Blackwell Science, LtdOxford, UKIJCInternational Journal of Consumer Studies0309-3891Blackwell Science, 200226Original ArticleAdolescents brand sensitivityM. J.

Lachance
et al.

Adolescents brand sensitivity in apparel: influence of three

socialization agents
Marie J. Lachance, Pierre Beaudoin and Jean Robitaille
Department of Agricultural Economics and Consumer Sciences, Universit Laval, Quebec, Canada

Abstract
Wearing clothes with prestigious brand names seems to be
very important for adolescents. This phenomenon was studied in the context of consumer socialization by examining
the influence of three socialization agents, namely parents,
peers and TV, on the development of French Canadian adolescents brand sensitivity and their relative importance.
Controlling for socio-economic variables, multiple regression analyses were conducted separately for boys and for
girls. For both genders, brand sensitivity is related to peer
influence. Girls brand sensitivity is related to the importance fathers give to clothing brands. TV exposure is not
related to adolescents brand sensitivity. For boys and girls,
peers represent the most important predictor of this consumer socialization. The results are discussed in the light of
social and economic pressures and family relationships.
Keywords

Adolescents, clothing, socialization agents, brands.

Relevant literature

Introduction

Although wearing prestigious brand names is not a

recent trend for teenagers of the new millennium, it
seems to have reached unprecedented proportions during the last decade. Of course, marketers are very interested in what teens look for in brands and develop
brand affinity.1,2 The phenomenon is also highly discussed in households because of the economic pressures
these demands impose on parents. In addition to exposing the importance of these brand preferences for
youth,1,3 the media have contributed to emphasizing this
preoccupation by reporting on extreme cases associated
with this craze such as clothing-related violence4,5 and

Correspondence
Marie J. Lachance, Department of Agricultural Economics and Consumer
Sciences, 4310C Pavillon Paul-Comtois, Universit Laval, Qubec, Qc,
Canada G1K 7P4. E-mail: marie.lachance@eac.ulaval.ca

2003 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

brand name tattooing.3 Despite its popularity, little is

known about this phenomenon, which has been rarely
studied by academics, except that, for adolescents, wearing brand names apparel seems to be a way of feeling
adequate.69 Consequently, many questions remain
unanswered. One of them concerns the influence of
socialization on the development of this sensitivity to
apparel brand names.
Researchers have identified three main sources of
influence on adolescents consumer socialization. They
are: peers, parents and the mass media.1012 Rarely have
these socialization agents been examined simultaneously, especially in the context of clothing behaviour.13,14 The purpose of this research was, from an
exploratory perspective, to study the influence of these
three socialization agents as well as their relative importance on the development of French Canadian adolescents brand sensitivity in apparel.

Clothing is an important means by which adolescents

gain social appreciation15 and develop positive selfesteem.6 Teenagers who conform to clothing norms are
more likely to be accepted in their social environment
than those who express their individualism.9,15 Clearly,
during adolescence, clothing-related decisions are associated with an important social risk.
Consumer socialization is defined as the process by
which an individual acquires the skills, knowledge and
attitudes that are relevant to his/her role as a consumer.12 From that perspective, consumer behaviours
or attitudes, such as brand sensitivity, are seen as the
results of learning acquired through interaction
between the consumer (the learner) and the socialization agents.10,12 These agents are the main sources with
which the consumer interacts. During adolescence, parents, peers and television are recognized as representing
the major sources of interaction when it comes to con-

International Journal of Consumer Studies, 27, 1, January 2003, pp4757

47

Adolescents brand sensitivity M.J. Lachance et al.

sumption matters, although their respective influences

are different in nature and relative importance.
Parents

The influence of parents as consumer socialization

agents is reported to be mostly instrumental in the
development of childrens consumer skills and in the
basic rational aspects of consumer behaviour.10,16 However, they can also affect expressive aspects such as
developing social and materialistic motivations to
consume17 or preferences for brands.18,19 Parents influence their offspring by overtly interacting with them
and by acting as models that are observed and imitated.20 In the clothing area, teenagers actively interact
with their parents,8,13 who are perceived as actual influences on their clothing choices.14,21

act as role models for teenagers and then can be considered as symbolic peers.14 According to some studies,
television is, to some extent, influential on youth clothes
shopping behaviour, at least for the late adolescent/
young adult group,30 and teenagers attitudes towards
athletic shoes.31
Relative importance of consumer socialization agents

The relative importance of the influence of socializing

agents is known to differ according to the nature of
product, even within the clothing area. In that case,
peers definitively represent a major influence32 found to
be related to social significance and acceptance among
adolescents.28 Parental influence on adolescent clothing
choices does exist but generally tends to decline with
age as the peers influences seem to expand.14,21,26,33
However, in contrast with peers, media appear to play
only a minimal role in influencing clothing purchases.27,33

