2. Background Chinese apparel market is now ranked as the world's third largest - behind only the United States and Japan. Many marketers predict that Chinese consumers will become one of the most powerful driving forces in the global market within the next twenty years. Therefore, it is important to understand their needs and aspirations. Product types may play an important role on consumer’s perceptions. For example, women unlikely to spend substantial amount of money on invisible products.

4. Research Questions Do people perceive publicly consumed products more important than privately consumed products? Does the price play a vital role on the perceptions of a product? Is it reasonable to suggest that all clothing products play a similar role on consumer’s perceptions?

5. Literature Review Privately Consumed Product versus Publicly Consumed Product Women unlikely to spend much money on invisible products (Lee et al., 2004). Consumers often use visible or publicly consumed product to build identity, elevate societal status and display wealth (Ackerman and Tellis, 2001; Rahman 2010; Rahman et al., 2008). The concept of ‘face’ (mianzi) remains to play an important role in modern consumer culture.

6. Literature Review - Product Cues Extrinsic/intangible and intrinsic/tangible cues and both are often used concurrently when evaluating a product. Intrinsic cues are perceived to be more important and reliable indicators of quality than extrinsic cues (Wall et al., 1991). If consumers are familiar with the product, they often use intrinsic cues to assess the product quality. Ten product cues were adopted for this study including fit, comfort, fabric, style, colour, durability, wardrobe coordination, price, brand name and country-of-origin. The selection criteria of the above cues were based on the relevancy and importance (Eckman et al., 1990).

7. Literature Review ResearchersYearCountryApparel Top 3 Significant Evaluative Product Cues Chan et al.2001Hong KongBra 1.Comfort 2.Fitting, functions: pushing, uplifting 3.Aesthetic DeLong et al.2002 South Korea & U.S.A. Jeans 1.Colour (S. Korea & USA) 2.Style/design (S. Korea); Fit (USA) 3.Brand name (S. Korea); Tactile quality (USA) Herbst and Burger2002South AfricaJeans 1.Brand 2.Style 3.Place of purchase Chen et al.2004China Children’s clothing 1.Quality 2.Style 3.Personal preferences Chae et al.2006U.S.A.Tennis Wear 1.Comfort 2.Fit 3.Construction quality Swinker and Hines2006U.S.A.Clothing 1.Style/Fit 2.Price 3.Fashionability Wu and DeLong2006ChinaJeans 1.Comfort 2.Fit/shape 3.Design/cut Rahman et al.2008ChinaPyjamas 1.Comfort 2.Quality 3.Fabric Rahman et al.2009ChinaSleepwear 1.Comfort 2.Quality 3.Fabric Rahman et al.2010Canada & China Jeans1.Fit (Canada); Comfort (China) 2.Style (Canada); Fit (China) 3.Quality (Canada and China)

8. Literature Review - Price If consumers are not familiar with the product, they are more likely to use price as a significant evaluative cue (McGowan and Sternquist, 1998). Consumers tended to focus on price when they make their purchase decision on low-involvement product for private consumption (Balestrini and Gamble, 2006). Chinese consumers are generally more willing to spend their money on visible product than invisible products (Chao and Schor, 1998; Rahman et al., 2008).

9. Hypotheses H1: Price play a more important role on publicly consumed product (e.g., t-shirt and eveningwear) than privately consumed product (e.g., socks). H2: Comfort plays a more important role in the process of selection and evaluation of socks than t-shirts and eveningwear. H3: Brand name plays a less important role in evaluation of socks, t-shirts and eveningwear.

10. Hypotheses H4: Country-of-origin plays a less important role in evaluation of socks, t-shirts and eveningwear. H5: Style plays a more important role in evaluation of t- shirts and eveningwear than socks. H6: Fit plays a more important role in evaluation of t- shirts and eveningwear than socks.

11. Research Method Eveningwear (dresses/suits), t-shirts, and socks were used for this study. Ten product cues (six intrinsic and four extrinsic) were selected and a 5-point Likert measuring scale were adopted. 300 usable data were collected – 188 females (mean age=22.1, 62.7%) and 112 males (mean age=22.6, 37.3%).

12. ProductSockst-shirtEveningwear (Dress/Suit) RankProduct CueMeanS.D.NProduct CueMeanS.D.NProduct CueMeanS.D.N 1Comfort4.650.67299Fit4.710.98298Fit4.760.60297 2Fit4.600.74294Style4.410.63300Colour4.280.89296 3Fabric4.290.85294Comfort4.350.86297Style4.270/90291 4Durability4.131.04300Fabric4.201.10297Comfort4.250/95293 5Colour3.661.15296Colour4.100.94299Fabric4.220/90295 6Price3.561.20295Price3.840.93298Price3.880.93296 7Style3.561.08295Durability3.760.80297Brand Name3.711.13295 8 Wardrobe Coordination 3.161.31299 Wardrobe Coordination 3.481.26296Durability3.561.24296 9Brand Name2.951.32293Brand Name3.271.14296 Wardrobe coordination 3.441.29297 10COO2.531.26291COO2.641.28298COO2.791.26293 The Significance of Product Cues

13. Results and Discussion Brand name and country-of-origin did not play a significant role in the evaluation of socks, t-shirt and eveningwear. Chinese consumers are more concerned about tangible benefits (style and functions) rather than intangible factors. Therefore, H3 and 4 were supported. The salient effect of price cue for both privately consumed product (socks) and publicly consumed products (t-shirt and eveningwear) were ranked the same. Thus, H1 was not supported. “Consumers now rely less on price to gauge the quality of a product. They do not always agree with the notion that ‘you get what you pay for’. (Rahman et al. 2009, pp. 87) ”

14. Gender Differences Females were more concerned about the style of eveningwear than their male counterparts whereas males were more price sensitive toward socks than females. Female respondents ranked colour cue of t-shirt and brand name of socks relatively higher than their male counterparts. Both genders considered fit as important evaluative cue whereas country-of-origin ranked as the least important cue for all the products.

15. Sockst-shirtEveningwear FemaleMaleFemaleMaleFemaleMale Product CueRankMeanRankMeanRankMeanRankMeanRankMeanRankMean Fit24.6214.5714.7014.7114.8514.61 Style73.5653.5424.4824.2824.4653.94 Colour63.7563.4944.2263.9134.3924.09 Comfort14.7224.5383.4734.1444.3844.03 Fabric34.4234.0534.2644.0954.3034.07 Price83.3943.8453.7753.9563.886 Wardrobe coordination93.1973.1173.5483.3793.4893.37 Durability44.1983.1163.7673.7583.6083.51 Brand name53.8693.1093.2293.3573.7373.68 Country of origin102.44102.67102.51102.86102.72102.91 Gender Differences of Perceived Product Cues

16. Limitations and Future Research Second-tier coastal city was surveyed which may limit the generalization of the results. Further research is needed to strengthen the validity and reliability. Research on different products is recommended. The sample was skewed towards younger consumers.

17. Thank you!