Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) Volume 6 (2015), Number 1 ISSN 1855-931X EFFECTS OF BRAND ORIGIN, FASHION CONSCIOUSNESS AND PRICE-QUALITY PERCEPTION ON LUXURY CONSUMPTION MOTIVATIONS: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS DIRECTED TO TURKISH CONSUMERS Deniz Maden, Ph.D. Ege University Faculty of Communication Turkey deniz.maden@ege.edu.tr Aylin Göztaş, Prof. Dr. Ege University Faculty of Communication Turkey aylin.goztas@ege.edu.tr Füsun Topsümer, Prof. Dr. Ege University Faculty of Communication Turkey fusun.kocabas@ege.edu.tr Abstract Brand origin, fashion consciousness and price-quality perceptions are some of the concepts which have great importance for the branding and consumption of luxuries. On the other hand, consumption motivations are critical factors which directly affect consumption. Therefore, within the scope of this study, the effects of brand origin, fashion consciousness and price-quality perceptions have been analyzed in relation with pleasure seeking, status seeking an uniqueness seeking luxury consumption motivations. The empirical research has been directed to a sample of Turkish consumers. While the luxury market is rising its importance in developing countries, it is necessary to have more research on luxury consumption within the framework of countries such as Turkey. To contribute in this process, the research model has been analyzed with multiple regression analysis and the results were reported with academic and managerial implications. ABSRJ 6 (1): 15 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) Volume 6 (2015), Number 1 Keywords: Brand origin, fashion consciousness, price-quality perception, luxury consumption motivations, Turkish luxury consumers Topic Groups: Humanities and arts and business, Marketing and consumer behavior, Social sciences and business INTRODUCTION According to previous research on luxury brands (Danziger 2005; Jung, Shen 2011; Kapferer 2001; Okonkwo 2007; Silverstein, Fiske 2003), the market is gradually rising its importance in developing countries. Currently, the luxury market in many European countries is in its maturity stage. In developing countries, luxury market is in its fast growing stage (Okonkwo, 2007:4). According the fact that Turkey is an economically growing country with a young population, it is anticipated that in the following years, Turkey is going to be one of the important countries where the luxury market will gain a serious growth. Therefore, in the case of Turkey, it is a necessity to have research on luxury brand management and the motivation for luxury consumption. While there are few studies on luxury brands and luxury consumption in Turkey, the whole field needs more research. It is necessary to have research on luxury consumption focusing on Turkey for two reasons: First, it is expected that, in the following years, existing luxury brands with west origin are going to take more place in the Turkish market. Second, to be able to create managerial implications for the development of Turkish luxury brands. In this way, it would be possible to develop strategies in accordance with the dynamics of the Turkish market. In this research, the effects of brand origin, fashion consciousness, price-quality perception on luxury consumption motivations have been undertaken, with an empirical research directed to Turkish consumers. 1. LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT 1.1. Luxury Consumption Motivations Consumption motivations are fundamental to understanding consumer behavior. Consumers are motivated to fulfill a need or desire (Odabaşı 2006: 30). The motivation process of consumers is both a rational and an emotional process. Within the case of luxury brands, mostly, emotional motives are more effective (Odabaşı, 2006: 113-119). To be able to understand luxury consumption motivations, it is necessary to have an overview of the important theories in the field. Most striking theories on luxury consumption motivations are: Veblen’s conspicuous consumption theory, snob and conformist effects and Vigneron and Johnson’s classification for luxury consumption motivations. "In order to gain and to hold the esteem of men, wealth must be put in evidence, for esteem is awarded only on evidence" (Veblen, 1899: 24). Consequently, Veblen effect occurs when one wants to signal wealth with showing a willingness to pay a higher price for a functionally equivalent good (Bagwell&Bernheim, 1996: 350). Veblen’s conspicuous consumption has been distinguished between two motives: ‘invidious comparison’ and ‘pecuniary emulation’. In invidious consumption, members of higher classes consume to distinguish themselves from members of lower classes. In pecuniary emulation, members of the lower class consume conspicuously with the willingness to reach the members of the upper classes (Bagwell&Bernheim, 1996: 350). In both invidious consumption and pecuniary emulation, ABSRJ 6 (1): 16 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) Volume 6 (2015), Number 1 there is a process of comparing self