Peers
Operational definitions and method

From peers, children and adolescents clearly acquire

expressive aspects of consumer behaviour by developing consciousness of the product social value.10,16,22 Part
of this expressive learning is the attention adolescents
pay to brands13,23 and the formation of their brand preferences in clothing.24 Those teenagers who interact
more with peers about consumer matters present a decision making style that is brand oriented.25 Peers are also
known to play a role in adolescents clothing purchases,
choices or satisfaction14,26,27 by providing informative,
reference or normative influence.28 Adolescents conformity to clothing patterns occurs within social interactions and is a significant factor in peers acceptance.9

Adolescents are youths aged between 12 and 18 years,

living with their parents and attending secondary
school.34 In this study, apparel is assumed to include
clothing, shoes of any type, and accessories such as caps,
handbags and rucksacks. Here, sport shoes and clothes
were both accounted for in our operational definition
of apparel because of their high level of complementarity in the way todays adolescents dress up, regardless
of their genuine involvement in sportive activities.
Moreover, some of the most popular brands offer both
sport shoes/clothes and ordinary or dress clothes. For
these reasons, we did not separate them in this study.

Television

Brand sensitivity

Despite the fact that TV represents the most studied

consumer socialization agents, there seem to exist no
general consensus about its exact influence on youth.29
Furthermore, its impact on clothing behaviour has not
been examined frequently. TV influence is largely
expressive in nature,10 affecting attitudes such as desire
for products19 and brand preferences.23 TV advertising
tends to favour the learning of brand names.23 As Wilson
and MacGillivray reported from Duke, in addition to
advertising, celebrities who appear on the screen may

Brand sensitivity is a psychological construct that refers

to the buyers decision-making process.35 Saying that an
individual is brand sensitive means that brands play an
important role in the psychological process that precedes the buying act. Conceptually speaking, it is different from brand loyalty, which is a behavioural concept
that can be measured by examining patterns of repeated
buying over time. Essentially, we say that a consumer is
brand loyal when he/she has a strong tendency to buy
the very same brand within a certain period of time.

48

International Journal of Consumer Studies, 27, 1, January 2003, pp4757

2003 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

M.J. Lachance et al. Adolescents brand sensitivity

However, this measure of brand loyalty says nothing

about the reasons that explain this loyalty.
One of the factors that are the most directly related
to brand sensitivity is consumer involvement in a specific product category.36,37 Adolescents represent the
group that grants the greatest interest in clothing.38,39
Indeed, clothing plays a particularly important role for
teenagers as they feel and act as if they were on stage,
their behaviour and physical appearance being watched
by an imaginary audience.40
To assess participants brand sensitivity, we used the
Kapferer and Laurents36 brand sensitivity scale. The
original scale presents a single dimension and is composed of eight items. However, after validation with
adolescents through two preliminary studies, we had to
discard one item that did not appear to share sufficient
construct communalities with the other items. Particularly, the dimensionality of the eight items composing
the original brand sensitivity scale was assessed using
maximum likelihood factor analysis. Three criteria were
used to determine the number of factors to rotate: the
a priori hypothesis that the scale was uni-dimensional,
the scree test, and the interpretability of the factor solution. Based on these criteria, our initial hypothesis of
uni-dimensionality was dismissed. As such, results from
Varimax rotations permitted to demonstrate that a single item was defining a different construct than brand
sensitivity. In fact, whereas seven items were found to
share high levels of communalities with brand sensitivity, one item was found to stand alone inasmuch as it
seemed to semantically address brand loyalty rather
than brand sensitivity.
From these seven items, six are five-point Likert scale
items and the seventh item asks the participant to rank
the importance of five criteria in clothing choice including brand name. The scores to each individual item were
aggregated to form an overall brand sensitivity index.
Cronbachs alpha reliability coefficient obtained for the
main study was 0.89. The items (translated in English
for the purpose of this article) are reproduced in Appendix A.

peers influence on adolescents. The construct mirrors

the desire to identify with ones image in the opinion of
significant others through the acquisition and use of
products, the willingness to conform to the expectations
of others regarding purchase decisions, and the tendency to learn about products and services by observing
others or seeking information from them.41 Composed
of 12 items, the scale reflects two dimensions corresponding to normative (eight items) and informational
influences (four items), which can be summed for an
overall susceptibility to peers influence score ranging
from 12 to 84. Respondents answered by using a sevenpoint Likert scale. The dimensionality and validity of
the instrument were examined by the original authors
through many methods and studies.42 We used the Bavugirose, Delage and dAstouss French adaptation presented by dAstous.43 After validation with adolescents
via two preliminary studies, maximum likelihood factor
analysis followed by orthogonal rotations (i.e. Varimax)
confirmed the bi-dimensionality of the scale. Cronbachs internal consistency coefficient for the main
study was 0.86, which is consistent with those reported
by the authors of the scale.42 Appendix B presents the
items making up this scale.
Parents influence

