Advertisement

Marketing Letters

, Volume 30, Issue 1, pp 45–56 | Cite as

Spending as protection: the need for safety increases preference for luxury products

  • Han Ma
  • Hannah K. Bradshaw
  • Narayan JanakiramanEmail author
  • Sarah E. Hill
Article
  • 134 Downloads

Abstract

We live in a world where physical threats, to ourselves and to our loved ones, are made salient every single day in the news and in the entertainment that we consume. Our research provides initial evidence that consumers survive in such a world by purchasing luxury brands to act as safety shields against these threats. This is because consumers derive symbolic safety value from luxury brands even when no functional safety features are relevant for the product category in which the brand operates. Thus, we hypothesize that when need for safety is likely salient (such as, after facing a physical safety threat), consumers are likely to show an increased preference for luxury brands, given the associations of luxury brands with safety. We provide empirical support for our proposed hypothesis, using four multi-method studies.

Keywords

Safety Luxury brands Consumer behavior 

Notes

Supplementary material

11002_2019_9480_MOESM1_ESM.docx (1.5 mb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 1.47 mb)

References

  1. Ajitha, S., & Sivakumar, V. J. (2017). Understanding the effect of personal and social value on attitude and usage behavior of luxury cosmetic brands. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 39(June), 103–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Altemeyer, B. (1988). Enemies of freedom: understanding right-wing authoritarianism. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  3. Amatulli, C., & Guido, G. (2011). Determinants of purchasing intention for fashion luxury goods in the Italian market. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 15(1), 123–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson, C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2006). Power, optimism, and risk-taking. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(4), 511–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berger, J., & Heath, C. (2008). Who drives divergence? Identity signaling, outgroup dissimilarity, and the abandonment of cultural tastes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(3), 593–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berger, J., & Ward, M. (2010). Subtle signals of inconspicuous consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(4), 555–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berthon, P., Pitt, L., Parent, M., & Berthon, J.-P. (2009). Aesthetics and ephemerality: Observing and preserving the luxury brand. California Management Review, 52(1), 45–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carr, H. L., & Vignoles, V. L. (2011). Keeping up with the joneses: Status projection as symbolic self-completion. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(4), 518–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Consumer Reports. (2017). Luxury car buying guide. Retrieved December 07, 2017, from https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/luxury-cars/buying-guide.
  10. Dion, D., & Borraz, S. (2017). Managing status: How luxury brands shape class subjectivities in the service encounter. Journal of Marketing, 81(5), 67–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dubois, D., & Ordabayeva, N. (2015). Social hierarchy, social status, and status consumption. In M. I. Norton, D. D. Rucker, & C. Lamberton (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of consumer psychology (pp. 332–367). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ehrlich, I., & Becker, G. S. (1972). Market insurance, self-insurance, and self-protection. Journal of Political Economy, 80(4), 623–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Esmaeilpour, F. (2015). The role of functional and symbolic brand associations on brand loyalty: a study on luxury brands. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 19(4), 384–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fionda, A. M., & Moore, C. M. (2009). The anatomy of the luxury fashion brand. Journal of Brand Management, 16(5–6), 347–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fiske, S. T., Dupree, C. H., Nicolas, G., & Swencionis, J. K. (2016). Status, power, and intergroup relations: The personal is the societal. Current Opinion in Psychology, 11, 44–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gao, L., Wheeler, S. C., & Shiv, B. (2009). The “shaken self”: Product choices as a means of restoring self-view confidence. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(1), 29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Godey, B., Pederzoli, D., Aiello, G., Donvito, R., Wiedmann, K., & Hennigs, N. (2013). A cross-cultural exploratory content analysis of the perception of luxury six countries. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 22(3), 229–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1464–1480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 197–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Griskevicius, V., & Kenrick, D. T. (2013). Fundamental motives: How evolutionary needs influence consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(3), 372–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Griskevicius, V., Goldstein, N. J., Mortensen, C. R., Cialdini, R. B., & Kenrick, D. T. (2006). Going along versus going alone: When fundamental motives facilitate strategic (non)conformity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(2), 281–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Han, D., Duhachek, A., & Rucker, D. D. (2015). Distinct threats, common remedies: How consumers cope with psychological threat. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25(4), 531–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hansen, J., & Wänke, M. (2011). The abstractness of luxury. Journal of Economic Psychology, 32(5), 789–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Heine, K. (2012). The concept of luxury brands. Retrieved February 26, 2019, from www.conceptofluxurybrands.com/concept-of-luxury-brands.
  25. Hirschman, E. C. (1990). Secular immortality and the American ideology of affluence. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(1), 31–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Huang, Z., & Wyer, R. S. (2015). Diverging effects of mortality salience on variety seeking: The different roles of death anxiety and semantic concept activation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 58, 112–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Huang, H., Hu, S., & Abdel-Aty, M. (2014). Indexing crash worthiness and crash aggressivity by major car brands. Safety Science, 62, 339–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kapferer, J.-N., & Bastien, V. (2009). The specificity of luxury management: Turning marketing upside down. Journal of Brand Management, 16(5–6), 311–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Keller, K. L. (2009). Managing the growth tradeoff: Challenges and opportunities in luxury branding. Journal of Brand Management, 16(5–6), 290–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kenrick, D. T., Neuberg, S. L., Griskevicius, V., Becker, D. V., & Schaller, M. (2010). Goal-driven cognition and functional behavior. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(1), 63–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kwon, J. H., Seo, Y., & Ko, D. (2016). Effective luxury-brand advertising: The ES–IF matching (entity–symbolic versus incremental–functional) model. Journal of Advertising, 45(4), 459–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lachman, M. E., & Weaver, S. L. (1998). The sense of control as a moderator of social class differences in health and well-being. Social Psychology, 74(3), 763–773.Google Scholar
  33. Lasaleta, J. D., Sedikides, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2014). Nostalgia weakens the desire for money. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(3), 713–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mandel, N., Rucker, D. D., Levav, J., & Galinsky, A. D. (2017). The compensatory consumer behavior model: How self-discrepancies drive consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 27(1), 133–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mayer, J. D., & Gaschke, Y. N. (1988). The Experience and Meta-Experience of Mood, 55(1), 102–111.Google Scholar
  36. Morley, J., & McMahon, K. (2011). Innovation, interaction, and inclusion: Heritage luxury brands in collusion with the consumer. In Fashion & Luxury: Between Heritage & Innovation: The 13th annual conference for the International Foundation of Fashion Technology Institutes (pp. 11–16). Paris: Institut Francais de la Mode.Google Scholar
  37. Neal, A., Griffin, M., & Hart, P. (2000). The impact of organizational climate on safety climate and individual behavior. Safety science., 34(1–3), 99–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nelissen, R. M. A., & Meijers, M. H. C. (2011). Social benefits of luxury brands as costly signals of wealth and status. Evolution and Human Behavior, 32(5), 343–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nueno, J. L., & Quelch, J. A. (1998). The mass marketing of luxury. Business Horizons, 41(6), 61–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ohman, A., & Mineka, S. (2001). Fears, phobias, and preparedness: Toward an evolved module of fear and fear. Learning, 108(3), 483–522.Google Scholar
  41. Patrick, V. M., & Hagtvedt, H. (2014). Luxury branding. In D. J. MacInnis, C. W. Park & J. R. Priester (Eds.), Handbook of brand relationships (pp. 267–280). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  42. Rucker, D. D., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Desire to acquire: Powerlessness and compensatory consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(2), 257–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Shachar, R., Erdem, T., Cutright, K. M., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2011). Brands: The opiate of the nonreligious masses? Marketing Science, 30(1), 92–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Shavitt, S. (1990). The role of attitude objects in attitude functions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26(2), 124–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vigneron, F., & Johnson, L. W. (2004). Measuring perceptions of brand luxury. Journal of Brand Management, 11(6), 484–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Vrkljan, B. H., & Anaby, D. (2011). What vehicle features are considered important when buying an automobile? An examination of driver preferences by age and gender. Journal of Safety Research, 42(1), 61–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. White, A. E., Kenrick, D. T., Li, Y. J., Mortensen, C. R., Neuberg, S. L., & Cohen, A. B. (2012). When nasty breeds nice: Threats of violence amplify agreeableness at national, individual, and situational levels. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(4), 622–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wilson-Doenges, G. (2000). An exploration of sense of community and fear of crime in gated communities. Environment and Behavior, 32(5), 597–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Young, S. G., Slepian, M. L., & Sacco, D. F. (2015). Sensitivity to perceived facial trustworthiness is increased by activating self-protection motives. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6(6), 607–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MarketingUniversity of Texas at ArlingtonArlingtonUSA
  2. 2.Texas Christian UniversityTexas CityUSA

Personalised recommendations