Skip to main content
Log in

Product Ownership as a Moderator of Self-Congruity Effects

  • Published:
Marketing Letters Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A number of studies have investigated the self-congruity hypothesis, which predicts that consumers prefer products and brands whose images closely correspond to their own self-concepts. Support for this hypothesis has been equivocal, and investigators have explored methodological factors and moderators that might account for the discrepant results. In this research we introduce a new variable, product ownership status, as a theoretically important moderator of self-congruity effects. Our study demonstrates that product ownership does indeed moderate these effects, as the self-congruity effect observed under conditions of ownership was eliminated in the absence of ownership.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barone, Michael J., Terence A. Shimp, and David E. Sprott. (1997a). “The Mere Ownership Effect: A Robust Phenomenon?” Journal of Consumer Psychology 6(3), 257–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • _____, ______, and ______. (1997b). “A Commentary on the Mere Ownership Effect: 'More There Than Meets Their Eyes' or 'Less There Than They Would Have Us Believe?'” Journal of Consumer Psychology 6(3), 299–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beggan, James K. (1992). “On the Social Nature of Nonsocial Perception: The Mere Ownership Effect,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 62, 229–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • _____ and Scott T. Allison. (1997). “More There Than Meets Their Eyes: Support for the Mere-Ownership Effect,” Journal of Consumer Psychology 6(3), 285–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belch, George E. and E. Laird Landon, Jr. (1977). “Discriminant Validity of a Product-Anchored Self-Concept Measure,” Journal of Marketing Research 14 (May), 22–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belk, Russell W. (1988). “Possessions and the Extended Self,” Journal of Consumer Research 13 (September), 265–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Claiborne, C.B. and M. Joseph Sirgy. (1990). “Self-Congruity as a Model of Attitude Formation and Change: Conceptual Review and Guide for Future Research,” in Developments in Marketing Science, Vol. 13, B.J. Dunlap (Ed.), Cullowhee, NC: Academy of Marketing Science, 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolich, Ira J. (1969). “Congruence Relationships Between Self Images and Product Brands,” Journal of Marketing Research 6 (February), 80–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, Seymour. (1979). “The Stability of Behavior I: On Predicting Most of the People Much of the Time,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37 (July), 1097–1126.

    Google Scholar 

  • _____. (1980). “The Self-Concept: A Review and the Proposal of an Integrated Theory of Personality,” in Personality: Basic Issues and Current Research, Ervin Straub (Ed.), Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, Burleigh B. and Sidney J. Levy. (1955). “The Product and the Brand,” Harvard Business Review 33 (April), 33–39.

  • Green, Paul E., Arun Maheshwari, and Vithala R. Rao. (1969). “Self-Concept and Brand Preference: An Empirical Appication of Multidimensional Scaling,” Journal of the Market Research Society 11(4), 343–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong, Jae W. and George M. Zinkhan. (1995). “Self-Concept and Advertising Effectiveness: The Influence of Congruency, Conspicuousness, and Response Mode,” Psychology & Marketing 12(1), 53–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johar, J.S. and M. Joseph Sirgy. (1991). “Value-Expressive Versus Utilitarian Advertising Appeals: When and Why to Use Which Appeal,” Journal of Advertising 20(3), 23–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, Daniel, Jack L. Knetsch, and Richard H. Thaler. (1990). “Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem,” Journal of Political Economy 98, 1325–1348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kassarjian, Harold H. (1971). “Personality and Consumer Behavior: A Review,” Journal of Marketing Research 8 (November), 409–418.

    Google Scholar 

  • _____. (1978). “Presidential Address, 1977: Anthropomorphism and Parsimony,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 5, H.K. Hunt (Ed.), Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, xiii–xiv.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirmani, Amna, Sanjay Sood and Sheri Bridges. (1997). “The Ownership Effect in Consumer Responses to Brand Line Stretches,” Working Paper Series, Report No. 97–128, Marketing Science Institute.

  • Lastovicka, John L. and Erich A. Joachimsthaler. (1988). “Improving the Detection of Personality-Behavior Relationships in Consumer Research,” Journal of Consumer Research 14 (March), 583–587.

  • Landon, Jr., E. Laird. (1974). “Self Concept, Ideal Self Concept, and Consumer Purchase Intentions,” Journal of Consumer Research 1 (September), 44–51.

  • Levy, Sidney J. (1959). “Symbols for Sale,” Harvard Business Review 37(4), 117–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malhotra, Naresh K. (1988). “Self Concept and Product Choice: An Integrated Perspective,” Journal of Economic Psychology 9, 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markus, Hazel. (1977). “Self-Schemata and Processing Information About the Self,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 35(2), 63–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • _____, Jeanne Smith, and Richard L. Moreland. (1985). “Role of the Self-Concept in the Perception of Others,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 49(6), 1494–1512.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, Warren S. and Joseph Bellizzi. (1982). “An Analysis of Congruous Relationships between Self-Images and Product Images,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 10(4), 473–489.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, Morris. (1965). Society and the Adolescent Self-Image, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, Ivan. (1971). “Self-Concept and Brand Preference,” Journal of Business 44, 38–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudmin, Floyd. (1986). “Psychology of Ownership, Possession, and Property: A Selected Bibliography Since 1890,” Psychological Reports 58, 859–869.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlenker, Barry R. (1975). “Self-Presentation: Managing the Impression of Consistency When Reality Interferences with Self-Enhancement,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 32(6), 1030–1037.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, Sankar and Eric J. Johnson. (1997). “Mere Possession Effects without Possession in Consumer Choice,” Journal of Consumer Research 21 (June), 105–117.

  • Sirgy, M. Joseph. (1982a). “Self-Concept in Consumer Behavior: A Critical Review,” Journal of Consumer Research 9 (December), 287–300.

  • _____. (1982b). “Self-Image/Product-Image Congruity and Purchase Motivation: A Role-Playing Experiment,” Proceedings of the American Psychological Association 90.

  • _____. (1985). “Using Self-Congruity and Ideal Congruity to Predict Purchase Motivation,” Journal of Business Research 13, 195–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • _____, Dhruv Grewal, Tamara F. Mangleburg, Jae-ok Park, Kye-Sung Chon, C.B. Claiborne, J.S. Johar, and Harold Berkman. (1997). “Assessing the Predictive Validity of Two Methods of Measuring Self-Image Congruence,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 25(3), 229–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • _____, J.S. Johar, A.C. Samli, and C.B. Claiborne. (1991). “Self-Congruity Versus Functional Congruity: Predictors of Consumer Behavior,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 19(4), 363–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • _____ and A. Coskun Samli. (1985). “A Path Analytic Model of Store Loyalty Involving Self-Concept, Store Image, Geographic Loyalty, and Socioeconomic Status,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 13(3), 265–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thaler, Richard H. (1980). “Toward a Positive Theory of Consumer Choice,” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 1, 39–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallendorf, Melanie and Eric J. Arnould. (1988). ”'My Favorite Things': A Cross-Cultural Inquiry into Object Attachment, Possessiveness, and Social Linkage,” Journal of Consumer Research 14 (March), 531–547.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Barone, M.J., Shimp, T.A. & Sprott, D.E. Product Ownership as a Moderator of Self-Congruity Effects. Marketing Letters 10, 75–86 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008091225061

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008091225061

Navigation