic attitudes in these apparel studies included the

idea that consumers would have to trade off attributes creating apparel product quality

in order to obtain other attributes such as socially responsible (environmental/ethical)

production. In the case of organic cotton apparel, including both 100 percent and

blends, many products now offered do not require the consumer to make a tradeoff in

terms of the attributes that create quality, just in terms of price. While it is possible that

some consumers believe that purchasing organic cotton apparel may give them

perceived health benefits similar to organic food products, in the case of products with

only a small percentage of organic cotton, altruistic purchase motivations would seem

to become more likely.

Self-identity

Consumer self-identity is another psychographic variable that has been related to both

socially responsible and organic consumers. Self-identity can be defined as the

“relatively enduring characteristics that people ascribe to themselves”, and is often

synonymous with self-perception or self-concept (Sparks and Guthrie, 1998, p. 1396). In

the case of consumers of organic cotton apparel, it might be possible that a

self-identification as a “green consumer” or an “organic consumer” would have some

impact on their behavior in addition to their attitudes toward the products, beliefs

about the environment, or their feelings of moral obligation to buy organic products.

Sparks and Shepherd (1992, p. 392) looked specifically at the role of identification in

green consumerism in their study of self-identity and the theory of planned behavior.

Agreement with statements such as “I think of myself as a ‘green consumer’”

correlated as highly with behavioral intention to purchase organic foods (r 1⁄4 0:37) as

did attitudes toward organic foods (r 1⁄4 0:38).

Stets and Biga (2003) included the variable of environmental self-identity in their

study of environmental behavior along with the variables of environmental concern

(measured with the New Environmental Paradigm scale) and awareness of

Purchasing

organic cotton

apparel

53
consequences of human behavior on the environment. The variables of awareness of

consequences and environmental concern together significantly predicted general

proenvironmental behavior (R2 1⁄4 0:23). However, the addition of environmental

self-identity increased the amount of variance explained by the model (R2 1⁄4 0:38).

Further, once environmental identity was included in the model the variable of

environmental concern no longer significantly predicted behavior. This suggests that

some portion of awareness of consequences or environmental concern is tied to

self-identity. The role of self-identity in predicting environmental behavior also

suggests that efforts to change environmental consumer behavior might focus on

creating or reinforcing self-concepts of environmental consumerism.

Shaw et al. (2000) also found that including self-identity along with the variables

from the theory of planned behavior and personal norm of perceived ethical obligation

in their survey of ethical consumers slightly improved the ability of the model to

predict the purchase of fair trade groceries (R2 1⁄4 0:21 to R2 1⁄4 0:24). Agreement with

items such as “I think of myself as someone who is concerned with ethical issues” (p.

894) correlated with behavioral intention to purchase fair trade groceries (r 1⁄4 0:25).

Method

Sample and procedure

The survey method was a good way to obtain information in a systematic way about

variables that are not easy to observe, such as attitudes and intentions, and allowed

access to consumers located across the United States. The names and addresses of 2905

health and natural food consumers were purchased from a national mailing list

database firm. While this focus means results cannot be generalized to all consumers,

we felt that targeting consumers who were likely already aware of the issues related to

organic food would allow greater insight into the impact of organic related attitudes on

purchase decisions. The randomly selected sample of adults 18 years or older was

stratified by state population.

Questionnaire

The questionnaire format was a 12-page booklet similar to that recommended by

Dillman (2000). The questionnaire measured the likelihood of purchasing specific

organic cotton apparel products and skepticism of environmental product claims using

items adapted from previously published research as well as items developed

specifically for this study.

The first portion of the questionnaire contained a conjoint task designed to elicit

consumer evaluations of apparel product attributes relevant to the purchase of organic

cotton apparel. Respondents were asked to rate their intentions to purchase each of

eight hypothetical t-shirts that varied based on levels of four attributes: organic cotton

content (5 percent, 45 percent or 70 percent), price ($15 or $18), social responsibility

labeling (fairly traded fiber or $1 donation to cancer research, and processing labeling

(organic processing or eco-friendly processing). Research has shown that the appeal of

the clothing itself, based on factors such as style or color, is often more important to

consumers than intangible attributes like social responsibility (Dickson and Littrell,

1996: Kim et al., 1999). For this reason, respondents were asked to imagine that the

hypothetical t-shirts described in the profiles were in their favorite color and style.

