Journal Search Engine
Search Advanced Search Adode Reader(link)
Download PDF Export Citaion korean bibliography PMC previewer
ISSN : 2233-4165(Print)
ISSN : 2233-5382(Online)
The International Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business Vol.9 No.5 pp.73-81
DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.13106/ijidb.2018.vol9.no5.73.

The Effects of Types of Envy and Self Construal Level on Indulgence

Nak-Hwan Choi**
** Professor, Department of Business Administration, Chonbuk National University, Korea. Tel: +82-63-270-2998
E-mail: cnh@jbnu.ac.kr
April 15, 2018. April 30, 2018. May 15, 2018.

Abstract

Purpose - When indulging in hedonic items is construed as wasteful and evokes anticipated regret or guilt, consumers are more likely to seek reasons to justify their indulgence. Justification requirement for spending on indulgences over necessities could lead to the places of their finding the ways that mitigate the anticipated regret and guilt. However the previous research focusing on consumers’ own great effort leading to positive outcomes has not given much attention to other’s outcomes induced from his or her little or no efforts, by which consumers could feel envy. The guilt associated with consumers’ indulgence could vary according to envy type felt according to their evaluation about other’s outcomes and their self construal level. Current research explored the envy type’s effects on consumers’ spending on hedonic products, and moderation effects of self construal level on the envy type’s effects.
Research design, data, and methodology – 2(envy type: benign versus malicious) × 2(self construal level: high versus low) between-subjects design was employed. Data for empirical analysis were from 173 undergraduate participants. ANOVA was used to verify hypotheses.
Results – The tendency of choosing utilitarian product versus hedonic product was moderated by the envy type. The participants who felt benign envy were more likely to choose utilitarian product versus hedonic product than those who felt malicious envy were. And the tendency of benign envy-felt participants’ choosing hedonic versus utilitarian product was more weakened to those with lower-level self construal than to those with higher-level self construal. However the tendency of malicious envy-felt participants’ choosing hedonic versus utilitarian product was not moderated by the self construal level.
Conclusions – This research could advance the theory related to indulgent hedonic consumption by exploring the effects of self construal level and envy type on hedonic indulgence. In view of the results from current study, marketers should make efforts of communicating and selling utilitarian products to persuade consumers with lower-level construal when they feel benign envy to others. And they should conduct marketing acts for hedonic products to persuade consumers when they feel malicious envy to others.

JEL Classifications: C83, L81, M31, P46.

