Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics

Symbolic consumption and Generation Y consumers evidence from Thailand

WANRUDEE TANGSUPWATTANA, Xiaobing Liu,
Article information:
To cite this document:
WANRUDEE TANGSUPWATTANA, Xiaobing Liu, "Symbolic consumption and Generation Y consumers evidence from
Thailand", Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-01-2017-0013
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-01-2017-0013
Downloaded on: 11 October 2017, At: 11:10 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 7 times since 2017*
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:387340 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please
visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 Abstract
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to investigate Generation Y consumers’ symbolic
consumption on brand attitude and purchase intention toward global brands.
Design/methodology/approach - A conceptual model has been developed to illustrate the
proposed relationships among the related variables. Data from a total of 300 usable surveys were
collected from Thai Generation Y consumers. The proposed hypotheses were tested using
structural equation modelling (SEM) analyses.
Finding – The study found that Generation Y consumers’ symbolic consumption has a significant
and positive effect on brand attitude and purchase intention.
Research limitations/implications – Time and resources limitation did not allow to study the
larger sample. Future research should include more product categories and more global brands.
Sample can be extended to consumers in ASEAN countries to provide more comprehensive
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

insights into consumer perceptions and brand behaviors toward global brands.
Practical implications – The findings suggest that symbolic consumption is a key motivations to
increase purchase intention when developing marketing strategies for the Generation Y consumer.
Originality/value – This study has contributions to symbolic consumption and Generation Y
literature combining several important dimensions into a structural model, and examines the
relationships among these dimensions.
Keywords – Symbolic consumption, Self-concept, Lifestyle, Global brand, Brand attitude,
Purchase intention, Generation Y, Thailand
Paper type – Research paper
 1. Introduction
In this era of marketing, focus only on product function value seem not to gain an advantage
in the fierce competitiveness. Symbolic consumption is prevalent in social life. Individuals who
favored terminal values (e.g. beliefs about desired end-states such as freedom, comfortable life,
and mature love) preferred to attend to the symbolic meanings of products and preferred to evaluate
products through an emotional judgment (Allen, Ng, & Wilson, 2002).
Elliott and Wattanasuwan (1998) argue that brands are symbolic means used by consumers
to communicate the self and others. Woodside et al. (2008) support this argument in their study.
Product symbolism is often consumed by the social actor for the purpose of defining and clarifying
behavior patterns associated with social role. The symbolic meaning embodied in products as one
type of social stimulus (Solomom 1983). Hence, symbolic reflects the consumers’ self-concept
and lifestyle (McCracken, 1990).
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

In such countries (e.g. Thai), some consumers prefer foreign brands because of symbolic
meanings that these brand convey (Kottak, 1990).This preference is more common when the
foreign product is associated to conspicuous consumption (Piron, 2000). For example, many Thais
regarded branded clothes, handbags, mobile phone to be highly meaningful as they believe in the
link between brand name and those of social status, success, and affluence (Tiwsakul, 2012).
Today’s largest generation of consumers often called Generation Y or Millennial (Solomon,
2015) accounts for about a third of world’s population. In present study, Generation Y born from
1981 to 2000. In this era Generation Y is the largest customer group in Thailand (Source: EIC
analysis based on data from UN).
Massive purchasing power and large number of the generation Y has created high value
for global youth market (Esmaeilpour, 2015; Belleau et al., 2007). Furthermore, it is perceived as
being consumption-oriented and sophisticated in terms of shopping (Wolburg and Pokrywczynski,
2001). They emphasize favorable lifestyle and leisure (Lyons et al., 2015). They, spend the greatest
part of their money on products which make them feel good (Solomon, 2015).
Researcher has examined the relationship between symbolic consumption and consumer
behavior. Their area of investigation limited to the impact of consumer attitude and purchase
intention on global brands. Ekinci (2013) developed and tested a conceptual model of symbolic
consumption. He shows that symbolic consumption positively influences brand loyalty. However,
these theories only focus on Western countries but limit on Eastern countries.
For successful market penetration or into Thailand, global brands promoters should first
identity what leads Thai generation Y consumers to purchase global brands. This study explored
symbolic consumption on Thai generation Y consumers, in terms of self-concept, lifestyle, brand
attitude, and purchase intention on global brands. Moreover, to develop an understanding of why
they use these symbolic consumption. The result of this study would contribute to the marketing
arena and the body of literature for generate on Generation Y consumer behavior toward global
brands, which has received relatively little attention.
 2. Theoretical background
Symbolic consumption
Consumption is certainly a significant sources of symbolic meanings with which we
implement and sustain our project of the self. In our everyday life, we employ consumption
symbolism to construct and express our self-concept as well as to identify our associations with
other (Dittmar 1992; Elliott 1997; Wallendorf and Arnold 1988). People engage in consumption
activities for both symbolic properties and functional benefits (Levy 1959; Elliott 1999). Piacentini
and Mailer (2004) point to processes of ‘symbolic consumption’, how individuals use products as
mechanisms to create, develop and maintain their identities. Clammer (1992) argues that this is
true even of the most common consumption choices, which can reflect an individual’s identity,
tastes and social position (Elliott and Wattanasuwan, 1998; Slater, 1997). Hence, there has been a
burgeoning interest amongst social scientists in the relationship between identity and consumption
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

(Dittmar, 1992; Elliott, 1999; Hogg and Michell, 1996; Piacentini and Mailer, 2004; Solomon,
1983; Wattanasuwan, 2005).
A more considerable way toward achieving such an understanding of the role of goods as
social tools is to view them as symbols used as communication modes between the individual and
significant references. The symbols themselves are defined as “thing used for representing
something else”. Symbols should be thought of as unitary characters composed of signs and their
meanings (Warner 1959). If a product is to serve as a symbolic communicative device it must
achieve social recognition. Moreover the meaning associated with the product must be clearly
established and understood by related segment of society. In actual fact this procedure is a
classification procedure where an object be considered in relation to other objects basic to society.
(Grubb and Grathwohl 1976). Here, the symbolic meaning of goods is used as an outward
expression of their self-concept and connection to society (Elliott, 1999).
Thompson (1995) described the self-concept as a ‘symbolic project’ that is actively
constructed and preserved through symbolic consumption behavior. A repertoire of symbolic
consumption objects, which can be collectively used for the building of self-identity, can be
developed in person. Individuals then can use the symbolic content of chosen consumption objects
to reflect their affiliation or connection to a particular social group (Elliott and Wattanasuwan,
1998). Similarly, they might reject certain products on the basis of their symbolic meanings if they
prove to be incongruent with the consumption choices of significant referents (Elliott, 1999). In
this way, symbolic purchasing behavior also encompasses aspects of aversive consumer choice
(Hogg, 1998).
Different researchers (e.g., Solomon 1983) argue about theory of symbolic consumption,
A theory of symbolic consumption must account mechanism(s) by which the consumption of
products is related to the rest of social behavior According to Veblen’s study (1994), during the
late 19th century, the American upper class focus was on mimicking, gaining, and using
consumption objects in differentiating as well as maintaining distances themselves from those of
lower class and working world. (Timothy, 2005). Piacentini and Mailer (2004) also study symbolic
consumption in teenagers’ clothing choices, the study shown that buying branded clothes was
important to demonstrate that they were not poor, and brands were a useful way of ‘keeping up’
with others in the school. In contrast, those participants attending the private school expressed
 distaste for heavily branded clothes, and generally distanced themselves from such clothes. These
perspectives are the product of social conditioning, and will be determined by family, school and
neighborhood, reflecting the material conditions that are experienced as a result of one’s position
in society (Allen and Anderson, 1994). Therefore, an examination of symbolic consumption can
provide academics and practitioners with a better understanding of the values which are important
to consumers.

Attitude-behavior model
The product choice can be used to communicate one’s characteristics, motivations as well as
social patterns likes a symbol. This so-called symbolic consumption reflects consumer identity
and habits as well as expresses consumer social distinctions. (e.g., Sirgy, 1982). Consumers
choose products/brands perceptually consistent with their own self-concept (Grubb and
Grathwohl, 1967; Sirgy, 1982).
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

This study adapts Fishbein’s model to clarify future the relationship between brand attitude
and purchase intention. The theory of reasoned action is based on the assumption that individuals
are rational and make systematic use of the information available to them (Ajzen and Fishbein
1975); that is, the individual’s attitude affects a person’s behavioral intention. Attitude is often
viewed as an index of the degree to which a person likes or dislikes an object and carries favorable
implications (Ajzen and Fishbein 1980). It is considered to be an important indicator tools in
determining one’s behavioral choices as well as intentions (Dabholkar 1994) since it reflects one’s
opinion of an object (Ajzen and Fishbein 1997) or evaluative judgment (Bagozzi et al., 1999) and
embodies one’s conspicuous beliefs at such a moment (Ajzen and Fishbein 1975).

Generation Y
Generation Y who were born between 1980 and 2000 (Richard K. Miller and Associates,
2011). Generation Y is regarded as a group that shares life experience resulting in the fact that they
develop similar attitudes and belief, despite being in different cultures; worldwide even have had
similar outcomes on the beliefs of the generation group (Raisenwitz and Iyer, 2009; Lazarevic,
2012; Parment, 2012). They are cultivated and technologically adept and, consequently, not afraid
to try new products and services (Noble et al., 2009; Aquino, 2012).
Scholars have reported that Generation Y has been brought up in as era where is shopping
is not regarded as a simple act of purchasing. Retail culture are the result of the growing number
of retail and product choices which focus on the new dimension of shopping like entertainment
and experiential. (Lehtonen and Maenpaa, 1997). Consequently, the millennial seem to have
developed more new different shopping styles. (Bakewell and Mitchell, 2003). They are
surrounded by materialistic ideas (Bakewell et al., 2006) and has a broad social network (Parment,
2009). Thus, Thus, it is not surprising why generation Y seem to driven by status-seeking
consumption than those of previous generation - they believe purchased goods and services can be
used as tool to represent wealth and prosperity (Eastman and Liu, 2012; O’cass & Frost, 2002).
From a brand perspective, they are knowledgeable about brands (Lazarevic, 2012), as they
have grown up in an environment that is brand-saturate and they have more experience in making
brand-related decisions (Bakewell and Vincent Wayne, 2003). Generation Y loyalty is somehow
 unpredictable and changeful these days as the millennial generation often following trend and
brand popularity. They also place more important on style and quality rather than price.
(Raisenwitz and Iyer, 2009). It is hard to build customer loyalty among them, since their attitude
is clearly based on their experience, which determine who will get their money at that time
(Parment, 2009). Additionally, Generation Y consumers are perceived by marketers as a
population group with the strongest spending power (Martin and Turley, 2004; Wolburg and
Pokrywczynski, 2001). This power in the marketplace has the potential to influence the survival
and/or success of brands.
3. The research model and hypotheses development
Symbolic consumption in this study include self-concept and lifestyle. The model
postulates these symbolic consumption components positively influence brand attitude and
purchase intention. The next section address these concepts’ meanings and their relationship with
brand attitude and purchase intention.
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

Self-concept
Grubb and Grathwohl (1967) emphasis on the concept of the self as an object which is
perceive by the individual. The self is what one is aware of, one’s attitude, feelings, perceptions,
and evaluations of oneself as an object. An individual’s self-concept includes his or her perceived
abilities, limitations, appearance, as well as personality (Graeff, 1996). The ideas of Levy (1959),
a number of self-concept models were formulated to describe, explain, and predict the precise role
of consumers’ self-concepts in consumer purchasing behavior.
Onkvisit and Shaw (1987) has pointed out the importance of self-concept and the
relevance of consumer behavior studies, which explains how self-image influence purchase
decision made by customers. This view has been reinforced by a number of other researchers
(Feinberg et al., 1992; Schwer and Daneshvary, 1995; Sirgy and Ericksen, 1992).
In 1960s, self-concept research has been developed (Birdwell, 1968; Grubb and Grathwohl,
1967; Grubb and Hupp, 1968; Hamm and Cundiff, 1969). The marketing literature identifies four
dimensions of self-concept to explain and predict behavior; (1) actual self-concept, how a person
sees himself or herself; (2) ideal self-concept, how a person would like to see himself or herself;
(3) social self-concept, how a person thinks others view them; (4) ideal social self-concept, how a
person would like to be seen by others (Belch and Landon 1977; Dolich, 1969; Hughes and
Guerrore, 1971; Sirgy, 1982). The self-concept requires two common components the actual and
the ideal self (e.g., Belch and Landon, 1977).
Sirgy et al (1997) have shown that congruence between product image and self-concept
predict consumers’ attitudes and purchase intention toward brands. We propose that:
H1. Actual self-concept has a positive effect on Brand attitude.
H2. Actual self-concept has a positive effect on purchase intention.
H3. Ideal self-concept has a positive effect on Brand attitude.
H4. Ideal self-concept has a positive effect on purchase intention.
Lifestyle
 Lifestyle reflect consumer’s day to day interests and to explain consumer behavior (Assael,
1992). The self-concept and lifestyles to determine how the market can be divided and what are
the reasons behind consumption decision making of consumers of across different segments
(Demby 1989). Haley (1972) believed that lifestyle was better in understanding individual
differences than focused on product related characteristics alone. Lifestyle patterns and
relationship to marketing was introduced by Lazer (1963) in defining lifestyle patterns as a
distinctive mode of living. Solomon (2002) suggests that lifestyle consists of shared values, tastes
in consumption patterns, and contains symbolic nuances differentiating groups. Kucukemiroglu
(1999) has once described the word lifestyle as the individual or group behavior that can be used
to identify potential consumers. Kaynak and Kara (2001) stated that the basic premise of research
on lifestyle is that the effective communication and delivery depend on the degree of knowing and
understanding customer of marketers. The study of people’s values and way of livings has become
worldwide accepted tools by both social scientists and marketers (Chu and Lee, 2007). Bellman et
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

al. (1999) point out that the most important information for predicting shopping behaviors are
measures of consumer lifestyles, not demographics. As Krishnan and Murugan (2007) noted, the
importance they attach to the products, the sources of information, the influencers, the buying
patterns and brand choices are all affected by the lifestyle.
Westbrook (1987) argue consumer develop repeat purchase patterns because the brand
improves consumers’ lifestyle. He et al. (2010) show that the relationship between lifestyle and
consumers’ attitude toward products. Del Rio et al. (2001) also finds that lifestyle positively
influences consumers’ intention to recommend. We propose that:
H5. Lifestyle has a positive effect on brand attitude.
H6. Lifestyle has a positive effect on purchase intention.

Brand attitude and purchase intention

Attitude is generally perceived as an indicator which used to define the degree of preference
– how much a person like or dislike an object (Ajzen and Fishbein 1980). It also constitutes
important determinant of a person’s behavioral choices as well as intentions (Dabholkar 1994)
since it reflects one’s opinion of an object (Ajzen and Fishbein 1997) or evaluative judgment
(Bagozzi et al., 1999) and embodies one’s salient beliefs at a given point in time (Ajzen and
Fishbein 1975).
According to the theory of reasoned action (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975), an individual’s
mindset on the behavior and perceived social pressure related to behavior can influence one’s
behavioral intention. Prior studies demonstrate the strong and positive relationship between
attitude and intention in a wide variety of setting (e.g., Dabholkar and Bagozzi, 2002; Sheppard,
Hartwick, and Warshaw, 1988).
A considerable number of studies found positive link between viewpoint and purchase
intention of customer toward different products and services. (e.g., Pavlou and Fygenson, 2006).
Bian (2010), Zhang and Kim (2013) found that consumers purchase intention of luxury brands is
positively affected by their attitude towards the brands.
We also hypothesize a direct relationship between Brand Attitude and Brand Purchase
Intention.
 H7. Brand attitude has a positive effect on purchase Intention.
Based on the aforesaid hypotheses, the conceptual model of this study is represented in
Figure. 1.

Figure 1 Conceptual model

4. Research design
Sample
This study uses a sample Generation Y (=Gen Y) in Bangkok, Thailand. Gen Y, which
refers to those born from 1980 and 2000 (Richard K. Miller and Associates, 2011). There are
several reasons for choice Thailand for our study. Thailand is a major partner in the ASEAN
trading bloc, one of the fastest growing trade blocs in the world. And understanding of Thai
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

consumers’ attitudes and behavior may help multinational brands understand the larger ASEAN
market (Subir, Nittaya and Gillian 2011). Gen Y also known as Millennial, is perceived as being
consumption-oriented and sophisticated in terms of shopping. These generational cohorts have
different experiences, values, attitudes and preferences that significantly influence their purchase
patterns and shopping behaviors (Jackson et al., 2001; Wolburg and Pokrywczynski, 2001;
Parment, 2011, 2013).

Measurement of Brand selection

Stage one. A focus group consisting of 20 subjects who are representative of the main
sample for this study to determine brand names that group perceive as being “global” in their
respective societies. We focus on the category of coffee shops as samples perceive coffee shops to
be very popular in Thai respective cultures. The brand product that was most frequently mentioned
by the group was Starbucks. Therefore, Starbucks was used as the setting for this study.
Stage two. In this initial stage, 42 personality traits were elicited from the literature on the
basic that they were used to describe both people and products (Aker 1997)
Stage three. The pilot study used 25 Thai subjects to see whether the selected bipolar
adjectives would be relevant to their description of a Starbucks. The criterion for selection of pair
of adjectives was if they were chosen by 70% of the sample. This resulted in 7 pairs of adjectives:
exciting/dull, cool/uncool, upper class/lower class, reliable/unreliable, friendly/unfriendly,
successful/unsuccessful, and unique/ordinary.

Questionnaire development
The survey included questions regarding self-concept, lifestyle, attitude toward brand,
purchase intention and demographic information. Image characteristics using a 7-point bipolar
scale.
For measuring self-concept, we have adopted the items developed by Sirgy and Sue (2000).
Self-concept in this study comprise of four items (actual self-2; ideal self-2) using a 7-point Likert
type scale. A 7-point Likert type scale ranging from (1) Strongly Disagree to (7) Strong Agree.
 Lifestyle used three items based on Ekinci (2013) using a 7-point Likert type scale. A 7-
point Likert type scale ranging from (1) Strongly Disagree to (7) Strong Agree.
Brand attitude was measured with three items developed from Riefler (2012) using 7-point
bipolar scale.
Purchase intention were measuring three items from Riefler (2012) using a 7-point Likert
type scale. A 7-point Likert type scale ranging from (1) Strongly Disagree to (7) Strong Agree.
This study was conducted in Thailand all scales were translated and back-translated from
English into Thai. Respondents’ experience and knowledge of Starbucks was also tested in the
survey. Results indicated that a large majority (90%) have purchased products from Starbucks.

Data Collection
Data were gathered from Gen Y consumers in Bangkok, Thailand and 300 returned
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

completed questionnaires. Generation Y consumers were in the age range of 16-35. This study the
generation Y consumers who were in the range of 20-35 years old at the time of this study.
The sample was 25.7% male 74.3% female. Concerning education levels, 56.3% of the
respondents held a bachelor’s degrees, and 22.7% had advance degree (Master, Ph.D., M.D., etc.).
Around 29.3% of respondents earn more than 30,001 Bath per month.

Table 1 Profile of the Sample (n=300)

5. Finding and Results

Confirmatory Factor Analysis
In this study using Amos 23 through maximum likelihood estimate. Confirmatory factor
analysis (CFA) results showed a good fit to the data. ‫ݔ‬2 = 152.513; df = 55; p < 0.001; root mean
square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.077; Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = 0.962;
Incremental Fit Index (IFI) = 0.963; Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) = 0.946; Normed Fit Index (NFI)
= 0.943; Relative Fit Index (RFI) = 0.919. Byrne (1998), defined, the values of CFI, IFI, TLI, NFI,
and RFI were greater than 0.9. A RMSEA value between 0.04 and 0.08 also indicates an acceptable
fit (Striger, 2007). The Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient ranges 0.7-0.90, proving acceptable
reliability of the measurements. All of the factor loadings were equal to or higher than 0.789, and
all factor loading were significant at p < 0.001. Table 2 provides a detailed overview of the
variables.
Table 2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis

The composite reliabilities of all constructs was greater than the minimum criteria of 0.60
which satisfies the value recommended by Fornell (1992). In addition, average variance extracted
(AVE) was higher than the 0.05 cut-off for all the constructs, showing that convergent validity of
the measurement scales was strongly supported (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Discriminant validity
was evaluated by comparing the squared correlation between a pair of constructs (Fornell &
Larcker, 1981). The results indicated that each squared correlation between a pair of constructs
 was less than the AVE for each construct, indicating that discriminant validity was well established,
which define the Table 3.

Table 3 Discriminant validity analysis

Structural Equation Modeling

Structural equation modeling was used to assess the overall fit of the proposed model and
to test the hypotheses. The full structural model demonstrated and adequate fit to the data, ‫ݔ‬2 =
152.513; df = 55; p < 0.001; RMSEA = 0.077; CFI = 0.962; IFI = 0.963; TLI = 0.946; NFI = 0.943;
RFI = 0.919. Table 4 described the summarizes standardize coefficients fit statistics for the model,
while Figure 2 shows the results of hypotheses testing.
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

Table 4 Summarizes standardize coefficients fit statistics for the model

Overall, the results lend support to the hypothesized model. The results confirm the
proposed effects of actual self on brand attitude (H1: β=0.158，p<0.05) and purchase intention
(H2: β=0.146，p<0.05). Additionally, the results indicates that actual self positively affects the
brand attitude (H3: β=0.231，p<0.05) and purchase intention (H4: β=0.172，p<0.05). Finding
also indicate that lifestyle positively affects brand attitude (H5: β=0.169，p<0.05) and purchase
intention (H6: β=0.251，p<0.001). The effect of brand attitude on purchase intention was also
positive (H7: β=0.246，p<0.001).
The ܴ2 value measures the percentage of the variance explained by each construct in the
model (Wixom and Watson, 2001). The results indicate that actual self, ideal self, lifestyle
explained 20.5 percent of brand attitude, and 37.9 percent of purchase intention (see Figure 2).

Figure 2 Results of structural equation model

 6. Discussion and conclusion
This study presented a symbolic consumption effect on brand attitude and purchase
intention in terms of self-concept and lifestyle on global brand in Generation Y consumers. It is
found that self-concept and lifestyle have significant impacts on brand attitude and purchase
intention (accepted by H1-H6). Brand attitude had a positive effect on purchase intention (accepted
by H7). It shows that Thai Generation Y consumers consume products not only on functional
benefits but also on symbolic meaning.
As a theoretical framework, symbolic consumption has been applied to understand
individuals’ attitude and behavior in various fields, which include tourism (Ekinci 2013, Ahn et
al., 2013, Hosany and Martin 2012), marketing (Piacentini and Mailer 2004, Anisimova 2016), etc.
This study was the first this kind in ASEAN countries to apply self-concept theory and Thai
Generation Y collectivistic culture to explain consumers’ consumption behavior in global brand
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

coffee shop.
Findings supported by Landon (1974) argues that the relationship between self-concept
and product preferences. It may change according to different product categories due to different
forms of self-concept (such as actual self and ideal self) being involved in evaluation. The results
of this study showed that actual self-concept and deal self-concept positively influences brand
attitude and purchase intention. This result supported by previous studies the similarity between
self-concept and the typical user’s image can play significant role in consumers’ attitude or
purchasing intentions (Hong and Zinkhan, 1995; Graeff 1996; Sirgy et al., 1997; Kang et al. 2012).
Lifestyle also influences brand attitude and purchase intention. These finding supported by
the claims of Kim et al (2001) that found a significant relation between lifestyle towards attitude
and purchase intention, this finding differs from previous studies (Qing et al., 2012). Qing et al
(2012) find lifestyle no significant with purchase attitude on US products but lifestyle significantly
relate to purchase intention on US products. Lifestyle marketing refer to person’s unique lifestyle
patterns as expressed by activities, interests, and option (Brassington and Pettitt, 2003).
Brand attitude and purchase intention are important concept in the marketing literature.
These findings already defined in previous studies that demonstrated positive relationship between
brand attitude and purchase intention in global brand contexts (Rirfler, 2012).
The Korean study similar results, young-generation people, show their identity or
belonging to the group of trend leaders or people who enjoy western culture through visiting brand
name coffee shops (Babin et al., 2006).
With the growing purchase power and the large market size, Generation Y become an
extremely attractive market segment. The Generation Y group were more inquisitive, high
standards for quality and taking long time to make a purchase decision, and look for exactly what
they want. Understanding relationship between symbolic consumption and Generation Y behavior
is crucial. Therefore, self-concept and lifestyle may be key factors in maintaining a long- term
relationship between Generation Y consumers and brands. Brands as status symbols that support
or encourage a specific lifestyle or personal value would be useful when targeting the Generation
Y consumers. The marketers are advised to evaluate brand personality characteristics and
 consumption motivations from Generation Y consumers. Brand image development should match
the consumers’ actual and ideal self-concept. Consumers’ self-concept can be expected that an
increase in positive consumer attitude and purchase intention. This type of strategy is also
supported by the research of Sirgy (1985) who determined that consumers who are driven to feel
a connection with the products they purchase are likely to seek out brands that reflect their self-
image.

Managerial implications
Marketers are under greater pressure to understand consumers’ behavior and the resulting
influence on purchase intention. The finding shows actual and ideal self-concept play important
roles in Thai Generation Y consumers. The higher congruity between brand image and his/her self-
concept relates to more exciting, cool, upper class, reliable, friendly, successful, and unique. These
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

characteristics positively relate to self-concept suggesting important implications for developing

promotional strategies. Marketers must develop an image/personality closely matching the self-
concept of potential Generation Y consumers. Results broadly apply to managers in marketing,
and service industries.
Generation Y consumers who are motivated by symbolic consumption are present a
potential of purchase intention for products. Marketers should offer limited edition or exclusive
seasonal products.
This study shows that lifestyle found to be stronger predictors of brand attitude and
purchase intention towards brands than self-concept mean that lifestyle was important to
Generation Y consumers and that they made purchasing decisions accordingly.
Generation Y grew up with computers, Internet, social media and mobile tech; they are
confident using technology in everyday living. Generation Y connect online to share information
and experiences with peers and people with similar interests. The growth of coffee bars such as
the Starbucks partly is fuelled by the demand of leisure activities that can fit into the work schedule.
Thus, marketers should understand their needs and develop goods or service to enhance brands
and products (Ekinci et al. 2013). Store should provide free Wi-Fi, check-in via mobile app, USB-
charging ports.
This study apply to many other countries, including other ASEAN countries, initially. If
similar results emerge from these studies, global brand could use a regional branding strategy for
ASEAN countries such as Vietnam, Myanmar, Laos and Cambodia which are closer to Thailand
in proximity and culture than other countries.
Brand marketers must adapt their advertising messages to target Generation Y’s self-
concept. In addition, managers need to understand the role of actual self-concept, ideal self-
concept, lifestyle and brand attitude in Generation Y behavior intention. The finding suggests self-
concept influences attitude predicts purchase intention. Creating pleasant characteristics generates
higher self-concept and positively influences Generation Y behavioral intentions.
 Limitations, future research and conclusion
Although this research makes important contributions to the understanding of Generation
Y’s consumption. There are a number of possible limitations that need to be noted beyond the
caution about a limited number of product categories being studied. The sample was only one of
many targets for global brands, and only one brands was tested. The study only involves
respondents from Bangkok Thailand. Results might be different if other countries and cultures
were taken into consideration. For example, consumers from Eastern countries are often more
influenced by symbolic consumption than consumers from Western cultures. The authors suggest
that future research can further expand the sample to other age groups, gender and current marital
status. Another interesting future pursuit would be a comparison between domestic brands and
global brands.
The objective of this study was examine the self-concept and lifestyle of Generation Y in
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

their reported brand attitude and purchase intention toward global brands. The findings show that
self-concept and lifestyle are both effect brand attitude and purchase intention. These could be
applied to domestic brands and categories to create a competitive advantage over other competing
brands.
 Reference
Aaker, J.L. (1997), “Dimensions of brand personality”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 34
No. 3, pp. 347-56.
Ahn, T., Ekinci, Y., and Li, G. (2013), “Self-congruence, functional congruence, and destination
choice”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 66 No. 6, pp. 719-723.
Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1980), Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior,
Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ
Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1977), “Attitude-behavior relations: a theoretical analysis and review
of empirical research”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 84 No. 5, pp. 888-918.
Allen, D. E. and Anderson, P. F. (1994), “Consumption and Social Stratification: Bourdieu's
Distinctio”", Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 21, pp. 70-74.
Allen, M.W., Ng, S.K, Wilson, M. (2002), “A functional approach to instrumental and terminal
values the value-attitude-behavior system of consumer choice”, European Journal of
Marketing, Vol.36 No. 1, pp. 111 – 135.
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

Anisimova, Y. (2016), “The effects of corporate brand symbolism on consumer satisfaction and
loyalty Evidence from Australia”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol.
28 No. 3 pp. 481 – 498.
Aquino, J. (2012), “Gen Y: the next generation of spenders: they're young, educated, and tech-
savvy. Here's how to get them to pay attention to you”, CRM Magazine, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp.
20.
Assael, H. (1992), Consumer Behavior and Marketing Action, PWS-KENT, Boston, MA.
Belleau, B.D., Summers, T.A., Xu, Y. and Pinel, R. (2007), “Theory of reasoned action:
purchase intention of young consumers”, Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 25
No. 3, pp. 244- 257.
Babin, B.J., Chebat, J.C., and Robicheaux, R. (2006), “Introduction to the special section on
retailing research: The mind and emotion of the 21st century shopper”, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 59 No.12, pp. 1279–1280.
Bagozzi, R.P., Gopinath, M. and Nyer, P.U. (1999), “The role of emotions in marketing”,
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 184-206.
Bakewell, C., and Mitchell, V.W. (2003), “Generation Y female consumer decision‐making
styles”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 95
– 106
Bakewell, C., Mitchell, V.W., and Rothwell, M. (2006), “UK Generation Y male fashion
consciousness”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol. 10 No 2, pp. 169–
180.
Bandyopadhyay, S., Wongtada, N., and Rice, G. (2011), “Measuring the impact of inter
attitudinal conflict”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 211–224
Bassington, F., and Pettitt, S. (2003), Principles of Marketing, Prentice Hall, Harlow, UK.
Belch, G.E., and Landon, L.E. (1977), “Discriminant validity of a product-anchored self-concept
measure”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 252–6.
Bellman, S., Lohse, G.L. and Johnson, E.J. (1999), ‘‘Predictors of online buying behavior’’,
Communication of the ACM, Vol. 42 No. 12, pp. 32-8.
Bian, Q. (2010), Examining U.S. and Chinese Students’ Purchase Intention Formation for
Luxury Brands. Auburn University, Auburn
Birdwell, A.E. (1968), “A study of the influence of image congruence on consumer choice”,
Journal of Business, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 76-88.
 Byrne, B.M. (1998), Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL, PRELIS and SIMPLIS: Basic
Concepts, Applications and Programming, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New
Jersey.
Chu, Y. and Lee, J.J. (2007), “The experiential preferences of the online consumers in different
Internet shopping lifestyles towards online shopping web sites’’, Human-Computer
Interaction. HCI Applications and Services, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol.
4553, Springer, Berlin, pp. 3-11.
Clammer, J. (1992). Aesthetics of the self: Shopping and social being in contemporary urban
Japan. In Shields R. (Ed.), Lifestyle Shopping: The Subject of Consumption, Routledge,
London, pp. 195-215.
Dabholkar, P. (1994), “Incorporating choice into an attitudinal framework: analyzing models of
mental comparison processes”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 100-
118
Dabholkar, P., and Bagozzi, R. (2002), “An attitudinal model of technology-based self:
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

Moderating effects of consumer traits and situational factors”, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 184-201.
Del Rio A, Vazquez R, Iglesias V. (2001), “The effects of brand associations on consumer
response”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 410 - 425
Demby, E.H. (1989), “Psychographics revisited: the birth of a technique”, Marketing News, Vol.
23 No. 1, p. 21.
Dittmar, H. (1992), The Social Psychology of Material Possessions: To Have Is To Be,
Hertfordshire, Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Dolich, I.J. (1969), “Congruence relationships between self-images and product brands”. Journal
of Marketing Research, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 80–84.
Eastman, J. and Liu, J. (2012), “The impact of generational cohorts on status consumption: an
exploratory look at generational cohort and demographics on status consumption”,
Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol.29 No. 2, pp. 93-102.
Ekinci Y, Sirakaya-Turk, E. and Preciado, S. (2013), “Symbolic consumption of tourism
destination brands”. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 66 No. 6, pp 711-718
Elliott, R. (1997), “Existential consumption and irrational desire”, European Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 285-296.
Elliott, R. (1999), Symbolic meaning and postmodern consumer culture. In Brownlie, D., Saren,
M., Wensley, R., Wittington, R. (Eds.), Rethinking Marketing: Towards Critical Marketing
Accountings, Sage Publications, London, pp. 112-125.
Elliott, R. and Wattanasuwan, K. (1998), “Brands as symbolic resources for the construction of
identity”, International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 131-144.
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: An
International Journal, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. –
Feinberg, R.A., Mataro, L. and Burroughs, W.J. (1992), “Clothing and social identity”, Clothing
and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 18-23
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to
theory and research. Reading, Addison-Wesley, MA.
Fornell, C. (1992), “A national customer satisfaction barometer: The Swedish experience”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 6–21.
 Fornell, C., and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equity models with unobservable
variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39–
50.
Grubb, E.L., and Grathwohl, H.L. (1967), “Consumer self-concept, symbolism and market
behavior: a theoretical approach”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 22–27.
Grubb, E.L., and Hupp G. (1968), “Perception of self, generalized stereotypes and brand
selection”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 58–63.
Grubb, E.L., and Stern, B.L. (1971), “Self-concept and significant others”. Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 382–385.
Haley, R.I. (1972), Attitude Research in Transition, American Marketing Association, Chicago,
IL.
Hamm, B.C., and Cundiff, E.W. (1969), “Self-actualization and product perception”. Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 470–472.
He, Y., Zou, D., and Jin, L. (2010) “Exploiting the goldmine: a lifestyle analysis of affluent
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

Chinese consumers”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vo. 27 No. 7, pp. 615–628

Hogg, M. K. (1998), “Anti-constellations: Conceptualization and content”, European Advance in
Consumer Research, Vol. 3, pp. 44-49.
Hogg, M.K., and Michell, P.C.N. (1996), “Identity, self and consumption: A conceptual
framework”. Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 12, pp. 629-644.
Hong, J.W., and Zinkhan, G.M. (1995), “Self-concept and advertising effectiveness: the
influence of congruency, conspicuousness and response modes”, Psychology and
Marketing, Vol.12 No. 1, pp. 53-77.
Hosany, S., and Martin, D. (2012), “Self-image congruence in consumer behavior”, Journal of
Business behavior, Vol. 65 No. 5, pp. 685-691.
Hughes, G.D., and Guerrero, J.L. (1971), “Automobile self-congruity models reexamined.
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 125–127.
Jackson, V., Stoel, L., and Brantley, A. (2011), “Mall attributes and shopping value: differences
by gender and generational cohort”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Service, Vol.18
No. 1, pp. 1–9.
Kang, J., Tang, L., Lee, J. Y., and Bosselman, R. H. (2012), “Understanding customer behavior
in name-brand Korean coffee shops: The role of self-congruity and functional congruity”,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 809-818.
Kaynak, E. and Kara, A. (2001), “An examination of the relationship among consumer lifestyles,
ethnocentrism, knowledge structures, attitudes and behavioural tendencies: a comparative
study in two CIS states”, International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 455-82.
Kim, K.H., Park, J.Y., Ki, D.Y. and Moon, H.I. (2001), “Internet user lifestyle: its impact on
effectiveness and attitude toward internet advertising in Korea”, paper presented at the
Annual Conference of the American Academy of Advertising, Salt Lake City, UT.
Kottak, C.P. (1990), Prime Time Society, Wadsworth, Belmont, CA
Krishnan, J. and Murugan, M.S. (2007), ‘‘Lifestyle analysis – A tool for understanding buyer
behavior’’, AIMA Journal of Management and Research, Vol. 1 No. 1-4, pp. 1-25.
Kucukemiroglu, O. (1999), “Marketing segmentation by using consumer lifestyle dimensions
and ethnocentrism: an empirical study”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 33 No. 5/6,
pp. 470-87.
Lazarevic,V. (2012), "Encouraging brand loyalty in fickle generation Y consumers", Young
Consumers, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 45 – 61.
 Lazer, W. (1963), Life Style Concepts and Marketing, in Toward Scientific Marketing, American
Marketing Association, Chicago, IL.
Lehtonen, T.K. and Maenpaa, P. (1997), Shopping in the East Centre Mall: The Shopping
Experience, Sage Publications, London.
Lyons, S.T., Schweitzer, L. and Ng, E.S.W. (2015), “How have careers changed? An
investigation of changing career patterns across four generations”, Journal of Managerial
Psychology, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 8-21
Martin, C.A. and Turley, L.W. (2004), “Malls and consumption motivation: an exploratory
examination of older Generation Y consumers”, International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, Vol. 32 No. 10, pp. 464-75.
McCracken, G. (1990), Culture and Consumption: new approaches to the symbolic character of
consumer goods and activities, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN.
Noble, S. M., Haytko, D. L., and Phillips, J. (2009), “What drives college- age Generation Y
consumers?”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 62 No. 6, pp. 617-628.
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

O’Cass, A. and Frost, H. (2000), “Status brands: examining the effects of non-product-related
brand associations on status and conspicuous consumption”, Journal of Product and
Brand Management, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp.67-88.
Onkvisit, S. and Shaw, J. (1987), “Self-concept and image congruence: Some reseach and
managerial implications”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 4 No. 1 pp. 13 – 23
Parment, A. (2009), Automobile Marketing: Distribution Strategies for Competitiveness. VDM
Publishing, Saarbrucken.
Parment, A. (2011), Generation Y in Consumer and Labour Markets. Routledge, NewYork.
Parment, A. (2013), “Generation Y vs. Baby Boomers: shopping behavior, buyer involvement
and implications for retailing”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Service, Vol. 20 No. 2,
pp. 189–199.
Pavlou, P.A., and Fygenson, M. (2006), “Understanding and predicting electronic commerce
adoption: An extension of the theory of planned behavior”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 30 No.1,
pp. 115-143
Piacentini, M. and Mailer, G. (2004), “Symbolic consumption in teenagers’ clothing choices”.
Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 3 No.3, pp.251-262.
Piron, F. (2000). “Consumers’ perceptions of the country‐of‐origin effect on purchasing
intentions of (in) conspicuous products”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 4,
pp.308 – 321
Qing, P., Lobo, A., and Chongguang, L. (2012), “The impact of lifestyle and ethnocentrism on
consumers' purchase intentions of fresh fruit in China”, Journal of Consumer Marketing,
Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 43 – 51
Reisenwitz, T.H. and Iyer, R. (2009), “Differences in Generation X and Generation Y:
implications for the organization and marketers”, Marketing Management Journal, Vol.
19 No. 2, pp. 91-103.
Richard K. Miller and Associates (2011a), Consumer Behavior 2011: Millennial Consumers,
Richard K. Miller and Associates (RKMA), Loganville, GA.
Riefler, P. (2012), “Why consumers do (not) like global brands: The role of globalization
attitude, GCO and global brand origin”, International Journal of Research in Marketing,
Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 25-34
 Schwer, R.K. and Daneshvary, R. (1995), “Symbolic product attributes and emulatory
consumption: the case of rodeo fan attendance and the wearing of western clothing”,
Journal of Applied Business Research, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 74-81.
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”, The Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 325-343
Sirgy, M.J. and Ericksen, M.K. (1992), “Employed females clothing preference, self-image
congruence, and career anchorage”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 22 No. 5,
pp. 408-22
Sirgy, M.J., Grewal, D., Mangleburg, T.F. and Park, J.O. (1997), “Assessing the predictive
validity of two methods of measuring self-image congruence”, Academy of Marketing
Science Journal, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 229-38
Sirgy, M.J., and Su, C. (2000), “Destination image, self-congruity, and travel behaviour: towards
integrative model”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol.38 No. 4, pp. 340–352.
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

Slater, D. (1997), Consumer Culture and Modernity, Polity Press, Cambridge.

Solomon, M.R. (1983), “The role of products as social stimuli: A symbolic interactionism
perspective”. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 319-328.
Solomon, M.R. (2015), Consumer Behavior: Buying, Having, and Being, Pearson Education,
USA.
Solomon, M.R. (1983), “The role of products as social stimuli: A symbolic interactionism
perspective”. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 10 No, 3, pp. 319-328.
Solomon, M.R., (2002), Consumer behaviour: buying, having, and being, Prentice Hall, Upper
Saddle River, NJ.
Steiger, J.H. (2007), “Understanding the limitations of global fit assessment in structural
equation modeling”, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 42 No. 5, pp. 893-98.
Sutapa Amornvivat, (2014), “Insight Capturing Thai Gen Y Consumers”, available at:
https://www.scbeic.com/en/detail/file/product/276/e1y9el9c4h/Insight_Eng_GenY_2014.p
df (accessed 30 September 2016).
Tiwsakul, R.A., and Hackley, C. (2012), “Postmodern paradoxes in Thai-Asian consumer
identity”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 65 No. 4, pp.490-496
Thompson, J. B. (1995), The Media and Modernity: A social Theory of the media, Polity,
Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
Timothy DJ. (2005), Shopping tourism, retailing and leisure, Cronwell Press, Clevedon, UK.
Timothy R. Graeff (1996), “Using promotional messages to manage the effects of brand and self-
image on brand evaluations”, Journal of Consumers Marketing, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 4-18.
Wallendorf, M. and Arnould, E.J. (1988), “My Favorite Things: A Cross-Cultural Inquiry into
Object Attachment, Possessiveness, and Social Linkage”, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 531-547
Warner, W.L. (1959), The Living and the Dead: A Study of the Symbolic life of Americans,
Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.
Wattanasuwan, K. (2005), “The self and symbolic consumption”. Journal of American Academy
of Business, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 179-184.
Westbrook, RA. (1987), “Product/consumption-based affective responses and post-purchase
processes”. Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 24, No. 3, pp. 258-270
Wixom, B.H. & Watson, H.J. (2001), “An empirical investigation of the factors affecting data
warehousing success”, MIS Quarterly, Vol .25 No. 1, pp. 17-41.
 Wolburg, J.M. and Pokrywczynski, J. (2001), “A psychographic analysis of Generation Y
college students”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 41 No. 5, pp. 33-52.
Woodside, A.G., Sood, S. and Miller, K.E. (2008), “When consumers and brands talk:
storytelling theory and research in psychology and marketing”, Psychology and
Marketing, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 97-145.
Zhang, B., and Kim, J.H. (2013), “Luxury fashion consumption in China: Factors affecting
attitude and purchase intent”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 20 No. 1,
pp. 68–79
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)
 Table 1 Profile of the Sample (n=300)
Variable n Percentage
Gender
Male 77 25.7
Female 223 74.3
Income
Under or equal 10,000 Bath 66 22
10,001-20,000 Bath 70 23.3
20,001-30,000 Bath 76 25.3
30,0001 or more 88 29.3
Education
High school graduate 15 5
Undergraduate student 48 16
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

Bachelor’s degree 169 56.3

Advance degree (Master, Ph.D., M.D., etc.) 68 22.7
Have you ever bought products from Brand X
Yes 270 90
No 30 10
 Table 2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis
Standardizes
Construct and scale items Alpha CR AVE
loadings
Image characteristics 0.772
Exciting/dull
Cool/uncool
Upper class/lower class
Reliable/unreliable
Friendly/unfriendly
Successful/unsuccessful
Unique/ordinary
Self-concept
Actual self 0.888 0.888 0.799
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

Brand X is similar to how I am. 0.902

It is important for me to use products that reflect who I am. 0.886
Ideal self 0.835 0.84 0.724
Brand X is similar to how I would like to be. 0.909
This brand is consistent with how I would like others to see me. 0.789
Lifestyle 0.909 0.911 0.774
Brand X reflects my personal lifestyle. 0.858
Brand X is totally in line with lifestyle. 0.93
Using Brand X supports my lifestyle. 0.85
Brand attitude 0.877 0.88 0.71
My opinion toward Brand X (positive/negative). 0.884
I think Brand X is good/bad. 0.838
I think Brand X is a good value for money. 0.827
Purchase intention 0.899 0.9 0.75
I will consider Brand X for my next purchase. 0.849
It is very likely that I will buy Brand X in the future. 0.827
I intend to continue buying Brand X. 0.919
 Table 3 Discriminant validity analysis
Actual self Ideal self Lifestyle Attitude Intention

Actual self 0.894

Ideal self 0.449 0.851

Lifestyle 0.528 0.476 0.880

Attitude 0.351 0.382 0.362 0.843

Intention 0.442 0.451 0.499 0.454 0.866

The bold diagonal elements are the square root of the variance shared between the constructs and their measures. Off diagonal
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

elements are the correlations between constructs.

 Table 4 Summarizes standardize coefficients fit statistics for the model

Standardized Standard C.R.(t-

Hypothesize path P Result
estimate error value)

H1: Actual self → Brand attitude 0.158 0.076 2.073 0.038 Accepted

Purchase Accepted
H2: Actual self → 0.231 0.078 3.081 0.002
intention

H3: Ideal self → Brand attitude 0.169 0.073 2.218 0.027 Accepted

Purchase Accepted
H4: Ideal self → 0.146 0.071 2.137 0.033
intention
Downloaded by Göteborgs Universitet At 11:10 11 October 2017 (PT)

H5: Lifestyle → Brand attitude 0.172 0.074 2.523 0.012 Accepted

Purchase Accepted
H6: Lifestyle → 0.251 0.069 3.651 < 0.001
intention

Purchase Accepted
H7: Brand attitude → 0.246 0.064 3.963 < 0.001
intention