JFMM

13,1

54
Conjoint and cluster analysis were used to create two market segments based on the

use of the organic cotton content attribute.

The second section of the questionnaire included a number of different measures for

psychological variables that have been related to environmental, organic or socially

responsible consumer behavior. The 13 items, measured with a 1 to 7 Likert type scale

(1 1⁄4 strongly disagree, 7 1⁄4 strongly agree), included general attitudes toward organic

agriculture, attitudes toward the environmental impact of clothing production, and

attitudes of support for organic and fairly traded fiber clothing production. Two of the

items “Government subsidies of US cotton producers are unfair to farmers in

developing countries” and “ Cotton producers in foreign countries do not get a fair price

for their cotton” were designed to determine if some of the fair trade issues of concern

to social responsibility organizations, specifically US trade policy, resonate in any way

with consumers.

A measure of self-identity was adapted from the single item measure “I think of

myself as someone who is concerned about ethical issues” used by Shaw et al. (2000,

p. 894). This item, adapted by changing “ethical” to “social”, and another item “I am a

socially responsible consumer” was added. Because of the potentially dual

environmental/ethical nature of organic apparel products, several more items were

added reflecting the environmental or organic side of this issue and all five items were

measured on a seven-point Likert type scale (1 1⁄4 strongly disagree, 7 1⁄4 strongly agree).

Attitude was measured in this study using the expectancy-value model, which

defines the attitude toward an attitude object as the sum of expectancy-value products

related to the attributes of the attitude object (Fishbein, 1967). Using this model,

attitude was measured by responses to both behavioral beliefs and outcome

evaluations related to the behavioral beliefs. The behavioral beliefs, covering a wide

range of issues related to ethical/environmental consumerism, were measured by

asking respondents to rate their agreement (on a seven-point Likert scale) that selected

outcomes would result from their purchase of an organic cotton apparel product. The

outcome evaluations were measured by asking respondents to rate the importance

(1 1⁄4 very unimportant to 7 1⁄4 very important) “How important is each of the following

to you?” for each of the outcomes suggested in the behavioral beliefs.

Two items were included to measure behavioral intention, which in the case of this

study, was the intention to purchase organic cotton apparel products. An item adapted

from Shaw et al. (2000), “The next time you go apparel shopping, how likely are you to

purchase an organic cotton apparel product?” using a seven-point scale from likely (1)

to unlikely (7) was included to measure purchase intention. Because some consumers

may never have encountered an organic cotton apparel product while shopping, it was

suggested by an organic industry professional we consulted with that a second

purchase intention question be included. This second item asked respondents how

likely they would be to purchase an organic cotton apparel product if they found one

the next time they went shopping for apparel. This removed the issue of actually

looking for an organic cotton apparel product, allowing respondents to focus on the

actual purchase. For this reason, the resulting variable was called Purchase Intention,

while the variable measured by the first item was called Search Intention, reflecting

that some searching for organic apparel may be involved in the behavior. The final

section of the questionnaire included demographic items such as age, gender,

household income, education level and number of children at home.

Purchasing

organic cotton

apparel

55
Results

The number of returned questionnaires that were at least partially complete was 422

out of 2,846 questionnaires that were delivered (response rate of 14.9 percent). Of the

422 questionnaires, 377 (89.3 percent) appropriately completed the conjoint task and

were used for the analysis presented here.

Respondent profile

Analysis of respondent demographics showed that typical participants were equally

likely to be male or female, 57 years of age, and unlikely to have children under the age

of 18 in the home. Over 40 percent of respondents had completed a college degree. Of

respondents who shared their income level, 65 percent had annual pre-tax household

incomes of at least $50,000 in 2004. A discussion of how the demographic of

respondents relates to those of the general population and the failure of demographics

to predict interest in organic cotton content in apparel will be shared in a forthcoming

paper by the authors.

