A study of consumer choice between sustainable and non-sustainable apparel cues in Poland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study is to expand the existing knowledge on fashion consumption in general and age/gender effects on clothing choice in particular. This study was undertaken to empirically examine the importance of various sustainable and non-sustainable apparel cues, as well as the functional, aesthetic, symbolic, financial, environmental and social/ethical aspects of clothing. Although Poland's economy has been transformed remarkably over the last decade, there is still a paucity of empirical research focusing on this area has been conducted. Design/methodology/approach A self-administered online survey was employed for this study. Twenty product cues (10 non-sustainable cues and 10 sustainable), eight items of ‘environmental commitment and behaviour’ measuring scale and demographic questions were used for data collection and empirical testing. Findings A total of 288 useable surveys were collected for analysis. The results revealed that many Polish consumers would not purchase a sustainable or ‘green’ product if it did not provide enough aesthetic, functional and financial benefits to satisfy their needs and aspirations. Women were more reliant on garment fit and style than men. Our findings underscore several meaningful implications and useful information. Sustainable fashion is not merely about environmental, social and ethical benefits, but their aesthetic, functional, symbolic and financial values must be factored in as well. Originality/value There is limited empirical research examining the age and gender effects in relation to sustainable and non-sustainable apparel cues. Unlike many previous research that only focused on one dimension or single aspect of clothing (e.g. aesthetic/hedonic attribute or functional/utilitarian attribute).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".