with the others. However, in invidious consumption there is a tendency to recede from certain groups (lower classes), on the other hand in pecuniary emulation, consumers try to reach other groups (higher classes). Conformist and snob effects are other important motives for luxury consumption (Chaudhuri&Majumdar, 2006;Kastanakis&Balabanis, 2012; Vigneron& Johnson, 1999). Conformist and snob effects are very similar to invidious consumption and pecuniary emulation. In conformist effects, consumption occurs to be able to belong to a group and fit with fashion. Conversely in snob effects, consumers try to distinguish themselves and have exclusivity (Khabiri, et. al., 2012: 12672-12673). So, in all of these motivations, there is either a tendency to distinguish or to relate the self with others. Vigneron and Johnson’s classification for luxury consumption motivations include; status, uniqueness, conformity, quality and hedonic motivations (Vigneron & Johnson, 1999). Status motivation is a commonly associated concept with the purchase of luxuries. Status consumption is defined as “the desire of individuals to improve their social standing through the conspicuous consumption and / or non-conspicuous consumption of luxury consumer products that are perceived to confer and symbolize status both for the individual and / or surrounding significant others” (Allison, 2008: 22). Status consumption is a motivational process in which people consume conspicuously to show out their status to others (Kilsheimer, 1993: 341). Uniqueness motivations within the concept of luxury consumption are individuals’s willingness to show their uniqueness and exclusivity to others by consuming products which are perceived to be luxurious (Allison, 2008: 26). Hence, luxury consumers with a uniqueness motivation are prone to consume rare products do distinguish themselves. The willingness to have acceptance of others lies at the center of conformist consumption motivations. Consumers with conformist motivations consume products/services to be accepted by others and to enter social groups. In quality motivations, consumers are mostly interested in the technical and performance features of products and services. Hence, in quality motivations utilitarian features are more important than hedonic features. Hedonic consumption is one of the most important research fields in luxury studies (Allison, 2008; Dubois, Czellar&Laurent, 2005; Hagtvedt&Patrick, 2009; Snell&Varey, 1995; Vigneron& Johnson, 1999). Hedonic consumption is described as “those facets of consumer behavior that relate to the multi sensory, fantasy and emotive aspects of one’s experience with products (Hirschman & Holbrook, 1982)”. Hedonic consumption is closely related with emotions, rather than rationality and is associated with concepts such as; pleasure, arousal, fantasies, feelings, fun and the role of the individual (Hopkinson & Pujari, 1999: 274). In luxury consumption, consumers choose products/services which enable them to feel positive emotions and have experiences. In this research, the scales of pleasure seeking, status seeking and uniqueness seeking luxury consumption motivations were used from the study of Allison (2008). The model of motivation for consuming luxuries developed by Vigneron and Johnson was empirically tested by Allison in his doctoral thesis on a cross cultural study of motivation for consuming luxuries, in which he had a comparison of consumers from New Zealand and Thailand. In this study, three of the dimensions which luxury consumption motivations dimensions which appeared in Allison’s research were used (pleasure seeking, status seeking, uniqueness seeking). ABSRJ 6 (1): 17 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) Volume 6 (2015), Number 1 1.2. Brand Origin Brand origin can be defined “as the place, region, or country to which a brand is perceived to belong by its target consumers (Thakor & Lavack, 2003)”. In another definition, brand origin is defined as “the country which the brand is associated with by its target consumers regardless of where it is manufactured (Thakor & Lavack, 2003)”. In short words, brand origin represents the country of origin which the consumers are likely to see a strong strong connection with the brand. Many brands use their national origins for positioning their brands. While many luxury brands tend to build their brands on a strong focus on brand origins, the issue of ‘brand origin’ is one of the important subjects handled in research on luxury (Chevalier & Mazzalovo, 2008). The attribution of brand origin provides an appealing perspective for most luxury firms. Use of European brand origins in their marketing strategy gives many luxury brands an opportunity to increase trust and charge premium prices (Chevalier& Mazzalovo, 2008; Oetzel & Doh, 2009 as cited in Shukla, 2011: 245). This fact may be seemed looking at some of the most popular luxury brands in the world: Ferragamo, Gucci, Versace, Armani (Italian), Chanel, Dior, Hermès, Louis Vuitton (French). Consumers in developing markets are more likely to