5.3 Limitations and conclusion By integrating the ABC model in attitude, identity and social identity theory, factors affecting purchase intention for luxury fashion have been empirically examined. Self-identity predicts affect-based attitudes (i.e. passive engagement and active engagement) and social identity predicts cognition-based attitude (i.e. attitude toward celebrity endorsement). Both attitudes are important antecedents to enhancing brand attractiveness which positively affects young consumers’ purchase intention. Nevertheless, there are some limitations to this study. First, our research focuses only on Generation Z in Hong Kong; thus, future studies might consider samples of Generation Z in other cities or countries, such as Japan, Singapore or Korea, allowing a more comprehensive understanding of young consumers. Second, the results of this study suggest that attitude toward celebrity endorsement has an impact on consumers’ perception of brand attractiveness and in turn affects future purchase intention. Future research could further examine the factors influencing consumers’ attitudes toward celebrity endorsement. The role of celebrity endorsement in the young consumers’ purchase intention of luxury fashion should be further examined. With no doubt, young consumers of Generation Z become the world’s most influential consumers, and social media is an essential source for the ABC and zoomers to look for luxury fashion. Studies on these segments’ purchase behavior should be highly important. References Abbott, M., Holland, R., Giacomin, J. and Shackleton, J. (2009), “Changing affective content in brand and product attributes”, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 17-26. Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 179-211. Ajzen, I. (2015), “The theory of planned behaviour is alive and well, and not ready to retire: a commentary on Sniehotta, Presseau, and Araujo-Soares”, Health Psychology Review, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 131-137. Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1980), Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs. Ajzen, I. and Sheikh, S. (2013), “Action versus inaction: anticipated affect in the theory of planned behavior”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 155-162. Anand, P., Holbrook, M.B. and Stephens, D. (1988), “The formation of affective judgments: the cognitiveaffective model versus the independence hypothesis”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 386-391. Armitage, C.J. and Conner, M. (2001), “Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: a meta-analytic review”, British Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 471-499. Aw, E.C.X. and Labrecque, L.I. (2020), “Celebrity endorsement in social media contexts: understanding the role of parasocial interactions and the need to belong”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 37 No. 7, pp. 895-908. Bain and Company (2021), “Luxury market rebounds in 2021, set to return to historic growth trajectory”, available at: www.bain.com/about/media-center/press-releases/2021/luxury-report-2021/(accessed 20 May 2022). Bhatt, N., Jayswal, R.M. and Patel, J.D. (2013), “Impact of celebrity endorser’s source credibility on attitude towards advertisements and brands”, South Asian Journal of Management, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 74-95. Bian, Q. and Forsythe, S. (2012), “Purchase intention for luxury brands: a cross cultural comparison”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 65 No. 10, pp. 1443-1451. Caraka, R.E., Noh, M., Lee, Y., Toharudin, T., Tyasti, A.E., Royanow, A.F., Dewata, D.P., Gio, P.U., Basyuni, M. and Pardamean, B. (2022), “The impact of social media influencers Raffi Ahmad and Nagita Slavina on tourism visit intentions across millennials and zoomers using a hierarchical likelihood structural equation model”, Sustainability, Vol. 14 No. 1, p. 524. Chatzisarantis, N.L., Hagger, M.S., Wang, C. and Thøgersen-Ntoumani, C. (2009), “The effects of social identity and perceived autonomy support on health behaviour within the theory of planned behaviour”, Current Psychology, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 55-68. VOL. 24 NO. 1 2023 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 127
Cheah, J.-H., Ting, H., Cham, T.H. and Memon, M.A. (2019), “The effect of selfie promotion and celebrity endorsed advertisement on decision-making processes: a model comparison”, Internet Research, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 552-577. Chen, X., Li, X., Yao, D. and Zhou, Z. (2019), “Seeking the support of the silent majority: are lurking users valuable to UGC platforms?”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 47 No. 6, pp. 986-1004. Chen, H., Wang, Y. and Qiao, F. (2021), “Informing, reinforcing, and referencing: Chinese male consumers’ interpretation of luxury advertising and luxury brands’ presence on Chinese social media”, Journal of Global Marketing, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 38-55. Cheung, M.L., Pires, G. and Rosenberger, P.J. III (2020), “Exploring synergetic effects of social-media communication and distribution strategy on consumer-based brand equity”, Asian Journal of Business Research, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 126-149. Chin, W.W. (1998), “The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling”, Modern Methods for Business Research, Vol. 295 No. 2, pp. 295-336. Chin, W., Cheah, J.-H., Liu, Y., Ting, H., Lim, X.-J. and Cham, T.H. (2020), “Demystifying the role of causal-predictive modeling using partial least squares structural equation modeling in information systems research”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 120 No. 12, pp. 2161-2209. Chuah, S.H.-W., Aw, E.C.-X. and Tseng, M.-L. (2020), “The missing link in the promotion of customer engagement: the roles of brand fan page attractiveness and agility”, Internet Research, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 587-612. CivicScience (2016), “Millennials vs Gen Z”, available at: https://civicscience.com/wp-content/uploads/ 2016/08/Millennials-vs.-Gen-Z.pdf (accessed 10 May 2022). CN Logistics International Holdings Ltd (2020), “Challenges and opportunities facing the luxury industry”, available at: www.cnlogistics.com.hk/doc/2020%20DEC%20ISSUE_Challenges%20and%20Opportunities% 20Facing%20the%20Luxury%20Industry_new.pdf(accessed 6 September 2022). Cuomo, M.T., Foroudi, P., Tortora, D., Hussain, S. and Melewar, T.C. (2019), “Celebrity endorsement and the attitude towards luxury brands for sustainable consumption”, Sustainability, Vol. 11 No. 23, pp. 1-21. Curras-P erez, R., Bign e-Alcan ˜iz, E. and Alvarado-Herrera, A. (2009), “The role of self-definitional principles in consumer identification with a socially responsible company”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 89 No. 4, pp. 547-564. Disosa, D. (2021), “Luxury fashion market analysis size key player, statistics, regional demand, forecast”, available at: www.viv.net/articles/blog/luxury-fashion-market-analysis-size-key-player-statistics-regionaldemand-forecast (accessed 20 February 2022). Eisend, M. and Langner, T. (2010), “Immediate and delayed advertising effects of celebrity endorsers’ attractiveness and expertise”, International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 527-546. Elbedweihy, A.M., Jayawardhena, C., Elsharnouby, M.H. and Elsharnouby, T.H. (2016), “Customer relationship building: the role of brand attractiveness and consumer–brand identification”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 8, pp. 2901-2910. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G. and Buchner, A. (2007), “G power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences”, Behavior Research Methods, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 175-191. Fernandes, T. and Castro, A. (2020), “Understanding drivers and outcomes of lurking vs posting engagement behaviours in social media-based brand communities”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 36 Nos 7/8, pp. 660-681. Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1977), “Belief, Attitude, Intention, Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research”, Philosophy and Rhetoric, Addison-Wesley Pub, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 310-321. Grand View Research (2019), “Luxury apparel market size, share & trends analysis report by end-user (men, women), by distribution channel (offline retail, online retail), by region, and segment forecasts, 2019-2025”, available at: www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/luxury-apparel-market(accessed 20 May 2022). Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N.P. and Ray, S. (2021), “Evaluation of reflective measurement models”, A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Using R: A Workbook, Springer Nature, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, pp. 75-90. Heine, K. (2010), “The personality of luxury fashion brands”, Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 154-163. PAGE 128 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 24 NO. 1 2023
Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2015), “A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 115-135. Ho, H.-C., Lado, N. and Rivera-Torres, P. (2017), “Detangling consumer attitudes to better explain co-branding success”, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 26 No. 7, pp. 704-721. Hogg, M.A., Terry, D.J. and White, K.M. (1995), “A tale of two theories: a critical comparison of identity theory with social identity theory”, Social Psychology Quarterly, Vol. 58 No. 4, pp. 255-269. Hsu, C.-L. and Lin, J.C.-C. (2016), “Effect of perceived value and social influences on mobile app stickiness and in-app purchase intention”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 108, pp. 42-53. Iqbal, Q. and Ahmad, N.H. (2021), “Sustainable development: the colors of sustainable leadership in learning organization”, Sustainable Development, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 108-119. Jain, S. (2020a), “Assessing the moderating effect of subjective norm on luxury purchase intention: a study of Gen Y consumers in India”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 48 No. 5, pp. 517-536. Jain, S. (2020b), “Role of conspicuous value in luxury purchase intention”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 169-185. Jain, V. and Roy, S. (2016), “Understanding meaning transfer in celebrity endorsements: a qualitative exploration”, Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 266-286. Jamshidi, D. and Kazemi, F. (2019), “Innovation diffusion theory and customers’ behavioral intention for Islamic credit card: implications for awareness and satisfaction”, Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 1245-1275. Jin, W., Sun, Y., Wang, N. and Zhang, X. (2017), “Why users purchase virtual products in MMORPG? An integrative perspective of social presence and user engagement”, Internet Research, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 408-427. Kaur, J. and Bhardwaj, N. (2021), “Their control will make or break the sustainable clothing deal-a study of the moderating impact of actual behavioural control on the purchase intention-behaviour gap for sustainable clothing in India”, Australasian Business, Accounting and Finance Journal, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 82-98. Kim, W., Jeong, O.-R. and Lee, S.-W. (2010), “On social web sites”, Information Systems, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 215-236. Kock, F., Berbekova, A. and Assaf, A.G. (2021), “Understanding and managing the threat of common method bias: detection, prevention and control”, Tourism Management, Vol. 86, p. 104330. Kozub, K.R., O’Neill, M.A. and Palmer, A.A. (2014), “Emotional antecedents and outcomes of service recovery: an exploratory study in the luxury hotel industry”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 233-243. Kwon, J. and Vogt, C.A. (2010), “Identifying the role of cognitive, affective, and behavioral components in understanding residents’ attitudes toward place marketing”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 423-435. Kwon, H.S. and Chidambaram, L. (2000), “A test of the technology acceptance model: the case of cellular telephone adoption”, A test of the technology acceptance model: the case of cellular telephone adoption, Paper presented to the Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Vol. 1, p. 7. Laroche, M., Li, R., Richard, M.O. and Shao, M. (2021), “Understanding Chinese consumers’ and Chinese immigrants’ purchase intentions toward global brands with Chinese elements”, Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 30 No. 8, pp. 1077-1093. Lisjak, M., Bonezzi, A. and Rucker, D.D. (2021), “How marketing perks influence word of mouth”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 85 No. 5, pp. 128-144. Lissitsa, S. and Kol, O. (2016), “Generation X vs. Generation Y – a decade of online shopping”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 31, pp. 304-312. McCracken, G. (1989), “Who is the celebrity endorser? Cultural foundations of the endorsement process”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 310-321. Mael, F. and Ashforth, B.E. (1992), “Alumni and their alma mater: a partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 103-123. VOL. 24 NO. 1 2023 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 129
Ma, Y. (2021), “Hong Kong: Changes in buying luxury goods during coronavirus COVID-19 2021”, Statista, available at: www.statista.com/statistics/1261796/hong-kong-changes-in-buying-luxury-goodsduring-coronavirus-covid-19/ Nast, C., Vogue Business (2020), “Luxury’s new focus in Hong Kong: luxury’s new focus in Hong Kong: high-net locals”, available at: www.voguebusiness.com/consumers/hong-kong-luxury-consumer (accessed 6 September 2022). Ng, P.M.L. and Cheung, C.T.Y. (2022), “Why do young people do things for the environment? The effect of perceived values on pro-environmental behaviour”, Young Consumers, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 539-554. Ouvrein, G., Vandebosch, H. and De Backer, C.J.S. (2022), “They are wallowing in luxury, but complain about the struggles of lockdown: a field study of audiences’ responses to celebrity COVID-19 posts”, Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, pp. 1-15. Pauliene, R. and Sedneva, K. (2019), “The influence of recommendations in social media on purchase intentions of generations Y and Z”, Organizations and Markets in Emerging Economies, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 227-256. Pentina, I., Guilloux, V. and Micu, A.C. (2018), “Exploring social media engagement behaviors in the context of luxury brands”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 55-69. Ray, M. (1973), “Marketing communications and the hierarch-of-effects”, in Clarke, P.F. (Ed.), New Models for Mass Communication Research, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills. Ringle, C.M., Wende, S. and Becker, J.-M. (2015), “SmartPLS 3. SmartPLS GmbH, boenningstedt”, Journal of Service Science and Management, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 32-49. Salem, S.F. and Salem, S.O. (2018), “Self-identity and social identity as drivers of consumers’ purchase intention towards luxury fashion goods and willingness to pay premium price”, Asian Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 161-184. Sheppard, B.H., Hartwick, J. and Warshaw, P.R. (1988), “The theory of reasoned action: a meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modifications and future research”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 325-343. Spero, I. and Stone, M. (2004), “Agents of change: how young consumers are changing the world of marketing”, Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 153-159. Statista (2022), “Luxury fashion”, available at: www.statista.com/outlook/cmo/luxury-goods/luxuryfashion/worldwide (accessed 6 June 2022). Stryker, S. (1968), “Identity salience and role performance: the relevance of symbolic interaction theory for family research”, Journal of Marriage and the Family, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 558-564. Sudhir, S. and Unnithan, A.B. (2019), “Marketplace rumor sharing among young consumers: the role of anxiety and arousal”, Young Consumers, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 1-13. Summers, T.A., Belleau, B.D. and Xu, Y. (2006), “Predicting purchase intention of a controversial luxury apparel product”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 405-419. Tajfel, H. (1974), “Social identity and intergroup behaviour”, Social Science Information, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 65-93. Tajfel, H. (1979), “Individuals and groups in social psychology”, British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 183-190. Think with Google (2019), “How generations Y and Z differ – and what brands can talk to about them”, available at: www.thinkwithgoogle.com/intl/en-145/consumer-insights/consumer-trends/how-generations-yand-z-differ-and-what-brands-can-talk-to-about-them/ (accessed 6 June 2022). Thoits, P.A. (1991), “On merging identity theory and stress research”, Social Psychology Quarterly, Vol. 54 No. 2, pp. 101-112. Tsen, W.S. and Cheng, B.K.L. (2021), “Who to find to endorse? Evaluation of online influencers among young consumers and its implications for effective influencer marketing”, Young Consumers, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 237-253. Valaei, N. and Nikhashemi, S. (2017), “Generation Y consumers’ buying behaviour in fashion apparel industry: a moderation analysis”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 523-543. PAGE 130 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 24 NO. 1 2023
Van Nguyen, P., Trieu, H.D.X., Ton, U.N.H., Dinh, C.Q. and Tran, H.Q. (2021), “Impacts of career adaptability, life meaning, career satisfaction, and work volition on level of life satisfaction and job performance”, Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 96-110. Wang, S.W. and Scheinbaum, A.C. (2018), “Enhancing brand credibility via celebrity endorsement: trustworthiness trumps attractiveness and expertise”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 16-32. Wang, X. and Yang, Z. (2010), “The effect of brand credibility on consumers’ brand purchase intention in emerging economies: the moderating role of brand awareness and brand image”, Journal of Global Marketing, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 177-188. Wu, M.-Y. and Liao, S.-C. (2011), “Consumers’ behavioral intention to use internet shopping: an integrated model of TAM and TRA”, Journal of Statistics and Management Systems, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 375-392. Xiong, L., Cho, V., Law, K.M. and Lam, L. (2021), “A study of KOL effectiveness on brand image of skincare products”, Enterprise Information Systems, Vol. 15 No. 10, pp. 1483-1500. Xu, Z., Islam, T., Liang, X., Akhtar, N. and Shahzad, M. (2021), “I’m like you, and I like what you like” sustainable food purchase influenced by vloggers: a moderated serial-mediation model”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 63, p. 102737. Zhuang, L. (2018), “The influences of idol effect on the purchase decisions of their fans”, Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, Vol. 68, pp. 164-171. Corresponding author Mei Mei Lau can be contacted at: [email protected] For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website: www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm Or contact us for further details: [email protected] VOL. 24 NO. 1 2023 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 131
Investigating the antecedents of luxury brand loyalty for Gen Z consumers in India: a PLS-SEM approach Kaustav Ghosh and Subhajit Bhattacharya Abstract Purpose – This study aims to explore the antecedents related to luxury brand loyalty in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment. It obtains the connection between luxury brand attachment, luxury brand trust and luxury brand loyalty. The study also envisages how luxury brand trust plays a mediation role in strengthening the relationship between luxury brand attachment and luxury brand loyalty in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment. Design/methodology/approach – The empirical investigation is based on the Indian Gen Z consumer segment. Data was acquired with the help of a structured questionnaire, following convenience and snowball sampling techniques. A total of 230 primary responses was used for the statistical analysis of the present research. The analysis was carried out with the help of SmartPLS software to validate a proposed model and corresponding hypotheses. Findings – The research findings demonstrate that two major branding outcomes support luxury brand loyalty behavior in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment: luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) attributes and sustainability attributes, luxury product attributes, luxury brand attributes and social media attributes positively influence luxury brand attachment in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment. CSR attributes and sustainability attributes have negligible contribution toward positively influencing luxury brand trust towards the same. However, when luxury brand trust is combined with luxury brand attachment, then luxury brand trust plays a significant role in enhancing luxury brand loyalty among the Indian Gen Z consumer segment. Then, luxury brand attributes, product attributes and social media attribute positively impact luxury brand trust in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment. The study also identifies that luxury brand trust plays a significant mediation role in consolidating the relationship between attachment and loyalty. Originality/value – The proposed model in the research is an integrated framework comprising maximum potential variables that can positively influence luxury brand loyalty in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment. The analysis in the research shows the mediation role of luxury brand trust between luxury brand attachment and luxury brand loyalty in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment. This study has also identified the vital role of luxury brands’ CSR attributes and sustainability attributes to support luxury brand loyalty. Keywords Luxury brand, Luxury brand trust, Luxury brand attachment, Luxury brand loyalty, Gen Z, PLS-SEM Paper type Research paper Introduction The word “luxury” comes from the Latin word “luxus” meaning “excess” (Kapferer and Michaut-Denizeau, 2020). In the marketing context, “luxury” refers to a way to get admired, recognized, appreciated and respected by using differentiation from the crowd and does not merely define a product, service or a lifestyle. It is a philosophy, identity and culture. The function of the luxury brands has its roots in the glitzy lifestyle that the royals led and their consumption of such goods/services. They used to designate themselves as a class higher Kaustav Ghosh is based at Aditya Birla Sun Life Insurance, Kolkata, India. Subhajit Bhattacharya is based at XIM University, Bhubaneswar, India. Received 15 September 2021 Revised 8 February 2022 7 April 2022 Accepted 19 June 2022 DOI 10.1108/YC-09-2021-1390 VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022, pp. 603-626, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 1747-3616 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 603
than the middle class and underprivileged ones. A brand that is luxurious to a particular class of people is not the same for a different set of people (Atwal and Williams, 2017). Researchers over the years have investigated several attributes of luxury brands. Any product/service that is luxurious should possess exclusivity (Phau and Prendergast, 2000), have a premium price (Keller, 2009), possess prestigious image, meet functional needs (Ko et al., 2019), evoke emotions in consumers, arise to consumer’s aspiration for a better life (Silverstein and Fiske, 2003) and possess several other attributes as delineated in the subsequent sections. Factors influencing luxury consumption vary across generations (Thangavel et al., 2021); hence, it is essential to study the consumer behavior of the generations, namely, Gen X, Y or Z, before targeting them. India has one of the leading luxury consumers in the world. Euromonitor International (2021) has forecasted that the Indian luxury market will increase from approximately INR42K crores (i.e. US$5.619bn) to INR70K crores (i.e. US$9.366bn) from 2021 to 2025, after a slump in 2019. The most significant players will be the fashion, hospitality, dining, beverages and tourism sectors. Sustainability measures will play a key role in this luxury business. It will include moves like the usage of solar power, paper packing, reduction in single-use plastic, recycling and more of plant-based products instead of animal-based products (Euromonitor International, 2021). Thus, the Indian luxury market paints a very promising picture. Gen Z consumers of India are emerging as the biggest consumers of luxury products/services in India (Sanyal et al., 2021). These are individuals of the newest generation born between 1995 and the early 2010s (Djafarova and Bowes, 2021). They have different values and ideas than Gen X and Y individuals (Bakir et al., 2020). India has a whopping 472 million Gen Z population (Kataria, 2020); hence, it is a promising customer segment for luxury brands operating in India. So, it is put forward that studying the consumer behavior of Indian Gen Z, pertaining to luxury consumption, is essential for both the academic and the corporate sector. Studies have been conducted considering luxury brand attributes (LBA) (Phau and Prendergast, 2000; Qiu et al., 2017), luxury product attributes (LPA) (Pereira et al., 2019; Dhaliwal et al., 2020), social media attributes (SMA) (Kim and Ko, 2012; Agnihotri, 2020), corporate social responsibility attributes (CSRA) (Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001; Sipila¨ et al., 2021), sustainability attributes (SUA) (Jain and Mishra, 2020), luxury brand attachment (Lin and Ku, 2018; Shimul et al., 2019), luxury brand trust (Khan and Zaman, 2021; Lee Park et al., 2021; Pir and Derino¨zlu¨, 2021) and luxury brand loyalty (Park et al., 2011; Kim and Ko, 2010; Rao and Ko, 2021; Chung and Kim, 2020) in a segregated manner. When consumers purchase a luxury product, they consider several attributes from each of the mentioned areas before deciding on their purchase. Hence, an integrated model considering several attributes pertaining to luxury brands is essential to draw a comprehensive picture of luxury buying behavior, which is the stepping-stone toward understanding the drivers of luxury brand loyalty. This gap in the existing literature motivated the current research to develop an integrated model by incorporating different constructs: LBA, LPA, SMA, CSRA and SUA. In the domain of luxury marketing, several studies have been conducted focusing on the consumer behavior of diverse consumer segments (Cavender and Kincade, 2015; Chung and Kim, 2020; Kapferer and Michaut-Denizeau, 2020; Rao and Ko, 2021), but less number of studies have been conducted focusing exclusively on luxury brand consumption behavior and loyalty of Gen Z consumer segment (Pencarelli et al., 2020). Sustainability and CSR attributes have started to become more relevant in the luxury business than ever before (Amatulli et al., 2018; Balconi et al., 2020; Gardetti and Muthu, 2015; Hong and Nam, 2021; Janssen et al., 2014; Kumagai, 2021; Olsˇanova et al., 2021; Panigyrakis et al., 2020; Wong and Dhanesh, 2017). Studies have shown that sustainable and CSR play a role in luxury brand management; they help in building luxury brand appeal among customers; the same is gaining the interest of global researchers (Dekhili and Achabou, 2016; Gardetti, 2020; Kumagai, 2021; Muniz and Guzman, 2021 ; Septianto et al., 2021). The present study has the potential to guide luxury brands to identify the areas to concentrate on and channelize their efforts on branding luxury products or services. Most of the studies have PAGE 604 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022
been conducted in the context of developed nations (Amatulli et al., 2018; Balconi et al., 2020; Hong and Nam, 2021; Janssen et al., 2014; Olsˇanova et al., 2021; Panigyrakis et al., 2020; Wong and Dhanesh, 2017). The existing literature has a dearth of significant empirical evidence explaining how CSR and SUA would influence luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust and, in turn, influence luxury brand loyalty in young customers in the context of emerging economies. The present research has tried to fill the abovementioned gaps and has considered methods by which CSR and SUA can simulate luxury brand attachment, luxury brand trust and in turn, luxury brand loyalty in an emerging economy. This study has tried to explore the luxury brand consumption behavior of the Indian Gen Z consumer segment, and the conceptualized integrated framework obtains the luxury brand loyalty drivers of this consumer segment. The current study revolves around the following research objectives: to investigate the most prominent variables that can positively influence luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment; to inspect whether CSR and SUA have a role in the development of luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust in the Gen Z consumer segment; to envisage the role of luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust in the development of luxury brand loyalty; and to check the mediation role of luxury brand trust in strengthening the relationship between luxury brand attachment and luxury brand loyalty of the Indian Gen Z consumer segment. This research identifies antecedents that can evoke luxury brand loyalty in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment. It establishes the relationship between these attributes and luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust, respectively. Eventually, it envisages the contribution of luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust in the development of luxury brand loyalty. The mediation role of luxury brand trust in strengthening luxury brand loyalty is examined. The study identifies that CSRA and SUA of luxury products/services do not directly influence luxury brand trust, but it is effective when it is blended with luxury brand attachment. The study also identifies that luxury brand loyalty is influenced by two elements, namely, luxury brand attachment and luxury brand loyalty where the mediation role of luxury brand loyalty is also very important. The present study is inspired by different eminent theories such as the social identity theory (SIT), social exchange theory (SET), theory of reasoned action and stimuli–organism–response (S-O-R) model. These theories have guided the present research in understanding the different antecedents and their consequences to conceptualize the proposed formative model in the current research. 2. Literature review Luxury branding and marketing have gained the interest of researchers across the globe (Dekhili and Achabou, 2016). There is a widespread curiosity to identify the various dimensions of luxury brands that appeal to individuals, especially young individuals, and lay the foundation for their luxury consumption (Bakir et al., 2020; Sanyal et al., 2021). The Indian Gen Z consumers have started to surface as the most proliferating segment of luxury consumers in India and promises to be so for a considerable time (Sanyal et al., 2021). This makes the study of the consumer behavior of this segment essential for both the academic and the corporate sectors. Academic researchers have embarked on the same (Jain and Mishra, 2020; Sanyal et al., 2021; Thangavel et al., 2021), but the area’s enrichment is required. The subsequent sections arise to it. The research obtains potential attributes that can drive luxury brand attachment, luxury brand trust and luxury brand loyalty in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment. A structural framework is provided to envisage the role of luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust in building luxury brand loyalty in this consumer segment. VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 605
2.1 Theories behind this current research Different researchers have identified the contribution of the SET to explain multi-constructbased consumers’ brand loyalty behavior (Hogg et al., 1995; Cropanzano et al., 2017). The SET helped the current research in describing how SMA like reviews and recommendations influence the luxury brand purchase behavior of Gen Z. The SIT suggests that the consumers’ self-expressions are associated with brand choice behavior (Hogg et al., 1995; Shavitt, 1989; Stets and Burke, 2000). The SIT guided us toward the relationship between LBA and luxury brand attachment, relating to the current research. The SIT (Hogg et al., 1995; Shavitt, 1989; Stets and Burke, 2000) expresses that the purposes served by a product can exert an essential influence on the functions that attitudes toward the product will serve. Many studies have shown that brand identity based on product and brand attributes evokes brand trust and brand loyalty (Doney and Cannon, 1997). Other studies have demonstrated that social identity influences luxury brand selection behavior (Phan et al., 2011; Cavender and Kincade, 2015). For instance, it can be observed that people spend a hefty amount to purchase a luxury car or handbag to gain social status and identity. Ajzen and Fishbein (1975) presented the theory of reasoned action (TRA), a wellestablished model for analyzing consumer buying behavior. TRA elucidates that when consumers decide to purchase any product or service, they observe and comprehend the attributes of the brand, product, social media reviews, contribution to the environment and several other attributes before making a decision. These factors are conducive to consumers’ purchase decision-making and also evoke luxury brand attachment (Lin and Ku, 2018; Petravici ūte_ et al., 2021; Thomson et al.,2005; Shahid and Farooqi, 2019). TRA guided us to explain how luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust are developed in Gen Z, considering the different product attributes, brand attributes, SMA, CSRA and SUA. The concept of brand attachment explains the consumers’ cognitive, emotional or behavioral connections with the brand. Many studies have separately established the relationship between brand attachment, brand trust and brand loyalty with multidimensional constructs (Gilal et al., 2021; Hwang et al., 2021; Japutra et al., 2014; Petravici ūte_ et al., 2021). This concept of brand attachment has also guided the present study to explain how the different antecedents of luxury brand attachment, directly and indirectly, evoke luxury brand loyalty. Finally, this research is also inspired by the S-O-R model (Mehrabian and Russell, 1974), which helps understand the Indian Gen Z population’s luxury brand loyalty behavior. It is observed that consumer loyalty behavior is based on multidimensional constructs. Different stimuli include LPA, LBA, SMA, CSRA and SUA. These stimuli can support organism processes to generate emotional outcomes such as luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment, thereby strengthening luxury brand loyalty toward a particular luxury brand. The proposed research model in the current research has indicated the S-O-R model that may explain the luxury brand loyalty behavior. 2.2 Luxury brand attachment, luxury brand trust and luxury brand loyalty Brand attachment is an emotional connection between an individual and a brand that portrays the former’s feelings for the latter (Petravici ūte_ et al., 2021). It creates a commitment in the individual’s mind regarding the brand that evolves into a long-term relationship between him and the brand. It helps the brand to earn enhanced consumer lifetime value and profitability (Lin and Ku, 2018). Aesthetics portrayed through various brand elements help develop brand attachment in individuals (Dolbec and Chebat, 2013). This can be attributed to luxury brands to a considerable extent. Lin and Ku (2018) are of the view that social influence, individual value and luxury brand image influence luxury brand attachment in individuals. High involvement with a luxury brand results in the same (Sreejesh et al., 2016). Luxury brands that reflect an individual’s ideal self and aspiration successfully create brand attachment in him (Thomson et al., 2005). PAGE 606 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022
Shahid and Farooqi (2019) argued that luxury brand attachment helps individuals pick a brand, among many, to purchase (Shimul et al., 2019). Brand trust comes from interaction and prior experience with the brand (Garbarino and Johnson, 1999). That leads to enhanced purchase intention and increased word of mouth (WOM) (Kuo and Nagasawa, 2020). Past studies have shown that brand trust leads to brand equity development (Khadim et al., 2018). This helps the brand to develop better relationships with the consumer and extract higher customer lifetime value (Hernandez-Fernandez and Lewis, 2019). Brand loyalty refers to a biased choice behavior by a customer with respect to branded merchandise. It is the relative frequency with which a customer chooses one brand over the other. It can be evoke due to quality, color, shape and brand name or their combination (Tucker, 1964). It leads customers to repurchase products from a brand, uninfluenced (Park et al., 2011) and achieve their attitudinal commitment (Chaudhuri and Holbrook, 2001). From the consumer perspective, brand loyalty helps him get functional benefits (consistent product quality and reliability), social benefits (enjoyable, social approval, self-expression) and experiential benefits (variety, cognitive stimulation, sensory) (Huang et al., 2016). In the case of luxury brands, brand loyalty is evoked due to conspicuous, unique, social, hedonic and quality values (Esmaeilpour, 2015). Intimacy and interaction with luxury brands are directly proportional to the development of luxury brand loyalty (Kim and Ko, 2010). Higher brand loyalty earns increased brand choice, customer satisfaction and higher spending (Chung and Kim, 2020). 2.3 Luxury brand attributes (LBA) and luxury product attributes (LPA) Over the years, researchers have associated several attributes with luxury brands. Keller (2009) mentions that a luxury brand should possess ten characteristics, namely, premium image, intangible brand associations, pleasurable purchase experience, brand elements (logo, symbol, packaging), secondary brand associations (linked personalities, countries, events), selective channel distribution, premium pricing, quality and trademark. Phau and Prendergast (2000) view that luxury brands should stimulate exclusivity, have a brand identity, increase brand awareness and perceived quality and retain sales and customer loyalty. Its products should be held by only a few so that the luxury component of a brand stays intact. Country of the brand (COB) plays an essential role in consumers’ perceived value regarding a brand and is often a significant factor in their intention to purchase (Qiu et al., 2017). COB builds inner-self expressive value, prestige value and social-self expressive value in individuals (Qiu et al., 2017). Arora (2011) has obtained an 8P model of luxury brand marketing. It finds mention of craftsmanship, brand pedigree, natural paucity, informative entertainment form of advertisement and promotion as essential attributes to build on emotions in the audience’s minds regarding a luxury brand. Besides these, premium price and rarity of materials are considered important attributes behind the development of exclusivity of luxury products (Arora, 2011). For example: in the gem and jewelry industry, rare gemstones play the role of perceived rarity (Pereira et al., 2019). Wuestefeld et al. (2012) and Rose (2016) have put forward that the customers prefer brands with a heritage as they are perceived to be trustworthy, credible and reliable. Customization of luxury products contributes to the uniqueness of the luxury product/service and enhances exclusivity (Moreau et al., 2020). Psychological factors, namely, conspicuous consumption, self-esteem, symbolic value, pride, and other psychological factors, drive the purchase of luxury products. Luxury aesthetics, luxury service, authenticity and innovativeness of luxury brands, positively impact customers in their progress towards luxury purchase (Dhaliwal et al., 2020). Luxury services (Dhaliwal et al., 2020) are superlative hedonic experiences that encompass exclusivity. The exclusivity can be monetary, social or hedonic in nature. The luxuriousness can be combinedly determined by subjective customer perception and objective service features (Wirtz et al., 2020). A luxury brand’s perceived value, quality and uniqueness are components behind the willingness to pay a premium price for a product (Sjostrom et al., 2016). By considering the discussion in VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 607
the above two sections, the present research formulates the following hypotheses to investigate the influence of LBA, and LPA on luxury brand attachment and trust within the Indian Gen Z population: H1a. LBA positively affects luxury brand attachment. H1b. LBA positively impacts luxury brand trust. H2a. LPA positively affects luxury brand attachment. H2b. LPA positively impacts luxury brand trust. 2.4 Social media attributes (SMA) Social media presence, website design and brand advocacy have emerged as essential factors pertaining to luxury brands that influence purchase (Dhaliwal et al., 2020). Social media reviews, recommendations and comments persuade the audience about the luxury brand and curate WOM influence among customers (Godey et al., 2016; Agnihotri, 2020). As it passes on from individual to individual, the brand loyalty regarding the brand keeps on enhancing (Colella et al., 2019). Luxury brands’ perceived social media marketing activities include five constructs, namely, interaction, trendiness, WOM, entertainment and customization (Kim and Ko, 2012). The concept of customization refers to providing customized information hunting and facilitation of customized services to customers. These constructs positively affect relationship equity, value equity and brand equity (Kim and Ko, 2012). Informative entertainment has emerged as a significant motivational factor in customers’ engagement with luxury brands on social media (Bazi et al., 2020). Encouraging interactivity with the brand and moderating interaction among fans adds to productive customer integration. Brand interaction boosts the supreme image of the luxury brand (Jahn et al., 2012). Social media “buzz” leads to in-store purchases (Dauriz et al., 2014). Integration of offline and online marketing of luxury brands facilitates luxury purchases (Inside Retail Asia, 2020). Information in the form of significant announcements by the brands, promotional campaigns and discounts act as facilitators of luxury purchases (Dauriz et al., 2014). Millennial consumers prefer gathering information about luxury brands from social media above any luxury brand or fashion magazines (Farrag, 2017). They have become apathetic to traditional marketing techniques (Duffett, 2017). By considering the discussion in the above section and the section “luxury brand attachment, luxury brand trust, and brand loyalty,” the present research formulates the mentioned hypotheses to envisage the influence of SMA on luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust, respectively, within Indian Gen Z population: H3a. SMA positively impacts luxury brand attachment. H3b. SMA positively affects luxury brand trust. 2.5 Corporate social responsibility attributes (CSRA) and sustainability attributes (SUA) The effect of CSR and its benefits for luxury brands have drawn the attention of management scholars over the years (Dekhili and Achabou, 2016). However, Sipila¨ et al. (2021) have obtained that customers perceive luxury companies have superficial motives behind undertaking CSR activities thus. CSR activities are detrimental to the brands’ loyalty intentions. Hence, CSR strategies should be carefully crafted so that they align more with the brand’s luxury context. This can reap benefits for the luxury brand. In the view of Janssen et al. (2017), Franssen Willem (2017), if the products of a brand are scarce and enduring at the same time (diamond), the consumers develop a good perception toward the compatibility between CSR and luxury. Janssen et al. (2017) and Sen and Bhattacharya (2001) further posit that if the luxury brands undertake CSR activities to overcome issues PAGE 608 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022
that are congruent with the brand’s core business or the brand’s reputation, then it evokes a positive response from the customers, about the brand’s CSR contributions. Pinto et al. (2019) suggest that CSR focuses that are consistent with the respective luxury brand personalities are held in high regard by customers. There is a strong relationship between consumer self-image and brand image (Jacob et al., 2020). According to Sen and Bhattacharya (2001), if there is a congruence between a customer’s personality traits and the socially responsible luxury brand, then the CSR activities undertaken by the brand are perceived well by the customer. Pencarelli et al. (2020) suggest that millennials (limited to Italy) have a reasonably strong sustainability awareness in terms of luxury product consumption. They consider CSR activities along with their transparent communication in great appraise. Luxury brands contribute toward environmental pollution, but they can achieve sustainability as well (Godart and Seong, 2017). Green initiatives strengthen the consumer satisfaction and lead to positive WOM (Amatulli et al., 2021b); hence, luxury brands should involve in green initiatives and report them (Bendell and Kleanthous, 2007). The Indian Gen Z consumer segment accepts shared luxury consumption, which is a method to attain sustainable luxury (Jain and Mishra, 2020). Several luxury brands have started to take active steps in achieving sustainability through their products; some of the notable examples are Upasana (upasana.in, 2021), No Nasties, Forrest Essentials (forestessentialsindia.com, 2021), Matt and Nat (mattandnat.com, 2021) and others. By considering the discussion in the above section and the section “luxury brand attachment, luxury brand trust, and luxury brand loyalty,” the present research formulates the mentioned hypotheses to envision the influence of CSRA and SUA on luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust, respectively, within Indian Gen Z population: H4a. CSRA positively impacts luxury brand attachment. H4b. CSRA positively impacts luxury brand trust. H5a. SUA positively impacts luxury brand attachment. H5b. SUA positively impacts luxury brand trust. Studies have already shown that there is a relation between consumer experience and brand attachment (Liu et al., 2020). Repeated positive experience with a brand creates a perception of relief, certitude and security. Thus, it leads to brand trust in consumers (Huaman-Ramirez and Merunka, 2019). Studies have also shown that higher brand attachment positively impacts brand loyalty (Lee and Workman, 2015). Atulkar (2020) has argued that brand attachment leads to loyalty and repeat purchases. Existing scholarly works have also demonstrated the role of brand trust in supporting brand loyalty (Abdullah, 2015; Kwan Soo Shin et al., 2019). Based on the mentioned notions, the study formulates the following three hypotheses to check whether the same branding outcomes also hold true in the luxury brand domain in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment: H6. Luxury brand attachment positively impacts luxury brand trust. H7a. Luxury brand attachment positively impacts luxury brand loyalty. H7b. Luxury brand trust performs a mediation role in strengthening the relation luxury brand attachment and luxury brand loyalty. 2.6 Proposed model for the current research The above hypotheses have helped the current study develop a conceptual framework that is expected to be useful for threadbare analysis of the antecedents relating to luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust. The proposed model explores the connection between luxury brand attachment, luxury brand trust and luxury brand loyalty. It tries to investigate how luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust can influence luxury brand loyalty. VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 609
It also examines the mediation role of luxury brand trust in strengthening the relationship between luxury brand attachment and luxury brand loyalty, specifically for the Gen Z segment in India (Figure 1). 3. Methodology 3.1 Data collection and sampling The target population for the current research is the Indian Gen Z customers who buy and use products/services from luxury brands. During data acquisition, all the participants were in the age group 16 to 24 years, comprising both male and female and having varied occupational backgrounds. Three basic assumptions were made in selecting this target population. First, young people can settle their preferred luxury brands and interpret the value offered by the same. Second, young consumers’ luxury brand selection behavior depends on environmental, rational, social and emotional stimuli. And finally, luxury industry members and practitioners aim to target these groups to increase their markets’ potential by developing new marketing strategies. A structured questionnaire was prepared based on existing scales to capture data from the target audience, Indian Gen Z consumers. The questionnaire items were measured on a five-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to agree (5) strongly. For data collection, convenience sampling and snowball sampling (Etikan and Bala, 2017) were followed. The sample responses were collected through an online survey, which is considered an efficient and acceptable approach (Hsiao et al., 2010). This data collection method helped reach out to actual users of luxury brands. Numerous researchers have followed the same data collection procedure and achieved valid and reliable results (Jain, 2021; Jain, 2020; Mainolfi, 2019). Personal contacts sent the questionnaire to youth coordinators of premium clubs and business school students. A total of 253 samples were collected, and 230 were used for the research. All the participants participated independently and filled out the questionnaire based on their own judgment. The demographic profile of the responders has been represented in Table 1. Figure 1 The proposed conceptual model on luxury brand loyalty for the Gen Z consumer segment PAGE 610 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022
3.2 Measures The present study has identified the most prominent variables from the existing scales (Refer to Appendix, Table A1) to analyze luxury brand loyalty amongst the Indian Gen Z population. The scales adopted for this study are reflective in nature. The research model showcases the relationship between endogenous variables and exogenous variables. The proposed research framework in this current study contains eight reflective constructs, namely, LBA, LPA, SMA, CSRA, SUA, luxury brand attachment, luxury brand trust and luxury brand loyalty. The antecedents for the luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust are bracketed under LBA, LPA, SMA, CSRA and SUA. Luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust are considered antecedents of luxury brand loyalty. Hence, the model is designated as formative (antecedents based) in nature (MacKenzie et al., 2011). To assess the measurement model of reflective constructs, the loading of items of each construct, the composite reliability (CR), the rho_A, and the average variance extracted (AVE) were checked. Table 2 displays the results of the assessment of the measurement model for eight reflective constructs, thus demonstrating acceptable reliability and convergent validity for all constructs. 3.3 Data analysis process This study applies partial least squares-structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) approach to gain deeper insights into the effects of model components (independent variables), namely, LBA, LPA, SMA, CSRA and SUA, on luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust. It also checks the impacts of luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust on luxury brand loyalty. The PLS-SEM technique is adopted because of its predictive nature and complexity of the proposed research model of the current study (Hair et al., 2012; Hair et al., 2013a, 2013b; Shmueli et al., 2019). To perform the PLS-SEM, we have used the SmartPLS 3.0 software package. To address the mediator the product of the coefficients approach, we have applied bootstrapping approach (Mooney and Duval, 1993; Streukens and Leroi-Werelds, 2016). 4. Results From the statistical analysis shown in Table 2, it can be obtained that all the reflective constructs have Cronbach’s a coefficient values greater than 0.70 (Fornell and Larcker, 1981; Hair et al., 2013a, 2013b), which indicates that the required reliability of the model is achieved. All the average factor loading (for the endogenous and exogenous variables) is greater than 0.50 (Hair et al., 2013a, 2013b), which indicates the convergent validity of the model (Kline, 1998; Hair et al., 2013a, 2013b). Table 1 Demographic profile of respondents Frequency (%) Gender Male 126 54.78 Female 104 45.21 Total 230 100 Occupation Students 182 79.13 Service 35 15.21 Family business 5 2.17 Unemployed 6 2.60 Age 16–20 66 28.69 21–24 164 71.30 Total 230 100 VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 611
Table 2 displays that items, namely, “customization,” “congruent with personality,” “transparent communication,” “no cruelty,” “overall willingness to purchase,” “willingness to recommend,” “willingness to buy newly launched product” have higher factor loading values indicating higher contribution to the proposed model. All the CR values of all the factors are greater than the minimum average value of 0.70 (Hair et al., 2013a, 2013b), indicating the internal consistency of the structural research model. As per the thumb rule, the Dijkstra–Henseler’s rho (rA) constructs’ values must be above 0.70. Table 2 shows that all the constructs have attained the Dijkstra–Henseler’s rho (rA) value of more than 0.70, suggesting the model’s higher internal consistency reliability (Dijkstra, 1983). To check the convergent validity, we have checked the AVE of all the parameters and found that all the constructs have secured values more than 0.5, and the CR value of all the parameters have represented values more than 0.7 (Hair et al., 2021). Therefore, we can say that convergent validity of the model is achieved. Table 3 demonstrates that the R2 value of luxury brand attachment, luxury brand trust and luxury brand loyalty in the proposed PLS-SEM model are considered acceptable, as their values are above 0.5, which signifies the PLS-SEM model’s inputs can explain the observed variation at an acceptable level (Hair et al., 2021). Table 2 Assessment of the measurement model Factors Items Factor loading (standardized value) Cronbach’s a coefficient Dijkstra–Henseler’s rho (rA) AVE CR LBA Prestigiousness Exclusivity Country of brand Premium price Luxury service Heritage 0.741 0.735 0.686 0.754 0.682 0.726 0.770 0.781 0.521 0.867 LPA Exquisite craftsmanship Uniqueness Customization Natural paucity 0.672 0.724 0.810 0.715 0.707 0.716 0.536 0.821 SMA Interaction Information entertainment Personalization Integration (online and offline) Reviews Recommendations 0.637 0.560 0.677 0.718 0.746 0.744 0.772 0.784 0.502 0.858 CSRA Congruent with business Congruent with personality Transparent communication 0.790 0.813 0.820 0.737 0.747 0.653 0.849 SUA Green initiatives No cruelty Using non-toxic chemicals 0.745 0.827 0.806 0.705 0.705 0.630 0.836 Luxury brand attachment Willingness to pay premium price Meeting emotional and functional purpose Overall willingness to purchase 0.743 0.784 0.816 0.708 0.717 0.611 0.824 Luxury brand trust Willingness to recommend Willingness to discuss Overall trust 0.850 0.782 0.756 0.713 0.724 0.635 0.839 Luxury brand loyalty Overall satisfaction Overall expectation Willingness to buy new product category Willingness to buy newly launched product 0.710 0.790 0.786 0.802 0.774 0.775 0.597 0.855 PAGE 612 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022
Table 4 demonstrates that the model fit indices validate the model as an acceptable one (Hair et al., 2021). Table 5 shows the results of hypothesis testing after running bootstrapping in SmartPLS3. The bootstrapping was run using subsamples of 2,000 to achieve maximum stability of the results (Hair et al., 2021). According to Table 5, 11 out of 13 hypotheses significantly correlate with the path model. These include the constructs that obtained a t-value higher than 3.226, and a p-value less than 0.05. From Table 5 and Figure 2, it can be seen that all the hypotheses are supported, except H4b and H5b, as they have p-values greater than 0.05. H4b and H5b indicate CSRA and SUA, suggesting that their direct influence on luxury brand trust is insignificant. This research had identified excellent outcomes when the mediation analysis was performed. Table 6 and Figure 2 show that luxury brand attachment performs a full mediation role in strengthening the relationship between CSRA and luxury brand trust. The indirect effect between CSRA and luxury brand trust is 0.80 (significant at 1% level), and the direct effect is 0.023 (insignificant), yet the total effect is 0.103 (significant at 1% level). Mediation analysis also reveals that luxury brand attachment performs a full mediation role in establishing the association between SUA and luxury brand trust. Here the indirect effect is 0.046 (significant at 1% level), the direct effect is 0.003 (insignificant), yet the total impact Table 3 Results of R2 and adjusted R2 Latent variables R2 R2 adjusted Remarks Luxury brand attachment 0.538 0.524 Moderate Luxury brand trust 0.607 0.592 Moderate Luxury brand loyalty 0.668 0.647 Moderate Table 4 PLS-SEM model fit indices Saturated model Estimated model Model fit criteria SRMR 0.0792 0.083 At < 95% bootstrap quantile (SRMR < 0.08) d_ULS 3.521 3.819 Should be less than theoretical model (after bootstrapping) d_G 0.947 0.953 Should be less than theoretical model (after bootstrapping) x 2 1227.718 1234.643 Should be less than theoretical model (after bootstrapping) NFI 0.814 0.781 NFI > 0.90 RMS_theta 0.072 Close to zero Table 5 Structural model estimation Hypotheses and relationship Std. b p-values t-value Decision 2.50% 97.50% VIF F2 H1a: LBA ! Luxury brand attachment 0.271 7.243 Supported 0.270 0.469 1.501 0.397 H1b: LBA ! Luxury brand trust 0.096 5.184 Supported 0.433 0.593 1.597 0.287 H2a: LPA ! Luxury brand attachment 0.041 3.226 Supported 0.062 0.224 1.607 0.493 H2b: LPA ! Luxury brand trust 0.042 3.518 Supported 0.238 0.786 1.61 0.309 H3a: SMA ! Luxury brand attachment 0.102 6.328 Supported 0.032 0.258 1.569 0.233 H3b: SMA ! Luxury brand trust 0.055 4.028 Supported 0.075 0.356 1.583 0.162 H4a: CSRA ! Luxury brand attachment 0.142 6.957 Supported 0.229 0.503 1.467 0.274 H4b: CSRA ! luxury brand trust 0.023 0.682 2.058 Not Supported 0.325 0.616 1.493 0.487 H5a: SUA ! Luxury brand attachment 0.083 4.827 Supported 0.244 0.478 1.333 0.074 H5b: SUA ! Luxury brand trust 0.003 0.831 2.149 Not Supported 0.268 0.723 1.342 0.356 H6: Luxury brand attachment ! Luxury brand trust 0.563 11.264 Supported 0.062 0.317 1.302 0.402 H7a: Luxury brand attachment ! Luxury brand loyalty 0.377 8.158 Supported 0.105 0.254 1.66 0.121 H7b: Luxury brand trust ! Luxury brand loyalty 0.463 8.759 Supported 0.259 0.482 1.66 0.196 Notes: Indicates the p-value significant at 1% level; indicates the p-value significant at 5% VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 613
Figure 2 The estimated model on luxury brand loyalty for the Gen Z consumer segment Table 6 Mediation analysis Paths Direct impact Indirect impact Total impact Mediation effect CSRA ! Luxury brand attachment ! Luxury brand trust 0.023 0.080 0.103 Full mediation SUA ! Luxury brand attachment ! Luxury brand trust 0.003 0.046 0.049 Full mediation LBA ! Luxury brand attachment ! Luxury brand trust 0.096 0.153 0.249 Partial mediation LPA ! Luxury brand attachment ! Luxury brand trust 0.042 0.023 0.065 Partial mediation SMA ! Luxury brand attachment ! Luxury brand trust 0.055 0.057 0.112 Partial mediation Luxury brand attachment ! Luxury brand trust ! Luxury brand loyalty 0.377 0.261 0.638 Partial mediation Notes: Indicates the p-value significant at 1% level; indicates the p-value significant at 5% PAGE 614 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022
is 0.049 (significant at 1% level). As an interpretation, it can be said that CSRA and SUA of luxury brands directly fail to generate luxury brand trust. Still, they can develop luxury brand trust when they are blended with the luxury brand attachment. Similarly, mediation analysis suggests that luxury brand attachment performs a partial mediation role in strengthening the relationship between LBA and luxury brand trust because here, the indirect effect is 0.153 (significant at 1% level) and the direct effect is 0.096 (significant at 1% level), yet the total effect is 0.249 (significant at 1% level); this represents the partial mediation luxury brand attachment. The same holds true for the relationship between LPA and luxury brand trust. The indirect effect relating to the relationship between the LPA and luxury brand trust is 0.023 (significant at 1% level), and the direct impact is 0.042 (significant at 1% level), yet the total effect is 0.065 (significant at 1% level), so luxury brand attachment mediates the relationship between LPA and luxury brand trust. In the case of the relationship between SMA and luxury brand trust, luxury brand attachment partially mediates the association. Because it demonstrates the following statistical values: indirect effect 0.057 (significant at 1% level), and the direct impact is 0.055 (significant at 1% level) and the total effect is 0.112 (significant at 1% level). Mediation analysis also suggests that luxury brand trust significantly plays a mediating role in strengthening the relationship between luxury brand attachment and luxury brand loyalty. If we consider the mediation analysis, the indirect effect is 0.255 (significant at 1% level), the direct effect is 0.377 (significant at 1% level), but the total effect is 0.664 (significant at 1% level). It demonstrates that the total effect is higher than the direct effect, thus confirming the luxury brand trust’s mediation role in boosting the relationship between luxury brand attachment and luxury brand loyalty. Table 7 shows that all the heterotrait-monotrait criterion values are less than 0.85 (Henseler et al., 2015), indicating that the PLS-SEM model’s discriminant validity in this current research is achieved. 5. Discussion Based on the hypotheses, a conceptual model was developed. The same has provided many statistical outcomes, which are novel, essential, and interesting at the same time. It shows that LBA positively influence luxury brand attachment (b value 0.271, significant at 1%) and luxury brand trust (b value 0.096, significant at 1%) in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment, so H1a and H1b are supported. LPA positively influences luxury brand attachment (b value 0.041 significant at 1%) and luxury brand trust (b value 0.042 at 1% significance) in the same consumer segment; hence, H2a and H2b are supported. SMA positively influences luxury brand attachment (b value 0.102 at 1% significance) and luxury brand trust (b value 0.055, significant at 1%) in the consumer segment, thus showing that H3a and H3b are supported. CSRA positively influences luxury brand attachment (b value is 0.142, at 1% significance) in the consumer segment. Hence, H4a is supported, but the former is not influencing luxury brand trust (b value 0.023, at 1% significance) in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment. Thus, H4b is not supported. Similar is the case with SUA. They positively influence luxury brand attachment (b value 0.083, at 1% significance) in the Table 7 Discriminant validity: heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) criterion CSRA Luxury brand attachment LBA Luxury brand loyalty Luxury brand trust LPA SMA Luxury brand attachment 0.488 LBA 0.526 0.541 Luxury brand loyalty 0.335 0.503 0.440 Luxury brand trust 0.370 0.480 0.482 0.495 LPA 0.632 0.463 0.653 0.378 0.434 SMA 0.399 0.442 0.585 0.485 0.385 0.753 SUA 0.556 0.413 0.414 0.292 0.264 0.471 0.538 VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 615
Indian Gen Z consumer segment; hence, H5a is supported but fails to influence luxury brand trust (b value 0.003, at 1% significance) in the consumer segment; thus H5b is not supported in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment context. The statistical outcomes also show that there is a significant influence of luxury brand attachment on both luxury brand loyalty and luxury brand trust; H6 and H7a are supported. Research analysis demonstrates a significant impact of luxury brand trust on luxury brand loyalty; hence, H7a is supported. When we have performed the mediation analysis in the current research, a few interesting outcomes have come up that give an intriguing insight into the luxury brand loyalty behavior of the Indian Gen Z consumers. From the mediation analysis of Table 6 and Figure 2, it is seen that luxury brand attachment performs a full mediation role in strengthening the relationship between CSRA and luxury brand trust. Mediation analysis shows that luxury brand attachment performs a full mediation role in establishing the association among SUA and luxury brand trust. As an inference, it can be obtained that CSRA and SUA cannot directly generate luxury brand trust, but when CSRA and SUA are mediated with luxury brand attachment, then each of them contributes toward strengthening luxury brand trust. So, the contribution of CSRA and SUA I indirectly influencing luxury brand trust via luxury brand attachment. Mediation analysis also reveals that luxury brand attachment partially strengthens the relationship between LBA and luxury brand trust. The same holds true for the relationship between LPA and luxury brand trust. Luxury brand trust plays an essential mediation role in strengthening the relationship between luxury brand attachment and luxury brand loyalty. The mediation analysis reveals that when luxury brand trust is combined with luxury brand attachment, the capability of luxury brand attachment to evoke luxury brand trust in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment increases significantly, hence proving the importance of stimulating luxury brand trust in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment to gain their luxury brand loyalty. 6. Conclusions and implications Indian Gen Z is the largest luxury consuming segment in India. To help luxury brand managers to target the population and enhance their businesses, the research work has concentrated on obtaining a comprehensive framework for determining the luxury brand loyalty drivers of the Indian Gen Z consumer segment. It has obtained the same using factors bracketed under LPA, LBA, SMA, CSRA and SUA. The effects of each of the attributes, under each bracket, on luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust have been obtained separately, and their role in positively influencing luxury brand loyalty yields the final results. In pursuit of doing the same, it has been obtained that CSRA and SUA have not been able to directly influence luxury brand trust but when it is passing through luxury brand attachment then the contribution is very significant. Sustainability and CSR are important aspects in the present-day luxury industry as luxury consumption is contributing to environmental pollution, and the same needs to be stopped. Hence, the research has suggested concrete measures to stimulate luxury brand trust through CSRA and SUA in the consumer segment. It has also gone a step ahead to obtain that luxury brand trust strengthens the relationship between luxury brand attachment and luxury brand loyalty in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment. Hence, to stimulate luxury brand loyalty in the consumer segment, creating luxury brand attachment is not enough but the brands need to create luxury brand trust amongst the population as well. By this, the research shows a profound and strong path to the luxury brand managers in India so that they earn the luxury brand loyalty of the segment. They should concentrate on proper measures of CSRA and SUA and communicate the same to ensure that these attributes contribute toward luxury brand trust in the consumer segment. This would ensure that the Indian Gen Z consumers purchase from luxury brands that sell sustainable luxury products and from brands that contribute toward CSR activities, and at the same time, stay loyal to those brands. PAGE 616 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022
