DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2018.00337

Acta Psychologica Sinica (心理学报) 2018/50:3 PP.337-348

The effect of incidental similarity (“dress same”) on consumers' product disposition intentions and its underlying mechanism

As a critical stage of consumer behavior, product disposition is closely related to the development of secondhand markets, ecology and public welfare. It is thus vital to examine the antecedents of product disposition behavior. Based on identity signaling perspective, we proposed a positive effect of "dress same" (i.e., incidental similarity of identity-signalling vs. non-identity-signaling products) on consumers' product disposition intentions, with embarrassment as the underlying mechanism. Meanwhile, this paper also examined the moderating role of comparison of physical attractiveness in the aforementioned effect.
Four studies were conducted to test our hypotheses. Study 1 was designed to test the main effect of "dress same". Participants were randomly assigned to two conditions (i.e., incidental similarity of jacket vs. cellphone case). They were first instructed to read and imagine a scenario where they incidentally found a classmate wearing the same jacket (vs. using the same cellphone case) as theirs when they entered the classroom. Afterwards, they indicated their intentions to dispose of that jacket (vs. cellphone case). Study 2 was conducted on MTurk to test the mediating role of embarrassment and to preclude other alternative explanations. Similarly, participants read and imagined that they incidentally found a coworker wearing the same jacket (vs. riding the same bike) as theirs in a social interaction. Moods and product disposition intentions were measured subsequently. In study 3, we employed three product stimuli of the same product category (outfit:jacket vs. jeans vs. sports shoes) to rule out the confounding effect induced by product attributes and to enhance the robustness of our results. Study 4 further examined the moderating role of comparison of physical attractiveness using a 2 (incidental similarity of T-shirt vs. umbrella) * 2 (direction of comparison:upward vs. downward) between-subjects design. Comparison of physical attractiveness was manipulated by instructing participants to imagine that their physical attractiveness is superior or inferior to the person depicted in the scenario.
In line with our predictions, "dress same" had a significant positive effect on consumers' product disposition intentions, driven by feeling embarrassed. This effect was robust by using both student and non-student samples and independent of product visibility, price, and endowment effect. Moreover, our results also revealed a significant moderating role of comparison of physical attractiveness in the aforementioned effect. In the upward comparison condition, the main effect of "dress same" on product disposition intentions as well as the mediating effect of embarrassment was enhanced, but they were attenuated in the downward comparison condition.
Our findings contribute to the literature in several different areas. First, by examining how "dress same" influences consumers' product disposition intentions, this research enriches the literature of product disposition behavior in particular and consumer decisions in general. Second, our findings shed light on the literature of incidental similarity by exploring its negative consequences. Third, the current research contributes to the embarrassment literature by examining embarrassment in an important consumption context (i.e. "dress same"). Finally, we also extend the application of social comparison theory in consumer behavior research.

Key words:dress same,incidental similarity,product disposition intentions,identity signaling,embarrassment,comparison of physical attractiveness

ReleaseDate:2018-03-29 16:23:27

Argo, J. J., White, K., & Dahl, D. W. (2006). Social comparison theory and deception in the interpersonal exchange of consumption information. Journal of Consumer Research, 33(1), 99-108.

Asendorpf, J. (1984). Shyness, embarrassment and self-presentation:A control theory approach. Advances in Psychology, 21, 109-114.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research:Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.

Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139-168.

Berger, J., & Heath, C. (2007). Where consumers diverge from others:Identity signaling and product domains. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(2), 121-134.

Blair, S., & Roese, N. J. (2013). Balancing the basket:The role of shopping basket composition in embarrassment. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(4), 676-691.

Buunk, A. P., & Dijkstra, P. (2011). Does attractiveness sell? Women's attitude toward a product as a function of model attractiveness, gender priming, and social comparison orientation. Psychology and Marketing, 28(9), 958-973.

Campbell, J. D. (1986). Similarity and uniqueness:The effects of attribute type, relevance, and individual differences in self-esteem and depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(2), 281-294.

Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1981). Attention and self-regulation:A control-theory approach to human behavior. New York:Springer Verlag.

Chan, C., Berger, J., & van Boven, L. (2012). Identifiable but not identical:Combining social identity and uniqueness motives in choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(3), 561-573.

Collins, R. L. (1996). For better or worse:The impact of upward social comparison on self-evaluations. Psychological Bulletin, 119(1), 51-69.

Coskuner-Balli, G., & Sandikci, Ö. (2014). The aura of new goods:How consumers mediate newness. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 13(2), 122-130.

Crump, M. J. C., McDonnell, J. V., & Gureckis, T. M. (2013). Evaluating Amazon's Mechanical Turk as a tool for experimental behavioral research. PLoS one, 8(3), e57410.

Dahl, D. W., Manchanda, R. V., & Argo, J. J. (2001). Embarrassment in consumer purchase:The roles of social presence and purchase familiarity. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(3), 473-481.

Dong, P., Huang, X. I., & Wyer, R. S. Jr. (2013). The illusion of saving face:How people symbolically cope with embarrassment. Psychological Science, 24(10), 2005-2012.

Edelmann, R. J. (1985). Social embarrassment:An analysis of the process. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 2(2), 195-213.

Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117-140.

Goffman, E. (1956). Embarrassment and social organization. American Journal of Sociology, 62(3), 264-271.

Guéguen, N., Martin, A., & Meineri, S. (2011). Similarity and social interaction:When similarity fosters implicit behavior toward a stranger. The Journal of Social Psychology, 151(6), 671-673.

Hanson, J. W. (1980). A proposed paradigm for consumer product disposition processes. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 14(1), 49-67.

Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis:A regression-based approach. New York, NY:Guilford.

Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York:JohnWiley.

Huang, T. T., Liu, L. Q., Wang, D. H., & Zhang, W. H. (2016). Socioeconomic status and sociometric status:Age differences on the effects of social comparison on subjective well-being. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 48(9), 1163-1174.

[黄婷婷, 刘莉倩, 王大华, 张文海. (2016). 经济地位和计量地位:社会地位比较对主观幸福感的影响及其年龄差异. 心理学报, 48(9), 1163-1174.]

Jacoby, J. (1976). Consumer psychology:An octennium. Annual Review of Psychology, 27(1), 331-358.

Jiang, L., Hoegg, J., Dahl, D. W., & Chattopadhyay, A. (2010). The persuasive role of incidental similarity on attitudes and purchase intentions in a sales context. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(5), 778-791.

Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. K., & Thaler, R. H. (1991). Anomalies:The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 193-206.

Lastovicka, J. L., & Fernandez, K. V. (2005). Three paths to disposition:The movement of meaningful possessions to strangers. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(4), 813-823.

Leary, M. R., Britt, T. W., Cutlip, W. D., Ⅱ, & Templeton, J. L. (1992). Social blushing. Psychological Bulletin, 112(3), 446-460.

Liu, D. G., Li, W. D., & Chen, W. J. (2017). Antecedents of malicious and benign envy and mechanisms for their influences. Advances in Psychological Science, 25(2), 342-357.

[刘得格, 李文东, 陈文晶. (2017). 恶意妒忌和善意妒忌的影响因素与作用机制. 心理科学进展, 25(2), 342-357.]

Lord, K. R. (1994). Motivating recycling behavior:A quasiexperimental investigation of message and source strategies. Psychology and Marketing, 11(4), 341-358.

Martin, A., & Guéguen, N. (2013). The influence of incidental similarity on self-revelation in response to an intimate survey. Social Behavior and Personality:An International Journal, 41(3), 353-356.

Miller, R. S., & Leary, M. R. (1992). Social sources and interactive functions of emotion:The case of embarrassment. In M. S. Clark (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology:Emotion and social behavior (vol. 14, pp. 202-221). Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage Publications.

Nichols, B. S., Raska, D., & Flint, D. J. (2015). Effects of consumer embarrassment on shopping basket size and value:A study of the millennial consumer. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 14(1), 41-56.

Owens, T. J., Robinson, D. T., & Smith-Lovin, L. (2010). Three faces of identity. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 477-499.

Reysen, S., Landau, M. J., & Branscombe, N. R. (2012). Copycatting as a threat to public identity. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 34(3), 226-235.

Schlosser, A. E., & Levy, E. (2016). Helping others or oneself:How direction of comparison affects pro-social behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 26(4), 461-473.

Snyder, C. R. (1992). Product scarcity by need for uniqueness interaction:A consumer catch-22 carousel? Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13(1), 9-24.

Snyder, C. R., & Fromkin, H. L. (1980). Uniqueness:The human pursuit of difference. New York:Plenum Press.

Suls, J., Martin, R., & Wheeler, L. (2002). Social comparison:Why, with whom, and with what effect? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(5), 159-163.

Trudel, R., & Argo, J. J. (2013). The effect of product size and form distortion on consumer recycling behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(4), 632-643.

Tsao, Y. C., & Chan, S. C. (2011). A study on embarrassment associated with product use. Applied Ergonomics, 42(3), 503-510.

White, K., & Argo, J. J. (2011). When imitation doesn't flatter:The role of consumer distinctiveness in responses to mimicry. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(4), 667-680.

Woolley, K., & Fishbach, A. (2017). A recipe for friendship:Similar food consumption promotes trust and cooperation. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 27(1), 1-10.

Zheng, X. Y., Peng, S. Q., & Peng, L. L. (2015). Feeling better and becoming more benevolent:Impact of social comparison on prosocial behavior. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 47(2), 243-250.

[郑晓莹, 彭泗清, 彭璐珞. (2015). "达"则兼济天下? 社会比较对亲社会行为的影响及心理机制. 心理学报, 47(2), 243-250.]