Parents influence comes through different processes. In

consumer socialization research, social interaction has
been the most investigated socialization process. In the
present study, mother and father were studied as consumer role models that youth can observe and imitate,
a role that seems to be prevalent compared with purposive educational efforts in teaching consumer skills.11,12
This was assessed through two separate five-point Likert scale items measuring brand importance in apparel
for the father and for the mother as perceived by the
adolescent. The wording of these items was as follows:
Brand names on the clothes my mother/father wears
are very important to her/him.
Television

Socialization agents influence

The Bearden, Netemeyer and Teels41 susceptibility to

reference group influence scale was used to measure

2003 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

The total number of hours adolescents normally watch

TV during days of the week and days of the weekend
provided the total subjects exposure to TV.

International Journal of Consumer Studies, 27, 1, January 2003, pp4757

49

Adolescents brand sensitivity M.J. Lachance et al.

Control variables

A review of the relevant literature recommended

controlling for gender, age and socio-economic
status.10,16,21,44
Data collection

The entire questionnaire was first validated during a

pilot study. Data for the purposive sample were then
collected in three urban secondary schools of the
Quebec City area from three different economic backgrounds. Quebec city is a mid-size urban area in the
province of Quebec (Canada), where, respectively, 96%
and 82% of the population are French speaking.45
Because the information necessary to determine the
family economic status was hardly available from our
young respondents, we selected three schools of different economic levels as ranked by a government source.46
Although this source does not provide researchers with
the income means of the different areas or schools, it
ranks each school according to the mean income of
households living in the surrounding administrative
area. From these available data, we chose the lowest
and the highest ranked schools of our area, and one in
the middle (8th, 48th and 94th rank of 100). Each subject was conferred the economic level of the school he/
she was attending at the time of the study.
The adolescents from 7th to 11th grade (from 11 to
18 years old) who agreed to participate were given a
self-completion questionnaire by their teacher and were
informed of the confidentiality and anonymity of their
responses. The total number of usable questionnaires
was 1034.
Results

The sample was composed of a similar proportion of

boys and girls (see Table 1). The vast majority of pupils
were between 12 and 17 years of age. Less than 20
respondents were 18 years old. The distribution of participants through the low, middle and high economic
levels (as determined by the rank) was 31.6%, 46.6%
and 21.8% respectively. Table 2 provides both the
means and standard deviations for the dependent and
independent variables. The mean on the brand sensitiv-

50

Table 1 Subjects characteristics

Total sample
Gender
Female
Male
Age (years)
1214
1516
17+
Economic levelb
Low
Middle
High

%a

1034

100.0

505
506

48.8
48.9

410
424
191

39.7
41.0
18.5

327
482
225

31.6
46.6
21.8

Total number and percentage may vary because of missing answers data
for each item.
b
Low, middle and high economic levels correspond to ranks 8, 48 and 94,
respectively, of the economic classification of schools (on 100).

Table 2 Descriptive statistics for the dependent and

independent variables
Variable

Mean

SD

Minimum

Maximum

Brand sensitivity
Age
Brand Importance for mother
Brand Importance for father
Influence from peers
TV exposure (hours/week)

21.31
15.00
1.96
1.94
30.14
19.23

7.00
1.53
1.13
1.18
8.92
8.06

7.00
12.00
1.00
1.00
12.00
7.00

35.00
19.00
5.00
5.00
57.00
35.00

ity scale is 21 on 35. Given that no normative scores or

guidelines currently exist for adults or for young people,
we cannot discuss this result in the light of relative
degree of brand sensitivity. On average, importance of
brands for both parents are similar, indicating that
fathers and mothers show a similar attraction to brands
of clothes, at least as perceived by their teens. Again, no
normative guidelines currently exist to discuss mean of
peers influence on our sample of adolescents, which is
30.14 on a maximum of 57.00. On average, reported
hours of TV exposure in our sample does not differ from
those reported by typical adolescents living in the province of Quebec.47

International Journal of Consumer Studies, 27, 1, January 2003, pp4757

2003 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

M.J. Lachance et al. Adolescents brand sensitivity

Table 3 OLS multiple regression analysis results for girls ( n = 485)

Independent variables
Constant
Age
Middle economic levela
High economic levela
Brand importance for mother
Brand importance for father
Peers influence
TV exposure

Unstandardized coefficients

Standardized coefficients

Adjusted R 2

15.598***
-0.555***
0.253
0.943
0.495
1.121***
0.255***
0.002

-0.132***
0.019
0.053
0.086
0.206***
0.333***
0.072

0.041
0.108
0.143
0.246
0.250

a
Economic level was treated as a dummy set variable, with low economic status being the reference category for comparison purposes.
*** P < 0.001.

OLS multiple regression analysis was performed

using brand sensitivity scores as the dependent variable.
This analysis allows to control for the influence of
potentially important covariables, namely, age and economic status, while testing for the possible interrelationships among brand sensitivity and the three
socialization agents, as well as assessing the relative
explanatory power (i.e. importance) of these distinct
socialization agents on brand sensitivity.48 Literature
about consumer and clothing behaviour suggests that
boys and girls would experience consumer socialization
differently, especially in the clothing area. Moreover,
our preliminary analyses revealed that gender was an
important determinant of brand sensitivity. Consequently, we ran two separate regression analyses: one
for boys and one for girls. Age and socio-economic
status were entered first in the model to control for
their potential influences. Then, the three socialization
sources were entered separately to assess their respective contribution to the explanatory power of the estimating model.
Results from Table 3 show that after controlling for
socio-economic variables both brand importance for
fathers and peers influences present significant conditioning impact on girls brand sensitivity (unstandardized coefficients: b= 1.121, P < 0.001; b= 0.255,
P < 0.001). The latter represents the most important relative influence as shown by their respective standardized coefficient. As such, from statistical standpoint,
Table 3 shows that the inclusion of these specific regres-

2003 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

sors improved the explanatory power of the model by

as much as 80% (adjusted R2 from 0.041 to 0.246). Television exposure does not affect brand sensitivity as a
matter of fact; the adjusted R2 do not improve significantly when this regressor is considered in the model
specification.
For boys (Table 4), once socio-economic variables are
controlled for, peers influence remains the only influential agent on brand sensitivity (b = 0.324, P < 0.001).
We note that the inclusion of this agent alone improved
the fit of the model by almost 90% (adjusted R2 from
0.021 to 0.187).
Discussion
Peers influence

The most important agent in developing brand sensitivity in apparel appears to be the influence of peers, confirming the huge importance of friends and pals during
adolescence, and the role that clothes seem to play in
their relationships with them. These results are not only
consistent with the literature on the greater influence of
peers during adolescence relative to other consumer
socialization agents,10 but also with most findings about
their greater influence in clothing.14,21,26 As they can be
classified as public luxuries, the nature of these prestigious brands of clothing and shoes makes them more
likely to be affected by peers.49 Also, these findings
could be partly explained by the fact that teens shop

International Journal of Consumer Studies, 27, 1, January 2003, pp4757

51

Adolescents brand sensitivity M.J. Lachance et al.

Table 4 OLS multiple regression analysis results for boys (n = 483)

Independent variables
Constant
Age
Middle economic levela
High economic levela
Brand importance for mother
Brand importance for father
Peers influence
TV exposure

Unstandardized coefficients

Standardized coefficients

16.321***
-0.102
-2.304***
-0.552
-0.279
0.004
0.324***
0.002

-0.022
-0.166
-0.032
-0.049
0.006
0.427***
0.021

Adjusted R 2

0.021
0.019
0.019
0.187
0.187

Socio-economic level was treated as artificial numerical variables (dummies) and zero value was attributed to the low level.
*** P < 0.001 (see modifications on the note of the previous table).

more often for clothes with friends than with other people.26,30 We know the importance of acceptance and
approval from the groups of which teens want to be
part. Just like teenagers perception of dress,9 brand
names on clothes and sport shoes seem to be part of the
social interaction process and possibly, a prerequisite
condition to verbal exchange or even to peer acceptance. Zollo2 would call these clothes with brand names
badge items, which tell others how adolescents see
themselves and how they want to be perceived by others. This is in line with reference and normative influences of peers on clothing behaviour.28 In return, brand
names can be instrumental in helping teens to gain this
acceptance. One consequence is that this social pressure
to fit the norms by wearing the right brand names may
add to the economic burden parents and adolescents
themselves have to cope with. Indeed, most of the time,
these prestigious brands are expensive and adolescents
brand sensitivity makes the desired clothes difficult to
substitute. They do not want or need a windbreaker,
they need a particular one from this specific popular
prestigious brand.
All these pressures could have a negative impact on
parentadolescent communication or relationship. As
clothing seems to be one of the sources of greatest conflict between adolescents and parents,50 it is possible that
repeating or insisting demands from teens for brand
names and negative reactions or refusal from parents
can generate important tensions or even conflicts in the
household.

