Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Consumer Well-Being (CWB): The Effects of Self-Image Congruence, Brand-Community Belongingness, Brand Loyalty, and Consumption Recency

  • Published:
Applied Research in Quality of Life Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Consumer well-being (CWB) refers to the extent to which a particular consumer good or service creates an overall perception of the quality-of-life impact of that product. We developed a model that posits that CWB related to a specific product is heavily influenced by self-image congruence and brand-community belongingness. Self-image congruence is also hypothesized to influence CWB moderated by brand loyalty. Similarly, brand-community belongingness is hypothesized to influence CWB moderated by consumption recency. Our survey data of 275 undergraduate students reporting on their coffee consumption showed the following: (1) CWB was significantly predicted by brand loyalty and brand-community belongingness; (2) the effect of brand loyalty on CWB was moderated by self-image congruence, and (3) the effect of brand-community belongingness was moderated by consumption recency.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16, 74–94, (Spring).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Churchill, G. A. Jr. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16(1), 64–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day, R. L. (1978). Beyond social Indicators: Quality of life at the individual level. In F. D. Reynolds & H. C. Barksdale (Eds.), Marketing and the quality of life (pp. 11–18). Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, R. L. (1987). Relationships between life satisfaction and consumer satisfaction. In A. C. Samli (Ed.), Marketing and the quality-of-life interface (pp. 289–311). Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, S. (1980). The self-concept: A review and the proposal of an integrated theory of personality. In E. Staub (Ed.), Personality: Basic issues and current research. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C. (1992). A national customer satisfaction barometer: The Swedish experience. Journal of Marketing, 56, 6–21, (January).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C., Johnson, M. D., Anderson, E. W., Cha, J., & Bryant, B. E. (1996). The American Customer Satisfaction Index: Nature, purpose, and findings. Journal of Marketing, 60, 7–18, (October).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C. D., & Larcker, F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement errors. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39–50, (Feb).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: developing relationship theory in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 343–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hornik, J. (1984). Subjective vs. objective time measures: A note on the perception of time in consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(1), 615–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lecky, P. (1945). Self-consistency: A theory of personality. New York: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, D.-J., & Sirgy, M. J. (2004). Quality-of-life (QOL) marketing: Proposed antecedents and consequences. Journal of Macromarketing, 24, 44–58, (June).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leelakulthanit, O., Day, R., & Walters, R. (1991). Investigating the relationship between marketing and overall satisfaction with life in a developing country. Journal of Macromarketing, (Spring), 3–23.

  • Leigh, T. W., Peters, C., & Shelton, J. (2006). The consumer quest for authenticity: The multiplicity of meanings within the MG subculture of consumption. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(4), 481–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, S. J. (1959). Symbols for sale. Harvard Business Review, 37 (July-August), 117–124.

  • McAlexander, J., Schouten, J., & Koenig, H. F. (2002). Building brand community. Journal of Marketing, 66(1), 38–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muniz, A., & O’Guinn, T. (2001). Brand community. Journal of Consumer Research, 27, 412–432, (June).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, R. (1997). Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the customer. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, R. L. (1999). Whence consumer loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 63, 33–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, C. W., Jaworski, B. J., & MacInnis, D. J. (1986). Strategic brand concept-image management. Journal of Marketing, 50, 135–145, (October).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. M., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method variance in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K. R. (1935). Logik der Forschung. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samli, A. C., Sirgy, M. J., & Meadow, H. L. (1987). Measuring marketing contribution to quality of life. In A. C. Samli (Ed.), Marketing and quality-of-life interface (pp. 3–14). Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schouten, J., & McAlexander, J. (1995). Subcultures of consumption: An ethnography of the new bikers. Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 43–61, (June).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirgy, M. J. (1982). Self-concept in consumer behavior: A critical review. Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 287–300, (December).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirgy, M. J. (2001). Handbook of quality-of-life research: An ethical marketing perspective. Dordecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirgy, M. J., Grewal, D., Mangleburg, T. F., Park, J. O., Chon, K. S., Claiborne, C. B., Johar, J. S., & Berkman, H. (1997). Assessing the predictive validity of two methods of measuring self-image congruence. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25(1), 229–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirgy, M. J., Lee, D.-J., & Bae, J. (2006). Developing a subjective measure of Internet well-being: Nomological (predictive) validation. Social Indicators Research, 78(2), 205–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirgy, M. J., Lee, D.-J., & Rahtz, D. (2007). Research in consumer well-being (CWB): An overview of the field and introduction to the special issue. Journal of Macromarketing, 27(4), 341–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szymanski, D. M., & Henard, D. H. (2001). Customer satisfaction: A meta-analysis of the empirical evidence. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 29(1), 16–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Home Office (2003). Building a picture of community cohesion. London, UK.: The Home Office Community Cohesion Unit.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Marketing and Logistics Management, University of Minnesota, 3-150 Carlson School of Management, 321-19th Ave South, Minnapolis, MN, 55455, USA

    Stephan Grzeskowiak

  2. Marketing and Virginia Real Estate Research Fellow, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, USA

    M. Joseph Sirgy

Authors
  1. Stephan Grzeskowiak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Joseph Sirgy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephan Grzeskowiak.

APPENDIX 1. Scale Items and Reliabilities

APPENDIX 1. Scale Items and Reliabilities

Perceived Quality of Life Impact (AVE = 0.61; ρ = 0.83)

Does shopping at this coffee shop contribute to your quality of life?

  1. 1.

    This coffee shop satisfies my overall coffee needs.X

  2. 2.

    This coffee shop plays a very important role in my social well-being.

  3. 3.

    This coffee shop plays an important role in my leisure well-being.

  4. 4.

    This coffee shop plays an important role in enhancing the quality of my school-life.

Brand Community Belongingness (AVE = 0.53; ρ = 0.85)

How do you evaluate the social environment in this coffee shop?

  1. 1.

    I enjoy being part of the social activities in this coffee shop.

  2. 2.

    I would miss interacting with other patrons of this coffee shop if it was to go out of business.

  3. 3.

    Some of my best friends frequent this coffee shop.

  4. 4.

    I enjoy interacting with patrons at this coffee shop more than interacting with those of other coffee shops.

  5. 5.

    For me, the patrons of this coffee shop are one of the most important groups to which I belong.

Self-image Congruence

  • Brand-(AVE = 0.77; ρ = 0.87)

    Do the typical people who buy this brand of coffee match how you see yourself?

    1. 1.

      I can identify myself with the people who buy this brand of coffee.

    2. 2.

      The typical person who buys this brand of coffee matches how I see myself.

    3. 3.

      The image of this coffee brand is highly inconsistent with my self-image.XR

  • Retail-(AVE = 0.80; ρ = 0.89)

    Do the typical people who shop at this coffee store match how you see yourself?

    1. 1.

      I can identify myself with the people who shop at this store.

    2. 2.

      The typical person who comes to this store matches how I see myself.

    3. 3.

      The image of this store is highly inconsistent with my self-image.XR

  • Personnel- (AVE = 0.83; ρ = 0.91)

    Do the typical people who work at this coffee store match how you see yourself?

    1. 1.

      I can identify myself with the people who work at this store.

    2. 2.

      The typical person who works at this store matches how I see myself.

    3. 3.

      The image of this store’s personnel is highly inconsistent with my self-image.XR

Brand Loyalty

  • Behavior-(AVE = 0.80; ρ = 0.89)

    How often do you come to this coffee shop?

    1. 1.

      I am a ‘regular’ at this coffee shop.

    2. 2.

      I visit this coffee shop very frequently.

    3. 3.

      I always go to this coffee shop.X

  • Cognition-(AVE = 0.60; ρ = 0.81)

    Do you believe this coffee shop offers value?

    1. 1.

      This coffee shop is the best.

    2. 2.

      This coffee shop has high quality products.

    3. 3.

      Buying at this coffee shop will always satisfy my needs.

  • Affect-(AVE = 0.74; ρ = 0.89)

    How do you feel about this coffee shop?

    1. 1.

      I like it a lot.

    2. 2.

      I am very fond of it.

    3. 3.

      I love it.

  • Action-(AVE = 0.75; ρ = 0.90)

    Would you go out of your way for this coffee shop?

    1. 1.

      I would not switch coffee shops even if it was more convenient.

    2. 2.

      I would pay more at this coffee shop than at other ones.

    3. 3.

      I would wait longer at this coffee shop than at other ones.

Consumption Recency

How long ago did you visit this coffee shop? ______________ (days)

Notes:

X = scale item excluded during measure purification

R = reverse scaled item.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Grzeskowiak, S., Sirgy, M.J. Consumer Well-Being (CWB): The Effects of Self-Image Congruence, Brand-Community Belongingness, Brand Loyalty, and Consumption Recency. Applied Research Quality Life 2, 289–304 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-008-9043-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-008-9043-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation