Status Seeking and Luxury Consumption: The Mediating Roles of Brand Identity and Social Value, and the Moderating Effect of Price Sensitivity
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61173/76rpwk63Keywords:
Status Seeking, Brand Identity, Social Value, Price Sensitivity, Purchase IntentionAbstract
The study explores how status-seeking motivations influence consumer purchase intentions in the context of luxury brand sub-brands, focusing on the mediating roles of brand identity and social value, and examining the moderating effect of price sensitivity. Drawing from social cognitive theory, the research highlights how personal and social factors shape luxury consumption behavior. Through a survey of 402 Chinese consumers, results indicate that status seeking positively impacts purchase intention, with brand identity and social value acting as significant mediators. Furthermore, price sensitivity is shown to moderate these relationships, influencing how brand identity and social value affect purchase intention. This study enriches the literature on luxury consumption by elucidating the pathways through which social value and brand identity connect status-driven motivations to purchasing behavior and provides actionable insights for marketers in segmenting consumers based on price sensitivity to optimize sub-brand positioning. Limitations and directions for future research are highlighted.References
[1] Danziger, E. (2005). The Eye of the Beholder: How Linguistic Categorization Affects” Natural” Experience.
[2] Kapferer, J. N., & Bastien, V. (2017). The specificity of luxury management: Turning marketing upside down. Advances in luxury brand management, 65-84.
[3] Jose Luis Nueno, & John A. Quelch (1998) The mass marketing of luxury. Business Horizons, 61-68.
[4] Walley, A. Y., Xuan, Z., Hackman, H. H., Quinn, E., Doe- Simkins, M., Sorensen-Alawad, A., ... & Ozonoff, A. (2013). Opioid overdose rates and implementation of overdose education and nasal naloxone distribution in Massachusetts: interrupted time series analysis. Bmj, 346.
[5] Nia, A., & Lynne Zaichkowsky, J. (2000). Do counterfeits devalue the ownership of luxury brands?. Journal of product & brand management, 9(7), 485-497.
[6] Bandura, A. (1986). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual review of psychology, 52(1), 1-26.
[7] Aaker, J. (1997). Dimensions of brand personally. Journal of Marketing Research, 34, 342-352.
[8] Danziger, E. (2005). The Eye of the Beholder: How Linguistic Categorization Affects” Natural” Experience.
[9] Kapferer, J. N. & Bastien, V. (2009) The Luxury Strategy. London: Kogan Page.
[10] Anderson, C., Hildreth, J. A. D., & Howland, L. (2015). Is the desire for status a fundamental human motive? A review of the empirical literature. Psychological bulletin, 141(3), 574.
[11] Ridgeway, C. L. (2014). Why status matters for inequality. American sociological review, 79(1), 1-16.
[12] Swaminathan, V., Page, K. L., & Gürhan-Canli, Z. (2007). “My” brand or “our” brand: The effects of brand relationship dimensions and self-construal on brand evaluations. Journal of consumer research, 34(2), 248-259.
[13] Wiedmann, K. P., Hennigs, N., & Siebels, A. (2009). Value‐ based segmentation of luxury consumption behavior. Psychology & Marketing, 26(7), 625-651.
[14] Vigneron, F., & Johnson, L. W. (2004). Measuring brand luxury perceptions. The Journal of Brand Management, 11(6), 484-508.
[15] Goldsmith, A. (2005). Wireless communications. Cambridge university press.
[16] Farzin, M., Sadeghi, M., Fattahi, M., & Eghbal, M. R. (2022). Effect of social media marketing and eWOM on willingness to pay in the etailing: Mediating role of brand equity and brand identity. Business Perspectives and Research, 10(3), 327-343.
[17] Kunz, J., May, S., & Schmidt, H. J. (2020). Sustainable luxury: Current status and perspectives for future research. Business Research, 13, 541-601.
[18] Sindhwani, R., Afridi, S., Kumar, A., Banaitis, A., Luthra, S., & Singh, P. L. (2022). Can industry 5.0 revolutionize the wave of resilience and social value creation? A multi-criteria framework to analyze enablers. Technology in Society, 68, 101887.
[19] Harris, Lloyd C., and Mark MH Goode. “Online servicescapes, trust, and purchase intentions.” Journal of services marketing24.3 (2010): 230-243.
[20] Dwivedi, Yogesh K., et al. “Setting the future of digital and social media marketing research: Perspectives and research propositions.” International journal of information management59 (2021): 102168.
[21] Davis, James R., and Christine Reyna. “Seeing red: How perceptions of social status and worth influence hostile attributions and endorsement of aggression.” British journal of social psychology 54.4 (2015): 728-747.
[22] Paskov, Marii, Klarita Gërxhani, and Herman G. Van De Werfhorst. “Giving up on the Joneses? The relationship between income inequality and status-seeking.” European Sociological Review 33.1 (2017): 112-123.
[23] Yang, J., Ma, J., Arnold, M., & Nuttavuthisit, K. (2018). Global identity, perceptions of luxury value and consumer purchase intention: a cross-cultural examination. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 35(5), 533-542.
[24] Natarajan, T., Balasubramanian, S. A., & Kasilingam, D. L. (2017). Understanding the intention to use mobile shopping applications and its influence on price sensitivity. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 37, 8-22.
[25] Kline, R. B. (2023). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford publications.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 by the authors.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
