Theoretical Linkage between Theories of Social Comparison, Brand Congruence, Self Concept and Social Indentity
Asian Journal of Advanced Research and Reports,
Aim: This paper proposed a theoretical framework to fulfill the theoretical gap which will lead to an extended theory for conspicuous consumption.
Methodology: The main theory considered for this study is social comparison theory which is the grounded theory of the concept of conspicuous consumption. Further, theoretical framework is entailed of 3 supporting theories. As explained below brand association variable is emerged from brand congruency theory. while Self-concept variable is emerged from self-concept theory. Whereas personal cultural orientation is based on the social identity theory.
Conclusion: The researcher strongly argues that in order to do a thorough comparison and purchase, the consumer would look at overall spectrum i.e., brand image, self-image and social image where it will give him an overall evaluation for him to make a consumption behavior which may lead to conspicuous consumption.
- Brand congruence
- conspicuous consumption
- theoretical framework
- social identity
How to Cite
Yang W, Mattila A. Do affluent customers care when luxury brands go mass? International Journal Of Contemporary Hospitality Management. 2014;26(4):526-543.
Grubb E, Grathwohl H. Consumer self-concept, symbolism and market behavior: A Theoretical approach. Journal of Marketing. 1967;31(4):22.
Sirgy M, Su C. Destination image, self-congruity, and travel behavior: Toward an integrative model. Journal of Travel Research. 2000;38(4):340-352.
Sirgy M, Grewal D, Mangleburg T, Park J, Chon K, Claiborne C, et al. Assessing the predictive validity of two methods of measuring self-image congruence. Journal of The Academy of Marketing Science. 1997;25(3):229-241.
Sirgy M, Johar J, Samli A, Claiborne C. Self-congruity versus functional congruity: Predictors of consumer behavior. Journal of The Academy of Marketing Science. 1991;19(4):363-375.
Hall-Phillips A, Park J, Chung T, Anaza N, Rathod S. I (heart) social ventures: Identification and social media engagement. Journal Of Business Research. 2016;69(2):484-491.
Wood J. Theory and research concerning social comparisons of personal attributes. Psychological Bulletin. 1989;106(2):231-248.
Kruglanski A, Mayseless O. Classic and current social comparison research: Expanding the perspective. Psychological Bulletin. 1990;108(2):195-208.
Mares M. Social comparison theory. The International Encyclopedia of Communication; 2008.
Ruble DN, Frey KS. Social comparison and self-evaluation in the classroom: Developmental changes in knowledge and function. In J. C. Masters & W. P. Smith (Eds.), Social comparison, social justice, and relative deprivation: Theoretical empirical and policy perspectives. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. 1987;81-104.
Bers S, Rodin J. Social-comparison jealousy: A developmental and motivational study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1984;47(4):766-779.
Lewicki P. Self-image bias in person perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1983;45(2):384-393.
Markus H, Smith J. The influence of self-schemata on the perception of others. In N. Cantor and J. Kihlstrom (Eds.), Personality, cognition, and social interaction. HiUsdale, NJ: Edbaum.1981;233-262.
Rosenberg M. Conceiving the self, New York: Basic books; 1979.
Sirgy M. Self-concept in consumer behavior: A critical review. Journal of Consumer Research. 1982;9(3):287-300.
Green P, Maheshwari A, Rao V. Dimensional interpretation and configuration invariance in multidimensional scaling: An empirical study. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 1969;4(2):159-180.
Claiborne C, Sirgy MJ, M. Self-image congruence as a model of consumer attitude formation and behavior: A conceptual review and guide for future research. In in Proceedings of the 1990 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference. New Orleans, Louisiana.: Springer International Publishing. 2015;1-7)
Sirgy M. Using self-congruity and ideal congruity to predict purchase motivation. Journal of Business Research. 1985;13(3):195-206.
Eren-Erdogmus I, Cobanoglu E, Budeyri-Turan I. Exploring dimensions of brand personality for Generation Y in the apparel market: The case of Turkey. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing. 2015;6(2):150-161.
Jamal A, Goode M. Consumers and brands: a study of the impact of self‐image congruence on brand preference and satisfaction. Marketing Intelligence & Planning. 2001;19(7):482-492.
Vernette É. Targeting women's clothing fashion opinion leaders in media planning: An application for magazines. Journal Of Advertising Research. 2004;44(1):90-107.
Malhotra N. Self-concept and product choice: An integrated perspective. Journal of Economic Psychology. 1988;9(1):1-28.
Mehta A. Using self-concept to assess advertising effectiveness. Journal of Advertising Research. 1999;39(1):81-89.
Han Y, Nunes J, Drèze X. Signaling status with luxury goods: The role of brand prominence. Journal of Marketing. 2010;74(4):15-30.
Shukla P. Status consumption in cross‐national context. International Marketing Review. 2010;27(1):108-129.
Tynan C, McKechnie S, Chhuon C. Co-creating value for luxury brands. Journal of Business Research. 2010;63(11):1156-1163.
Wiedmann K, Hennigs N, Siebels A. Value-based segmentation of luxury consumption behavior. Psychology and Marketing. 2009;26(7):625-651.
Alpert F, Kamins M. An Empirical investigation of consumer memory, attitude, and perceptions toward pioneer and follower brands. Journal of Marketing. 1995;59(4):34.
Snyder M, Gangestad S. On the nature of self-monitoring: Matters of assessment, matters of validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1986;51(1):125-139.
Puzakova M, Aggarwal P. Brands as rivals: Consumer pursuit of distinctiveness and the role of brand anthropomorphism. Journal of Consumer Research. 2018;45(4):869-888.
Whitley S, Trudel R, Kurt D. The influence of purchase motivation on perceived preference uniqueness and assortment size choice. Journal of Consumer Research. 2018;45(4):710-724.
Huang X, Dong P, Mukhopadhyay A. Retracted: Proud to belong or proudly different? Lay Theories Determine Contrasting Effects of Incidental Pride on Uniqueness Seeking. Journal of Consumer Research. 2014;41(3):697-712.
Bhaduri G, Stanforth N. Evaluation of absolute luxury. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal. 2016;20(4):471-486.
Abosag I, Ramadan Z, Baker T, Jin Z. Customers' need for uniqueness theory versus brand congruence theory: The impact on satisfaction with social network sites. Journal of Business Research; 2019.
Tajfel H. Differentiation between social groups Studies in the social psychology of inter-group; 1978.
Tajfel H, Turner JC. An integrative theory of inter-group conflict. In W. G. Austin and S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of inter-group relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. 1979;33–47.
Hogg M, Terry D, White K. A tale of two theories: A critical comparison of identity theory with social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly. 1995;58(4):255.
Hogg M, Williams K. From I do we: Social identity and the collective self. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, And Practice. 2000;4(1):81-97.
Tajfel H. Experiments in intergroup discrimination. Scientific American. 1970;223(5):96-102.
Tajfel H, Flament C, Billig M, Bundy R. Social categorization and inter-group behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology. 1971;1:149–178.
Dovidio J, Gaertner S, Validzic A. Intergroup bias: Status, differentiation, and a common in-group identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1998;75(1):109-120.
Sidanius J, Pratto F, Mitchell M. In-group identification, social dominance orientation, and differential intergroup social allocation. The Journal of Social Psychology. 1994;134(2):151-167.
Reynolds K, Turner J, Haslam S. When are we better than them and they are worse than us? A closer look at social discrimination in positive and negative domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2000;78(1): 64-80.
Islam G. Social identity theory. Springer-Verlag; 2014.
Hekler EB, Klasnja P, Froehlich JE, Buman MP. Mind the theoretical gap: Interpreting, using, and developing behavioural theory in HCI research. CHI 2013, Changing Perspectives, Paris, France. 2013;3307-3316.
Abstract View: 130 times
PDF Download: 145 times