Do they shop to stand out or fit in? The luxury fashion purchase intentions of young adults

Abstract

A three‐study examination of young adults suggests that their motivation for status in terms of their luxury fashion purchase intentions is impacted by a bandwagon effect. In Study 1, qualitative research informs what fashion items represent status to young adults, how they view these items, and how they view others owning these items. In Study 2, survey research establishes the link between the motivation for status (status consumption) and purchase intention/ownership of these fashion items. In Study 3, a national survey of young adults examines what mediates and moderates the motivation for status to lead to luxury fashion purchase intentions. Results from the three studies indicate that status consumption has a positive impact on purchase intention of luxury fashion. This research also finds that cultural variables have an impact (mediate) the relationship between status consumption and purchase intention. Specifically, collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, power distance, and masculinity mediate the relationship between status consumption and purchase intention. Finally, the moderating impact of the bandwagon effect has a significant effect on the relationship between status consumption and fashion purchase intention for the cultural variables of uncertainty avoidance, long‐term orientation, and power distance. Implications for marketers are provided based on the findings.

The picture of luxury: A comprehensive examination of college student consumers' relationship with luxury brands

“…Another aspect of external influences illustrated in Table were interpersonal influences (79.4%), with reference groups (71.4%) playing a stronger role than family (38.1%). This is in line with the importance of peer influence for young adults (Eastman et al, ; Gentina et al, ; Kim & Jang, ; Schade et al, ). Finally, culture/subculture played a role (25.4%).…”

“…As illustrated in Table for internal influences that affect college student consumers' relationship with luxury, motivation (92.1%) played the most significant role with specific elements of motivation including conspicuous (58.7%), snob (31.7%), and bandwagon (20.6%). These made sense given that young adults are more open to conspicuous consumption (Kim & Jang, ), but still want to fit in (Eastman et al, ). Luxury as part of a lifestyle was also a key theme (79.4%), as was emotions (74.6%) with positive emotions playing a dominant role (69.8%), compared to negative emotions (23.8%).…”

“…As illustrated in Table , the college student respondents primarily saw luxury as a means to improve their appearance/health (76.2%). This makes sense given the importance of peers for young adults (Eastman et al, ; Gentina et al, ; Kim & Jang, ; Schade et al, ), self‐presentation motives for college student consumers (Shin et al, ), and the importance of luxury brands strengthening ones' image and identity (Seo & Buchanan‐Oliver, ; Thakur & Kaur, ). Examples of luxury's role in self‐presentation can be seen in the collages as the respondents described how they would like to wear designer suits to work to instill confidence, represent power, and have supreme productivity.…”

“…The luxury market continues to grow approximately five percent annually to an estimated 1.5 trillion‐dollar market in 2017 (D'Arpizio, Levato, & de Montgolfier, ; D'Arpizio, Levato, Kamel, & de Montgolfier, ). While this growth has been attributed to various factors, among the most notable is the shift to young adult luxury consumers (D'Arpizio, et al, ; Eastman, Iyer, Shepherd, Heugel, & Faulk, ). Young adults represent the fastest growing luxury segment worldwide (Gentina, Shrum, & Lowrey, ; Schade, Hegner, Horstmann, & Brinkmann, ) and fueled 85% of luxury growth in 2017 alone (D'Arpizio et al, ).…”

“…Young adults (Generations Y and Z) represent 47% of luxury consumers in 2018 and 33% of luxury purchases (D'Arpizio et al, ). Existing research suggests these younger luxury consumers differ from older luxury consumers (Department, ; Eastman et al, ; Halzack, ; Kauppinen‐Räisänen, Björk, Lönnström, & Jauffret, ), and therefore need further examination (D'Arpizio et al, ; Eastman et al, ; Halzack, ).…”