52

Parents role model

Parents are known to play the first role in the consumer

socialization of their offspring, although they seem to
act as a second role in the clothing behaviour of their
adolescents. Therefore, results about boys brand sensitivity being not related to parents as models should not
be surprising. However, contrary to our findings, male
adolescents from some previous studies were found to
be more dependent on parental influence than female
adolescents.30,33 Consequently, the significant relationship between perceived importance of brand in clothing
for fathers and girls brand sensitivity is a rather unexpected result. Indeed, mothers are recognized as being
the most influential socialization agent in the family
because of their involvement in day-to-day family consumer decisions and shopping. Compared with men,
women are also known for their greater interest in good
appearance.28,44 Data from our exploratory study do not
allow to explain this result. Moreover, as the role of
fathers as consumer socialization agents of their children or adolescents has rarely been studied, it follows
that we do not know much about the importance or the
nature of this particular relationship. Among the exceptions, Martin and Bush51 found with a rural sample of
adolescents that fathers, as role models, were the most
influential in determining adolescents attitude toward
brand and products in general, followed by mothers,
athletes and entertainers. Unfortunately, the authors
did not differentiate between male and female adoles-

International Journal of Consumer Studies, 27, 1, January 2003, pp4757

2003 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

M.J. Lachance et al. Adolescents brand sensitivity

cents, and did not explain or even speculate on the

greater influence of fathers.
Here, we can speculate on some hypotheses in
attempting to explain this finding. Before adolescence,
children tend to imitate the parent of the same gender.52
During adolescence, however, it is found that daughters
live a fundamental conflict with their mothers, which
seems to impact on their social development.53 Hence,
this might partly explain why this is fathers and not
mothers attitude toward brands that influences girls
brand sensitivity. Some authors argue that adolescents
tend to perceive their fathers as they did during childhood: seeking their approval and believing that fathers
have insights into society.54 In the absence of a qualitative insight from our exploratory research, it is difficult
to asses the true nature of the fatherdaughter relationship in the development of brand sensitivity in the clothing area. Perhaps female adolescents perceiving that
brands of clothing are important to their fathers seek to
please them through their own dressing habits that conform, or at least reflect, a similar brand sensitivity in
clothing. It may also represent the other-oriented concerns demonstrated by young women through their
clothing.44 This social psychological function of clothing
might be especially relevant when it comes to the relationship with fathers during female adolescence.
Clearly, this hypothesis should be addressed in future
research.
Moreover, sex roles have changed in the family and
fathers have taken more responsibilities in child rearing.
It is suggested that some of these changes affect more
girls than boys, particularly in the showing of more
androgynous patterns of interests, activities and personal-social attributes.55 This may contribute to reinforce the particular relationship between fathers and
daughters discussed above. Further research is needed
to verify this hypothesis and to better understand the
role of mothers and fathers in the consumer socialization process of their daughters and sons. To this extent,
and given the current stage of research on the subject
matter, it is believed that qualitative enquiries will provide for the most suitable approach to get at the nature
of the social interaction that is taking place.
The present study does not allow us to speculate further with these possible explanations. The results are
even more surprising in that they occur in the domain

2003 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

of apparel, which has been generally assumed to be a

rather feminine sphere. Moreover, if Peters30 results
about late adolescents and young adults clothing purchases were still valid today, it would not be the result
of socialization occurring during apparel shopping, as
fathers rarely shopped with their offspring. Moreover,
in their general relationships with their daughters,
fathers, in contrast with mothers, have been found to be
more authoritarian and more restrictive as well as more
focused on domains centred on objective performance.54
Undeniably, times and parental role enactment have
changed and our findings point at the need for further
studies.
As parents who may be critical about their brandsensitive adolescents, it is interesting to learn that
fathers may contribute, consciously or not, to the development of this outcome. Indeed, here we must keep in
mind that this result sprang up from an exploratory
study, based on a convenient sample of respondents
who answered a single item (importance of brand for
each parent). Overall, and consistent with Johns11 suggestion, these results certainly emphasize the need to
identify specific and/or respective roles in the family
unit when studying parental influence on their children
consumer socialization.
TV influence

Even if it is recognized that media play an important

role in the socialization process of young consumers,29
the present study found no evidence that TV exposure
was related to teenagers brand sensitivity. To this
extent, our results do not corroborate most of the findings with respect to the influence of media on brand
recognition or preference among adolescents10 or children.22,29 Concerning clothing choice, adolescents from
the Koester and Mays33 study declared that they almost
never selected clothes like those worn by persons in
newspaper, in magazines and on TV. Only Wilson and
MacGallivray14 found that black adolescents were more
influenced by media than white respondents. Because
of the increasing presence of media in todays life and
the increasing importance of brand in clothing choices,
we thought we would have found different results today;
however, this was not the case with our sample of
respondents. MacGillivray and Wilson found limited