6.1 Theoretical contributions In the present research, we have made notable theoretical contributions to the body of knowledge on luxury brand loyalty behavior related to Gen Z consumers, in the context of emerging markets. First, we have applied the SIT, SET, TRA and S-O-R model in luxury brand loyalty behavior to understand the different antecedents and consequences and conceptualize the proposed formative model in the current research. Second, this study has developed and tested a proposed formative model that has initially examined the influence of LBA, LPA, SMA, CSRA, SUA on luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust. Then the empirical data-driven model has analyzed the impact of luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust on luxury brand loyalty within the Gen Z consumer segment in the context of emerging economies. The proposed and tested model in this current research may be seen as one of the integrated multidimensional reflective construct-based formative models to examine luxury brand loyalty. The present study has identified that achieving luxury brand loyalty within the Gen Z segment is a complex process. Here, luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust are considered essential constructs. To ensure luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust, the luxury brands must simultaneously focus on improving LBA, LPA, SMA, CSRA and SUA. The research shows that luxury brand trust mediates the relationship between luxury brand attachment and luxury brand loyalty. So, this study suggests strengthening upon the luxury brand trust to achieve better luxury brand loyalty among the Gen Z segments. So, to gain more loyal customers, luxury brands must focus on gaining the trust of the potential target group. The study has obtained the immense potential of CSRA and SUA to stimulate the young customers to make luxury brand choices. The positive effect of using sustainable luxury is well known by the Indian Gen Z consumers, but it has not materialized in the real world. Our analysis shows that CSR and sustainability attribute positively influence luxury brand attachment but do not directly evoke luxury brand trust in the Indian Gen Z consumer segment. Still, the mediation effect of luxury brand attachment exists to strengthen the relationship between CSRA and luxury brand trust as well as the relationship between sustainable attributes and luxury brand trust. It can be observed that a few renowned brands like Stella McCartney, Mud Jeans, and No Nasties have already initiated promoting CSRA and SUA to optimize their brand values. This research recommends measures to evoke implicit trust using CSR and sustainability measures, thus automatically increasing the usage of sustainable luxury products and services among the Gen Z consumer segment. 6.2 Managerial implications This article has obtained four identifiable managerial implications. The same possess the ability to help luxury brand managers and practitioners in their respective luxury brand management endeavors. First, it obtains that to enhance luxury business in India, the luxury brands should earn the loyalty of the Indian Gen Z consumer segment. At present, they are the highest value consumers (Blattberg and Deighton, 1996) in India, and it only makes sense that the luxury brands retain them and generate repurchases out of them (Chung and Kim, 2020). Secondly, the luxury brands should concentrate on enhancing luxury brand attachment and luxury brand trust measures, as supported in the previous sections, to ensure luxury brand loyalty. In the entire process of luxury branding precisely designed for the Indian Gen Z consumer segment, the managers and practitioners should also focus on CSRA and SUA to gain their luxury brand loyalty. Third, to grab their luxury brand trust through CSR activities, the brands should focus on CSR activities that are congruent with their core business. For instance, it can be said that if a luxury brand abstains from using animal skin and fur in its products and it does CSR activities to save wildlife, then the CSR activity is congruent to the brand’s core business. Consumers tend to purchase from brands that have a similar image to the customer’s self-image. There is a strong relationship VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 617
between self-image congruence and satisfaction (Jacob et al., 2020). Luxury brands should also concentrate on CSR activities that are congruent with customers’ personalities (Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001). For instance, it can be said that environmentally conscious customers have a higher probability of striking a better chord with CSR activities, which aim to increase afforestation. It is recommended that modern-day luxury brands implement CSR measures and communicate the same to increase luxury brand attachment that will help build luxury brand trust among the concerned generation. It will help remove the wrong notion of show-off CSR and will help to connect the dedicated CSR domains with the moral foundations of the individuals. Finally, to grab luxury brand trust through sustainability activities, the luxury brands should concentrate on doing away with fast fashion and the corresponding wastage of materials. If required, they should emerge as pioneers of sustainable fashion like Mud Jeans (Godart and Seong, 2017). They should also concentrate on no-cruelty in their products like Stella McCartney, abstinence from using harmful products like Forest Essential and green initiatives like Ecoalf, and communicate the same (Gahlot Sarkar et al., 2019). They should shift away from classical marketing practices and take up strategies focused on authenticity (Kerviler et al., 2021). Like in luxury fashion, sustainability should be ensured in luxury hospitality (Amatulli et al., 2021a), dining (Ahed, 2015) and other segments of luxury as well. 6.3 Limitations and further directions This article has a few limitations. The present research is conducted only on the Indian Gen Z customers. It can be replicated in other countries’ contexts to generalize the proposed model better. The statistical results may slightly change with a larger sample size. The study has only discussed the mediation role of luxury brand trust in consolidating the relationship between luxury brand attachment and luxury brand loyalty. Hence, further study can be conducted to check the multi-mediation role of luxury brand trust, luxury brand love, luxury brand pride and other brand outcome attributes. The current research does not comprise gender heterogeneity and cultural differences. Future research may incorporate the same and the contribution of luxury brand pride, luxury brand love and other attributes. References Abdullah, A. (2015), “A structural model of the relationships between brand image, brand trust and brand loyalty”, International Journal of Management Research & Review, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 137-45. Agnihotri, R. (2020), “Social media, customer engagement, and sales organizations: a research agenda”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 90, pp. 291-299. Ahed, K. (2015), “Toward a responsible luxury in the hotel industry”, Doctoral dissertation, Dublin Business School. Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1975), Belief, Attitude, Attention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research, Addison Wesley Publishing Company, Boston, MI. Amatulli, C., De Angelis, M., Korschun, D. and Romani, S. (2018), “Consumers’ perceptions of luxury brands’ CSR initiatives: an investigation of the role of status and conspicuous consumption”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 194, pp. 277-287. Amatulli, C., De Angelis, M., Pino, G. and Jain, S. (2021a), “Consumer reactions to unsustainable luxury: a cross-country analysis”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 412-452. Amatulli, C., De Angelis, M. and Stoppani, A. (2021b), “The appeal of sustainability in luxury hospitality: an investigation on the role of perceived integrity”, Tourism Management, Vol. 83, p. 104228. Arora, R. (2011), “8 P’s of luxury brand marketing”, available at: https://chasedistillery.wordpress.com/8- ps-of-luxury-marketing/ (accessed 20 August 2021). Atulkar, S. (2020), “Brand trust and brand loyalty in mall shoppers”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 559-572. PAGE 618 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022
Atwal, G. and Williams, A. (2017), Luxury Brand Marketing – the Experience is Everything! In Advances in Luxury Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, pp. 43-57. Bakir, A., Gentina, E. and de Araujo Gil, L. (2020), “What shapes adolescents ’ attitudes toward luxury brands? The role of self-worth, self-construal gender and national culture”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 57, p. 102208. Balconi, M., Sebastiani, R., Galeone, A.B. and Angioletti, L. (2020), “Sustainability in the fashion luxury branding. Using neuroscience to understand consumers’ intentions towards sustainable eco-luxury items”, Neuropsychological Trends, Vol. 27, pp. 65-74. Bazi, S., Filieri, R. and Gorton, M. (2020), “Customers’ motivation to engage with luxury brands on social media”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 112 No. C, pp. 223-235. Bendell, J. and Kleanthous, A. (2007), “Deeper luxury: quality and style when the world matters”, WWFUK, available at: http://d3nehc6yl9qzo4.cloudfront.net/downloads/deeperluxuryreport.pdf (accessed 12 June 2021). Blattberg, R.C. and Deighton, J. (1996), “Manage marketing by the customer equity test”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 74 No. 4, p. 136. Cavender, R.C. and Kincade, D.H. (2015), “A luxury brand management framework built from historical review and case study analysis”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 43 Nos 10/11, pp. 1083-1100. Chaudhuri, A. and Holbrook, M.B. (2001), “The chain of effects from brand trust and brand affect to brand performance: the role of brand loyalty”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 65 No. 2, pp. 81-93. Chung, Y. and Kim, A.J. (2020), “Effects of mergers and acquisitions on brand loyalty in luxury brands: the moderating roles of luxury tier difference and social media”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 120, pp. 434-442. Colella, G., Amatulli, C. and Martinez-Ruiz, M.P. (2019), “Social media marketing and luxury consumption: a literature”, International Journal of Marketing Studies, Vol. 11 No. 4. Cropanzano, R., Anthony, E.L., Daniels, S.R. and Hall, A.V. (2017), “Social exchange theory: a critical review with theoretical remedies”, Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 479-516. Dauriz, L., Remy, N. and Sandri, N. (2014), “Luxury shopping in the digital age. Perspectives on retail and Consumers Goods”, available at: www.mckinsey.com/industries/retail/our-insights/luxury-shopping-inthe-digital-age (accessed 30 August 2021). Dekhili, S. and Achabou, M.A. (2016), “Is it beneficial for luxury brands to embrace CSR practices”, in Kim, K.K. (Ed.), Celebrating America’s Pastimes: Baseball, Hot Dogs, Apple Pie and Marketing?, Springer, New York, NY, pp. 3-18. Dhaliwal, A., Singh, D.P. and Paul, J. (2020), “The consumer behavior of luxury goods: a review and research agenda”, Journal of Strategic Marketing, pp. 1-27, doi: 10.1080/0965254X.2020.1758198. Dijkstra, T. (1983), “Some comments on maximum likelihood and partial least squares methods”, Journal of Econometrics, Vol. 22 Nos 1/2, pp. 67-90. Djafarova, E. and Bowes, T. (2021), “‘Instagram made me buy it’: Generation Z impulse purchases in fashion industry”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 59, p. 102345. Dolbec, P.Y. and Chebat, J.C. (2013), “The impact of a flagship vs. a brand store on brand attitude, brand attachment and brand equity”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 89 No. 4, pp. 460-466. Doney, P.M. and Cannon, J.P. (1997), “An examination of the nature of trust in buyer-seller relationships”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 61 No. 2, pp. 35-51. Duffett, R.G. (2017), “The impact of a flagship vs. a brand store on brand attitude, brand attachment and brand equity”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 19-39. Esmaeilpour, F. (2015), “The role of functional and symbolic brand associations on brand loyalty: a study on luxury brands”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 467-484. Etikan, I. and Bala, K. (2017), “Sampling and sampling methods”, Biometrics & Biostatistics International Journal, Vol. 5 No. 6, p. 149. Euromonitor International (2021), “Passport. Luxury Goods in India- Analysis”, Country Report. VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 619
Farrag, D.A. (2017), “The young luxury consumer in Qatar”, Young Consumers, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 393-407. forestessentialsindia.com (2021), available at: www.forestessentialsindia.com/social-responsibility (accessed 31 August 2021). Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50. Franssen Willem, A. (2017), “CSR in the luxury industry, whether and how product-cause fit influences the effectiveness of a luxury brand’s CSR initiatives mediated by consumer skepticism”. Gahlot Sarkar, J., Sarkar, A. and Yadav, R. (2019), “Brand it green: young consumers’ brand attitudes and purchase intentions toward green brand advertising appeals”, Young Consumers, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 190-207. Garbarino, E. and Johnson, M.S. (1999), “The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment in customer relationships”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63 No. 2, pp. 70-87. Gardetti, M.A. (2020), “The basic aspects of luxury and its relations with sustainability”, Environmental Footprints and Eco-Design of Products and Processes, Springer, pp. 17-64. Gardetti, M.A. and Muthu, S.S. (2015), Handbook of Sustainable Luxury Textiles and Fashion, Vol 1, pp. 1-211, Springer, Gateway East, doi: 10.1007/978-981-287-633-1. Gilal, F.G., Gilal, N.G., Gilal, R.G., Gong, Z., Gilal, W.G. and Tunio, M.N. (2021), “The ties that bind: do brand attachment and brand passion translate into consumer purchase intention?”, Central European Management Journal, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 14-38. Godart, F. and Seong, S. (2017), “Is sustainable luxury fashion possible?”, Sustainable Luxury, Routledge, pp. 12-27. Godey, B., Manthiou, A., Pederzoli, D., Rokka, J., Aiello, G., Donvito, R. and Singh, R. (2016), “Social media marketing efforts of luxury brands: influence on brand equity and consumer behavior”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 12, pp. 5833-5841. Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C. and Sarstedt, M. (2013a), A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) , Sage, Thousand Oaks. Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2013b), “Partial least squares structural equation modeling: rigorous applications, better results and higher acceptance”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 46 Nos 1/2, pp. 1-12. Hair, J.F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C.M. and Mena, J.A. (2012), “An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 414-433. Hair, J.F., Astrachan, C.B., Moisescu, O.I., Radomir, L., Sarstedt, M., Vaithilingam, S. and Ringle, C.M. (2021), “Executing and interpreting applications of PLS-SEM: Updates for family business researchers”, Journal of Family Business Strategy, Vol. 12 No. 3, doi: 10.1016/j.jfbs.2020.100392. Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2015), “A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 115-135. Hernandez-Fernandez, A. and Lewis, M.C. (2019), “Brand authenticity leads to perceived value and brand trust”, European Journal of Management and Business Economics, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 222-238. Hogg, M.A., Terry, D.J. and White, K.M. (1995), “A tale of two theories: a critical comparison of identity theory with social identity theory”, Social Psychology Quarterly, Vol. 58 No. 4, p. 255. Hong, S.Y. and Nam, M.W. (2021), “Research on sustainable management strategies of luxury fashion brands in the era of pandemic”, The Korean Society of Science & Art, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 519-537. Hsiao, K., Lin, J., Wang, X., Lu, H. and Yu, H. (2010), “Antecedents and consequences of trust in online product recommendations: an empirical study in social shopping”, Online Information Review, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 935-953. Huaman-Ramirez, R. and Merunka, D. (2019), “Brand experience effects on brand attachment: the role of brand trust, age, and income”, European Business Review, Vol. 31 No. 5, pp. 610-645. PAGE 620 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022
Huang, S.M., Fang, S.R., Fang, S.C. and Huang, C.C. (2016), “The influences of brand benefits on brand loyalty: intermediate mechanisms”, Australian Journal of Management, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 141-160. Hwang, J., Choe, J.Y., Kim, H.M. and Jacey, J.J. (2021), “Human baristas and robot baristas: how does brand experience affect brand satisfaction, brand attitude, brand attachment, and brand loyalty?”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 99, p. 103050, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2021.103050. Inside Retail Asia (2020), available at: www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxsx76-y0MA (accessed 18 August 2021). Inside Retail Asia (2020), available at: www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxsx76-y0MA (accessed 6 June 2020). Jacob, I., Khanna, M. and Rai, K.A. (2020), “Attribution analysis of luxury brands: an investigation into consumer-brand congruence through conspicuous consumption”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 116, pp. 597-607. Jahn, B., Kunz, W. and Meyer, A. (2012), “The role of social media for luxury brands – motives for consumer engagement and opportunities for business”, Identity-Based Luxury Brand Management, Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden, pp. 221-236. Jain, S. (2020), “Assessing the moderating effect of subjective norm on luxury purchase intention: a study of gen Y consumers in India”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 48 No. 5, pp. 517-536. Jain, S. (2021), “Examining the moderating role of perceived risk and web atmospherics in online luxury purchase intention”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 585-605. Jain, S. and Mishra, S. (2020), “Luxury fashion consumption in sharing economy: a study of Indian millennials”, Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 171-189. Janssen, C., Vanhamme, J. and Leblanc, S. (2017), “Should luxury brands say it out loud? Brand conspicuousness and consumer perceptions of responsible luxury”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 77, pp. 167-174. Janssen, C., Vanhamme, J., Lindgreen, A. and Lefebvre, C. (2014), “The catch-22 of responsible luxury: effects of luxury product characteristics on consumers’ perception of fit with corporate social responsibility”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 119 No. 1, pp. 45-57. Japutra, A., Ekinci, Y. and Simkin, L. (2014), “Exploring Brand attachment, its determinants and outcomes”, Journal of Strategic Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 7, pp. 616-630. Kapferer, J.N. and Michaut-Denizeau, A. (2020), “Are millennials really more sensitive to sustainable luxury? A cross-generational international comparison of sustainability consciousness when buying luxury”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 35-47. Kataria, K.A. (2020), available at: www.newindianexpress.com/magazine/2020/apr/12/its-time-gen-z-isready-to-rule-the-world-2128044.html Keller, K. (2009), “Managing the growth tradeoff: challenges and opportunities in luxury branding”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 16 Nos 5/6, pp. 290-301. Kerviler, G., Gentina, E. and Heuvinck, N. (2021), “Research: how to position a luxury brand as sustainable”, Harvard business review, available at: https://hbr.org/2021/09/research-how-to-position-aluxury-brand-as-sustainable Khadim, R.A., Hanan, M.A., Arshad, A., Saleem, N. and Khadim, N.A. (2018), “Revisiting antecedents of brand loyalty: impact of perceived social media communication with brand trust and brand equity as mediators”, Academy of Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 1-13. Khan, S.W. and Zaman, U. (2021), “Linking celebrity endorsement and luxury brand purchase intentions through signaling theory: a serial-mediation model involving psychological ownership, brand trust and brand attitude”, Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Science, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 586-613. Kim, A.J. and Ko, E. (2010), “Impacts of luxury fashion brand’s social media marketing on customer relationship and purchase intention”, Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 164-171. Kim, A.J. and Ko, E. (2012), “Do social media marketing activities enhance customer equity? An empirical study of luxury fashion Brand”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 65 No. 10, pp. 1480-1486. Kline, R.B. (1998), Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, Guilford Press. VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 621