prefer foreign brands (Batra et al., 2000). According to Batra, et. al. (2000), this preference is mostly driven by symbolic motives, in particular status. According to Zhou, Hui and Zhou (2007: 24) “when the distinction between local and non-local brands in terms of both product features and symbolic image is blurred, there is likely to be a considerable amount of confusion regarding the origin of the brands”. Right along with this fact, it would be an interesting outcome to see the effects of brand origin on luxury consumption motivations among Turkish consumers. Therefore, the first set of hypothesis are created: H1a. There is a positive relationship between brand origin and pleasure seeking motivation. H1b. There is a positive relationship between brand origin and status seeking motivation. H1c. There is a positive relationship between brand origin perception and uniqueness seeking motivation. 1.3. Fashion Consciousness Fashion is a form of collective behavior that is socially approved for a certain amount of time but is expected to change after a while ” (Summers, Belleau, & Wozniak, 1992). Fashion consciousness is defined as “a person’s degree of involvement with the styles of fashion products (Nam et. al., 2007: 103)”.. “Researchers have further referred to fashion conscious consumers as those individuals who are characterized by a deeper interest in fashion brands and products as well as in their physical appearance (Gutman & Mills, 1982)”. Though fashion and luxury definitely indicate different concepts, they are closely related terms. Therefore, it is expected that a consumer’s fashion consciousness will be effective on luxury consumption motivations. Luxury and fashion are concepts which are very close but at the same time different from each other. Though fashion and luxury have some issues in common and a relationship, they represent different concepts. Both luxury and fashion are ways for self differentiation but, fashion involves much more people while luxury involves less. In this sense luxury is more likely to be seen as a way for social differentiation (Kapferer&Bastien, 2009: 98). With ABSRJ 6 (1): 18 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) Volume 6 (2015), Number 1 luxury, consumers reach more rare products. Luxury trickles down from upper-classes to lower classes. New luxuries are first accepted by the upper-class, in a while it spreads to middle classes (Danziger, 2005). This process has a strong relationship with the formation and widespread of fashion. Considering that fashion and luxury are related terms and have a mutual relationship, it is anticipated that fashion consciousness has a positive relationship with luxury consumption motivations. Hence, the second group of the hypothesis are as follows: H2a. There is a positive relationship between fashion consciousness and pleasure seeking motivation. H2b. There is a positive relationship between fashion consciousness and s atus seeking motivation. t r t t t H2c. There is a positive relationship between fashion consciousness and uniqueness seeking motivation. 1.4. Price-quality Perception It would be a mistake to define luxury products just depending on their prices. The price strategies of luxury products are much more different compared to other products. Traditionally, higher prices have negative impact on consumers’ purchase decisions. In opposition with the other markets, in the luxury market, many times the product/service is more important and the demand to it is higher when the price is higher. Price-quality relation is defined as: “The generalized belief across product categories that the level of price is related positively to the quality level of the product (Lichtenstein, Ridgway & Netemeyer, 1993: 236) Price-quality perceptions stand out as important factors which affect consumers’ perceptions of luxury. Especially for the consumption of luxuries, price-quality perception strike out as an important effect. It is known that consumers tend to judge luxuries upon their high prices. Therefore, within this research, the relationship between price-quality perception and luxury consumption motivations is investigated with the following hypothesis: H3a. There is a positive relationship between p ice-quali y perception and pleasure seeking motivation. H3b. There is a positive relationship between price-quality perception and sta us seeking motivation. H3c. There is a positive relationship between price-quali y perception and uniqueness seeking motivation. 