Organic cotton apparel market segments

Conjoint analysis of the likelihood of purchasing eight different t-shirts for 377

respondents was used to determine which attributes of blended organic cotton apparel

products were most influential to purchasing decisions. The purchase likelihood

ratings were used to determine the individual part-worths for each attribute using

Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression. K-means cluster analysis was used to divide

the respondents into two groups based on their individual part-worths for the organic

cotton content attribute (see Table I).

The first cluster, 62 percent of the sample (n 1⁄4 234), had a very low R-square (0.03)

of variance in purchase likelihood accounted for by the product attributes (see Table I).

Members of this cluster were mainly interested in the lowest price and did not use the

organic content attribute to a significant degree. For this reason, it was named the

Non-User segment. The second cluster, 38 percent of the sample (n 1⁄4 143), had the

highest R-square (0.48) of variance accounted for by the attributes in the model and the

most interest in the organic cotton content of the t-shirt. This cluster was named the

Content User segment to highlight the importance of the organic cotton content to the

purchase likelihood.

One way to highlight the difference in behavior between these two segments is to

examine the changes in purchase likelihood for various hypothetical shirts based on

their regression equations from the conjoint analysis (see Table II). Consumers in the

Content User segment are nearly 20 percent more likely to purchase the $15 shirt with

70 percent organic cotton content than the Non-Users. The likelihood of purchase for

the Content Users increases steadily as the organic cotton content is increased, while

the likelihood of the Non-Users is nearly 20 percent higher at the 5 percent organic

cotton content level and does not significantly change once the organic cotton content

reaches 45 percent.

Exploratory factor analysis

Exploratory factor analysis using the Principal Factor method of extraction, with

Varimax rotation, was conducted separately on the items comprising each

psychographic variable or questionnaire section. These included: attitudes toward

JFMM

13,1

56
Variables

Organic content

A B Price Social label Processing label

Model

statistics

Cluster Constant

(21 1⁄4 5%,

1 1⁄4 45%,

0 1⁄4 70%)

(21 1⁄4 5%,

1 1⁄4 45%,

0 1⁄4 70%)

(21 1⁄4 $15,

1 1⁄4 $18)

(21 1⁄4 Fairtradefiber,

1 1⁄4 $1 donated to cancer

research)

(21 1⁄4 Organic processing,

1 1⁄4 eco-friendly processing) F R2

Cluster 1(n 1⁄4 234) 58.51 *** 3.06 * * 2.97 * * 22.80 *** 20.49 1.17 12.52 *** 0.03

Cluster 2(n 1⁄4 143) 52.64 *** 20.25 26.70 *** 23.12 *** 20.85 20.71 184.32 *** 0.48Overall(n 1⁄4 377) 56.52 *** 1.65 * 12.12 *** 22.91 *** 20.55 0.41 86.67 *** 0.13Notes: * p , 0.05; * * p , 0.01; *** p , 0,001

Table I.

Regression equations and

model statistics for

likelihood of buying by

clusters and overall

sample

Purchasing

organic cotton

apparel

57
the environmental impact of clothing production, organic agriculture and organic and

fair trade cotton or clothing products, consumer self-identity, behavioral beliefs, and

outcome evaluations. Factors were created from groups of items that had a factor

loading above 0.5 that were not cross-loaded onto another factor.

General attitudes and self-identity

Factor analysis of items measuring general attitudes related to organic agriculture,

organic clothing, the impact of clothing production on the environment, and fair trade

issues related to cotton grouped into two factors (see Table III). A variable named

Environmental Attitudes had an overall mean of 5.80 (SD 1⁄4 0:83, a 1⁄4 0:69), indicating

that respondents agreed that organic agriculture is good for the environment and that

sustainableagriculture isimportant. Asecond variable,Clothing Attitudes,had ameanof

4.57 (SD 1⁄4 1:30, a 1⁄4 0:79) indicating that overall, respondents slightly agreed that they

would go out of their way to buy organic or fair trade clothing with the aim of supporting

organic farming. Reliability analysis indicated a measure created from two items related

to attitudes towards the fairness of US cotton trade policies was not reliable enough for

even exploratory research (a 1⁄4 0:44), so it was not used for further analysis. The five

items related toconsumer self-identity, analyzed separately, all loaded onto a single factor

(see Table III). The overall mean for the resulting variable, called Self-Identity, was 5.40

(SD 1⁄4 0:93, a 1⁄4 0:84), indicating that respondents somewhat agreed that they

considered themselves to be socially responsible, organic or environmental consumers.

Attitudes toward organic cotton

The 11 items measuring behavioral beliefs about the purchase of organic cotton

products produced two factors (see Table IV). The five items loaded onto the first

factor all related in some way to the potential personal benefits that might be derived

from purchasing organic cotton apparel. This measure, called Self-Centered Behavioral

Beliefs, had a mean of 5.34 (SD 1⁄4 1:10, a 1⁄4 0:83), indicating that respondents slightly

Shirt A Shirt B Shirt C

5% Organic

cotton (21,

21)

45% Organic

cotton (1, 0)

70% Organic

cotton (0, 1) Change in Change in

$15 (21) $15 (21) $15 (21) purchase purchase

Fair trade fiber

(21)

Fair trade fiber

(21)

Fair trade fiber

(21)

likelihood due

to higher

likelihood due

to higher

Organic

processing

(21)

Organic

processing

(21)

Organic

processing

(21)

organic cotton

content (5% to

45%)

organic cotton

content (5% to

70%)

(%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

Cluster 1

(n 1⁄4 234) 54.60 63.69 63.60 9.09 9.00

Cluster 2

(n 1⁄4 143) 29.45 55.65 82.60 26.20 53.15

Overall

sample 48.80 64.22 74.69 15.42 25.89

Table II.

Prediction of purchase

likelihood for shirts

varying in organic

content

JFMM

13,1

58
agreed with statements that each of the benefits would result from their purchasing an

organic cotton apparel product.

Five items also loaded onto the second factor (see Table IV). Three of the five items

related directly to the benefits (support in this case) for others that would result from

the purchase of organic cotton apparel. The other two items loading onto this factor

were, “Purchasing a product which is more expensive” and “...not readily available”

relate to the personal costs in time or money associated with organic cotton apparel

purchase. This suggests that these costs are considered part of the altruistic behavior

that benefits others in spite of costs to the self. The variable, called Altruistic

Behavioral Beliefs, had a mean of 5.11 (SD 1⁄4 1:00, a 1⁄4 0:80), indicating that

respondents agreed that each of the benefits to others or costs to themselves would

result from their purchasing an organic cotton apparel product.

The 11 items measuring the importance of outcomes measured in the behavioral

beliefs about the purchase of organic cotton products also loaded onto two factors (see

Table IV). The nine items loaded onto the first factor all related to the benefits derived

for self and others from the purchase of organic cotton apparel. The variable, called

Benefit Related Outcomes, had a mean of 5.59 (SD 1⁄4 0:93, a 1⁄4 0:91) indicating that

respondents felt the outcomes of benefits to self and others, were important. Two items

related to the costs, either time or money, associated with the purchase of organic

Variable Item Factor loading

Environmental attitudes

(Cronbach’s alpha 1⁄4 0:69,

variance explained 1⁄4 34%,

Eigenvalue 1⁄4 3:70)

The dyes and chemicals used in apparel

production can be harmful to the

environment 0.73

Organic agriculture is good for the

environment 0.66

Sustainable agriculture is important to me 0.60

I prefer to “buy locally” 0.58

I am concerned about the impact of clothing

production on the environment 0.57

Clothing attitudes

(Cronbach’s alpha 1⁄4 0:79,

variance explained 1⁄4 12%,

I would go out of my way to buy organic

clothing 0.89

Eigenvalue 1⁄4 1:30) I would buy organic clothing to help support

organic farming 0.74

I would go out of my way to buy clothing

produced from fairly traded fibers 0.72

Consumer self-identity

(Cronbach’s alpha 1⁄4 0:849,

variance explained 1⁄4 64%,

I think of myself as an “environmental

consumer” 0.88

Eigenvalue 1⁄4 3:13) I am a socially responsible consumer 0.81

I think of myself as someone who is

concerned about environmental issues 0.79

I think of myself as an “organic consumer” 0.77

I think of myself as someone who is

concerned about social issues 0.71

Table III.

Factor loadings of

general attitudes and

self-identity

Purchasing

organic cotton

apparel

59
cotton apparel loaded onto a second factor. The Cronbach’s alpha for this measure

(0.59) was just below the level considered acceptable for even exploratory research. For

this reason, it was dropped from further analysis.

Analysis of segment differences

Analysis of variance for of the psychographic variables showed that only the means

for Self-Identity, Altruistic Behavioral Beliefs, and Benefit Related Outcomes did not

differ significantly between the two market segments of organic cotton apparel

consumers (see Table V).

Environmental and clothing attitudes and self-identity

The ANOVA revealed that the attitude of members of the Content User market

segment toward organic agriculture and the environmental impact of clothing

(M 1⁄4 5:94, SD 1⁄4 0:75) was significantly higher at the 0.05 level than the Non-User

Variable Item Factor loading

Self-centred behavioral beliefs

(Cronbach’s alpha 1⁄4 0:83,

variance explained 1⁄4 47%,

The following would result from my

purchasing an organic cotton apparel

product

Eigenvalue 1⁄4 5:12) Improving my health or the health of my

family 0.98

Increasing my peace of mind 0.76

Purchasing a quality product 0.72

A fair price for organic cotton producers 0.69

A reduction in the use of pesticides 0.65

Altruistic behavioral beliefs

(Cronbach’s alpha 1⁄4 0:80,

variance explained 1⁄4 13%,

The following would result from my

purchasing an organic cotton apparel

product

Eigenvalue 1⁄4 1:44) Supporting organic cotton producers 0.73

Supporting pro-environmental companies 0.72

Purchasing a product which is more

expensive 0.71

Supporting organic farming 0.70

Purchasing a product which is not readily

available 0.63

Benefit-related outcomes

(Cronbach’s alpha 1⁄4 0:890,

How important is each of the following to

you?

variance explained 1⁄4 47%,

Eigenvalue 1⁄4 5:14)

Improving my health or the health of my

family 0.77

Supporting organic farming 0.76

Supporting organic cotton producers 0.76\

More retailers selling organic cotton apparel

products 0.76

A reduction in the use of pesticides 0.72

A fair price for organic cotton producers 0.68

Purchasing a quality product 0.68

Supporting pro-environmental companies 0.68

Increasing my peace of mind 0.64

Table IV.

Factor loadings of

behavioral beliefs and

outcome evaluation

JFMM

13,1

60
market segment (M 1⁄4 5:74, SD 1⁄4 0:87, see Table V). The Content User segment agreed

with statements about organic and sustainable agriculture, local buying, and the

environmental impact of clothing production. The attitudes of members of the Content

User market segment toward going out of their way to purchase organic or fair trade

clothing (M 1⁄4 4:86, SD 1⁄4 1:10) was also significantly higher at the .001 level than the

Non-User market segment (M 1⁄4 4:40, SD 1⁄4 1:35, see Table V). The Content User

segment was somewhat in agreement that they would go out of their way to purchase

organic or fairly traded clothing. There was no significant difference however, between

the segments in terms of Self-Identity as organic or environmental consumers.

Behavioral beliefs and outcomes

Analysis of variance revealed that the Self-Centered Behavioral Beliefs of consumers in

the Non-User segment was significantly lower (M 1⁄4 5:22, SD 1⁄4 1:13) than the Content

User segment (M 1⁄4 5:54, SD 1⁄4 1:04, see Table V). Unlike the other segment, the

consumers who did not use the organic content to determine their purchase likelihood

only somewhat agreed that they would personally benefit from purchasing organic

cotton clothing. There was no significant difference between the segments in terms of

the mean Altruistic Behavioral Beliefs. Consumers in both segments were in agreement

Variable and source df SS MS F

Environmental attitudes

Between groups 1 4.33 4.33 6.35 * *

Within groups 369 250.75 0.68

Clothing attitudes

Between groups 1 17.96 17.96 11.30 ***

Within groups 369 584.2 1.59

Self-identity

Between groups 1 0.81 0.81 0.95

Within groups 372 319.34 0.86

Self-centred behavioral beliefs

Between groups 1 8.64 8.64 7.24 * *

Within groups 352 420.41 1.17

Altruistic behavioral beliefs

Between groups 1 3.40 3.40 3.39

Within groups 351 351.91 1.00

Benefit-related outcomes

Between groups 1 2.68 2.68 3.12

Within groups 360 309.65 0.86

Search intention

Between groups 1 15.97 15.97 7.689 * *

Within groups 370 771.61 2.085

Purchase intention

Between groups 1 19.18 19.18 12.13 ***

Within groups 370 585.36 1.582

Table V.

