Understanding mobile phone case evaluative criteria of US Millennials

ABSTRACT Millennials are the crucial market segment in mobile marketing and retail industry due to their heavy usage and higher dependency on mobile devices. The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of personal traits of college students with different majors on mobile phone case evaluative criteria. Five hundred-and-nine college students were recruited as participants in various disciplines/majors using a non-representative, convenience sampling technique. Findings showed that fashion majors exhibited higher levels of personal traits variables that were themed around fashion, such as self-monitoring tendency, fashion involvement, and proclivity to experiment with appearance, compared to non-fashion majors. Fashion majors were found to be significantly more dependent on their mobile devices, compared to non-fashion students. These findings provide valuable information to help the mobile phone industry understand young consumers’ evaluation criteria and develop their product and marketing strategy accordingly.

[1]  J. Mcguigan Towards a sociology of the mobile phone , 2005 .

[2]  B. Browne,et al.  Conceptualizing self‐monitoring: links to materialism and product involvement , 1997 .

[3]  Jeff M. Allen,et al.  Prediction of College Major Persistence Based on Vocational Interests, Academic Preparation, and First-Year Academic Performance , 2008 .

[4]  M. Snyder Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. , 1974 .

[5]  T. Kotzé,et al.  The importance of apparel product attributes for female buyers , 2010 .

[6]  Jason M. Carpenter,et al.  Shopping orientations of US males: A generational cohort comparison , 2011 .

[7]  Kim H. Y. Hahn,et al.  Effects of Personal Traits on Generation Y Consumers' Attitudes Toward the Use of Mobile Devices for Communication and Commerce , 2012 .

[8]  Sarah Cosbey,et al.  Clothing interest, clothing satisfaction and self perceptions of sociability, emotional stability, and dominance , 2001 .

[9]  O. A.,et al.  An assessment of consumers product , purchase decision , advertising and consumption involvement in fashion clothing , 2000 .

[10]  Ann Marie Fiore,et al.  Psychographic Variables Affecting Willingness to Use Body-Scanning , 2003 .

[11]  Denise M. Johnson,et al.  Effects of female adolescent locus of control on shopping behaviour, fashion orientation and information search , 1993 .

[12]  Kim H. Y. Hahn,et al.  Salient antecedents of mobile shopping intentions: Media dependency, fashion/brand interest and peer influence , 2013 .

[13]  Roy A. Cook,et al.  General Patterns of Cell Phone Usage Among College Students , 2005 .

[14]  Tina M. Lowrey,et al.  Attitude functions in advertising: The interactive role of products and self-monitoring , 1992 .

[15]  Ding Hooi Ting,et al.  Dependency on smartphone and the impact on purchase behaviour , 2011 .

[16]  Seunghee Lee Compulsive Buying Behavior, Fashion Orientation, and Self-Esteem among Female College Students in Fashion and Business Majors , 2009 .

[17]  Jiyun Kang,et al.  Hedonic and utilitarian shopping motivations of fashion leadership , 2010 .

[18]  Aron O'Cass,et al.  A psychometric evaluation of a revised version of the Lennox and Wolfe revised self-monitoring scale , 2000 .

[19]  R. Goldsmith,et al.  Young fashion leaders’ and followers’ attitudes toward American and imported apparel , 1998 .

[20]  Paul Freathy,et al.  More than just a name above the shop: a comparison of the branding strategies of two UK fashion retailers , 1998 .

[21]  Jane E. Workman,et al.  Gender, fashion innovativeness and opinion leadership, and need for touch: Effects on multi‐channel choice and touch/non‐touch preference in clothing shopping , 2011 .

[22]  Molly Eckman,et al.  Toward a Model of the In-Store Purchase Decision Process: Consumer Use of Criteria for Evaluating Women's Apparel , 1990 .

[23]  M. Kim,et al.  College Major Choice in STEM: Revisiting Confidence and Demographic Factors , 2014 .

[24]  L. Flynn,et al.  A cross‐cultural validation of three new marketing scales for fashion research: Involvement, opinion seeking and knowledge , 2000 .

[25]  Ian Phau,et al.  Profiling fashion innovators , 2004 .

[26]  Paul D. Umbach,et al.  COLLEGE MAJOR CHOICE: An Analysis of Person–Environment Fit , 2006 .

[27]  R. Goldsmith,et al.  Social Values and Fashion Leadership , 1991 .

[28]  James E. Katz,et al.  Mobile Phones as Fashion Statements: The Co-creation of Mobile Communication’s Public Meaning , 2005 .

[29]  Ailsa Kolsaker,et al.  Mobile advertising: The influence of emotional attachment to mobile devices on consumer receptiveness , 2009 .

[30]  L. A. Sullivan,et al.  Body image: Differences between high and low Self-Monitoring males and females , 1990 .

[31]  Grace I. Kunz,et al.  Individual differences, motivations, and willingness to use a mass customization option for fashion products , 2004 .

[32]  T. Graeff Image congruence effects on product evaluations: The role of self‐monitoring and public/private consumption , 1996 .

[33]  Ronald E. Goldsmith,et al.  Fashion Leaders' and Followers' Attitudes Toward Buying Domestic and Imported Apparel , 2000 .

[34]  R. Pertierra Mobile phones, identity and discursive intimacy , 2005 .

[35]  Venkatesh Shankar,et al.  Asymmetries in the Effects of Drivers of Brand Loyalty Between Early and Late Adopters and Across Technology Generations , 2014 .

[36]  John C. Weidman Academic Disciplines: Holland's Theory and the Study of College Students and Faculty , 2005 .

[37]  A. Fiore,et al.  Affective and Cognitive Online Shopping Experience , 2010 .

[38]  R. Reardon,et al.  Academic Disciplines: Holland's Theory and the Study of College Students and Faculty (review) , 2000 .

[39]  A. Kumar,et al.  Age differences in mobile service perceptions: comparison of Generation Y and baby boomers , 2008 .

[40]  Ruth N. Bolton,et al.  Understanding Generation Y and their use of social media: a review and research agenda , 2013 .

[41]  Lois M. Gurel,et al.  Clothing Interest: Conceptualization and Measurement , 1979 .