Leave or stay? The role of self‐construal on luxury brand attitudes and purchase intentions in response to brand rejection

Abstract

Marketing managers of luxury brands often use exclusionary marketing tactics that can lead consumers to feel rejected by those brands. In our research, we examine whether consumers with independent self‐construals are more likely than those with interdependent self‐construals to downgrade their evaluations of a luxury brand when feeling rejected by it. Results of three studies support this hypothesis. Using a manipulation of brand rejection with hypothetical future scenarios, study 1 provides evidence that consumers with a higher chronic independent (versus interdependent) self‐construal are more likely to lower their brand attitudes and purchase intentions of a desirable luxury brand that rejects them. Study 2 replicates the moderating effect of self‐construal at a cultural level, comparing Chinese and American respondents. Study 3 again compares self‐construals at a cultural level, but manipulates brand rejection by asking respondents to recall a prior rejection experience. Importantly, Study 3 reveals a mediating influence of self‐brand connection. That is, independents, when recalling an experience of luxury brand rejection, were more likely than interdependents to report a decrease in their feelings of connectedness to the rejecting brand, which in turn resulted in lower attitudes toward the brand and lower purchase intentions. Our findings provide luxury brand marketers with insights for both niche branding strategy design and cross‐cultural customer relationship management.

Social exclusion and consumer responses: A comprehensive review and theoretical framework

“…Aghakhani and Main (2019); Baek et al (2018); Baek et al (2019); Bozkurt and Gligor (2019); Chen et al (2017); Dommer et al (2013); Duclos et al (2013); El Hazzouri et al (2017); Gao and Mattila (2016); Guèvremont and Grohmann (2016); Han et al (2015); Hu et al (2018); Jiang et al (2018); Jiang et al (2020); Jiao and Wang (2018); Kandaurova and Lee (2019); Khalifa and Shukla (2017); Kim, Park, et al (2020); Lee et al (2017); Lee and Shrum (2012); Liang et al (2018); Liang and Chang (2016); Liu et al (2021); Loveland et al (2010); Lu and Sinha (2017); Mead et al (2011); Mourey et al (2017); Newman et al (2019); Sinha and Lu (2019); Sinha and Wang (2013); Su et al (2017); Su et al (2019); Tezer and Bodur (2020); Thomas and Saenger (2020); Tunçel and Kavak (n.d.); Vinuales and Thomas (2021); Wan et al (2014); Wang et al (2012); Wang and Ding (2017); Wang and Lalwani (2019); Ward and Dahl (2014); Wu and Dodoo (2020); Xie, Chen and Guo (2020); Xu and Jin (2020); Yang et al (2020); Yi et al (2017)…”

“…Moving forward, it was found that the majority of the reviewed studies were based on responses from North America and China. A few studies have captured responses from multiple countries with the help of online consumer panels like Amazon Mturk (Han et al, 2015;Wang & Lalwani, 2019;Ward & Dahl, 2014;Yi et al, 2017) or through cross cultural studies to compare consumption responses across contrasting cultures (Lee et al, 2017;Liu et al, 2021). Other populations, specifically of the South Asian subcontinent, have rarely been touched upon, and need urgent attention.…”

“…Social exclusion can also be caused by external factors not dependent on an individual's attributes, such as access to benefits in an organization based on hierarchy. Within the consumption context, exclusionary experiences can be perpetrated through various external sources like markets (Castilhos, 2019; Saren et al, 2019), brands (Hu et al, 2018; Liu et al, 2021; Wang & Ding, 2017; Ward & Dahl, 2014), the production off‐shoring strategy of firms (Felix & Fırat, 2019), retail or service settings (Sinha & Lu, 2019), employees like sales personnel or frontline sales employees (Sinha & Lu, 2019; Ward & Dahl, 2014), fellow consumers (Benos et al, 2018; Hémar‐Nicolas & Rodhain, 2017; Zhou et al, 2019) and consumption trends (Isaksen & Roper, 2012). Also, exclusionary promotional practices extend preferential treatment to a selected group of consumers, thereby generating feelings of being excluded among the non‐recipient consumers (Newman et al, 2019).…”

The mediating role of customer participation in the relationship between customer attitude and customer citizenship behavior of online shopping customers

“…Brand preference is positively influenced by customer attitudes (Hwang & Ok, 2013). Consumer attitudes toward luxury brands have a significant impact on customer intention, which in turn has a positive impact on luxury brand actual usage (Liu et al, 2021). Consumer attitudes are important in predicting brand attachment, willingness to pay more, and brand value (Hwang & Hyun, 2017).…”

(Mis)managing overstock in luxury: Burning inventory and brand trust to the ground

“…Luxury goods have been important objects of study in the most diverse areas, with the reasons driving their consumption being among the main topics researched (e.g., Kastanakis & Balabanis, 2012; Tseng et al, 2021). The investigation of consumers' choices (Kauppinen‐Räisänen et al, 2018), feelings (Amatulli et al, 2018), and reactions (Liu et al, 2021) gained in prominence, as the search for superior quality (Wiedmann et al, 2009) and social status (Balabanis & Stathopoulou, 2021) support – at least partially – the high value attributed to luxury brands (Stokburger‐Sauer & Teichmann, 2013). Whereas studying the psychological (Prestini & Sebastiani, 2021), economic (Zhan & He, 2012), and sociological (Wong & Ahuvia, 1998) aspects that influence the demand for luxury is critical, understanding those factors that may harm it is equally important.…”