2. METHODOLOGY 2.1. Research Objectives and Model Development To detect the relationship of brand origin, fashion consciousness and price-quality perception with pleasure, status and uniqueness seeking motivations, the research has been designed with a descriptive and relational model. While descriptive research models aim at detecting a situation concerning a subject (Erdoğan, 1998: 60-61), relational models aim at investigating the relation between variables (İftar, 2000). The research model may be seen below on Figure 1. ABSRJ 6 (1): 19 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) Volume 6 (2015), Number 1 Figure 1: Research Model 2.2. Measures Scales of pleasure seeking, status seeking and uniqueness seeking luxury consumption motivations were taken from Allison’s (2008) doctoral thesis on a cross cultural study of motivation for consuming luxuries. The scale used to measure brand origin was derived from Batra, et. al.’s research (2000) by Shukla, 2011. To measure fashion consciousness, scale developed by Sproles and Kendall, 1986 and revised by Bhardwaj (2010) was used. Finally, price-quality scale revised by Garretson and Burton (2003), depending on Lichtenstein’s scale (1993) was used. 2.3. Development of the Research Instrument The translation of the research instrument is a critical process. “Generally, direct translation of an instrument from one language to another does not guarantee content equivalence of the translated scale (Brislin 1970, Sechrest & Fay 1972 as cited in Cha, Kim & Erlen, 2007: 387)”. Therefore, in this research, translation methods suggested by experts were used to ensure the validity. As it is suggested by experts to combine different translation techniques to overcome limitations of a single technique, in this research, the back-translation method and the pretest method were used, (Cha, Kim & Erlen, 2007). In his well-known method, Brislin (1970) recommended a repeated independent translation and a back-translation from different translators. The second translation method used for this research is the pre-test method. This method is a pilot study to foresee any problems, which may accure in the clarity of the research instrument. The research instrument was first translated from english (original language) to Turkish (target language) and then by another person, it was translated from the target language to the original language. The two translations were compared for concept equivalence. 4 problematic items occurred in this process and they were eliminated with the translation of another translator. Translations were done by experts from the foreign languages ABSRJ 6 (1): 20 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) Volume 6 (2015), Number 1 department of Ege University. After the back-translation, the pretest method was used to make sure that there are no problems with the clarity of the questions. The questionnaires were filled by 60 participants among the sample and it was proved by the consistency of the answers and low number of missing that there were no misunderstandings of the research instrument. 2.4. Sample The sample of the study included 387 Turkish consumers. As seen on Table 1, the majority of the sample are women (60.5%). Most of the participants are in the 18-25 age interval (42,1%). 18-25 age interval is followed by 26-35 age interval (36,2%). Most of the participants are university graduates (59,4%). And most of them has a monthly income of 1501-3000 Turkish Liras (38%). As a result of the demographic analysis, it is seen that the research sample mostly includes well educated young participants with a middle income level. Table 1: Demographics of the Sample Frequency (n=387) Percentage (%) Gender Female Male 234 153 60,5 39,5 Age <18 18-25 26-35 36-45 >45 2 163 140 31 51 0.5 42,1 36,2 8 13,2 Education High school University Master’s PhD 17 230 94 46 4,4 59,4 24,3 11,9 Montly Income (Turkish liras) (In the period of resea ch, Turkish liras equaled to approxima ely ½ of euros). r t <1500 1501-3000 3001-6000 6001-12000 >12001 128 147 69 28 15 33.1 38 17.8 7.2 3.9 2.5. Findings The results of the research have been analyzed using SPSS 17. Reliability analysis and exploratory factor analysis were done. After the factor loadings and reliability tests were proved, further analysis have been carried out. Means and standard deviations of each ABSRJ 6 (1): 21 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) Volume 6 (2015), Number 1 dimension have been determined. Finally, a series of multiple regressions were carried out to test the hypothesis. Using exploratory factor analysis and reliability analysis, the factor loadings of each item and cronbach alpha values have been determined. The results may be seen on Table 2. Table 2: Factor Loadings and Cronbach Alpha Values Status Seeking Motivation Cronbach’s Alpha (α) ,853 ss2 I hope people think I am wealthy when they see me with a luxury product ,820 ss3 It is important that people know that a luxury product that I own was expensive ,811 ss1 It is important that I advertise my success by owning luxury products ,724 ss4 A luxury product is worth more if people think it is a status product ,775 ss5 Peopler are more likely to accept me if they see me with a luxurious product ,724 ss6 Sometimes it is necessary to purchase a luxury product to gain membership of a group ,550 Pleasure Seeking Motivation Cronbach’s Alpha (α) ,850 ps3 Luxury products should give me pleasure ,839 ps2 My reason for consuming luxuries is that it puts me in a good mood ,830 ps1 A luxury product is more valuable to me if it has the ability to make me feel better about myself ,823 Uniqueness Seeking Motivation Cronbach’s Alpha (α) ,686 us3 I am attracted to rare things ,833 us2 I am more likely to buy a luxury product if it is unique ,739 us1 I enjoy shopping at stores that carry merchandise that is unusual ,689 us4 I tend to be a fashion leader rather than a fashion follower ,528 ,837 KMO Sig. ,000 Brand origin Cronbach’s Alpha (α) ,797 ABSRJ 6 (1): 22 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) Volume 6 (2015), Number 1 bo2 If the luxury brand is originating from a country of which I have a favorable image I will be more inclined to buy that luxury brand ,896 bo1 The country that a luxury brand is originating from is important for me in making the final choice ,890 Fashion consciousness Cronbach’s Alpha (α) ,815 fc3 I usually have one or more outfits of the very new style ,843 fc2 I keep my wardrobe up-to-date with the changing fashions ,821 fc1 Fashionable, attractive styling is very important to me ,754 fc4 To get variety, I shop different stores and choose different brands ,728 f5 It’s fun to buy something new and exciting ,533 Price-quality perception Cronbach’s Alpha (α) ,831 pqp3 The price of a product is a good indicator of its quality ,881 pqp1 Generally speaking, the higher the price of a product, the higher the quality ,809 pqp4 You always have to pay a bit more for the best ,776 pqp2 The old saying “you get what you pay for” is generally true ,724 KMO ,772 Sig. ,000 KMO value shows weather the data is appropriate for the analysis. The KMO value may differ between 0 and 1. It is expected that the KMO value is at least 0,60 (Pett, Lackey, Sullivan, 2003). If it is between 0,5 -0,7 it is considered as normal, a KMO between 0,7- 0,8 is considered as good, a value between 0,8-0,9 is considered very good a value above 0.9 is considered to be perfect (Field, 2005). According to the results of the factor analysis, luxury consumption motivations have a very good KMO value and brand origin, fashion consciousness and price-quality perception have a good KMO value. A Cronbach Alpha value more than 0,70 proves the reliability of the scale, but in cases where there are less questions, this value is 0,60 (Sipahi, Yurtkoru, Çinko 2008:89). As seen on Table 3, all dimensions have Cronbach Alpha values greater than the suggested value of 0.60. In fact, many of them are above 0,80 which prooves their high reliability. Total item correlations are between 0.52 – 0.89, which indicates they are much more higher than Saxe and Weitz (1982) have suggested (0.32). This proves that the instrument purveys the minimum standards for collision validity. ABSRJ 6 (1): 23 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) Volume 6 (2015), Number 1 In table 3, means and standard deviations of the independent variables (brand origin, fashion consciousness, price-quality perception) and dependent variables (pleasure seeking motivation, status seeking motivation, uniqueness seeking motivation) may be seen. All items were designed on a 5 point likert scale. (5=strongly agree, 1=strongly disagree). As seen on Table 3, the mean values of pleasure seeking (3,17), uniqueness seeking (3,25) and fashion consciousness (3,08) dimensions represent ‘neither agree nor disagree’ with a tendency to ‘agree’. The mean values of brand origin (2,85) and price-quality perception (2,96) are very close to ‘neither agree nor disagree’. Lastly, status seeking dimension’s mean value (2,08) represents a sample who is more likely to ‘disagree’. Table 3: Means and standard deviations Dimensions Pleasure seeking Status seeking Uniqueness seeking Brand origin Fashion consciousness Price-quality perception Mean 3,177 2,088 3,256 2,851 3,0868 2,961 Std. Deviation 1,151 0,943 0,903 1,214 0,902 0,960 To be able to test the relationship of brand origin, fashion consciousness and price-quality perception with luxury consumption motivations, multiple regression analysis have been applied. With these multiple regressions, hypothesis and the research model of the study have been tested. In multiple regression, R2 value shows how much the independent variables are able to test the dependent variable. Standard error shows the standard deviation in the distribution of the results. P value shows the significance of the model. Durbin Watson is used to test autocorrelation. Values close to 4 indicate a very negative correlation, values near to 0 indicate a very positive correlation, values near to 2 show that there is no autocorrelation. Hence, the expected value is between 1,5 and 2,5. (Kalaycı, 2010: 264-268). All of these indicators have been shown in the the results of the multiple regressions (Table 4, 5, 6). Table 4: Relation of brand origin, fashion consciousness, price-quality perception with pleasure seeking motivation R2= 0,183 Standard Error = 1,04442 P<0,001 Durbion-Watson = 1,978 Independent variables: Brand origin, fashion consciousness, price-quality percep ion t Dependent variable: Pleasure seeking motivation Independent Variables Std.Err. Betaa t-value Sig.b Brand origin ,045 ,178 3,731 ,000 Fashion consciousness ,063 ,196 3,949 ,000 Price-quali y perception t ,060 ,225 4,505 ,000 ABSRJ 6 (1): 24 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) Volume 6 (2015), Number 1 In Table 4, the results of the relation of brand origin, fashion consciousness and price-quality perception with pleasure seeking motivation may be seen. The independent variables explain the 18,3 % (R2) of pleasure seeking motivation. There is a significant relationship between all three independent variables with the dependent variable pleasure seeking, while the p value (sig.) is smaller than 0,05. All three independent variables turned out to have a positive relationship with pleasure seeking motivation. Hence, H1a, H2a and H3a are supported. Price-quality perception has the strongest effect on pleasure seeking motivation (β = 0,225 t-value = 4,505). Price-quality perception is followed by fashion consciousness (β = 0.196, t- value = 3,949) and brand origin (β = 0,178 t-value = 3,731). As a result, among brand origin, fashion consciousness and price-quality motivation, price-quality motivation stands out with the most important positive relationship with pleasure seeking motivation. This result indicates that, for Turkish consumers, when the price-quality perception is higher, the pleasure seeking motivation for the consumption of luxuries increases in a strong way. Table 5: Relation of brand origin, fashion consciousness, price-quality perception with status seeking motivation R2= 0,223 Standard Error = ,83521 P<0,001 Durbion-Watson = 2,051 Independent variables: Brand origin, fashion consciousness, price-quality percep ion t tDependent variable: S atus seeking motivation Independent Variables Std.Err. Betaa t-value Sig.b Brand origin ,036 ,190 4,071 ,000 Fashion consciousness ,051 ,205 4,234 ,000 Price-quali y perception t ,048 ,264 5,426 ,000 In Table 5, the results of the relation of brand origin, fashion consciousness and price-quality perception with status seeking motivation may be seen. The independent variables explain the 22,3 % (R2) of status seeking motivation. Which means that, 22,3% of the status seeking motivation is related with brand origin, fashion consciousness and price-quality perception. There is a significant relationship between all three independent variables with the dependent variable status seeking, while the p value (sig.) is smaller than 0,05. All three independent variables turned out to have a positive relationship with pleasure seeking motivation. Hence, H1b, H2b and H3b are supported. Price-quality perception (β = 0,264 t-value = 5,426) has the strongest positive relation with status seeking motivation as it was also for the pleasure seeking motivation. Afterwards, ABSRJ 6 (1): 25 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) Volume 6 (2015), Number 1 fashion consciousness (β = 0.205, t-value = 4,234) and brand origin effects (β = 0,190 t- value = 4,071) also have positive relations with status seeking. As a result, it may be said that, price-quality perception is a strong factor for status seeking motivation, just like it is for pleasure seeking motivation. Which actually means that, a higher price-quality perception increases the status seeking motivation. Table 6: Relation of brand origin, fashion consciousness, price-quality perception with pleasure seeking motivation R2= 0,290 Standard Error = ,76346 P<0,001 Durbion-Watson = 1,882 Independent variables: Brand origin, fashion consciousness, price-quality percep ion t Dependent variable: Uniqueness seeking motivation Independent Variables Std.Err. Betaa t-value Sig.b Brand origin ,033 ,185 4,138 ,000 Fashion consciousness ,046 ,494 10,672 ,000 Price-quali y perception t ,044 -,071 -1,528 ,127 In Table 6, the results of the relation of brand origin, fashion consciousness and price- quality perception with uniqueness seeking motivation may be seen. The independent variables explain the 29 % (R2) of status seeking motivation. There is a significant relationship between brand origin and fashion consciousness with the dependent variable uniqueness seeking, while the p value (sig.) is smaller than 0,05. On the other hand, the relationship between price-quality perception and uniqueness seeking motivation did not turn out to present a significant result (p = 0,127) While there is a positive relationship between brand origin, fashion consciousness and uniqueness seeking motivation, H1c and H2c are supported. However, the relationship between price-quality perception and uniqueness seeking motivation did not turn out to be significant. Therefore, H3c is not supported. Even if the relationship level was significant, the result showed a negative relation between price-quality perception and uniqueness seeking motivation. Fashion conscious has the strongest relation with uniqueness seeking motivation (β = 0,494 t-value = 10,672). As seen from the beta and t-value, the positive relationship between fashion consciousness and uniqueness seeking motivation is on a very high level. This proves that, fashion consciousness is a very important variable for uniqueness seeking. In accordance with the theoretical information and antecedents of existing research, this result also proves that, fashion has an important role for uniqueness seeking. Brand origin also turned out to have a positive relation with uniqueness seeking motivation (β = 0.185, t-value = 4,138) This shows that brand origin is seen as a factor to increase uniqueness seeking. ABSRJ 6 (1): 26 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) Volume 6 (2015), Number 1 3. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS This research has been directed to the relation of brand origin, fashion consciousness and price-quality perception with pleasure, status and uniqueness seeking luxury consumption motivations. The sample of the research included Turkish consumers, who represent a population of a developing country with a developing luxury market. To test the hypothesis of the study, three multiple regression analysis have been carried out between the variables. The results of the hypothesis may be seen below on Table 7. Table 7: Results of the hypothesis tests Hypothesis Result H1a. There is a positive relationship between brand origin and pleasure seeking motivation. Supported H1b. There is a positive relationship between brand origin and status seeking motivation. Supported H1c. There is a positive relationship between brand origin perception and uniqueness seeking motivation. Supported H2a. There is a positive relationship between fashion consciousness and pleasure seeking motivation. Supported H2b. There is a positive relationship between fashion consciousness and status seeking motivation. Supported H2c. There is a positive relationship between fashion consciousness and uniqueness seeking motivation. Supported H3a. There is a positive relationship between price-quality perception and pleasure seeking motivation. Supported H3b. There is a positive relationship between price-quality perception and status seeking motivation. Supported H3c. There is a positive relationship between price-quality perception and uniqueness seeking motivation. Not Supported Results of the research showed that, brand origin, fashion consciousness and price-quality perception have positive relations with pleasure seeking, status seeking and uniqueness seeking motivations except for the relation of price-quality perception with uniqueness seeking motivation. The relation between price-quality perception and uniqueness seeking motivation did not turn out to have a significant result. Even if the result was significant, the regression analysis turned out to show a negative relation between the two concepts. But, all other relations turned out to have a strong positive value. Also, looking at the R squared levels, the effects of these relationships seem pretty important. As a result, this research shows that, within the concept of Turkish consumers, brand origin, fashion consciousness and price-quality perception have important positive contributions on pleasure, status and uniqueness seeking motivations, which are some of the most important luxury consumption motivations. Therefore, future studies on the subject targeting Turkish ABSRJ 6 (1): 27 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) Volume 6 (2015), Number 1 f consumers can be carried out to have a more in-depth understanding of these relations. As a managerial implication, results prove that for luxury brands who are in the Turkish market or looking forward to enter the Turkish luxury market, should pay attention to brand origin, fashion consciousness and price-quality perception variables while they affect luxury consumption motivations and in this way luxury consumption. In other words, brand should pay attention to these concepts in their branding strategies and communication. While it is expected for the luxury market to grow in Turkey, more research on the issue is necessary both for the academic and managerial development of the sector. REFERENCES Allison, G. (2008). A Cross-cultural ttudy of motivation for consuming luxuries. Doctoral Thesis, Lincoln University. Bagwell, L. S., & Bernheim, B. D. (1996). Veblen effects in a theory of conspicuous consumption. The American Economic Review 86 (3), 349-373. Batra, R., Ramaswamy, V., Alden, D. L., Steenkamp, J., & Ramachander, S. (2000). Effectsof brand local and nonlocal origin on consumer attitudes in developing countries. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9: 83–95. Bhardwaj, V. (2010). The effects of consumer orientatıons on the consumptıon of counterfeit luxury brands. Doctoral Thesis, University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Cha, E. S., Kim, K. H., & Erlen, J. A. (2007). Translation of scales in cross-cultural research: issues and techniques. Journal of Advanced Nursing 58 (4): 386–395. Chaudhuri, H. R., & Majumdar, S. (2006). Of diamonds and desires: Understanding conspicuous consumption from a contemporary marketing perspective. Academy o Marketing Science Review, 11, http://www.amsreview.org/articles/chaudhuri09- 2006.pdf. Chevalier, M., & Mazzalovo, G. (2008). Luxury brand management: A world of privilege. John Wiley and Sons, Singapore, Asia. Danziger, P. N. (2005). Let them eat cake: Marketing luxury to the masses – As well as the classes. Dearborn Trade Publishing, USA. Dubois, B., Laurent, G., & Czellar, S. (2005). Consumer segments based on attitudes toward luxury. Marketing Letters 16 (2), 115-128. Erdoğan, İ., (1998). Araştırma Dizaynı Ve İstatistik Yöntemleri, Emel Matbaası, Ankara. Field, A. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS. Sage Publications, Londra. Garretson, J. A., & Burton, S. (2003). Highly coupon and sale prone consumers: Benefits beyond price savings. Journal of Advertising Research, 43, 162-172. Gutman, J., & Mills, M. K. (1982). Fashion life style, self-concept, shopping orientation, and store patronage: An integrative analysis. Journal of Retailing, 58 (2), 64-87. Hagtvedt, H., & Patrick, V. M. (2009). The broad embrace of luxury: Hedonic potential as a driver of brand extendibility. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19, 608−618. Hopkinson, G. C., & Pujari, D. (1999). A factor analytic study of the sources of meaning in hedonic consumption, European Journal Of Marketing, 33 (3/4), 273-290. İftar, G. K., (2000). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri, http://bde.anadolu.edu.tr/ (http://193.140.21.192:8000/SCRIPT/bay2/scripts/student/serv_page.pl?970127244+b ay0401, Retrieved January 2013. Jung, J., & Shen, D. (2011). Brand equity of luxury fashion brands among Chinese and U.S. young female consumers. Journal of East-West Business, 17 (1), 48-69. Kalaycı, Ş. (2010). SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikler. 5. Basım, Asil Yayın Dağıtım, Ankara. ABSRJ 6 (1): 28 Advances in Business-Related Scientific Research Journal (ABSRJ) Volume 6 (2015), Number 1 f Kapferer, J. N. (2001). (Re)inventing the brand: Can top brands survive the new market realities? Kogan Page, London. Kastanakis, M. N., & Balabanis, G. (2012). Between the mass and the class: Antecedents of the bandwagon luxury consumption behaviour. Journal of Business Research, 65, 1399- 1407. Khabiri, N., Mazloumi, S., Razeghi, P., & Dravishvand, J. M. (2012). Influential factors in luxury apparel purchase intentions among Iranian customers. Journal o Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 2 (12), 12670-12680. Kilsheimer, J. C. (1993). Status consumption: The development and implications of a scale measuring motivation to consume for status. Dissertation Thesis, The Florida State University, Michigan. Lichtenstein, D. R., Ridgway, N. M., & Netemeyer, R. G. (1993). Price perceptions and consumer shopping behavior: a field study. Journal of Marketing Research, 234-245. Nam, J., Hamlin, R., Gam, J. J., Kang, Ji Hye, Kim, Jiyoung, Kuphai, P., Starr, C., & Richards, L. (2007). The fashion-conscious behaviours of mature female consumers. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31 (1), 102-108. Nunnally, J. C. Jr., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3. Baskı). McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York. Odabaşı, Y., & Barış, G. (2006). Tüketici davranışı. (6. Baskı), Mediacat Yayıncılık, İstanbul. Okonkwo, U. (2007). Luxury fashion branding: Trends, tactics techniques. Palgrave Macmillan, China. , Pett, M. A., Lackey, N. R., & Sullivan, J. J. (2003). Making sense of factor analysis: The use of fac or analysis for instrumen development in health care research. Sage. t t Saxe, R., & Weitz, B. A. (1982). The SOCO scale: A measure of the customer orientation of salespeople, Journal of Marketing Research, 19 (3), 343-351. Shukla, P. (2011). Impact of interpersonal influences, brand origin and brand image on luxury purchase intentions: Measuring interfunctional interactions and a cross-national comparison. Journal of World Business 46, 242–252. Silverstein, M. J., & Fiske, N. (2003). Trading up: Why consumers want new luxury goods – and how companies create them. Portfolio, USA. Sipahi, B., Yurtkoru, E. S., & Çinko, M., (2008). Sosyal Bilimlerde SPSS ile Veri Analizi, İstanbul: Beta Yayınları. Snell, J., Gibbs, B., & Varey, C. (1995). Intuitive hedonics: Consumer beliefs about the dynamics of liking”. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 4 (1), 33-60. Summers, T. A., Belleau, B. D., & Wozniak, P. J. (1992). Fashion and shopping perceptions, demographics, and store patronage. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 11 (1), 83-91. Thakor, M. V., & Lavack, A. M. (2003). Effect of perceived brand origin associations on consumer perceptions of quality. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 12 (6), 394- 407. Veblen, T. (1899). The heory of the leisure class. New American Library, New York. t Vigneron, F., & Johnson, L. W. (1999). A review and a conceptual framework of prestige- seeking consumer behaviour. Academy o Marketing Science Review, 1999 (1), 1-15. f Zhou, L., Hui, M. K., & Zhou, N. (2007, June). Confidence in Brand Origin and its Strategic Implications: Evidence from a Developing Market. In ASAC 28 (8). ABSRJ 6 (1): 29