부러움의 유형과 자아해석의 고저수준에 따른 탐닉적 소비성향의 차이

최낙환

초록


Figure

Table

Reference

  1. Agrawal, N., & Wan, E. W. (2009). Regulating risk or risking regulation? Construal levels and depletion effects in the processing of health messages. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(3), 448-462. doi:10.1086/597331.
  2. Appelbaum, L. D. (2001). The influence of perceived deservingness on policy decisions regarding aid to the poor. Political Psychology, 22(3), 419-442. doi:10.1111/0162-895x.00248.
  3. Bers, S. A., & Rodin, J. (1984). Social comparison jealousy: A developmental and motivational study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(4), 766-779. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.47.4.766.
  4. Cavanaugh, L. A. (2014). Because I (don't) deserve it: How relationship reminders and deservingness influence consumer indulgence. Journal of Marketing Research, 51(2), 218-232. doi:10.1509/jmr.12.0133.
  5. Choi, N. H., & Dhakal, A. (2017). Roles of power state and message types on restaurant store brand attitude. Journal of Distribution Science, 15(10), 5-14.
  6. Corneo, G., & Jeanne, O. (2001). On relative wealth effects and long-run growth. Research in Economics, 55(4), 349-358. doi:10.1006/reec.2001.0260.
  7. Elster, J. (1991). Envy in social life. In J. Z. Richard (ed.), Strategy and Choices (pp.49-82). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117-140. doi:10.4135/9781412972017.n235.
  8. Freitas, A. L., Gollwitzer, P., & Trope, Y. (2004). The influence of abstract and concrete mindsets on anticipating and guiding others’ self-regulatory efforts. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(6), 739-752. doi:10.1016/s0022-1031(04)00041-1.
  9. Fujita, K., Trope, Y., Liberman, N., & Levin-Sagi, M. (2006). Construal levels and self-control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(3), 351-367. doi:10.1037/e633962013-107.
  10. Gibbons, F. X., & Buunk, B. P. (1999). Individual differences in social comparison: The development of a scale of social comparison orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(1), 129-142. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.76.1.129.
  11. Haws, K. L., & Poynor, C. (2008). Seize the day! Encouraging indulgence for the hyperopic consumer. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(4), 680-691. doi:10.1086/592129.
  12. Hoch, S. J., & Loewenstein, G. F. (1991). Timeinconsistent preferences and consumer self-control. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(4), 492-507. doi:10.1086/208573.
  13. Keinan, A., & Kivetz, R. (2008). Remedying hyperopia: The effects of self-control regret on consumer behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(6), 676-689. doi:10.1509/jmkr.45.6.676.
  14. Kivetz, R., & Simonson, I. (2002a). Earning the right to indulge: Effort as a determinant of customer preferences toward frequency program rewards. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(2), 155-170. doi:10.1509/jmkr.39.2.155.19084.
  15. Kivetz, R., & Simonson, I. (2002b). Self-control for the righteous: Toward a theory of precommitment to indulge. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(2), 199-217. doi:10.1086/341571.
  16. Kivetz, R., & Zheng, Y. (2006). Determinants of justification and self-control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135(4), 572-587. doi:10.1037/e683162011-077.
  17. Laran, J. (2010). Goal management in sequential choices: Consumer choices for others are more indulgent than personal choices. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(August), 304–314. doi:10.1086/652193.
  18. Larsen, C. A. (2005). How welfare regimes influence judgement of deservingness and public support for welfare policy. Retrieved April 3, 2018 from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Christian_ Larsen6/publication/228536884.
  19. Mia, M. A. (2017). An Overview of the Microfinance Sector in Bangladesh. East Asian Journal of Business Management, 7(2), 31-38.
  20. Lalonde, R. N. (1992). The dynamics of group differentiation in the face of defeat. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(3), 336-342. doi:10.1177/0146167292183010.
  21. Lee, J. H., Wu, R., & Fan, L. (2017). Influence on the Use Intention of User’s Traits in China Market. East Asian Journal of Business Management, 7(2), 21-29.
  22. Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (1998). The role of feasibility and desirability considerations in near and distant future decisions: A test of temporal construal theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(1), 5-18. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.5.
  23. Mehta, R., Zhu, R. J., & Meyers-Levy, J. (2014). When does a higher construal level increase or decrease indulgence? Resolving the myopia versus hyperopia puzzle. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(2), 475-488. doi:10.1086/676968.
  24. Miceli, M., & Castelfranchi, C. (2007). The envious mind. Cognition and Emotion, 21(3), 449-479. doi:10.1080/02699930600814735。
  25. Mukhopadhyay, A., & Johar, G. V. (2005). Where there is a will, Is there a way? Effects of lay theories of self-control on setting and keeping resolutions. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(4), 779-786. doi:10.1086/426611.
  26. Okada, E. M. (2005). Justification effects on consumer choice of hedonic and utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 42(1), 43-53. doi:10.1509/jmkr.42.1.43.56889.
  27. Parks, C. D., Rumble, A. C., & Posey, D. C. (2002). The effects of envy on reciprocation in a social dilemma. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(4), 509-520. doi:10.1177/0146167202287008.
  28. Parrott, W. G., & Smith, R. H. (1993). Distinguishing the experiences of envy and jealousy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(6), 906-920. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.64.6.906.
  29. Salovey, P., & Rodin, J. (1985). The heart of jealousy. Psychology Today, 19(9), 22-29.
  30. Schoeck, H. (1969). Envy: A Theory of Social Behavior. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
  31. Smith, R. H., & Kim, S. H. (2007). Comprehending envy. Psychological Bulletin, 133(1), 46-64. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.46.
  32. Suls, J., Martin, R., & Wheeler, L. (2002). Social comparison: Why, with whom, and with what effect?. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(5), 159-163. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00191.
  33. Strahilevitz, M., & Myers, J. G. (1998). Donations to charity as purchase incentives: How well they work may depend on what you are trying to sell. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(March), 434– 446. doi:10.1086/209519.
  34. Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2003). Temporal construal. Psychological Review, 11(3), 403-421. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403.
  35. Van de Ven, N., Zeelenberg, M., & Pieters, R. (2009). Leveling up and down: The experience of benign and malicious envy. Emotion, 9(3), 419-429. doi:10.1037/a0015669.
  36. Van de Ven, N., Zeelenberg, M., & Pieters, R. (2010). Appraisal patterns of benign and malicious envy and related social comparison emotions. Unpublished report, Tilburg University.
  37. Wilcox, K., Kramer, T., & Sen, S. (2011). Indulgence or self-control: A dual process model of the effect of incidental pride in indulgent choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(June), 151-163. doi:10.1086/657606.