International Journal of Consumer Studies, 27, 1, January 2003, pp4757

53

Adolescents brand sensitivity M.J. Lachance et al.

mass media influence on adolescents clothing choices

and satisfaction, and pointed out at the apparent limitations of the mass media in spreading a homogenous
youth culture.
Recalling that the mean hours of TV viewing among
our subjects was rather high (19 h per week), it is less
surprising, however, that this variable was not found to
be a determinant of brand sensitivity when regressed
with the other socialization agents. This is not to say that
TV does not contribute to the development of brand
consciousness (awareness of brand names, celebrities,
look or coolness associated with them), but that it simply does not discriminate between low- and high-brandsensitive adolescents. Here, one ought to recall that
brand sensitivity is a different construct from brand
preference or recognition to which TV or other media
seem related. Our findings might have been quite different if we had accounted for the differences with
regard to specific TV sources, such as entertainers or
athletes, who were found to affect attitudes toward
products or brand in general or toward athletic
shoes.31,51 Again, there is a need to further investigate
the influence of TV shows watched by the respondents11
or the type of channels watched (e.g. MTV, Much Music
or sport channels), which may portray more or less subtle messages about meanings associated with brands of
clothing or sport shoes and their importance. This difference in the nature of the exposition to TV might
generate different significant influences on viewers
brand sensitivity.

It is also interesting to note that, in this specific case,

fathers play that unexpected role. These findings tend
to support the assertion that during adolescence, parents are still influential in consumer development even
though peers influence is quite decisive. In general,
parents influence on consumer socialization of their
offspring seems to be more a subtle process of social
interaction than a conscious effort to educate them.12 As
such, it is then interesting to observe that parents
appear to contribute, consciously or not, to the development of their adolescents brand sensitivity. The fact
that this is the parent of the opposite sex that seems to
perform this role model for girls warrants further
research and sheds light on the value of studying both
parents roles separately. Family geometry and role
enacting are changing, and consumer roles and socialization should be studied in this particular perspective,
including variables such as family structure and members of the household, such as older siblings or
step-parents.
Considering brand sensitivity in a broader context,
we need more research to pinpoint other important
characteristics (e.g. self-esteem, consumer competence,
etc.) that might be related to this phenomenon.
Finally, findings from this study should be interpreted
within the limited context of the convenience sample
and the geography (one area). Moreover, as the results
were drawn from a French Canadian context, it would
be important to assess the extent to which they cross
cultural boundaries.

Conclusion

References

Once socio-economic characteristics are controlled for,

it is not surprising that there exists an important influence from socialization agents, suggesting that brand
sensitivity is the result of interactions with the social
environment. However, the development of this socialization appears to be mostly influenced by peers. As
such, it contributes to social pressures to conform to
group expectations and brings about economic
demands on both adolescents and parents. Moreover,
this situation may contribute to altering parentchild
relationships. It is interesting to see that, at least for the
girls in our sample, not only peers but also parents play
a role in the development of this sensitivity to brands.

54

1. Rosenberg, J. (2000) Tweens mesh latest fads, moms and

dads. Advertizing Age, 70 (1), 40.
2. Zollo, P. (1999) Wise Up to Teens, 2nd edn. New Strategist,
Ithaca, NY.
3. Mass, I. (1998) Cest quoi ton sigle? Elle Qubec, 105,
7576.
4. Buchignani, W. (1990) Big name footwear has parents
running scared. Montreal Gazette, A1.
5. ONeal, G.S. (1997) Clothes to kill for: an analysis of
primary and secondary claims-making in press media.
Sociological Inquiry, 67 (3), 336349.
6. Daters, C.M. (1990) Importance of clothing and selfesteem among adolescents. Clothing and Textiles Research
Journal, 8 (3), 4550.

International Journal of Consumer Studies, 27, 1, January 2003, pp4757

2003 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

M.J. Lachance et al. Adolescents brand sensitivity

7. Forney, J. & Forney, W. (1995) Gangs or fashion:

influences on junior high student dress. Journal of Family
and Consumer Sciences, 87, 2632.
8. Frances, S. & Burns, L.D. (1992) Effects of consumer
socialization on clothing shopping attitudes, clothing
acquisition, and clothing satisfaction. Clothing and Textiles
Research Journal, 10, 3539.
9. Smucker, B. & Creekmore, A.M. (1972) Adolescents
clothing conformity, awareness, and peer acceptance.
Home Economics Research Journal, 1 (2), 9297.
10. Moschis, G.P. (1987) Consumer Socialization. A LifeCycle Perspective. Lexington Books, Lexington, MA.
11. John, D.R. (1999) Consumer socialization of children: a
retrospective look at twenty-five years of research. Journal
of Consumer Research, 26, 183213.
12. Ward (1974) Consumer socialization. Journal of
Consumer Research, 1 (2), 114.
13. Mascarenhas, O.A.J. & Higby, M.A. (1993) Peer, parent,
and media influences in teen apparel shopping. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, 21 (1), 5358.
14. Wilson, J.D. & MacGillivray, M.S. (1998) Self-perceived
influences of family, friends, and media on adolescent
clothing choice. Family and Consumer Sciences Research
Journal, 26 (4), 425443.
15. Creekmore, A.M. (1980) Clothing and personal
attractiveness of adolescents related to conformity, to
clothing mode, peer acceptance, and leadership potential.
Home Economics Research Journal, 8 (3), 203215.
16. Bre, J. (1993) Les enfants, la consommation et le
marketing. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris.
17. Carlson, L., Walsh, A., Lazniak, R.N. & Grossbart, S.
(1994) Family communication patterns and market place
motivations, attitudes, and behavior of children and
mothers. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 28 (1), 2553.
18. Bahn, K.D. (1986) How and when do brand perceptions
and preferences first form? A cognitive developmental
investigation. Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (3), 473
481.
19. Moschis, G.P. (1984) A longitudinal study of consumer
socialization. In AMA Winter Educators Conference
Proceedings (ed. by P. F. Anderson and M. J. Ryan),
pp. 189192. American Marketing Association, Chicago,
IL.
20. Ward, S., Wackman, D.B. & Ellen, W. (1977) How
Children Learn to Buy. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.
21. Simpson, L.D. & Douglas, S.U. (1998) Adolescents
purchasing role structure when shopping by catalog for
clothing. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 16 (2),
98104.
22. Hogg, M.K., Bruce, M. & Hill, A.J. (1998) Fashion brand

2003 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.
29.
30.
31.

32.

33.

34.

35.
36.

37.

38.

preferences among young consumers. International

Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 26 (8),
293300.
Moschis, G.P., Moore, R.L. & Stanley, T.J. (1984) An
exploratory study of brand loyalty development.
Advances in Consumer Research, 11, 314319.
Keillor, B.D., Parker, R.S. & Schaefer, A. (1996)
Influences on adolescent brand preferences in the United
States and Mexico. Journal of Advertising Research,
May/June, 4756.
Shim, S. & Koh, A. (1997) Profiling adolescent consumer
decision-making styles: effects of socialization agents and
social-structural variables. Clothing and Textiles Research
Journal, 15 (1), 5059.
Lewis, M.A., Dyer, C.L. & Moran, J.D.I. (1995) Parental
and peer influences on the clothing purchases of female
adolescent consumers as function of discretionary income.
Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 18 (1),
1520.
MacGillivray, M.S. & Wilson, J.D. (1997) Clothing and
appearance among early, middle and late adolescents.
Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 15 (1), 4349.
Kaiser, S.B. (1990) The Social Psychology of Clothing, 2nd
edn. Macmillan, New York.
Valkenburg, P.M. (2000) Media and youth consumerism.
Journal of Adolescent Health, 27, 5256.
Peters, J.F. (1989) Youth clothes-shopping behavior: an
analysis by gender. Adolescence, 24 (95), 575580.
Lee, E.B. & Browne, L.A. (1995) Effects of television
advertising on African American teenagers. Journal of
Black Studies, 25 (5), 523536.
Moschis, G.P. & Churchill, Jr, G.A. (1978) Consumer
socialization: a theoretical and empirical analysis. Journal
of Marketing, 15, 599609.
Koester, A.W. & May, J.K. (1985) Profiles of adolescents
clothing practices: Purchase, daily selection, and care.
Adolescence, 20 (77), 97113.
Fosse, M.-H. (1992) La participation de ladolescent aux
prises de dcision conomique de la famille. PhD Thesis,
Universit de Montpellier II, France.
Kapferer, J.-N. & Laurent, G. (1992) La sensibilit aux
marques. ditions dorganisation, Paris.
Kapferer, J.-N. & Laurent, G. (1983) La sensibilit aux
marques. Fondation Jour de France pour la recherche en
publicit, Paris.
Laurent, G. & Kapferer, J.-N. (1986) Conflict in the
Channel: the Case of European Store Brands. Annual
Conference Proceedings, pp. 6775. European Institute for
Advance Studies in Management, Bruxelles, Belgium.
Francis, S.K. & Liu, Q. (1990) Effect of economic stress

International Journal of Consumer Studies, 27, 1, January 2003, pp4757

55

Adolescents brand sensitivity M.J. Lachance et al.

39.
40.

41.

42.

43.
44.

45.

46.

47.

48.

49.

50.

51.

52.

53.

