Alternative Modes of Self‐Construal: Dimensions of Connectedness–Separateness and Advertising Appeals to the Cultural and Gender‐Specific Self

Abstract

This research examines how variations in consumers’ connectedness–separateness (C–S) self‐schema, which refers to an individual's perceptions of others as an extension of self or of the self as distinct from others, may explain cultural and gender‐level persuasion effects. Results from a cross‐cultural experiment demonstrate that a connected advertising appeal stressing interdependence and togetherness results in more favorable brand attitudes among Chinese and women consumers than does a separated appeal stressing independence and autonomy. Conversely, a separated appeal results in more favorable attitudes among U.S. and male consumers. Most important, the results suggest that the interactions detected between ad appeal and culture, as well as between ad appeal and gender, are mediated by distinct dimensions of consumers’ C–S. The self‐orientation dimension of C–S is shown to account for cultural‐level persuasion effects, whereas gender‐level effects are attributable to the dependence dimension. Thus, individual differences in these dimensions compose an important factor in explaining cultural and gender variations in consumers’ responses.

Effects of Culture, Gender, and Moral Obligations on Responses to Charity Advertising Across Masculine and Feminine Cultures

“…Similar1 y, research on gender often assumes traditional sex roles for women and men. Findings show that women across cultures prefer other-focused or altruistic appeals and men prefer self-focused or egoistic appeals (e.g., Andsager et al, 2002;Brunel & Nelson, 2000;Wang et al, 2000). Our research challenges these views.…”

“…These perceptions are often considered to be stable (Miller, 2001). Yet, Gardner, Gabriel, and Lee (1999) found that using priming techniques to shift the relative interdependence of self-construals increased United States individuals' sense of obligation to help others "in ways that were once be-'Appeals that focus on individuals' concerns (Lau-Gesk, 2003) have been referred to as individualistic (Andsager, Austin, & Pinkleton, 2002;Han & Shavitt, 1994;Shavitt et al, 1997;Zhang & Gelb, 1996), separated (Wang, Bristol, Mowen, & Chakraborty, 2000), or ego-focused (Aaker & Williams, 1998). Other-focused appeals have also been referred to as collectivist (Andsager et al, 2002;Han & Shavitt, 1994;Shavitt et al, 1997;Zhang & Gelb, 1996), connected (Wang et al, 2000), or interpersonally focused (Lau-Gesk, 2003).…”

Self-Construal Scales Lack Validity

“…Kanagawa et al's (2001) data, for example, suggested that cultural differences may be more evident in selfconcept stability-flexibility than in the specific content of the self. Other research (e.g., Kashima et al, 1995;Wang et al, 2000) suggested that cultural differences are most readily seen along autonomy and agency dimensions, whereas a relational dimension reflects gender differences more than cultural differences. Cross et al (2000) recently distinguished between two types of interdependent self-construal: collectivism-based interdependence (in which the group or situation dictates behavior) and relational interdependence (in which the self is defined in terms of relationships with close others).…”

Who I am and how I think: The impact of self‐construal on the roles of internal and external reference prices in price evaluations

“…Previous research has shown that self-construal influences the perceived separateness or connectedness of self to others (Wang, Bristol, Mowen & Chakraborty, 2000). According to the procedural application effect of the SPI model (Kühnen et al, 2001), when self-construal, one kind or another, is made salient, the corresponding cognitive style is more likely to be activated and affect subsequent judgments.…”