Ko, E., Costello, J.P. and Taylor, C.R. (2019), “What is a luxury brand? A new definition and review of the literature”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 99, pp. 405-413. Kumagai, K. (2021), “Sustainable plastic clothing and brand luxury: a discussion of contradictory consumer behaviour”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 994-1013. Kuo, C.H. and Nagasawa, S. (2020), “Deciphering luxury consumption behavior from knowledge perspectives”, Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 1-21. Kwan Soo Shin, S., Amenuvor, F.E., Basilisco, R. and Owusu-Antwi, K. (2019), “Brand trust and brand loyalty: a moderation and mediation perspective”, Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 1-17. Lee Park, C., Fracarolli Nunes, M. and Paiva, E.L. (2021), “(Mis)managing overstock in luxury: burning inventory and brand trust to the ground”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 1664-1674. Lee, S.H. and Workman, J.E. (2015), “Determinants of brand loyalty: self-construal, self-expressive brands, and brand attachment”, International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 12-20. Li, M.W., Teng, H.Y. and Chen, C.Y. (2020), “Unlocking the customer engagement-brand loyalty relationship in tourism social media: the roles of brand attachment and customer trust”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 44, pp. 184-192. Lin, T.L. and Ku, T.H. (2018), “Effects of luxury brand perceptions on brand attachment and purchase intention: a comparative analysis among consumers in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan”, South African Journal of Business Management, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 1-9. Liu, Y., Kou, Y., Guan, Z., Hu, J. and Pu, B. (2020), “Exploring hotel brand attachment: the mediating role of sentimental value”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 55, p. 102143. MacKenzie, S.B., Podsakoff, P.M. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2011), “Construct measurement and validation procedures in MIS and behavioral research: integrating new and existing techniques”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 293-334. Mainolfi, G. (2019), “Exploring materialistic bandwagon behaviour in online fashion consumption: a survey of Chinese luxury consumers”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 120, pp. 286-293. Mattandnat.com (2021), available at: https://mattandnat.com/collections/outerwear-collection (accessed 11 August 2021). Mehrabian, A. and Russell, J.A. (1974), An Approach to Environmental Psychology, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Mooney, C.Z. and Duval, R.D. (1993), Bootstrapping: A Nonparametric Approach to Statistical Inference, Sage, London. Moreau, C.P., Prandelli, E., Schreier, M. and Hieke, S. (2020), “Customization in luxury brands: can Valentino get personal?”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 57 No. 5, pp. 937-947. Muniz, F. and Guzman, F. (2021), “Overcoming the conflicting values of luxury branding and CSR by leveraging celebrity endorsements to build brand equity”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 347-358. Olsˇanova, K., Escobar Rı ´os, A., Cook, G., Kral, P. and Zlati c, M. (2021), “Impact of the awareness of brand-related CSR activities on purchase intention for luxury brands”, Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. 18 No. 3, doi: 10.1108/SRJ-10-2020-0398. Panigyrakis, G., Panopoulos, A. and Koronaki, E. (2020), “Looking for luxury CSR practices that make more sense: the role of corporate identity and consumer attitude”, Journal of Marketing Communications, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 666-684. Park, J., Song, H. and Ko, E. (2011), “The effect of the lifestyles of social networking service users on luxury brand loyalty”, Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 182-192. Pencarelli, T., Ali Taha, V., Sˇ kerhakov a, V., Valentiny, T. and Fedorko, R. (2020), “Luxury products and sustainability issues from the perspective of young Italian consumers”, Sustainability, Vol. 12 No. 1, p. 245. Pereira, B., Teah, K., Sung, B. and Teah, M. (2019), “Building blocks of the luxury Jewellery industry: conversations with a CEO”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 817-829. PAGE 622 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022
Petravici ūte, K., S _ ˇeinauskiene´, B., Rūtelione, A. and Krukowski, K. (2021), “Linking luxury brand _ perceived value, brand attachment, and purchase intention: the role of consumer vanity”, Sustainability, Vol. 13 No. 12, p. 6912, doi: 10.3390/su13126912. Phan, M., Thomas, R. and Heine, K. (2011), “Social media and luxury brand management: the case of Burberry”, Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 213-222. Phau, I. and Prendergast, G. (2000), “Consuming luxury brands: the relevance of the ‘rarity principle’”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 122-138. Pinto, D.C., Herter, M.M., Gonc¸alves, D. and Sayin, E. (2019), “Can luxury brands be ethical? Reducing the sophistication liability of luxury brands”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 233, pp. 1366-1376. Pir, E. and Derino¨zlu¨, E. (2021), “The mediating role of price sensitivity in the effect of trust and loyalty to luxury brands on the brand preference”, Upravlenets, Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 70-84. Qiu, Q., Wang, Y., Richard, J. and Wang, X. (2017), “The impact of country of brand image on symbolic value of luxury brands”, Asian Journal of Business Research, Vol. 7 No. 1, doi: 10.14707/ ajbr.170033. Rao, Q. and Ko, E. (2021), “Impulsive purchasing and luxury brand loyalty in we chat mini program”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 33 No. 10, doi: 10.1108/APJML-08-2020-0621. Rose, G.M., Merchant, A., Orth, U.R. and Horstmann, F. (2016), “Emphasizing brand heritage: does it work? And how?”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 2, pp. 936-943. Sanyal, S.N., Mazumder, R., Singh, R. and Sharma, Y. (2021), “Uncertainty and affluent teenagers’ luxury buying-decision: the role of avoidance-related indecisiveness”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 58, p. 102305. Sen, S. and Bhattacharya, C.B. (2001), “Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 225-243. Septianto, F., Seo, Y. and Errmann, A.C. (2021), “Distinct effects of pride and gratitude appeals on sustainable luxury brands”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 169 No. 2, pp. 211-224. Shahid, S. and Farooqi, R. (2019), “Consumer behavior towards personal luxury goods: the mediating role of brand attachment”, IUP Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 7-29. Shavitt, S. (1989), “Products, personalities and situations in attitude functions: implications for consumer behavior”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 300-305. Shimul, A.S., Phau, I. and Lwin, M. (2019), “Conceptualising luxury brand attachment: scale development and validation”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 675-690. Shmueli, G., Sarstedt, M., Hair, J.F., Cheah, J.-H., Ting, H., Vaithilingam, S. and Ringle, C.M. (2019), “Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: guidelines for using PLSpredict”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 53 No. 11, pp. 2322-2347. Silverstein, M.J. and Fiske, N. (2003), “Luxury for the masses”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 81 No. 4, pp. 48-59. Sipila¨, J., Alavi, S., Edinger-Schons, L.M., Do¨rfer, S. and Schmitz, C. (2021), “Corporate social responsibility in luxury contexts: potential pitfalls and how to overcome them”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 280-303. Sjostrom, T., Corsi, A.M. and Lockshin, L. (2016), “What characterises luxury products? A study across three product categories”, International Journal of Wine Business Research, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 76-95. Sreejesh, S., Sarkar, A. and Roy, S. (2016), “Validating a scale to measure consumer’s luxury brand aspiration”, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 465-478. Stets, J.E. and Burke, P.J. (2000), “Identity theory and social identity theory”, Social Psychology Quarterly, Vol. 63 No. 3, pp. 224-237. Streukens, S. and Leroi-Werelds, S. (2016), “Bootstrapping and PLS-SEM: a step-by-step guide to get more out of your bootstrap results”, European Management Journal, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 618-632. Thangavel, P., Pathak, P. and Chandra, B. (2021), “Millennials and generation Z: a generational cohort analysis of Indian consumers”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 28 No. 7, pp. 2157-2177. Thomson, M., MacInnis, D.J. and Park, C.W. (2005), “The ties that bind: measuring the strength of consumers’ emotional attachments to brands”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 77-91. VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 623
Tucker, W.T. (1964), “The development of brand loyalty”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 32-35. upasana.in (2021), available at: www.upasana.in/pages/our-philosophy (accessed 12 August 2021). Wirtz, J., Holmqvist, J. and Fritze, M.P. (2020), “Luxury services”, Journal of Service Management, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 665-691. Wong, J.Y. and Dhanesh, G.S. (2017), “Corporate social responsibility (CSR) for ethical corporate identity management: framing CSR as a tool for managing the CSR-luxury paradox online”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 420-439. Wuestefeld, T., Hennigs, N., Schmidt, S. and Wiedmann, K.P. (2012), “The impact of brand heritage on customer perceived value”, Der Markt, Vol. 51 Nos 2/3, pp. 51-61. Further reading Bagozzi, R.P. (1974), “Marketing as an organized behavioral system of exchange”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 77-81. cfda.com (2021), available at: https://cfda.com/resources/materials/detail/re-verso (accessed 23 May 2021). De Matos, C.A. and Rossi, C.A.V. (2008), “Word-of-mouth communications in marketing: a meta-analytic review of the antecedents and moderators”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 578-596. Jain, S. (2019), “Exploring relationship between value perception and luxury purchase intention: a case of Indian millennials”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 414-439. Kim, J.-H. (2019), “Imperative challenge for luxury brands: Generation Y consumers’ perceptions of luxury fashion brands’ e-commerce sites”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 47 No. 2, pp. 220-244. Morris, T. (2016), “It is 6 times more expensive to win a new customer than to retain an existing one”, available at: www.business2community.com/strategy/6-times-expensive-win-new-customer-retainexisting-one-01483871#::text=%E2%80%A2%20It%20is%20six%20to%20seven%20times%20more,the% 20probability%20of%20selling%20to%20a%20new%20customer Pentina, I., Guilloux, V. and Micu, A.C. (2018), “Exploring social media engagement behaviors in the context of luxury brands”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 55-69. Thakre, S. and Malik, M. (2021), “Gen Z- ‘the triple a luxury consumers’”, available at: https://lcbs.edu.in/ blog/post/gen-z-the-triple-a-luxury-consumers/ (accessed 29 August 2021). PAGE 624 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022
Appendix Table A1 The variables scale used in the research Construct Item: description Scale Source Luxury brand Attributes (LBA) Prestigiousness: the admiration acquired by an individual from his society What do you think a luxury brand indicate to you? Qiu et al. (2017), Ko et al. (2019) Heritage: rich history of luxury brands in terms of years of excellent craftsmanship and quality of products Arora (2011), Wuestefeld et al. (2012) Exclusivity: inaccessibility of a luxury brand’s products to the mass and their accessibility to only selected people Phau and Prendergast (2000), Moreau et al. (2020) Premium price: higher price, beyond the affordable range of most people, of products of a luxury brand Keller (2009), Arora (2011), Sjostrom et al. (2016) COO: the country of origin of famous luxury brands Qiu et al. (2017), Keller (2009), Sjostrom et al. (2016) Luxury service: the high profile, exclusive services related to purchase of luxury products, offered by luxury brands Arora (2011), Dhaliwal et al. (2020), Wirtz et al. (2020) LPA Exquisite craftsmanship: excellent designs of luxury products What do you think a luxury product should possess? Arora (2011), Dhaliwal et al. (2020) Uniqueness: exclusive design, product features of a luxury product that makes it stand out Esmaeilpour (2015), Sjostrom et al. (2016) Customization: Incorporation of product features according to customer’s desire, in a luxury product Arora (2011), Moreau et al. (2020) Natural paucity: usage of scarce materials like platinum or diamond in luxury products Arora (2011), Pereira et al. (2019) SMA Interaction: interaction with customers by luxury brands on social media to know them, provide product updates and other things accordingly Which of these SMA do you think plays a vital role in influencing luxury purchase? Kim and Ko (2012), Jahn et al. (2012) Informative entertainment: Publishing videos of manufacturing, statement from celebrities who are users of the luxury brand’s products, and others by luxury brands Kim and Ko (2012), Bazi et al. (2020) Personalization: sending of exclusive offers and invitation to events by luxury brands to customers Kim and Ko (2012) Integration (online and offline marketing): seamless facilitation between online and offline marketing and sales by luxury brands Dauriz et al. (2014), Inside Retail Asia (2020) Reviews and comments: customer reviews and comments about luxury products and brands on social media Godey et al. (2016), Agnihotri (2020) Recommendations: championing of a luxury product or brand by a customer Godey et al. (2016), Agnihotri (2020) CSRA Congruent (with core business): the extent of similarity between a luxury brand’s values and its CSR activities Which of the mentioned CSR acts of a luxury brand would appeal more to you? Sipila¨ et al. (2021), Sen and Bhattacharya (2001), Franssen Willem (2017) Congruent (with customers’ personality): the extent of similarity between the values contributed by a luxury brand’s CSR activities and the brand’s personal values Sen and Bhattacharya (2001), Jacob et al. (2020) Transparent communication: luxury brands should communicate about their CSR activities through ads or other media to influence customer perception about the brand Pencarelli et al. (2020), Janssen et al. (2017), Sipila¨ et al. (2021) SUA Green initiatives: recycling and reusing materials to manufacture luxury products, by luxury brands Which of the mentioned sustainability activities do you think is essential for luxury brands to undertake for the long run? Amatulli et al. (2021a, 2021b), mattandnat.com (2021) No cruelty: abstinence from using animal products like skin and fur to make luxury products mattandnat.com (2021) Unharmful (non-toxic) chemicals: abstinence from using carcinogen and other harmful raw materials in luxury products, mainly luxury cosmetics upasana.in (2021), forestessentialsindia.com (2021) (continued) VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 625
Corresponding author Subhajit Bhattacharya can be contacted at: [email protected] For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website: www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm Or contact us for further details: [email protected] Table A1 Construct Item: description Scale Source Consider your favorite luxury brand that you have mentioned in the beginning of the questionnaire. Imagine it has incorporated some of the 5- and 4-pointer attributes that you have marked above. If the brand already consists of the mentioned attributes, then well and good. Answer the following questions based on that Luxury brand attachment Willingness to pay a premium price Would you prefer a pay a premium price and buy a product from the brand? Lin and Ku (2018) Meeting emotional and functional purpose Will a luxury product from the brand serve your purpose better than any other product from a normal brand for the same purpose? Consider both emotional and functional purpose Thomson et al. (2005), Petravici ūte_ et al. (2021) Overall willingness to purchase How much overall willingness would you possess when it comes to buying luxury products from the brand? Shahid and Farooqi (2019) Luxury brand trust Willingness to recommend about the brand How likely would you be to recommend the brand to your peers and colleagues? Kuo and Nagasawa (2020), Khadim et al. (2018) Willingness to discuss about the brand How likely would you be to discuss about the brand with your peers and colleagues? Kuo and Nagasawa (2020), Khadim et al. (2018) Overall trust in the brand Do you believe that the brand would be trustworthy? Hernandez-Fernandez and Lewis (2019) Luxury brand loyalty Meeting overall satisfaction How much satisfied would you be after you buy luxury product from the brand? Huang et al. (2016), Esmaeilpour (2015) Meeting overall expectations Would possessing a luxury product from the brand fulfill your overall expectations better than a similar product from a normal brand? Huang et al. (2016), Esmaeilpour (2015) Willingness to buy new product category Would you buy products from of a new product category, if the luxury brand introduces the same? Park et al. (2011), Chaudhuri and Holbrook (2001) Willingness to buy newly launched product Would you enjoy to the extent you desire, purchasing a newly launched product from the brand? Park et al. (2011), Tucker (1964) PAGE 626 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j VOL. 23 NO. 4 2022
Effect of popularity and peer pressure on attitudes toward luxury among teens Luciana A. Gil, Abhishek Dwivedi and Lester W. Johnson Luciana A. Gil is based at the School of Business and Economics, University Diego Portales, Santiago, Chile. Abhishek Dwivedi is based at the School of Management and Marketing, Charles Sturt University, Albury, Australia. Lester W. Johnson is based at the Swinburne Business School, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Australia. Abstract Purpose – Peer pressure and popularity are important issues for teenagers, potentially affecting teenagers’ attitudes toward luxury products. In turn, peer pressure and popularity can potentially be affected by self-concept clarity (how clearly teens view themselves). The authors empirically aim to investigate these relationships using data from a sample of Brazilian teens and find that self-concept clarity has a significant effect on peer pressure, popularity and social consumption motivation, which, by itself, directly affects attitudes toward luxury items. Design/methodology/approach – The total sample consisted of 558 teenagers between the ages of 12 and 19 (grades 7 through 12). Hypotheses were tested using structural equation modeling. Findings – The results of the study suggest that teenagers’ social consumption motivations positively affect attitudes toward luxury. Originality/value – The paper first explicitly examines the impact of peer pressure and popularity on attitude toward luxury among teenagers. Keywords Popularity, Attitude toward luxury, Peer pressure, Social consumption motivation, Teenagers Paper type Research paper Introduction Adolescence is marked heavily by change. Body, mind and soul are continuously being reshaped during these years. Teenagers are, at the same time, intending to define their own identity and relate successfully to others (Gulland, 2006). They need to relearn constantly to behave appropriately (Steinberg, 1993). Academic interest for this age group is relatively new, as they seemed economically irrelevant a few years back (La Ferle et al., 2000). However, currently, they are perceived as important consumers, as their disposable income has grown steadily over the years (Moses, 2000). For example, Latin American teens are reported to have a spending power of approximately US$69bn (Sommer, 2012). In addition, many times, the adolescent is the informant and, eventually, decision-taker of family purchases, as they are better informed about many things. These new developments have raised interest in this age group (Gil et al., 2012). “Correct” behavior becomes a rather loose term among adolescents (Hopson and Adams, 1976). Belk (1988) shows that teenagers seek to define themselves through the acquisition and accumulation of a selection of consumption objects. Yet, others conclude that teen consumption focuses on specific things that friends use, the so called “right things”, as a way to fit into their social group (Moses, 2000; Muniz and O’Guinn, 2001; Siegel et al., 2001; Isaksen and Roper, 2012). They need to maintain this fragile equilibrium between self-identity and participation in society, which seems even contradictory. This pressure to fit in may lead teens to align their values to those of their peer group (Youniss and Smollar, 1985) and even share very similar interpretations of reality (Solomon, 1983). Received 4 October 2016 Revised 5 January 2017 Accepted 8 January 2017 PAGE 84 YOUNG CONSUMERS VOL. 18 NO. 1 2017, pp. 84-93, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 1747-3616 DOI 10.1108/YC-10-2016-00639
The way each person deals with outer pressures will ultimately determine their consumption choices and attitude toward luxury as well. This study investigates how perceptions of peer pressure, popularity and self-concept clarity relate to teens’ social consumption motivations and, through it, to their attitude toward luxury. Using a framework that represents a combination of interrelated fields such as consumer psychology, sociology and marketing, the objectives of this paper are: to understand the impact of popularity, peer pressure and self-clarity on social consumption motivations among teenagers; to examine how peer pressure, popularity and self-clarity are related among teens; and to investigate how social consumption motivations relate to attitudes toward luxury. The theoretical contribution of our study is that we reconcile teenagers’ normative influence susceptibility with the self-concept theory to explain social consumption motivations and ultimately attitude toward luxury, offering a novel mechanism of how teenagers’ peer pressure and popularity affect attitude toward luxury. Hypotheses development Peer pressure Peer pressure can influence how adolescents dress, what kind of music they listen to and in what types of behavior they engage, including even risky behaviors such as using drugs, tobacco, alcohol and engaging in sex (Robin and Johnson, 1996; Santor et al., 2000). Meeus et al. (2002) find that support from peers relates to a positive sense of identity and that peer acceptance and academic performance relate to self-concept in early adolescence (Harter et al., 1992). The intensity of peer pressure varies from situation to situation. Children and teenagers give in to peer pressure because they desire to be liked or because they are concerned that others may ridicule them if they do not go along with the group (Wooten, 2006). For instance, clothing is one of the most important status symbols for youth (Elliott and Leonard, 2004). Consequently, for many consumers, the desire to impress others, including peers and those in different social or age groups, is very significant. Therefore, they will purchase specific brands of clothing to achieve the support of others (Prendergast and Wong, 2003). Peer pressure is a powerful force among teenagers because of its power to change the way teens behave and care about external influences such as social consumption motivation. Furthermore, previous studies find that even teenagers with high self-esteem and self-confidence are subject to peer pressure (Michell and Amos, 1997). Thus, peers can have a negative or positive influence on knowledge, motivations, attitudes, perceptions, beliefs and behaviors. Therefore, we hypothesize: H1. Peer pressure positively affects social consumption motivation. Popularity There are two methods to access popularity. One is asking participants to nominate people who they like and dislike (Parkhurst and Hopmeyer, 1998). The alternative approach is to require participants to explicate their perceptions on the popularity of their peers and of themselves (Parkhurst and Hopmeyer, 1998; Santor et al., 2000). De Bruyn and Van Den Boom (2005) concluded that both types of popularity are correlated with self-esteem and through it to lower levels of peer role strain (De Bruyn and Van Den Boom, 2005). Their study concentrated on social behaviors and found that what we call “perceived popularity” (they called it “consensual popularity”) is related to fashion style (“dresses hip”). This confirms that adolescents intend to fit in by some visual cues. Thus, we hypothesize as follows: H2. Popularity positively affects social consumption motivation. VOL. 18 NO. 1 2017 YOUNG CONSUMERS PAGE 85
Self-concept clarity Self is a primary research topic in consumer psychology (Belk, 1988). Self-concept encapsulates personal traits and characteristics such as personality and self-perceptions (both the ideal self and the actual self). Self-concept is what comes to mind when we think about ourselves (Neisser, 1993). Most prior studies about self are found in the arenas of psychology and sociology, and studies connecting self with consumer behavior are recent and not large in number (Claiborne and Sirgy, 2015; Wong and Ahuvia, 1998). During adolescence, the process of building one’s own character takes place. For that reason, examining self-concept assists in understanding how attitudes and consumption represent a way to express a teen’s individual self to the outside world. The stability of the self-concept can be gauged with the construct called self-concept clarity, which is the degree of consistency with which an individual perceives himself (Campbell et al., 1996). A well-developed self-concept is less susceptible to the influence of external factors. Individuals with a lucid self-concept deal better with stress and have healthier behaviors such as positive self-talk and better mental skills (Campbell, 1990; Campbell et al., 1996). Past research establishes a positive relationship between high self-concept clarity and some indices of psychological health and well-being such as high self-esteem and lack of mental problems (Campbell, 1990; Campbell et al., 1996). Social consumption motivation (the motivation to display consumption behavior to others) increases with age and maturity (Churchill and Moschis, 1979) and plays a critical role in the development of teenagers’ sense of self. Previous findings show that self-concept clarity is positively related to self-esteem (Campbell, 1990; Erikson, 1959), and individuals with high self-esteem are less influenced by external sources. Campbell (1990) finds that individuals with low self-concept clarity are more susceptible to and dependent on the social environment. The findings imply that teenagers with high self-concept clarity would interpret their own behavior as separate from the social context. Hence, we hypothesize: H3. Self-concept clarity relates negatively with social consumption motivation. Self-esteem is positively related to self-concept clarity and popularity (Campbell et al., 1996; De Bruyn and Van Den Boom, 2005). A poorly developed or ambiguous self-concept may direct people to rely on, and to be very affected by, external sources such as peer pressure, mass media, social consumption motivations and other values such as materialism, which can influence individuals’ attitudes and decision making processes (Kernis et al., 2000), giving support to the following hypotheses: H4. Self-concept clarity relates negatively with peer pressure. H5. Self-concept clarity relates negatively with popularity. Social consumption motivation Luxury is something that many individuals cannot easily afford. However, some consumers continue to purchase luxury products, whether they can afford them or not, because luxury products may provide a sense of power or control over others or because possessing brands may be identified by their peers (Kapferer, 1998; Prendergast and Wong, 2003; Ruffin, 2007). Peer influence is particularly important among younger consumers, who often crave the attention and status that luxury brands can provide (Wooten, 2006). Many younger consumers search for products that they consider prestigious, through association with a specific designer, brand name or an emerging trend. In many ways, these products fulfill some type of social requirement (Heaney et al., 2005). For those consumers with discretionary income, a significant portion of these funds are often spent on goods that accommodate a social need or message (Heaney et al., 2005; Ruffin, 2007). PAGE 86 YOUNG CONSUMERS VOL. 18 NO. 1 2017
Social consumption motivation means that individuals want to display their consumption behavior to others. The wish to impress others with their ability to pay for prestigious brands motivates consumers (Mason, 1981), and social consumption motivation makes consumers more aware of social cues related to brand consumption. Martin and Turley (2003) establish that social consumption motivation predicts the preference for design, variety, excitement and ambience, whereas Clark’s (2006) findings show that social consumption motivation positively affects prestige sensitivity. Clark et al. (2007) indicate that consumers’ attention to social comparison information has a positive influence on status consumption. These findings show that consumer interest and evaluation of different brands often reflect a strong tendency to identify with the brand’s symbolic nature and to identify with their own social motivations. Therefore, we hypothesize as follows: H6. Social consumption motivation relates positively to attitude toward luxury. Figure 1 depicts our conceptual model. Method We collected data using a paper-based self-administered survey of high school students in São Paulo state of Brazil. The population of interest includes high school students aged between 12 and 19 years, corresponding to grades 7 through to grade 12. We collected data from three private high schools in the city of Santos. Unlike the USA, “private” schools in Brazil are not associated with affluence but cater to students from all socioeconomic backgrounds. We used school tuition fee as an indicator of socioeconomic status and to obtain a diverse sample selected three schools that represented a range of tuition fees. We recruited students for the survey based on cooperation with schools as well as receiving parental/guardian authorizations of survey participation. We advised the students that participation was entirely voluntary, and their responses would be held with strict confidence. The students with the requisite authorizations were invited to attempt the questionnaires in class. Instrument and measures We first prepared the survey instrument in English that was then translated into Portuguese by a native speaker external to the project. A different native Portuguese speaker (also fluent in English) translated the instrument back into English. We kept the wording of the Figure 1 Conceptual model Atude towards luxury Social consumpon movaon Peer Pressure Popularity Self-concept Clarity H1 (+) H6 (+) H2 (+) H3 (–) H4 (–) H5 (–) VOL. 18 NO. 1 2017 YOUNG CONSUMERS PAGE 87
items in the instrument simple and straightforward to reduce the risks of ambiguity and item demand characteristics. We attempted to minimize the effects of potential common method bias through several procedural techniques mentioned in Podsakoff et al. (2003, p. 899), who state that “there is no single best method for handling the problem”. Some of the procedural remedies adopted were breaking up the questionnaire into sub-sections with respective introductions (to increase psychological separation of the variables), avoiding item inter-mixing and ensuring respondent anonymity. We ensured that the questionnaire items did not contain hidden cues to respondents (i.e. item demand characteristics), also a potential source of common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003). We operationalize all the scales using multi-item seven-point Likert scales (anchored at 1 “Strongly Disagree” to 7 “Strongly Agree”). We measure peer pressure using 11 items derived from Santor et al. (2000). Statements include items such as “I give into peer pressure easily” and “When at school, if a group of people asked me to do something, it would be hard to say no”. Popularity was measured using 11 items based on Santor et al. (2000). Sample statements such as “I often do things just to be popular with people at school” and “It’s important that people think I’m popular” comprise the scale. We measure social consumption motivation using four items based on Moschis and Churchill (1978) and Moschis (1981). Before the items are presented, the participants are instructed to think about this question – “What is important to know before purchasing a product?” Sample items that follow this scale include “What others think of different brands or products” and “What brands or products to buy to make a good impression on others”. We measure self-concept clarity using 12 items derived from Campbell et al. (1996). Sample statements include “On one day I might have one opinion of myself and on another day I might have a different opinion” and “I seldom experience conflict between the different aspects of my personality”. Lastly, we measure attitude toward luxury using a six-item measure that is developed based on the work of Dubois et al. (2005). Sample items are “All things considered, I rather like luxury” and “I could talk about luxury for hours”. Results Sample description A total of 558 students across three high schools between the ages of 12 and 19 attempted the survey. We collected demographic data pertaining to ten demographic characteristics: gender, age, ownership of mobile phone, products purchased with allowance money, job, parents’ relationship status, parents’ education, grade level, number of siblings and the number of televisions at home. Out of 558 respondents, 40 per cent are 17 years old. Around 75 per cent of the respondents have at least three televisions at home, 85 per cent of the sample owns a mobile phone and nearly 65 per cent spend their own allowances on entertainment, clothes and shoes. Over half (i.e. 51 per cent) of the respondents have at least one brother or sister. Around 84 per cent of the respondents are not engaged in any employment. The sample is balanced in terms of gender representation, as 44 per cent of the respondents are male, and 43 per cent of the respondents are female (13 per cent did not answer). Data analysis We used structural equation modeling for analysis conducted with IBM’s AMOS 20.0. We first examine the measurement model using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) followed by estimating the hypotheses. Prior to estimating the hypotheses, we revised the measurement model. As a part of examining the measurement properties, we first examined the severity of common method bias using the Harman single factor test. Using CFA, we estimated a general common-methods factor that elicited a significant chi-square (2 4,938.32, df 902, p 0.05) with unacceptable fit to data (e.g. CFI 0.45, PAGE 88 YOUNG CONSUMERS VOL. 18 NO. 1 2017
SRMR 0.010). An unrotated exploratory factor analysis confirms this finding, whereby the first factor accounted for around 18 per cent of the total variance. The test suggests that common method bias does not seem to be problematic, though method effects may be present in many studies of this type and cannot be fully eliminated. Measurement model refinement We estimate a 44-item and 5-factor measurement model with the observed items loading on respective constructs. The model elicits a significant chi-square (2 2067.65; p 0.05) with 892 degrees of freedom. Given the sample-size sensitivity of the chi-square statistic, other indices of model fit are examined (i.e. normed 2 2.31, CFI 0.84, SRMR 0.055 and RMSEA 0.049). Given the effect of model complexity (i.e. the number of observed variables) and the sample size on fit indices (Sharma et al., 2005), our measurement model does not indicate an unsatisfactory fit to data (Sharma et al., 2005). Additionally, because of the sheer number of indicators involved per construct, some of the standardized loadings of the indicators on respective factors were not significant (Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer, 2001), indicating that the scales needed further purification. Thus, for each construct, we removed items with factor loadings below 0.40 (Netemeyer et al., 2003). A total of seven such items were removed: three items from peer pressure and two items each from popularity and self-concept clarity. The resulting 37-item, 5-factor measurement model was re-estimated, which yielded an acceptable fit, i.e. 2 (617) 1,265.53, p 0.05; normed 2 2.05, CFI 0.90; SRMR 0.057; RMSEA 0.043. Further testing revealed that all scale reliabilities (i.e. Cronbach’s alpha estimates) exceeded 0.70. Corrected item-total correlations exceeded the cut-off of 0.30 (Field, 2005) supporting scale reliability. The standardized items loaded adequately on expected constructs were significant (p 0.05) and exceeded 0.40 in magnitude (Netemeyer et al., 2003), thereby indicating convergent validity. We also examined the 95 per cent confidence interval (CI) around the correlation estimate between any two constructs, taking one pair at a time, for all pairs involved. The 95 per cent CI does not include the estimate 1.0 indicative of discriminant validity. Structural model results The structural model, estimated using maximum-likelihood method, yields acceptable fit: 2 (620) 1,269.66 (p 0.05); normed 2 2.05; TLI 0.89; CFI 0.90, SRMR 0.048 and RMSEA 0.043. Peer pressure exerts a direct impact on social consumption motivation [standardized path coefficient, () 0.19, critical ratio (C.R.) 2.46, p 0.05]. Hence, H1 is supported. H2 is supported because popularity has a direct significant impact on social consumption motivation ( 0.25, C.R. 3.56, p 0.01). Social consumption motivation exerts a direct significant impact on attitude toward luxury ( 0.54, C.R. 9.63, p 0.01), supporting H6. Additionally as expected, self-concept clarity exerted significant negative effects on social consumption motivation ( 0.14, C.R. 2.72, p 0.01), peer pressure ( 0.40, C.R. 5.40, p 0.01) and popularity ( 0.36, C.R. 6.00, p 0.01), supporting H3, H4 and H5 respectively. We present the conclusion next. Conclusion The results of our study suggest that teenagers’ social consumption motivations positively affect attitudes toward luxury. Teens that want to explicitly display their luxury consumption to others will likely have favorable attitude toward luxury. Our study compares favorably with Prendergast and Wong (2003) who observe a positive relationship between social consumption motivation and expenditure on luxury brands. Our results are also broadly consistent with studies on conspicuous consumption behavior (Ngai and Cho, 2012; Phau and Prendergast, 2000). An implication of our results for luxury brand marketers interested in targeting younger consumers is that they may consider positioning brands using a social VOL. 18 NO. 1 2017 YOUNG CONSUMERS PAGE 89
appeal platform. Luxury brands when positioned along these lines will likely engender more favorable attitudes toward luxury products. Peer pressure and popularity directly impact teens’ social consumption motivations. These two external forces seem to have a bearing on teen motivations to display their luxury consumption to others. Probably that is why parents, researchers and educators in general worry so much about these two big influencers of teen’s behavior: peer pressure and popularity (Wooten, 2006; Santor et al., 2000). Our results complement prior studies that observe a positive relationship between interpersonal (or reference group) influence and luxury consumption of young consumers (O’Cass and McEwen, 2004; Park et al., 2008). Interestingly, our expectation of a negative effect of self-concept clarity on peer pressure, popularity and social consumption motivations was empirically supported. The findings suggest that teens’ with higher self-concept clarity are less inclined to be influenced by their peers, complementing the studies by Campbell (1990) and Kernis et al. (2000). A theoretical implication of the finding is that teens with stable self-concepts are potentially more independent in their social consumption decision-making in comparison with teens with relatively less stable self-concepts. A managerial implication for luxury brands is that teens with stable concepts are less likely to be swayed by offline and online word-of-mouth and should possibly be targeted with more individualized marketing communications. Self-concept clarity exerts a negative effect on popularity, suggesting that teens with more stable self-concepts are less susceptible to the desire to “fit in” in terms of appearance. Theoretically, the findings imply that teens with higher self-concept clarity are comfortable with their projected social selves. Managerially, such teen are less likely to follow the bandwagon in terms of “the in” fashion styles instead likely adhering to a unique sense of fashion. Luxury fashion marketers may consider creating fashion portfolios that cater to unique fashion needs of teenage consumers. Lastly, self-concept clarity was negatively associated with social consumption motivations, suggesting that teens with greater self-concept clarity are less motivated to display their consumption behavior to others. Managerially, the finding implies that teens with greater self-concept clarity are less likely to engage in conspicuous (or “show off”) consumption. An implication for luxury clothing design is that teens with greater self-concept clarity may not prefer “loud” and “over-the-top” designs, likely preferring subtle design elements. For this segment of teens, luxury brands might have a chance in using small or even no logos at all. Actually according to Turunen and Laaksonen (2011), there is some new trend about smaller logos among luxury brands that is gaining more members with the time passing, the traditional big logos are getting called as “loud logos” and they are not being the top preferred choice like it used to be in the past. Overall, the negative effects of self-concept clarity in our research model imply that luxury brand managers need to thoroughly research their teenage audience prior to devising marketing strategies as traditionally held assumptions about teenagers being swayed by peer influence and craving popularity may not hold across all teenagers. Future research might examine this finding in more detail. We examined a direct-effects framework in this research. Future research efforts may examine moderating variables that may either strengthen or weaken the hypothesized effects. Young consumers’ personality traits may interact with the effect of popularity in explaining social consumption motivation. For instance, social consumption motivation may be explained by an interaction of popularity with consumers’ level of extraversion. That is, the effect of popularity on social consumption motivation may be stronger as the degree of consumer extraversion increases. Further, firm-controllable moderating influences such as consumers’ exposure to luxury marketing communications may also be tested. For instance, we expect that as the degree of consumer exposure to luxury marketing communications increases, the effect of peer pressure on social consumption motivation may get magnified. PAGE 90 YOUNG CONSUMERS VOL. 18 NO. 1 2017
References Belk, R.W. (1988), Possessions and Self, John Wiley & Sons, New York. Campbell, J. (1990), “Self-esteem and clarity of the self-concept”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 59 No. 3, pp. 538-549. Campbell, J., Trapnell, P., Heine, S., Katz, I., Lavallee, L. and Lehman, D. (1996), “Self-concept clarity: measurement, personality correlates, and cultural boundaries”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 70 No. 1, pp. 141-156. Churchill, G.A. and Moschis, G.P. (1979), “Television and interpersonal influences on adolescent consumer learning”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 23-35. Claiborne, C. and Sirgy, M.J. (2015), “Self-image congruence as a model of consumer attitude formation and behavior: a conceptual review and guide for future research”, paper presented at the Proceedings of the 1990 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference. Clark, R.A. (2006), Consumer Independence: Conceptualization, Measurement and Validation of a Previously Unmeasured Social Response Tendency, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL. Clark, R., Zboja, J. and Goldsmith, R. (2007), “Status consumption and role-relaxed consumption: a tale of two retail consumers”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 45-59. De Bruyn, E.H. and Van Den Boom, D.C. (2005), “Interpersonal behavior, peer popularity, and self-esteem in early adolescence”, Social Development, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 555-573. Diamantopoulos, A. and Winklhofer, H.M. (2001), “Index construction with formative indicators: an alternative to scale development”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 269-277. Dubois, B., Czellar, S. and Laurent, G. (2005), “Consumer segments based on attitudes toward luxury: empirical evidence from twenty countries”, Marketing Letters, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 115-128. Elliott, R. and Leonard, C. (2004), “Peer pressure and poverty: exploring fashion brands and consumption symbolism among children of the ‘British poor’”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 347-359. Erikson, E. (1959), “Identity and the life cycle”, Psychological Issues, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 13-117. Field, A.P. (2005), Discovering Statistics Using SPSS, 2nd ed., Sage, London. Gil, L.A., Kwon, K.N., Good, L.K. and Johnson, L.W. (2012), “Impact of self on attitudes toward luxury brands among teens”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 65 No. 10, pp. 1425-1433. Gulland, C. (2006), “The ten biggest themes of ‘What teens want’”, available at: www.ypulse.com/theten-biggest-themes-of-what-teens-want (accessed 20 March 2007). Harter, S., Whitesell, N. and Kowalski, P. (1992), “Individual differences in the effects of educational transitions on young adolescent’s perceptions of competence and motivational orientation”, American Educational Research Journal, pp. 777-807. Heaney, J.G., Goldsmith, R.E. and Jusoh, W.J.W. (2005), “Status consumption among Malaysian consumers: exploring its relationships with materialism and attention-to-social-comparisoninformation”, Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 83-98. Hopson, B. and Adams, J. (1976), “Toward an understanding of transition: defining some boundaries of transition dynamics”, in Adams, J., Hayes, J. and Hopson, B. (Eds), Transition: Understanding and Managing Personal Change, Martin Robertson, London. Isaksen, K.J. and Roper, S. (2012), “The commodification of self-esteem: branding and British teenagers”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 117-135. Kapferer, J.N. (1998), “Why are we seduced by luxury brands?”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 44-49. Kernis, M., Paradise, A., Whitaker, D., Wheatman, S. and Goldman, B. (2000), “Master of one’s psychological domain? Not likely if one’s self-esteem is unstable”, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 26 No. 10, 1297. La Ferle, C., Edwards, S.M. and Lee, W.N. (2000), “Teen’s use of traditional media and the Internet”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 55-66. VOL. 18 NO. 1 2017 YOUNG CONSUMERS PAGE 91