56

on perceived clothing deprivation among High school

students. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 71, 11911199.
Ossorio, S. (1995) Teen spending soar to $96 billions in
1994. Tuscon Citizen, p.13.
Castelbury, S. & Arnold, J. (1988) Early adolescent
perceptions of informal groups in a middle school. Journal
of Early Adolescence, 8 (1), 97107.
Bearden, W.O., Netemewer, R.G. & Teel, J.E. (1989)
Measurement of consumer susceptibility to interpersonal
influence. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 473381.
Bearden, W.O. & Netemeyer, R.G. (1999) Handbook of
Marketing Scales, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand
Oaks, CA.
dAstous, A. (1995) Le projet de recherche en marketing.
Chenelire/McGraw-Hill, Montral, Canada.
Cox, J.D. & Dittmar, H. (1995) The functions of clothes
and clothing dis (satisfaction): a gender analysis among
British students. Journal of Consumer Policy, 18, 237265.
Statistique Canada (2002) Population, selon la langue
maternelle. Recensement de 1996. Gouvernement du
Canada, Ottawa.
Ministre de lducation (1999) Dtermination des cotes
relatives aux indicateurs de revenu moyen et de sorties sans
diplme. Btiments secondaires. Gouvernement du
Qubec, Qubec.
Statistique Canada (1999) coute de la tlvision. Le
Quotidien, catalogue 11001F. Gouvernement du Canada,
Ottawa.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. & Black, W.C.
(1995) Multivariate Data Analysis, 4th edn. Prentice Hall,
Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Bachmann, G.R., Roedder John, D. & Rao, A.R. (1993)
Childrens susceptibility to peer group purchase influence:
an exploratory investigation. Advances in Consumer
Research, 20, 463468.
Ellis-Schwabe, M. & Thornburg, H.D. (1986) Conflict
areas between parents and their adolescents. Journal of
Psychology, 120 (1), 5968.
Martin, C. & Bush, A. (2000) Do role models influence
teenagers purchased intentions and behavior? Journal of
Consumer Research, 17 (5), 441453.
Campbell, A. (1998) Gender and the development
of personal orientation. In The Social Child (ed. by
A. Campbell and S. Muncer), pp. 330342. Psychology
Press, Hove.
Honess, T. & Robinson, M. (1993) Assessing parentadolescent relationships: a review of current research
issues and methods. In Adolescence and its Social Worlds
(ed. by S. Jackson and H. Rodriguez-Tom), pp. 4766.
Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale.

54. Youniss, J. & Smollar, J. (1985) Adolescent Relations with

Mothers, Fathers, and Friends. University of Chicago
Press, Chicago.
55. Huston, A.C. (1983) Sex-typing. In Handbook of Child
Psychology (ed. by P.H. Mussen), 4th edn, pp. 387467.
John Wiley, New York.

Appendix A
Kapferer and Laurents Brand Sensitivity Scale adapted
for adolescents

1. When I buy a piece of clothing or fashion accessories (sport shoes, caps, etc.), I look at the brand.
2. When I buy a piece of clothing or fashion accessories, I take brands into account.
3. I dont choose my clothes or fashion accessories
according to the brand.
4. Brand is not important to me.
5. When I buy clothing products, I prefer buying well
known brands.
6. If the store I am shopping in doesnt offer the specific brand of clothes or fashion accessories I am
looking for, I prefer to wait.
7. Using the scale reproduced below (1 = most important and 5 = least important) rank the following
characteristics according to the importance you
generally place on each one of them when you purchase a piece of clothing or a clothing accessory
(you must give a different rank to each aspect):

Fabric
Print
Brand
Price
Colour

Appendix B
Bearden, Netemeyer and Teels Susceptibility to Reference
Group Influence Scale

1. I often consult other people to help choose the best

alternative available from a product class.
2. If I want to be like someone, I often try to buy the
same brands that they buy.

International Journal of Consumer Studies, 27, 1, January 2003, pp4757

2003 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

M.J. Lachance et al. Adolescents brand sensitivity

3. It is important that others like the products and

brands I buy.
4. To make sure I buy the right product or brand, I
often observe what others are buying and using.
5. I rarely purchase the latest fashion styles until I am
sure my friends approve of them.
6. I often identify with other people by purchasing the
same products and brands they purchase.
7. If I have little experience with a product, I often ask
my friends about the product.
8. When buying products, I generally purchase those
brands that I think others will approve of.

2003 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

9. I like to know what brands and products make

good impressions on others.
10. I frequently gather information from friends or
family about a product before I buy.
11. If other people can see me using a product, I often
purchase the brand they expect me to buy.
12. I achieve a sense of belonging by purchasing the
same products and brands that others purchase.
Notes: normative factor items are 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11 and
12; informational factor items are 1, 4, 7 and 10.

International Journal of Consumer Studies, 27, 1, January 2003, pp4757

57