Adolescent Evaluations of Brand Extensions: The Influence of Reference Group

Abstract

This study examines the reference group effect on adolescent evaluations of brand extension. Three factors are important to this process: the product fit between parent and extension category (similar vs. dissimilar), the consumption type of the extension product (public vs. private), and the parent brand image (prestige-oriented vs. functional-oriented). An experiment with 217 teenagers generally supports the hypotheses. Results suggest that adolescents are willing to pay a higher price premium to publicly consumed brand extension product than a privately consumed. In addition, the level of category similarity enhances the consumption type effect. Managerial implications on brand extension strategy in adolescent's market are discussed. C 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

What is the Value of Luxury? A Cross‐Cultural Consumer Perspective

“…The individual dimension focuses on a customer's personal orientation toward luxury consumption and addresses personal issues, such as materialism (e.g., Liao & Wang 2009;Richins & Dawson, 1992), hedonism, and self-identity (e.g., Bao, Zhou, & Su 2003;Hirschman & Holbrook, 1982;Vigneron & Johnson, 2004). Finally, the social dimension refers to the perceived utility that individuals acquire from products or services that are recognized within their own social group(s), such as conspicuousness and prestige value, which may significantly affect the evaluation and propensity to purchase or consume luxury brands (Bearden & Etzel, 1982;Brinberg & Plimpton, 1986;Kim, 1998;Liu & Hu 2012;Vigneron & Johnson, 1999). Although these value dimensions operate independently, they interact with one another and have various degrees of influence on individual value perceptions and behaviors that can be used to further identify and segment different types of luxury consumers.…”

When are frugal consumers not frugal? The influence of personal networks

“…One explanation is that products consumed in public are seen by others as important for presenting one's identity (Chiders and Raos, 1992). As such, people are more willing to pay a higher price premium for publically consumed brand vs. private consumed brand (Liu and Hu, 2012). On the other hand, private goods are less socially relevant and therefore less likely to be influenced by consumer's reference groups.…”

Social Collective Decision Making among Adolescents: A Review and a Revamp

“…Little is known, however, about the collective social decision‐making practices of adolescents as discrete from established familial practices. Although the role of peers has been recognized in relation to shopping, fashion consumption, and brand choice (Liu & Hu, ; Mangleburg, Doney, & Bristol, ; Rose, Boush, & Friestad, ; Wan, Luk, Fam, Wu, & Chow, ) and there is widespread interest in how peer influence can have both positive and negative effects on decision‐making behavior (Bachmann, John, & Rae, ), the extent to which adolescents make collective decisions that affect their social group as well as individual outcomes is under‐researched.…”