Martin, C. and Turley, L. (2003), “Malls and Generation Y consumers: a consumption motivation perspective”, available at: www.wku.edu/gfcb/papers/Turley1.pdf (accessed 27 July 2009). Mason, R. (1981), Conspicuous Consumption, St Martin’s Press, New York, NY. Meeus, W., Oosterwegel, A. and Vollebergh, W. (2002), “Parental and peer attachment and identity development in adolescence”, Journal of Adolescence, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 93-106. Michell, L. and Amos, A. (1997), “Girls, pecking order and smoking”, Social Science & Medicine, Vol. 44 No. 12, pp. 1861-1869. Moschis, G.P. (1981), “Socialization perspectives and consumer behavior”, in Enis, B.M. and Roering, K.J. (Eds), Review in Marketing, American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 43-53. Moschis, G.P. and Churchill, G.A. (1978), “Consumer socialization: a theoretical and empirical analysis”, JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 599-609. Moses, E. (2000), The $ 100 Billion Allowance-Accessing the Global Teen Market, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Muniz, A.M. and O’Guinn, T.C. (2001), “Brand community”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 27, pp. 412-432. Neisser, U. (1993), The Perceived Self: Ecological and Interpersonal Sources of Self-knowledge, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Netemeyer, R.G., Bearden, W.O. and Sharma, S. (2003), Scaling Procedures: Issues and Applications, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. Ngai, J. and Cho, E. (2012), “The young luxury consumers in China”, Young Consumers, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 255-266. O’Cass, A. and McEwen, H. (2004), “Exploring consumer status and conspicuous consumption”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 25-39. Park, H.J., Rabolt, N.J. and Sook Jeon, K. (2008), “Purchasing global luxury brands among young Korean consumers”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 244-259. Parkhurst, J.T. and Hopmeyer, A. (1998), “Sociometric popularity and peer-perceived popularity two distinct dimensions of peer status”, The Journal of Early Adolescence, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 125-144. Phau, I. and Prendergast, G. (2000), “Consuming luxury brands: the relevance of the ‘rarity principle’”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 122-138. Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, 879. Prendergast, G. and Wong, C. (2003), “Parental influence on the purchase of luxury brands of infant apparel: an exploratory study in Hong Kong”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 20 Nos 2/3, pp. 157-169. Robin, S.S. and Johnson, E.O. (1996), “Attitude and peer cross pressure: adolescent drug use and alcohol use”, Journal of Drug Education, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 69-99. Ruffin, J. (2007), “Luxuries are things you wouldn’t buy if no one saw you use them”, available at: www.newsobserver.com/690/story/539390.html (accessed 14 September 2007). Santor, D.A., Messervey, D. and Kusumakar, V. (2000), “Measuring peer pressure, popularity, and conformity in adolescent boys and girls: predicting school performance, sexual attitudes, and substance abuse”, Journal of Youth and Adolescence, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 163-182. Sharma, S., Mukherjee, S., Kumar, A. and Dillon, W.R. (2005), “A simulation study to investigate the use of cutoff values for assessing model fit in covariance structure models”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 58 No. 7, pp. 935-943. Siegel, D.L., Coffey, T.J. and Livingston, G. (2001), The Great Tween Buying Machine, Paramount Market, Ithaca, NY. Solomon, M.R. (1983), “The role of products as social stimuli: a symbolic interactionism perspective”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 319-329. PAGE 92 YOUNG CONSUMERS VOL. 18 NO. 1 2017
Sommer, C. (2012), “Purchase power of global teens tops $819 Billion”, available at: https://insights. mastercard.com/2012/11/21/purchase-power-of-global-teens-tops-819-billion/ (accessed 19 December 2016). Steinberg, L. (1993), Adolescence, 3rd ed., McGraw Hill, New York, NY. Turunen, L.L.M. and Laaksonen, P. (2011), “Diffusing the boundaries between luxury and counterfeits”, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 468-474. Wong, N.Y. and Ahuvia, A.C. (1998), “Personal taste and family face: luxury consumption in confucian and western societies”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 423-441. Wooten, D.B. (2006), “From labeling possessions to possessing labels: ridicule and socialization among adolescents”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 188-198. Youniss, J. and Smollar, J. (1985), “The individual and relations”, in Youniss, J. and Smollar, J. (Eds), Adolescent Relations with Mothers, Fathers and Friends, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, pp. 160-176. Corresponding author Lester W. Johnson can be contacted at: [email protected] For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website: www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm Or contact us for further details: [email protected] VOL. 18 NO. 1 2017 YOUNG CONSUMERS PAGE 93
A structural model of the antecedents and consequences of Generation Y luxury fashion goods purchase decisions Catherine Qian Ying Soh, Sajad Rezaei and Man-Li Gu Catherine Qian Ying Soh is based at the Department of Marketing, Taylor’s Business School, Taylor’s University, Subang Jaya, Malaysia. Sajad Rezaei is based at the School of Business, Economic and Social Science, University of Hamburg, Germany and Taylor’s Business School, Taylor’s University, Subang Jaya, Malaysia. Man-Li Gu is based at the Taylor’s Business School, Taylor’s University, Subang Jaya, Malaysia. Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this study is to investigate the structural relationships between brand consciousness, perceived quality, social influences, traits of vanity, the need for uniqueness (i.e. antecedents), Generation Y purchase intentions and behaviour (consequences) towards luxury fashion goods. Design/methodology/approach – An integrative theoretical model is proposed based on social comparison theory, social impact theory, the perceived quality model and theory of uniqueness to predict the antecedents and consequences of Generation Y luxury fashion goods purchase decisions. Using cross-sectional data, a total of 384 sets of valid questionnaires were collected to perform the statistical analysis for the measurement and structural model using the partial least squares path modelling, a variance-based structural equation modelling technique. Findings – Overall, the structural results imply that the proposed model explains 73.1 and 64 per cent of variances to predict the Generation Y luxury fashion goods purchase decisions. As the several indices for evaluation of goodness of model fit, standardised Root Mean Square Residual, geodesic discrepancy, and unweighted least squares discrepancy show a satisfactory result. The results of two-tailed hypotheses reveal that brand consciousness, perceived quality, social influences, traits of vanity and the need for uniqueness influence Generation Y purchase intention. Moreover, perceived quality and social influences impact purchase behaviour but brand consciousness, traits of vanity and the need for uniqueness do not seem to be significant in explaining the variance in Generation Y purchase behaviour. Furthermore, Generation Y purchase intention is statistically related to purchase behaviour. Originality/value – There is a lack of empirical evidence and understanding on the influences of consumer purchase intention and behaviour towards luxury fashion goods among the Generation Y. Generation Y is likely to purchase and consume luxury fashion products, and it is important to have a deeper understanding of this market segment. Keywords Generation Y, Perceived quality, Brand consciousness, Need of uniqueness, Social influences, Traits of vanity Paper type Research paper 1. Introduction Examining factors influencing consumers’ intention to purchase luxury branded products has important managerial and theoretical contribution (Lee et al., 2008; Hung et al., 2011; Workman and Lee, 2013; Giovannini et al., 2015; Cheah et al., 2015; Chiu and Leng, 2016). It is valuable for marketers to explore the influences of consumer purchase intention, as the demand for fashion goods has significantly increased (Narang, 2011; Ngai and Cho, 2012). With a better understanding of young customers, retailers will be able to establish and improve more effective and efficient marketing strategies and plans to attract and gain more consumers (Mummalaneni and Meng, 2009). This study provides some important theoretical implications, which help to enhance a deeper understanding of the purchase Received 20 December 2016 Revised 28 March 2017 Accepted 30 March 2017 PAGE 180 YOUNG CONSUMERS VOL. 18 NO. 2 2017, pp. 180-204, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 1747-3616 DOI 10.1108/YC-12-2016-00654
intention of luxury fashion goods. Theoretically, the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991) has been widely used as a social psychology theory by many researchers to understand consumers’ behaviour (Hung et al., 2011; Cheah et al., 2015; Chiu and Leng, 2016). In previous studies, most of the researchers presented consumer purchase behaviour by using TPB, which is an extension of the theory of reasoned action (TRA). TPB is applied to the study of consumers’ intention to purchase counterfeit sporting goods by Chiu and Leng (2016), purchase intention towards foreign branded goods by Son et al. (2013) and purchase intention towards a US apparel brand by Lee et al. (2008). However, there seems to be a lack of TPB application in the luxury fashion goods among Generation Y. Thus, this study aims to further test the theory of TPB and to provide additional and valuable insights into this topic by proposing an integrative theoretical model based on social comparison theory (SCT), social impact theory (SIT), the perceived quality model and theory of uniqueness to predict the Generation Y behaviour and intention towards luxury fashion goods. Furthermore, there is a lack of evidence and understanding in examining the influences of consumer purchase intention towards luxury fashion goods among Generation Y (Lee et al., 2008; Cheah et al., 2015; Hung et al., 2011; Mamat et al., 2016). Despite that retailers should consider how Generation Y respond to their brands (Bhaduri and Stanforth, 2016; Shukla, 2012), there is a lack of consistency among scholars in explaining determinants of consumer intention and behaviour towards luxury fashion goods. Hung et al., (2011) propose that social influences and traits of vanity influence consumer purchase intention of luxury fashion goods, and Lee et al. (2008) claim that brand consciousness and perceived quality influence the purchase intention of luxury goods. Leo et al. (2007) have shown that intention is one of the predictive of sales and demand. Thus, it is important to study factors influencing consumer purchase intention that lead to the consumer’s behaviour towards luxury fashion goods (Hung et al., 2011). Hence, this study focuses on investigating variables such as brand consciousness, the need for uniqueness, traits of vanity, perceived quality and social influences towards consumer purchase intention of fashion luxury goods. Park et al., (2008) examine the need for uniqueness and its possible influence on purchase intention. Marketing strategy on company improvements should be conducted to convert potential customers into actual customers and retain them in future (Cheah et al., 2015). Besides, the results may help companies in a better understanding of factors that contribute most towards consumer purchase intention and recognise what factors affect Generation Y consumers before they perform a purchase (Hung et al., 2011). Therefore, companies should be aware of elements that will influence consumer purchase intention towards luxury fashion goods, including social influences, brand consciousness and perceived quality, and enhance the element which contributes most in this luxury fashion industry. 1.1 Background of research Over the years, the emerging markets have been one of the fastest growing demands for luxury brand products (Narang, 2011). In Asia, other than China and India, sales of the luxury market in Malaysia and Indonesia are expected to rise. Given the growing demand for luxury goods, fashion brands are considered to play an important role in affecting current consumer’s lifestyle (Tungate, 2005; McColl and Moore, 2011). The increase in a Malaysian’s disposable income has also fuelled the increased demand for luxury goods. The latest statistics provided by the Department of Statistics Malaysia (2016) mentioned that the Malaysian retail sale recorded a total of RM33.6bn in July 2016, an increase of 9.4 per cent from July 2015. Besides, the number of emerging international fashion brand names have also dramatically increased in Malaysia’s major shopping malls such as Pavilion, The Garden Mall, Johor Premium Outlet and Mitsui Outlet Park. This indicates Malaysian consumers’ inclination to shop for branded goods, regardless of whether they are local or foreign. VOL. 18 NO. 2 2017 YOUNG CONSUMERS PAGE 181
Morton (2002) defined Generation Y consumers as young consumers who are born between the year 1977 and 1994. Despite their youth and relatively low level of income, Generation Y desire to look “cool” to bolster their self-image as they tend to be well-educated, internet savvy and eager to shop. Fernandez (2009) also found that Generation Y consumers are extremely brand conscious and are willing to spend more and invest in luxury products for higher levels of quality and taste. Generation Y is considered as economic influencers as they contribute an estimated $600bn annually to the global economy (Kennedy, 2012). Generation Y consumers who may have heightened purchasing power have increased expenditure on luxury fashion goods such as luxury accessories, handbags and shoes. According to Xu and Paulins (2015), university students recorded an annual expenditure of close to $200bn in the USA, together with monthly discretionary spending at an average of $287 per month. Generation Y shoppers spend liberally when they have cash surpluses, with very little consideration about their debt levels (Mamat et al., 2016). As such, this market segment is seen to possess a high degree of demand for luxury products given the existing research findings. This study is mainly of an explanatory nature, as it aims to establish causal relationships between variables (Saunders et al., 2007). The purpose of this explanatory research is to investigate the structural relationships between brand consciousness, perceived quality, social influences, traits of vanity, the need for uniqueness, consumer purchase intentions and behaviour towards luxury fashion goods among the Malaysian Generation Y. This study is organised in several sections. First, a broad overview of the research background, research objectives, rationale and significance of the study are discussed. Second, the theoretical background and a comprehensive literature review are provided to examine the influences of consumer purchase intention towards luxury fashion goods and the relationship between consumer purchase intention and behaviour. Third, a justification of the chosen research methodology such as chosen statistical tests, measurement of constructs, research design, sampling plan and data collection methods, common method bias and variance are provided. It is then followed by the results and discussion. Last, conclusion, recommendations and limitations are discussed. 2. Literature review and hypotheses development There are various determinants influencing consumer intention and behaviour towards luxury fashion goods. Above and beyond TPB (Ajzen, 1991), theories such as the SCT, SIT, the perceived quality model and theory of uniqueness provide the theoretical foundation in this study to predict Generation Y’s purchase behaviour and intention towards luxury fashion goods (see Figure 1). The TPB is a theory that explains human behaviour and is related to belief and behaviour, which is an extension of the TRA (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975). Prior research proves that there is a positively correlated relationship between purchase intentions and purchase behaviour of luxury fashion products (Campbell and Fairhurst, 2016). However, TRA is insufficient to measure human behaviour, as it requires resources, collaboration or abilities to be added, giving rise to the need for a theoretical extension (Sheppard et al., 1988). In this study, the exogenous variables such as brand consciousness, social influences, perceived quality, need for uniqueness and traits of vanity are proposed as the several determinants of endogenous variables purchasing intention and behaviour. As depicted in Figure 1, an integrative theoretical framework is proposed to demonstrate the determinants of consumer purchase intention and behaviour towards luxury fashion goods. Moreover, behaviour can be determined by the TPB model as the intention is interrelated with behaviour (Ajzen, 1991). Consumer purchase behaviour reflects the attitudes, preferences, intentions and decisions in the marketplace (Kobia and Liu, 2016). In the context of pro-environmental purchase behaviour, consumers who have the intention to use PAGE 182 YOUNG CONSUMERS VOL. 18 NO. 2 2017
energy-efficient household goods will take the action of actual purchase (Nguyen et al., 2016). Consumer purchase intentions are the signal of their actual purchasing behaviour, deeming it important to study how consumer purchase intentions influence actual buying behaviour (Mamat et al., 2011). In the context of sustainable food choices, the researcher also found that the results of purchase intentions and behaviour of organic food are supported (Campbell and Fairhurst, 2016). Meanwhile, the green products purchase intention impacts positively on green purchase behaviour of Generation Y in Hong Kong (Lai and Cheng, 2016), and this result is similar to Moser’s (2015) study, who used a huge sample of households in Germany to examine the research. Therefore, it can be hypothesised as follows: H1. Generation Y purchase intention exerts influences the purchase behaviour of luxury fashion goods. 2.1 Social comparison theory According to Eastman and Liu (2012) and Gurau (2012), Generation Y consumers who possess high public self-consciousness and brand consciousness have a higher tendency to build their self-identity to display unique characteristics to appear different from others. SCT is proposed by Festinger (1953), which is the theory that emphasises on the belief that there is an inherent motivation within individuals to get precise self-evaluations. This theory defines how an individual learns to define his or herself and assesses its own opinions, appearance and abilities by comparing themselves to others. Based on the research conducted by Workman and Lee (2013), vanity is an important variable in SCT. Consequently, individuals determine the similarities and differences between others and the individual himself/herself by social comparison process (Festinger, 1954). For instance, Figure 1 Theoretical research framework Generation Y Purchase Behaviour Generation Y Purchase Intention Brand Consciousness Perceived Quality Social Influences Need of Uniqueness H1 & H2 H5 & H6 H3 & H4 H11 Traits Of Vanity H7 & H8 H9 & H10 VOL. 18 NO. 2 2017 YOUNG CONSUMERS PAGE 183
materialism, price-based prestige sensitivity, fashion and clothing concerns are the attitudes and behaviours of vain individuals (Workman and Lee, 2013). Brand-conscious consumers have a strong desire to show their achievements and wish to gain more attention from others. The evaluation of the quality of a product may not always be accurate (Chiu and Leng, 2016). Higher-priced items tend to make the customer believe that they are of a higher degree of quality (Rezaei, 2015). The price tag of luxury branded goods increases the rarity of the product by making the general public less able to purchase them, which is in tandem with the customer’s need to attract attention and improve self-concepts, both of which possess the ability to improve interpersonal relationships (Giovannini et al., 2015). Festinger (1954) further argues that self-enhancement (one of the functions of social comparison) and self-evaluation (seek to improve their self-esteem) are the motives that are related to SCT. Netemeyer et al. (1995) suggest that an individual’s attention towards physical appearance, self-improvement and social status can be seen through the person’s cosmetic product choices, clothing quality and other consumptions. Thus, in the context of this research, vanity is defined as being overly absorbed in one’s physical appearance or achievements. Thus, vanity affects consumers in a way that is often not direct or obvious, such as how physical vanity makes consumers invest in personal care products. 2.1.1 Brand consciousness. Brand consciousness refers to awareness of a well-known brand as a distinct product over other brands (Sproles and Kendall, 1986). According to the study of Workman and Lee (2013), self-consciousness and brand consciousness are examined within the context of SCT. Consumers who are brand conscious tend to purchase and use branded luxury fashion products (Ngai and Cho, 2012) as they believe that luxury brand-name will allow themselves to be part of a higher level of social class (Chiu and Leng, 2016), wealth status and prestige (Bian and Moutinho, 2011). Consumers who are highly brand conscious utilise branded goods to show their sense of fashion, demonstrate personality traits and minimise the risk in making purchase decisions (Liao and Wang, 2009). A prior study (Teimourpour and Hanzaee, 2011) also stated that Generation Y consumers in Iran who are brand conscious are more likely to purchase well-known luxury goods to display their wealth and status. Thus, awareness of and attraction to well-known branded products in the market is increasing because of their identity (Lee et al., 2008). Recent studies done by Giovannini et al. (2015), Yim et al. (2014) and Lee et al. (2008) mentioned that brand consciousness of consumers had a positive impact towards consumer purchase intention of luxury fashion goods. Therefore, Giovannini et al. (2015) found that Generation Y consumers with high brand consciousness would have a high intention to purchase luxury fashion products to enhance their self-image as the brands are seen as symbols of status. Liao and Wang (2009) mentioned that Generation Y who has a high level of brand consciousness is likely to purchase expensive, luxury well-known products instead of lesser-known brands because of the perception of brand-name products. This can be proved by a study on Mexican consumers, they are status-oriented and wish to display their social levels through their possessions (Teimourpour and Hanzaee, 2011). This is because the brand is important in decision-making to purchase sports apparels as it is considered to be a form of conspicuous goods. Moreover, Chiu and Leng (2016) found that brand consciousness and consumer purchase intention are related and influenced towards counterfeit sporting goods in Taiwan and Singapore. This result demonstrated that consumers with high brand consciousness have the tendency to have an intensive intention to purchase luxury fashion goods. It can be said that brand consciousness has a positive influence on consumer purchase intention of luxury fashion goods. Therefore, it can be hypothesised that: H2. Brand consciousness influences Generation Y purchase intention of luxury fashion goods. PAGE 184 YOUNG CONSUMERS VOL. 18 NO. 2 2017
H3. Brand consciousness influences Generation Y purchase behaviour of luxury fashion goods. 2.1.2 Traits of vanity. The vanity aspect of social influence has not been thoroughly studied, although attempts have been made to discover the effects vanity has on consumer culture (Wang and Waller, 2008). Achievement vanity, on the other hand, is the excessive concern for personal achievements. The marketing of many luxury goods is aimed at targeting the vanity aspects of consumers to influence them into purchasing their goods (Wang and Waller, 2008). In studies conducted by Tsai (2005), Hung et al. (2011) and Cheah et al. (2015), the significance of vanity on consumers’ behaviours are examined, with recent studies showing that vanity seems to have a greater level of impact than previously thought. A study done on vanity shows that individuals who are vain and spend a lot on high-quality products are likely to keep going back for more luxury goods to fulfil their self-esteem. To enhance self-image, consumers are willing to purchase fashion luxury products that can improve their physical appearance (Solomon, 2014). The theory (SCT) behind is that vanity is the individual’s internal desire and purchase of luxury goods is a way to express their vanity externally (Wang and Waller, 2008). Similarly, when it comes to purchasing luxury branded goods, consumers focus on increasing their attractiveness physically and hope to become more socially accepted at the same time (Cheah et al., 2015). Workman and Lee (2013) and Sedikides et al. (2007) have examined the aspect of vanity and public self-consciousness and discovered that purchase of fashion goods by consumers is motivated by the elevated physical appearance and professional achievement concerns. Hung et al. (2011) indicated that the features of fashion luxury brand are powerful of contributing achievement and physical vanity to the consumers. The traits of vanity are positively correlated with fashion luxury purchase intention (Mamat et al., 2016). Consumers are conscious about how the branding of their clothing shapes their image. Besides, consumers are likely to wear luxury fashion goods during occasions such as dinner and party to avoid the feeling of embarrassment. Therefore, it can be hypothesised as below: H4. Traits of vanity influence Generation Y purchase intention of luxury fashion goods. H5. Traits of the vanity influence Generation Y purchase behaviour of luxury fashion goods. 2.2 The perceived quality model Perceived quality is one of the brand equity dimensions and has a considerable impact on brand image. This concept was proposed and examined by Olson (1972) and Zeithamli (1988). Furthermore, Armstrong and Kotler (2003) propose that when the consumer has no or less information of the products that they are planning to purchase, perceived quality has a direct impact on customers’ purchase intention and brand loyalty. Perceived quality is not a creating attribute but an abstract perception on a higher-level, and it refers to consumer’s subjective judgment about a brand’s overall excellence or its superiority (Mummalaneni and Meng, 2009). Therefore, this criterion for product assessment is of great importance as consumer behaviour and purchase intention will be influenced (Cronin et al., 2009). The motivation of repurchase and the inhibition of switching behaviour will be strongly motivated when the purchased product exceeds customers’ quality expectations. Consumers determine their judgments and perceptions of brand quality through extrinsic (e.g. prices, image and country of origin of the luxury products) and intrinsic cues (performance and durability), which is in the context of perceived quality model (Yoo et al., 2006). Two cues that are included in this model are the extrinsic and intrinsic cues, where both attributes are important in quality perception. The extrinsic cues are external of the products such as warranty and brand name, where the actual and physical products do not alter when external attributes are modified. An intrinsic cue refers to the internal attributes of a product (physical properties) such as colour and texture. The prior research (Yoo et al., VOL. 18 NO. 2 2017 YOUNG CONSUMERS PAGE 185
2006; Thelen et al., 2006) examined the relationship between perceived quality and consumer purchase intention. 2.2.1 Perceived quality. Perceived quality refers to consumers’ subjective judgment about a brand’s overall excellence or superiority (Amatulli and Guido, 2011). Variables that are specific to a certain product, such as consumables’ perceived purity and durables’ quality level, are expected to be a dominant factor as a predictor of product bias (Thelen et al., 2006). Levy and Guterman (2012) stated that Generation Y consumers’ perceived quality is not based on the objective quality but slants towards the general appraisal of the product, which in large part forms the value of the brand in their perspective. Besides, varying perceptions on product quality by consumers depend heavily on different factors, for instance, the moment at which the consumers make the purchase or consume the product and the place where it is bought or consumed. However, the consumer will choose the superiority of a particular brand over other competing brands (Keller, 2007). Thus, we can hypothesise that Generation Y consumers who have high perceived quality of products will have greater intention to purchase luxury products (Lee et al., 2008). According to Lee et al. (2008), there is a relationship between perceived quality and purchase intentions of the Mexican Generation Y towards US apparel brands such as Polo, Gap and Guess brand. When making a purchase decision, they may not perceive the functional aspect of clothing to be as crucial as the emotional aspect (Mummalaneni and Meng, 2009). Besides that, previous studies also mentioned that there is a negative effect on this relationship as perceived quality is not evaluated as a driver of purchase intentions (Knight and Kim, 2007). Dodds et al. (1991) mentioned that the implicit recognition of the brand’s quality by the consumers exceeds the issue of price in the decision-making process (Dodds et al., 1991). However, Keller (2008) found that a strong brand relationship is built through purchase behaviour by perceiving a brand to be of high quality. The nature of the products can be changed and altered when the products are consumed. Thus, consumers can form their perception of product quality through both cues. Hence, as shown in the model, perceived quality has both a direct and indirect impact via the variables of brand attitude and perceived value. It can be said that perceived quality has a positive impact on consumer purchase intention towards luxury fashion goods. Therefore, it can be hypothesised that: H6. Perceived quality influences Generation Y purchase intention of luxury fashion goods. H7. Perceived quality influences Generation Y purchase behaviour of luxury fashion goods. 2.3 Social impact theory According to Danziger (2007), social influence is defined by how consumers’ senses of responsibilities are influenced by huge organisations, ethnicity, social statuses and ethnicity. The SIT is proposed by Latane (1981), which states that the degree to which a person influenced socially when situated in a group of people is proportional to a number of factors, which include the immediacy of the group (referring to the closeness of its members), the social status of the group and the number of members who give out strong influence. According to Mamat et al. (2016), social influence can be defined as an individual consumer’s connection with the world. As exposure to the world rises through time because of globalisation and foreign education, consumers may find foreign luxury brands increasingly important to them. The media is also a factor that influences consumers to purchase luxury products (Nelson and McLeod, 2009). The higher the status of a group and the closer are the members, and the more people exerting outward influence, the more social influence the group will have on a person. 2.3.1 Social influences. Generation Y consumers from all across the world tend to purchase luxury goods to conform to imposed standards by the society. Besides, the definition of PAGE 186 YOUNG CONSUMERS VOL. 18 NO. 2 2017
social influence by Ang et al. (2008) is the how a consumer’s behaviour can be affected by other people. Consumers who are more susceptible to external pressure will face much more significant impact on social influence. Another factor contributing to the purchase of luxury goods is reputation and social status, as many consumers purchase luxury goods in hopes that they improve their reputation and have a stronger presence among their social groups (Bearden and Etzel, 1982). This factor has been proven through an extensive amount of survey on the effect of social influence on purchase intentions of luxury goods (Hung et al., 2011). Consumer purchase intention of luxury fashion goods is influenced directly by social influences (Algesheimer et al., 2006). With the pervasive nature of social media and the internet, access to online product reviews has increasingly become easier for consumers. In short, the tendency of a consumer to buy luxury goods depends on his susceptibility to social pressure (Danziger, 2007). Consumers tend to ask around for reviews and experiences from other peers who have already bought the luxury goods, and they normally ask from a large range of sources such as peers, family members, relatives and colleagues. Homburg et al. (2010) proved that individuals often need to validate their projected image using their external environment. Consumers are highly likely to be socially pressured by people who are closer to them, such as their peers and family members. Besides, consumers do not purchase products just to suit their taste, as social conformity is also one of an important factor (Cheah et al., 2015). It can be said that social influence is positively related to the consumer purchase intention of luxury fashion brands. Therefore, it can be hypothesised that: H8. Social influences have an impact on Generation Y purchase intention of luxury fashion goods. H9. Social influences have an impact on Generation Y purchase behaviour of luxury fashion goods. 2.4 Theory of uniqueness According to Snyder and Fromkin (1977), the theory of uniqueness defines consumers’ need for uniqueness. The theory revolves around an individual’s desire to be distinct from others specifically in a way where the individual is perceived as having a higher level of social status. Individuals are able to draw self-confidence from the self-differentiating thoughts and behaviours. The display of uniqueness is not only in a person’s physical appearance but also in many other aspects as well, where the consequences of being unique are not highly negative. Individual differences in consumer counter-conformity are reflected in the perception of consumers’ need for uniqueness (Tian and McKenzie, 2001). The reason most people prefer product and material uniqueness over other uniqueness in other aspects such as social norms is because the consequences of material uniqueness are often not as devastating as others, at the same time being able to satisfy the feeling of uniqueness. 2.4.1 The need for uniqueness. Consumer’s need for uniqueness, which is fulfilled through purchasing consumer goods for the purpose of improving self-image, is an internal process that requires the consumers to personally see the products as having a symbolic meaning or public symbolic importance (Park et al., 2008). The theory of consumer’s need for uniqueness contains three behavioural dimensions. The first dimension, creative choice conformity, is meant by a consumer’s ability to develop his own personal and innovative style in trying to display self-image through luxury products (Lynn and Harris, 1997). The fact that the individual is capable of creativity proves his uniqueness as an individual and has a positive impact on his social status (Snyder and Fromkin, 1977). Some individuals from this dimension are reported to have gotten rid of goods once they became common and instead look for alternatives that are more innovative and less common (Bhaduri and Stanforth, 2016). The second dimension refers to unpopular choice counter-conformity, which is an individual’s choice to purchase products, which are not within common VOL. 18 NO. 2 2017 YOUNG CONSUMERS PAGE 187
choices. However, the second dimension puts the individual at risk of being socially rejected. An unpopular choice, nevertheless, is capable of displaying individual uniqueness in the long run and gain acceptance, thus improving self-image and potentially even making the individual stand out as a fashion leader. The last dimension is avoidance of similarity. Individuals in this dimension have a tendency to avoid purchasing commonly purchased goods. Park et al. (2008) indicated that the need for uniqueness has a positive impact on purchasing fashion goods among the Korean Generation Y consumers. The study stated that there is a surge of demand for foreign luxury products in Korea as Generation Y consumers tend to express their uniqueness by purchasing and consuming expensive foreign goods. There will be a decline in the individual’s liking towards a brand the more popular and common it becomes (Shukla, 2012). Recent studies (Bhaduri and Stanforth, 2016; Shukla, 2012; Knight and Kim, 2007) provided support that consumers who have a great need in expressing their personality often purchase luxury fashion clothing to gain scarcity value, uniqueness and avoid similarity with others in terms of clothing. Therefore, it can be hypothesised that: H10. Need for the uniqueness influences Generation Y purchase intention of luxury fashion goods. H11. Need for uniqueness influences Generation Y purchase behaviour of luxury fashion goods. 3. Research method In this study, the mono-quantitative method is used to analyse and conduct the statistical procedures; thus, the primary data are collected in a standardised manner through a survey using questionnaires. The sampling type of this study is conducted by using non-probability sampling techniques, as the individuals in the population do not possess equal chances of beings selected as the samples are being gathered (Statpac, 2014). This technique is selected because the sample size to be investigated is too huge (Generation Y) and it is impossible to make statistical inferences about the characteristics of the population (Bryman and Bell, 2007). Moreover, the sampling technique used to conduct this survey is the purposive sampling method, also known as the judgmental selective sampling method (Bryman and Bell, 2007). Following guidelines from sample size determination Table (Krejcie and Morgan, 1970), the adequate sample size was determined (384 respondents) in order to obtain reliable results. Therefore, a total of 384 sets of valid questionnaires were collected to conduct the statistical analysis (Table I). The questionnaire was distributed among Generation Y consumers who wear luxury fashion clothes, accessories and shoes or carrying luxury handbags from several universities in Malaysia. The measurement items in the questionnaire were adopted by analysing secondary data through systematic reviews from past studies (Appendix). The questionnaire was divided into two-fold main sections; questions designed for Section A (demographic profile of respondents) and Section B, which reflects the exogenous and endogenous constructs. The small scale preliminary study is conducted to predict an appropriate sample size, reveal questionnaire faults and improve the study design before running a full-scale research project. Respondents were selected for pre-test (N 27) and pilot test (N 119) before distributing the actual questionnaires. The reliability of the scale tested by Cronbach’s alpha and the cut-off point is 0.6 for the pre-test. The results revealed that there is internal consistency among the scale of brand consciousness; perceived quality; social influences; traits of vanity; the need for uniqueness; and purchase intention and behaviour as Cronbach’s alpha obtained greater than 0.7. Once satisfactory results were obtained from pre-test, the pilot study was performed (N 119) and the partial least squares (PLS)-structural equation modelling (SEM) results were interpreted based on measurement and structural criterion. The response from pre-test (N 27) and pilot test PAGE 188 YOUNG CONSUMERS VOL. 18 NO. 2 2017
(N 119) was not included for actual data analysis (N 384). Therefore, the study proceeds with main data collection procedure. 3.1 Common method variance and non-response bias Common method variance (CMV) might exist because of the single survey method (Podsakoff et al., 2003) and self-report surveys (Spector, 2006); thus, it threatens the validity of the research findings (Reio, 2010; Williams and Brown, 1994). CMV exists because of possible covariation among research latent constructs (MacKenzie and Podsakoff, 2012) and relative structural relationship (Kline et al., 2000). To ensure that CMV is not an issue, this research addresses the potential threat following the guideline recommended by Podsakoff et al. (2003). At the questionnaire design stage and at the data analysis stage, the statistical techniques, i.e. Harman’s one-factor test and the partial correlation procedures, were conducted. In addition to CMV, according to a continuum of resistance theory (Lin and Schaeffer, 1995), wave analysis and analysis of known characteristics were considered to handle the non-response bias. This involves analysing of the study population that is known to determine the differences between the response sample and the population as a whole or the non-response group (Lewis et al., 2013). Therefore, the statistical result shows that CMV and non-response bias are not a concern and the study proceeds for further statistical analysis (SEM). 3.2 Structural equation modelling As mentioned by Chin (2010), SEM is also known as holistic fashion as this technique combines several research processes and is also known by different approaches such as latent variable analysis, covariance-based analysis and variance-based SEM (PLS path analysis). According to the methodological reviews of Richter et al. (2016), PLS-SEM contributed heavily to behavioural studies (Sarstedt, 2008; Henseler and Chin, 2010). It allows for a better understanding of the relationship (Rigdon et al., 2010) among sets of observed constructs as it has developed through best practices in various management disciplines such as marketing (Hair et al., 2012; Henseler et al., 2009). In this study, the two-step approach was adopted by applying SEM analysis to analyse Generation Y purchase intention and behaviour (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988). The first step is the Table I Demographic characteristics of respondents Profile Characteristics Frequency (%) Gender Male 138 36 Female 245 64 Age 18-22 years old 134 35 24-28 years old 206 53.8 30-32 years old 43 11.2 Ethnicity Malay 67 17.5 Chinese 215 56.1 Indian 101 26.4 Education level SPM and below 12 3.1 Diploma 85 22.2 Undergraduate 170 44.4 Postgraduate 105 27.4 Professional qualification 11 2.9 Allowance or Income per month Below RM1000 48 12.5 RM1001-RM2000 73 19.1 RM2001-RM3000 114 29.8 RM3001-RM4000 81 21.1 RM4001 and above 67 17.5 Types of fashion luxury goods purchased Jewellery 47 12.3 Handbag 141 36.8 Shoe 131 34.2 Clothing (apparel) 64 16.7 VOL. 18 NO. 2 2017 YOUNG CONSUMERS PAGE 189
measurement model by selecting a fitting group of items to best represent each scale, and the second step is to test the structural model to study the causal relationships among latent variables and its effects. The measurement model was first estimated and gained a fitting group of items to best represent each scale. In this step, the measurement model indicated how observed variables stimulate the measurement of latent variables (Rezaei, 2015). Furthermore, the purpose of the goodness of model fit (GoF) measures is to enable PLS-SEM to be appropriate for confirmatory research. The standardised root means square residual (SRMR) is the sum of squared differences of the data’s square root between the implied model and the empirical correlation matrix, and it is the approximate model fit criterion adopted for PLS path modelling (Hu and Bentler, 1999). The second step is to test the structural model to study the causal relationships among latent variables and its effects. Hence, ADANCO software was adopted in this study, which is a modern approach to VB-SEM to evaluate SEM statistics for both measurement and structural model (Bollen, 1990). 4. Results 4.1 Assessment of measurement model It is of great importance and necessary to assess the GoF to ensure that the specified measurement (outer) model is acceptable in terms of reliability and validity. The structural (inner) model estimates are meaningless if the specified measurement does not meet the minimum criterion (Henseler et al., 2016). As shown in Table II, it is indicated that the Goodness of Model Fit (GOF) for saturated model are satisfactory and acceptable. According to Byrne (2008), the SRMR has a perfect fit when the value is 0 and the SRMR is an acceptable fit when the value is less than 0.05. However, a recent study by Henseler et al. (2015) proved that even models that are specified correctly may produce SRMR values of 0.06 and higher. Besides, Hu and Bentler (1999) also mentioned that the cut-off value of 0.08 is more suitable for PLS path modelling in new technology research. Thus, the HI95 SRMR value of 0.049 (lower than 0.05 or 0.06 or 0.08) met the criterion of approximate model fit (saturated model). Hence, the PLS goodness-of-fit shows were acceptable on a number of fit indices (Table II). Next, the adequacy of the measurement model was evaluated based on the criteria of construct reliability, convergent validity and discriminant validity. Reliability test is a measure of internal consistency or coefficient of reliability, which represents how closely related a set of items is as a group at a minimum cut-off value of 0.7 (Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994). PLS software offers a measure of composite reliability also known as Jöreskog’s rho (c), and Cronbach’s alpha (). However, according to Dijkstra and Henseler (2015), Dijkstra–Henseler’s rho (A) is the most important reliability test for PLS as it is the consistent reliability test for PLS construct scores. The results are provided in Table III; the range between the lowest to highest score among three reliability methods is from 0.724 to 0.896. Thus, it can be said that the reliability of all latent construct scores is sufficient as all of the scores met the minimum cut-off value, which is considered to be “acceptable” in most social science research situations. Table III depicts the construct reliability and validity. Table II Goodness of model fit (saturated model) PLS goodness-of-fit indices Value HI95 SRMR 0.060 0.049 dULS 0.055 0.074 dG 0.463 0.490 Notes: HI95 95% of bootstrap quantile. Model assessment criteria: SRMR 95% of bootstrap quantile (HI95 of SRMR), dULS 95% of bootstrap quantile (HI95 of dULS) and dG 95% of bootstrap quantile (HI95 dG) PAGE 190 YOUNG CONSUMERS VOL. 18 NO. 2 2017