One-way analysis of

variance for effects of

content use on

psychographic and

behavioral intention

variables

Purchasing

organic cotton

apparel

61
that they might incur some costs but that others would benefits from the purchase of

organic cotton apparel. In terms of the importance consumers placed on the benefit

related outcomes of organic cotton apparel purchases, analysis of variance found there

was also no difference between consumers in the two segments (see Table V).

Search and purchase intention

Both the Search and Purchase Intentions of the Content User segment were

significantly higher than that of the Non-User segment (see Table V). Consumers in the

Content User segment had a mean Search Intention of 5.04 (SD 1⁄4 1:45), meaning they

were somewhat likely to purchase organic clothing the next time they went shopping

for apparel. The Non-User segment was only neutral to somewhat likely to purchase

organic cotton apparel (M 1⁄4 4:61, SD 1⁄4 1:44). The Purchase Intention of the Non-User

market segment was higher than the Search Intention but still significantly lower than

the Purchase Intention of the Content User segment (see Table V). The Content User

segment had a mean Purchase Intention that was significantly higher (M 1⁄4 5:32,

SD 1⁄4 1:26) than the Non-User segment (M 1⁄4 4:86, SD 1⁄4 1:25), meaning both segments

were somewhat likely to purchase organic clothing if they happened to find it the next

time they went shopping for apparel.

Conclusions

The psychographic profiling of a market segment that uses organic content in their

purchasing decisions reveals several main themes. These consumers are motivated by

their beliefs about the beneficial outcomes of the purchase, for themselves, the organic

industry, and the environment. One outcome of purchasing organic cotton apparel that

consumers in both segments found important was “improving my health or the health

of my family”. Unlike organic food producers, organic cotton apparel manufacturers

and retailers do not typically make health related claims about their products.

Nonetheless, these results suggest that organic cotton apparel benefits from the aura of

health associated with organic food products. This conclusion is supported by the fact

that the Self-Centered Behavioral Beliefs, which included this health related item, had a

higher mean for both segments than Altruistic Behavioral Beliefs.

Another conclusion that can be drawn from the evaluation of the behavioral beliefs

is that supporting organic farming in general was more important to consumers than

supporting organic cotton farmers in particular or supporting pro-environmental

apparel companies or retailers of organic products. This suggests that consumers

would be receptive to marketing messages that place an emphasis on how the purchase

of organic cotton apparel supports not just cotton farmers, but also the growth of

organic farming in general. And because respondents agreed that organic farming is

good for the environment, it is clear that marketing about how organic cotton apparel

supports organic farming is another way to market the environmental benefits of

purchasing organic cotton apparel. Finally, it is encouraging to producers of organic

apparel products that even consumers in the Non-User segment agreed that the

purchase of a quality product was an outcome of their organic cotton apparel purchase,

given the importance of quality to consumers.

The main contribution of this study is the creation of a psychographic profile for

specific market segment of consumers interested in purchasing blended organic cotton

apparel. Consumers in the segment that used organic cotton content to form their

JFMM

13,1

62
purchase intentions had positive attitudes toward organic and sustainable agriculture

and were more concerned about the impact of clothing production on the environment

than other consumers. They also preferred to “buy locally” and had a strong

self-identity as environmental, organic, and socially responsible consumers.

Future research should focus on the exact nature of the health related benefits that

consumer believe they and their families derive from the use of organic cotton apparel

products, given that while general health related benefits are being touted by some

retailers, of infant wear for example, there is not currently any objective research

showing that organic apparel conveys health benefits to anyone beyond the producer

and the producers’ family and community.

References

Allen, P. and Kovach, M. (2000), “The capitalist composition of organic: the potential of markets

in fulfilling the promise of organic agriculture”, Agriculture and Human Values, Vol. 17

No. 3, pp. 221-32.

Antil, J.A. and Bennett, P.D. (1979), “Construction and validation of a scale to measure socially

responsible consumption behavior”, in Henion, K.E. and Kinnear, T.C. (Eds), The Conserver

Society, American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 51-68.

Boone, N. (1999), “Blending organic cotton with conventional cotton”, in Myers, D. and

Stolton, S. (Eds), Organic Cotton: From Field to Final Product, Intermediate Technology

Publications Ltd (ITP), London, pp. 110-11.

Butler, S.M. and Francis, S. (1997), “The effects of environmental attitudes on apparel purchasing

behavior”, Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 76-85.

Conner, D.S. (2004), “Consumer preferences for organic standards: does the final rule reflect

them?”, Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 125-43.

Dickson, M.A. (2000), “Personal values, beliefs, knowledge, and attitudes relating to intentions to

purchase apparel from socially responsible businesses”, Clothing and Textiles Research

Journal, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 19-30.

Dickson, M.A. and Littrell, M. (1996), “Socially responsible behavior; values and attitudes of the

alternative trading organization consumer”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and

Management, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 50-69.

Dickson, M.A. and Littrell, M. (1997), “Consumers of clothing for alternative trading

organizations: societal attitudes and purchase evaluative criteria”, Clothing and Textiles

Research Journal, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 20-33.

Dietz, T., Kalof, L. and Stern, P.C. (2002), “Gender, values, and environmentalism”, Social Science

Quarterly, Vol. 83 No. 1, pp. 353-64.

Dillman, D.A. (2000), Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method, 2nd ed., Wiley,

New York, NY.

Dunlap, R.E. and Jones, R.E. (2002), “Environmental concern: conceptual and measurement

issues”, in Dunlap, R.E. and Michelson, W. (Eds), Handbook of Environmental Sociology,

Greenwood Press, Westport, CT, pp. 482-524.

Dunlap, R.E. and Van Liere, K.D. (1978), “The ‘new environmental paradigm’: a proposed

measuring instrument and preliminary results”, Journal of Environmental Education,

Vol. 9, pp. 10-19.

Fishbein, M. (1967), “Attitude and the prediction of behavior”, in Fishbein, M. (Ed.), Readings in

Attitude Theory and Measurement, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.

Purchasing

organic cotton

apparel

63
Fransson, N. and Garling, T. (1999), “Environmental concern: conceptual definitions,

measurement methods, and research findings”, Journal of Environmental Psychology,

Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 369-82.

Hearne, R.R. and Volcan, M.M. (2006), “The use of choice experiments to analyze consumer

preferences for ecolabeled and organic produce in Costa Rica”, The Quarterly Journal of

International Agriculture, Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 381-98.

Hines, J.M., Hungerford, H.R. and Tomera, A.N. (1986), “Analysis and synthesis of research on

responsible environmental behavior: a meta-analysis”, The Journal of Environmental

Education, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 1-8.

Hutchins, R.K. and Greenhalgh, L.A. (1997), “Organic confusion: sustaining competitive

advantage”, British Food Journal, Vol. 99 Nos 8/9, pp. 336-8.

International Working Group on Global Organic Textile Standard (IWGGOTS) (2005), Global

Organic Textile Standard, available at: www.global-standard.org/ (accessed October 20,

2007).

International Working Group on Global Organic Textile Standard (IWGGOTS) (2006),

“The international working group”, available at: www.global-standard.org/ (accessed

November 27, 2007).

Kim, H.S. and Damhorst, M.L. (1998), “Environmental concern and apparel consumption”,

Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 126-34.

Kim, H.S., Littrel, M.A. and Ogle, J.L.P. (1999), “The relative importance of social responsibility as

a predictor of purchase intentions for clothing”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and

Management, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 207-18.

Kim, Y.K., Forney, J. and Arnold, E. (1997), “Environmental messages in fashion advertisements:

impact on consumer responses”, Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 15 No. 3,

pp. 147-54.

Lackman, M. (2005), “Organic clothing: emerging standards”, available at: www.lotusorganics.

com/articles/OrganicClothingStandards.aspx (accessed November 27, 2007).

Lipke, D. (2007), “The greening of men’s wear“, DNR, 2 April, available at: www.dnrnews.com/

site/article.php?id 1⁄4 32 (accessed May 15, 2007).

Loureiro, M.L., McCluskey, J.J. and Mittelhammer, R.C. (2001), “Assessing consumer preferences

for organic, eco-labeled, and regular apples”, Journal of Agricultural and Resource

Economics., Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 404-16.

Myers, D. and Stolton, S. (1999), Organic Cotton: From Field to Final Product, Intermediate

Technology Publications Ltd (ITP), London.

Nordlund, A.M. and Garvill, J. (2002), “Value structures behind pro-environmental behavior”,

Environment and Behavior, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 740-56.

Nordlund, A.M. and Garvill, J. (2003), “Effects of values, problem awareness, and personal norm

on willingness to reduce personal car use”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 23

No. 4, pp. 339-47.

Organic Exchange (2007), OE Blended Standard, available at: www.organicexchange.org/

Documents/blended2007.pdf (accessed September 28, 2007).

Reicks, M., Splett, P. and Fishman, A. (1999), “Shelf labeling of organic foods: customer response

in Minnesota grocery stores”, Journal of Food Distribtution Resesearch, Vol. 30 No. 2,

pp. 11-23.

Roosen, J., Fox, J.A., Hennessy, D.A. and Schreiber, A. (1998), “Consumers’ valuation of

insecticide use restrictions: an application to apples”, Journal of Agricultural and Resource

Economics, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 367-84.

JFMM

13,1

64
Rundgren, G. and Hagenfors, S. (1999), “Certifying organic production and processing”,

in Myers, D. and Stolton, S. (Eds), Organic Cotton: From Field to Final Product,

Intermediate Technology Publications Ltd (ITP), London, pp. 65-85.

Schwartz, S.H. and Howard, J.A. (1984), “Internalized values as motivators of altruism”,

in Staub, E., Bar-Tal, D., Karylowski, J. and Reykowski, J. (Eds), Development and

Maintenance of Prosocial Behavior: International Perspectives on Positive Morality, Plenum

Press, New York, NY, pp. 225-9.

Shaw, D., Shiu, E. and Clarke, I. (2000), “The contribution of ethical obligation and self-identity to

the theory of planned behavior: an exploration of ethical consumers”, Journal of Marketing

Management, Vol. 16 No. 8, pp. 879-94.

Shim, S. (1995), “Environmentalism and consumers’ clothing disposal patterns: an exploratory

study”, Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 38-48.

Sparks, P. and Guthrie, C.A. (1998), “Self-identity and the theory of planned behavior: a useful

addition or an unhelpful artifice?”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 28 No. 15,

pp. 1393-410.

Sparks, P. and Shepard, R. (1992), “Self-identity and the theory of planned behavior: assessing the

role of identification with green consumerism”, Social Psychology Quarterly, Vol. 55 No. 4,

pp. 388-99.

Stern, P.C., Dietz, T. and Kalof, L. (1993), “Value orientations, gender, and environmental

concern”, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 322-48.

Stern, P.C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G.A. and Kalof, L.A. (1999), “A value-belief-norm

theory of support for social movements; the case for environmentalism”, Human Ecology

Review, Vol. 6, pp. 81-97.

Stets, J.E. and Biga, C.F. (2003), “Bringing identity theory into environmental sociology”,

Sociological Theory, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 398-423.

United States Department of Agriculture (2002) Vol. 11, Organic Food Standards and Labels:

The Facts, available at: www.ams.usda.gov/nop/Consumers/brochure.html (accessed

11 February 2005).

Further reading

Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1980), Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior,

Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Dimitri, C. and Green, C. (2002), Recent Growth Patterns in the US Organic Foods Market,

Economic Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, available at:

www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aib777/ (accessed October 30, 2003).

Corresponding author

Gwendolyn Hustvedt can be contacted at: gh21@txstate.edu

Purchasing

organic cotton

apparel

65

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints