“Buying status” by choosing or rejecting luxury brands and their counterfeits

  • Stephanie Geiger-Oneto
  • Betsy D. Gelb
  • Doug Walker
  • James D. Hess
Original Empirical Research

Abstract

Even in difficult economic times, many consumers consider the social implications of the goods they select and therefore take into account whether those goods carry a luxury brand label—which for some will be authentic, for some counterfeit. While previous research has investigated influences on the authentic vs. counterfeit choice, this study adds a third possibility: rejecting both types of luxury brands to show that one has better claims to status than “buying the label.” This study tests a model of three alternative brand type choice processes and finds support for the importance of status considerations in the selection or rejection of luxury brands.

Keywords

Status consumption Counterfeit goods Brand/product choice Luxury goods 

References

  1. Ai, C., & Norton, E. C. (2003). Interaction terms in logit and probit models. Economics Letters, 80, 123–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bagozzi, R., & Yi, Y. (2012). Specification, evaluation, and interpretation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40, 8–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baltas, G., & Doyle, P. (2001). Random utility models in marketing research: a survey. Journal of Business Research, 51, 115–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 139–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berger, J., & Ward, M. K. (2010). Subtle signals of inconspicuous consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(4), 555–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berger, J., Rosenholtz, S., & Zelditch, M. (1977). Status organizing processes. Annual Review of Sociology, 6, 479–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bernthal, M. J., Crockett, D., & Rose, R. (2005). Credit cards and lifestyle facilitators. Journal of Consumer Research, 32, 130–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Braun, O. L., & Wicklund, R. A. (1989). Psychological antecedents of conspicuous consumption. Journal of Economic Psychology, 10(2), 161–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brooks, D. (2001). Bobos in paradise: The new upper class and how they got there. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  11. Burton, S., Lichtenstein, D., Netemeyer, R. G., & Garretson, J. (1998). A scale for measuring attitude toward private label products and an examination of psychological correlates and purchase behaviors. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26, 293–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chao, A., & Schor, J. B. (1998). Empirical tests of status consumption: evidence from women’s cosmetics. Journal of Economic Psychology, 19, 107–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Charles, K. K., Hurst, E. & Roussanov, N. (2007). Conspicuous consumption and race. NBER Working Paper Series no. 13392; Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved January 7, 2009 from http://www.nber.org/papers/w13392.
  14. Chatpaiboon, P. (2004). Designer knockoffs. BT Magazine, Fall, Retrieved online: http://businesstoday.org/magazine/issues/1/6.php.
  15. Cheng, S., & Long, J. S. (2007). Testing for IIA in the multinomial logit model. Sociological Methods & Research, 35(4), 583–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Clifford, S. (2010). In a downturn, even knockoffs go downscale. New York Times, August 1, 1, 4.Google Scholar
  17. Cohen, R. (2005). Acceptable knockoffs. New York Times Magazine, May 22, 24.Google Scholar
  18. Commuri, S. (2009). The impact of counterfeiting on genuine-item consumers’ brand relationships. Journal of Marketing, 73, 86–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cordell, V., Wongtada, N., & Dieschnick, R. L. (1996). Counterfeit purchase intentions: the role of lawfulness attitudes and product traits as determinants. Journal of Business Research, 35, 41–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cronbach, L. J. (1987). Statistical tests for moderator variables. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 51–57.Google Scholar
  21. Davis, J. A., Smith, T. W., & Marsden, J. A. (2009). General social surveys cumulative codebook:1972:2008. Chicago: NORC.Google Scholar
  22. Driskell, J., & Mullen, B. (1990). Status, expectations and behavior: a meta-analytic review and test of the theory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16(3), 541–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Eastman, J., Goldman, R. & Flynn, L.R. (1999). Status consumption in consumer behavior: scale development and validation. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Summer, 41–52.Google Scholar
  24. Echambadi, R., & Hess, J. D. (2007). Mean-centering does not alleviate collinearity problems in moderated multiple regression models. Marketing Science, 26(3), 438–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Emerson, R. (1962). Power-dependence relations. American Sociological Review, 27, 31–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Frank, R. (1985). The demand for unobservable and other nonpositional goods. American Economic Review, 75(1), 101–116.Google Scholar
  28. Gelb, B. D. (2010). Pay more get more? What buyers say. Journal of Business Strategy, 31(5), 59–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Greene, W. H. (2003). Econometric analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  30. Hess, J.D., Hu, Y & Blair, E (2011). On testing moderation effects in experiments using binary logistic regression. (Working Paper). University of Houston.Google Scholar
  31. Holt, D. (1998). Does cultural capital structure American consumption? Journal of Consumer Research, 25, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Huberman, B., Loch, C., & Onculer, A. (2004). Status as a valued resource. Social Psychology Quarterly, 67(1), 103–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Leibenstein, H. (1950). Bandwagon, snob and Veblen effects in the theory of consumers’ demand. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 64, 183–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lichenstein, D., Ridgway, N. M., & Netemeyer, R. G. (1993). Price perceptions and consumer shopping behavior: a field study. Journal of Marketing Research, 30, 234–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lin, N. (1990). Social resources and social mobility: A structural theory of status attainment. In R. Breiger (Ed.), Social mobility and social structure (pp. 247–271). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Lin, N. (1994). Action, social resources and the emergence of social structures. In B. Markovsky, E. Lawler, J. O’Brien, & K. Heimer (Eds.), Advances in group processes vol. 11 (pp. 67–85). Greenwich: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  37. Lovaglia, M. (1994). Relating power to status. Advances in Group Processes, 11, 87–111.Google Scholar
  38. Mason, R. S. (1981). Conspicuous consumption: A study of exceptional consumer behavior. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  39. McCracken, G. (1986). Culture and consumption: a theoretical account of the structure and movement of the cultural meanings of consumer goods. Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 71–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. McCracken, G. (2005). Culture and consumption II. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Mick, D. (1996). Are studies of dark side variables confounded by socially desirable responding? The case of materialism. Journal of Consumer Research, 23, 106–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Miller, G. (2009). Spent. New York: Viking Penguin.Google Scholar
  43. Milner, M. (2004). Freaks, geeks and cool kids: American teenagers, schools, and the culture of consumption. Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Nakao, K., & Treas, J. (1994). Updating occupational prestige and socioeconomic scores: how the new measures measure up. Sociological Methodology, 24, 1–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 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, 343–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. New York Times. (2005). Class matters. New York: Henry Holt and Company.Google Scholar
  47. Nia, A., & Zaichkowsky, J. L. (2000). Do counterfeits devalue the ownership of luxury brands? The Journal of Product and Brand Management, 9(7), 485–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. O’Cass, A., & Frost, H. (2002). Status brands: examining the effects of non-product-related brand associations on status and conspicuous consumption. The Journal of Product and Brand Management, 11(2), 67–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. O’Cass, A., & McEwen, H. (2004). Exploring consumer status and conspicuous consumption. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 4(1), 25–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. O’Guinn, T. C., & Shrum, L. J. (1997). The role of television in the construction of consumer reality. Journal of Consumer Research, 23, 278–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Penz, E., & Stottinger, B. (2005). Forget the “real” thing - take the copy! An exploratory model for the volitional purchase of counterfeit products. Advances in Consumer Research, 32, 568–575.Google Scholar
  52. Postrel, V. (2008). Inconspicuous consumption. The Atlantic (July-August), 148 ff.Google Scholar
  53. Ridgeway, C., & Erickson, K. (2000). Creating and spreading status beliefs. The American Journal of Sociology, 106, 579–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rose, J. (2003). Knockoffs—who is it? The Arizona Republic, January 15. Retrieved online from http://www.azcentral.com/style/articles/0116knockoffs.html.
  55. Rosen, C. (2008). The bare necessities: marketing luxury goods in a bad economy. Wall Street Journal, December 19, W11.Google Scholar
  56. Rucker, D. D., & Galinksy, A. (2009). Conspicuous consumption versus utilitarian ideals: how different levels of power shape consumer behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 549–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Saad, G. (2006). Applying evolutionary psychology in understanding the Darwinian roots of consumption phenomena. Managerial and Decision Economics, 27(2–3), 189–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Saad, G., & Gill, T. (2000). Applications of evolutionary psychology in marketing. Psychology and Marketing, 17(12), 1005–1034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Scitovsky, T. (1992). The joyless economy: The psychology of human satisfaction and consumer dissatisfaction. New York: Oxford University.Google Scholar
  60. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 94–109). Monterey: Brooks-Cole.Google Scholar
  61. Thye, S. (2000). A status value theory of power in exchange relations. American Sociological Review, 65(3), 407–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Tom, G., Garibaldi, B., Zeng, Y., & Pilcher, J. (1998). Consumer demand for counterfeit goods. Psychology and Marketing, 15(5), 405–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Train, K. (2004). Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Trebay, G. (2009). When Cartier was just for the likes of Liz. New York Times, April 26, ST 8.Google Scholar
  65. Trigg, A. (2001). Veblen, Bourdieu, and conspicuous consumption. Journal of Economic Issues, 35(1), 99–115.Google Scholar
  66. Veblen, T. (1899). The theory of the leisure class. New York: Mentor Book.Google Scholar
  67. Wang, J., & Wallendorf, M. (2006). Materialism, status signaling, and product satisfaction. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(4), 494–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wee, C., Tan, S., & Cheok, K. (1995). Non-price determinants of intention to purchase counterfeit goods. International Marketing Review, 12(6), 19–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wilcox, K., Kim, H. M., & Sen, S. (2009). Why do consumers buy counterfeit luxury brands? Journal of Marketing Research, 46(2), 247–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wood, J. V. (1989). Theory and research concerning social comparisons of personal attributes. Psychological Bulletin, 106(2), 231–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wu, J. (2001). The impact of status insecurity on credit card spending. (Working paper) University of Houston.Google Scholar
  72. Wyatt, R., Gelb, B. D., & Geiger-Oneto, S. (2008). How advertising reinforces minority consumers’ preference for national brands. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 30(1), 61–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Young, J., Nunes, J. C., & Dreze, X. (2010). Signaling status with luxury goods: the role of brand prominence. Journal of Marketing, 74, 15–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of Marketing Science 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephanie Geiger-Oneto
    • 1
  • Betsy D. Gelb
    • 2
  • Doug Walker
    • 3
  • James D. Hess
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Management and MarketingUniversity of WyomingLaramieUSA
  2. 2.Larry J. Sachnowitz Professor of Marketing & Entrepreneurship, Bauer College of BusinessUniversity of HoustonHoustonUSA
  3. 3.College of Business, Department of MarketingIowa State UniversityAmesUSA
  4. 4.C.T. Bauer Professor of Marketing ScienceUniversity of HoustonHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations