- Email: [email protected]
The ebb and flow of consumer identities: the role of memory, emotions and threats
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect The ebb and flow of consumer identities: the role of memory, emotions and threats Americus Reed II1,3 and Mark R Forehand2,3 It is well established that consumers use their product and brand choices to signal and reinforce identities. More recently, consumer researchers have begun to focus on the dynamic nature of identity. Moving beyond the momentary effect of a given identity on behavior, newer research investigates how a constellation of identities influence each other and how this interface drives long-term consumption and behavioral patterns. Of particular interest are the processes by which an identity becomes strengthened and weakened over time — both in isolation and also with respect to other identities the consumer may hold. We review these psychological processes based on recent consumer research in the areas of memory, emotions, and threats to identity. Addresses 1 Whitney M. Young Jr. Professor of Marketing, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States 2 Pigott Family Professor of Marketing, Michael G. Foster School of Business, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, United States Corresponding authors: Reed, II Americus ([email protected]) and Forehand, Mark R ([email protected]) 3 The authors contributed equally to this article and are listed in reverse alphabetical order. Current Opinion in Psychology 2016, 10:94–100 This review comes from a themed issue on Consumer behavior Edited by Jeff Joireman and Kristina Durante
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.12.015 2352-250/Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Prior research has shown that identities, whether objective and relatively stable (e.g. father, son, millennial, Hispanic, etc.), or transitory and fluid (e.g. Apple user, Democrat, lawyer, athlete, etc.) are organized as selfschemas [1,2]. When a given identity is top of mind for a consumer, identity relevant actions follow [1,3,4,5]. For example, if an ‘athlete’ identity is salient, one may be more likely to observe stronger liking of athlete-focused products like Gatorade (vs. Coca Cola); more positive reactions to pro-athlete spokespeople (vs. award-winning actors) in advertisements; more attention paid to identityrelevant media like ESPN (vs. CNN); and more frequent engagement in consumption behaviors that symbolize the identity like wearing a fit-bit (vs. an Apple Watch). It is often argued that this occurs because the self-schemas are Current Opinion in Psychology 2016, 10:94–100
constellations of thoughts, emotions, attitudes, judgements, and behaviors that define particular identities [2]. Motivational principles of consistency ensure that when these identities are top of mind [1,3], consumers conform to the normative proscriptions that signal and embody the identity [1–3,6] and avoid those that embody and signal dissociative identities [7]. These cognitive inputs to identity are well understood and have been well documented for various different types of identities [2,8]. More recently, identity scholars have argued that identity research should go beyond the simple premise that if a dimension of identity is made salient [1,3] or activated in the overall self-concept [9], attitudes, judgements, and choices consistent with the identity should follow. These theorists have argued that it is also important to deeply explore the inputs and processes by which identities interact and vie for dominance. Such an endeavor sees its origins in traditional models of the self-concept. These models have long proposed that a consumer’s myriad identities not only differ in their strength of association with the core self-concept, but are often associated (or disassociated) with one another [10]. For example, a consumer may strongly identify with being gay and being Republican despite a broader disassociation between the two identities. Although this proposition is relatively noncontroversial, the potential interplay of multiple-identity systems has received scant attention within the consumer research literature relative to extensive work on the processing of solitary identities. On the rare occasions that multiple identities have been considered in concert, the results suggest a more nuanced view where the various identities compete or interact with one another [11,12,13].
A framework of consumer identity To frame the current discussion of multiple-identity processing, we first present a conceptual framework that distinguishes between the processes that influence solitary identities and the processes that influence the interplay between multiple identities. This framework identifies six fundamental processes (as depicted in Figure 1), including: (A) Adoption — the process of bringing a new identity into the self-schema, (B) Reinforcement — the process of strengthening an identity over time, (C) Dilution — the process of weakening an identity over time, (D) Elevation — the process of increasing the prominence of a given identity within a hierarchy of identities, (E) Suppression — the process of reducing the prominence of a given identity within www.sciencedirect.com
Consumer identity processes Reed and Forehand 95
Figure 1
Environmental Inputs
Priming Centrality Relevance
Adoption
(+)
Single Social Identity Maintenance
Dilution
Reinforcement
(+) (+)
Multiple Social Identity Systems
CONSUMER IDENTITY
Elevation
(–) (–)
Suppression
(–)
Expulsion Current Opinion in Psychology
Framework of identity processes based on single and multiple identity maintenance. Source: original, based on Ref. [14].
a hierarchy of identities, and (F) Expulsion — the process of dispossession of an existing identity [14]. Although most of these processes influence the centrality of the identity within the self-concept at an absolute level, elevation and suppression are unique in their focus on the relative status of one’s various identities (see Figure 1). It should also be noted that these six processes do not work in isolation from one another. For example, any activity that prompts reinforcement of an identity and thereby strengthens its association with the selfconcept may simultaneously elevate the identity relative to other unaffected identities. Alternatively, repeated suppression of a given identity relative to a consumer’s full identity set may not only alter its relative prominence, but may also lead to dilution at an absolute level — dilution that may be so onerous, it may trigger expulsion of that identity. In this article, we review and comment on recent research that has implications for this framework [2,14]. To organize this review, this article focuses on three relatively new streams of consumer identity research: firstly, the role of memory in shaping identity development and expression, secondly, the interplay of emotion and identity as drivers of consumer behavior, and finally, the effects of external feedback regarding one’s identity (in the form of threats to the identity per se). We have www.sciencedirect.com
ordered these streams from an inward perspective to an outward perspective. At the most inward level, the selfconcept is a memory structure composed of many identities. Memory processes therefore play a significant role in the ebb and flow of individual identities. Moving beyond this core identity structure, emotions provide a key input and feedback process that influences each of the aforementioned identity processes. Finally, at the most external level, identity threats have been shown to have discrete effects on the prominence and expression of identities.
Memory and identity Memory is the fundamental building block upon which identity is built. It is ironic that memory has received relatively little attention within the consumer identity domain given that an entire literature in psychology has documented that self-relevant information in memory is easier to encode and retrieve [15]. In fact, one of the primary models of the self-concept is premised on the associative network model of memory [16]. Implicit in this model is the idea that a consumer’s various identities are interconnected with one another and hence may interact in both activation and expression. In an early investigation on this interplay, it was observed that salient identities influence both the encoding and retrieval of identity-linked information [17]. This work found that when an identity is top of mind at both encoding and Current Opinion in Psychology 2016, 10:94–100
96 Consumer behavior
retrieval, consumers are better at recalling and recognizing advertising content that is moderately connected to the identity in question. Specifically, if a consumer’s gender identity was activated prior to exposure to a vitamin advertisement, the consumer’s subsequent recognition of the vitamin’s gender-related benefits (e.g. skin health) increased provided that gender identity was simultaneously activated at recognition. However, such activation had no effect on recognition when the vitamin’s benefits were very strongly connected to gender (e.g. reduction in menstrual pain) as these benefits served to activate gender identity independent of external cues. Such effects in memory not only influence short-term recall, but also contribute over time to the reinforcement and elevation of core identities within the overall set of identities a consumer holds. Memory also shapes the full range of identity processes via both implicit and explicit inhibitory effects. At an implicit level, one study found that when individuals had their ‘Greek’ identities activated, thoughts regarding conflicting identities (e.g. ‘university students’) were inhibited. However, this pattern emerged only for those who strongly identified with the activated identity — even though all participants were equally familiar with both [18]. At an explicit level, information that is inconsistent with an identity a consumer holds may motivate her to suppress thoughts related to the identity including persuasive appeals linked to the identity in question [19]. Specifically, university students who viewed a long series of advertisements and then encountered negative information about their university were less likely to recognize previously viewed ads that targeted their university identity. Past identities can also be the target of discrete retrieval attempts and express themselves in the form of nostalgia. When retrieved in this manner, attention to past identities increases one’s social connectedness, with downstream consequences for consumer willingness to pay for a wide variety of both durable and non-durable products [20]. Finally, consumers explicitly and strategically guide their behavior in order to protect their memories [21]. In some cases, consumers will delay repeating previous special consumption episodes so that they may savor the episode and continue to reinforce the identity that was activated during the episode [22]. For example, consumers with a strong romantic identity were more likely to want to go back to a honeymoon destination that was ‘special’ (vs. not special) but they preferred to wait longer to actually go. This was particularly true for consumers who had higher dispositional tendencies to want to savor the past.
Emotion and identity Whereas memory serves as the core foundation of identity, recent research shows that emotions can help a consumer embody a salient identity. This happens because specific ‘emotion profiles’ become part of what it means to Current Opinion in Psychology 2016, 10:94–100
have specific identities [23]. To support the identity, consumers try to keep feeling the emotion to maintain consistency. For example, consumers with a salient athlete (vs. volunteer) identity chose to listen to more angry (vs. sad) music and were willing to pay more money to purchase tickets to attend a concert that predominately featured angry (vs. sad) music [24]. In these situations, emotions activate related identities and help consumers perform better in identity-related domains. Consumers engaged in an online activity that was framed as either an athletic or volunteer relevant task (‘Click for Fitness’ vs. ‘Click for Charity’) subsequently gave more effort (i.e. they clicked more) when a consistent identity was made salient prior to the task [23,24]. Additional research has shown that consumers keep trying to experience emotions (e.g. happiness) to stave off satiation when they engage in a behavior that is consistent with a strongly held identity that is currently salient [25]. For example, in one experiment, when university-identity was primed, compared to a control group participants reported more sustained happiness when they consecutively viewed (for ten times) a painting framed as done by an artist inspired by a campus visit. In another experiment, when university-identity was primed participants continuously ate more chocolates when they were told the chocolates were being considered as part of a gift basket for campus visitors [25]. Other research found that strong identities can overcome negative emotions associated with an act that will reinforce the identity. A strong moral identity reduces the aversion to give time (vs. money) especially when giving time is associated with the negative emotions of disgust and unpleasantness (e.g. helping to clean up after a sick, bed-ridden hospital patient) [26]. Several other recent findings demonstrate the critical role of how emotions mediate reinforcement/elevation and dilution/suppression. Moral identity increases donations through the experience of empathy when the recipient’s plight is perceived to not be their own fault [27]. This can occur when certain categories of identity (e.g. identity as a ‘volunteer’) have emotional profiles associated with empathy [23,24]. Relatedly, empathy has also been found to indirectly mediate the effects of social emotions like nostalgia on charitable behaviors [28]. Identities linked to the nostalgia of a valued past experience triggers charitable giving that is mediated by empathy with the beneficiary. Finally, empathy can lead to managers deviating away from their managerial identity to take on more of a consumer identity — and this leads to less desire to do marketing research. When managers are taught to overcome this bias, they make better decisions on how to serve customers in developing new products, managing communications, making pricing decisions, and choosing brand sponsorship [29]. Each of the aforementioned emotions are important in the experience of the identity, in that they mutually reinforce each other. www.sciencedirect.com
Consumer identity processes Reed and Forehand 97
Emotions can also motivate behavior that suppresses an undesirable identity (e.g. negative emotions, such as embarrassment, can spur purchases that attenuate the discomfort triggered by activation of an undesirable identity) [30]. Compared to a control group of consumers purchasing a black T-shirt, embarrassment experienced when purchasing an anti-foot odor product was reduced when consumers also purchased a pair of underwear. However, that same purchase of underwear increased embarrassment when consumers also purchased anti-diarrheal medicine, compared to purchasing only the anti-diarrheal medicine. This effect was strengthened when consumers had higher levels of public self-consciousness. Hence consumers change their behavior to mitigate anticipated embarrassment to the extent that the behavior is perceived to dilute the undesired identity communicated during purchase. There has been very little work specifically linking emotions to identity. Research is beginning to recognize that consumers pay attention to the relevant reinforcement and dilution signals that accompany emotions that come to define identities, as well as emotions that are both antecedents and consequence of having multiple-identities as part of who they are.
Identity threats At an external level, perhaps the largest driver of identityshaping is threats to specific identities within a consumer’s self-schema. External consumer identity threats come in many forms including perceptions of self-control over the identity [31] and its stability [32]. However, the most onerous threats usually originate from external feedback from other consumers or the media [2]. At a population level, such feedback can prompt broader product adoption [33] or avoidance [34]. At an individual level, such feedback often threatens specific identities a consumer may hold, with dramatic effects on personal reinforcement and dilution. Much of the early research on identity threat found that consumers tended to avoid products linked to a threatened identity. In a notable example of this, consumers were less likely to choose a magazine targeting their gender (Cosmopolitan or Sports Illustrated) if they had previously learned that their gender tends to perform worse on a variety of tasks including analytical reasoning and social intelligence [35]. Alternatively, there is newer evidence that suggests that threats can also cause consumers to purchase products linked to the threatened identity [36,37]. For example, giving a gift that represents a salient outgroup can threaten an individual’s self-association with an identity and lead consumers to reinforce the identity through purchasing products that signal commitment to the identity [38]. The key difference between these two types of threats is that the former introduce new negative information about the identity (e.g. ‘your gender is bad’) while the latter challenge how strongly the individual exemplifies the identity (e.g. ‘your behavior is inconsistent with your gender’). In general, threats that challenge the www.sciencedirect.com
association of an identity with positive valence (e.g. ‘your gender is bad’) prompt subsequent identity diffusion and suppression while threats challenging self-association with an identity prompt subsequent identity reinforcement and elevation [37]. Individual differences in threat response
Reaction to both valence threats and self-association threats is influenced by the individual’s identity confidence and self-esteem. Specifically, valence threats increase dilution/suppression more for consumers with a weak self-identity association [35] whereas self-association threats increase reinforcement/elevation more for consumers who possess a strong self-identity association [37]. As a case in point of the former, consumers weakly identified with a particular dimension of identity (e.g. low body esteem) are more readily affected by negative external threats to their identity (e.g. social comparisons to relevant attractive in-group referents in a retail environment) and this is worsened when the consumption behaviors are public [39,40], highly visible [39], or otherwise easily observable in the market place [39,40]. Such effects are also more likely when the identities in question are distinctly objective (e.g. gender based) rather than transitory. Research also shows that consumers with an independent self-construal are more likely to avoid identity-relevant products when their in-group identity is threatened — with the opposite being true for consumers with an interdependent self-construal. This distinction is attributed to a greater need to restore self-worth in the former case and to an increased need to establish belongingness and group affiliation in the latter case [36]. These effects clearly demonstrate that conflicting motives can influence how consumers respond to threat [41]. In some cases, consumers may trade off the need to distinguish themselves vs. fit in. In others, consumers can choose a product that is less popular within their in-group to achieve uniqueness within their in-group [42]. These dual needs encourage product customization. For example, a consumer can choose to purchase Nike products to signal his or membership within a sport-connected identity, but then use a service like NIKEiD to specify materials and designs so that the resulting apparel is unique within that identity group.
Conclusions and future directions To summarize, in this review we have responded to the call for future identity research to reflect the complex and dynamic nature of processes that influence multipleidentity systems. In our framework, particular attention is directed to the processes that influence the relative stature of an identity either in isolation or in relation to other identities. Memory, emotions, and external feedback in the form of threats are three emerging areas where such efforts are beginning to take shape — (see Table 1 Current Opinion in Psychology 2016, 10:94–100
98 Consumer behavior
Table 1 Directions for future research on the influence of memory, emotion and threats on identity processes. Memory
Emotions
Threats
(A) Adoption
Are there differences in memory effects for identities that are endowed vs. externally chosen? What is the relationship between these memory effects and the identity adoption probabilities over time? What types of internal and external cues are particularly effective at triggering identity schemas that impact adoption? How should marketers deploy these cues as part of messaging strategies?
How does a consumer ‘learn’ about what emotion profiles are connected to which identities prior to adoption? What impact does this have on the probability of adoption? Are there specific emotions that consistently impede the adoption process (fear, anxiety) — and under what processes of thought does this occur? Can marketers affect the process of connecting certain emotional profiles to their brands?
Are consumers aware of the likelihood of threats to identities that they adopt prior to adoption? How do they conceptualize the forecasted ‘threat assessment’? How do they rationalize these potential threats in the decision to pursue a particular identity? Are there specific types of threats that differentially impact the adoption of a given identity? How can marketers inoculate threats to ensure adoption of an identity linked to their brand?
(B) Reinforcement
What motivated reasoning processes potentially bias how memories related to identity are called to mind and reconsumed? What differences exist in reinforcement properties of short vs. longer delays between re-living an existing memory? Are consumers good at forecasting the time required to savor an identity reinforcing memory? How can marketers best insert their brands into the experiences that are reinforced identity-relevant memories?
If an emotion profile is strongly linked to a particular central identity, does that emotion differentially affect other identities the consumer has that are not linked to it? What role does ambivalence play in determining the reinforcement of a particular identity? How do emotional profiles dissociate over time from particular identities? What can marketers do to elicit the correct emotional profiles linked to identities that they want to connect to their brand?
Are the effects of threats to one’s identities on identity reinforcement influenced by the source of the threat? What are the long-term implications of repeated threat exposure? At what point do threats become internalized and lead to dilution instead of reinforcement? What coping mechanisms do consumers use to mitigate the effects of threat and do these strengthen or weaken the effects of threats on identity reinforcement?
(C) Dilution
How do consumers encode a negative experience and how does that turn into a memory that if accessed, results in the dilution of the identity? What types of biases occur at recall that differentially impact the dilution process? Are consumers more likely to selectively forget such experiences and if so, under what conditions? How can marketers facilitate ‘forgetting’ when it involves brand crises?
What is the relationship between emotional intelligence and the extent to which poor facilitation of identities and emotional profiles weaken particular identities? If a particular identity becomes sufficiently weak within the hierarchy of identities, will the ability to express the corresponding emotion profile that is linked to it also degrade? How can marketers use emotion profiles to protect against dilution of identities linked to their brands?
What factors determine whether threatinduced dilution is gradual or discrete — specifically, when do threats produce complete expulsion rather than dilution? Do consumer desires for cognitive consistency increase or decrease the effects of threats on dilution? (Consistency with the threat may encourage dilution, while consistency with past selfconception may decrease dilution). How can marketers counteract the effects of threat-based dilution?
(D) Elevation
On average, how many identities can a person hold as part of their self-schema in memory? What is the rate at which these identities need to be reinforced in memory to increase their relative position in the hierarchy? Is there an ‘optimal’ number of identities in the hierarchy that maximizes psychological well-being? How can marketers use memories around aspirational experiences to elevate the identities that are linked to their brands?
Do specific emotions that are linked to very important identities elicit different physiological responses when those emotions are being expressed by the consumer? Under what circumstances can the emotion trigger the identity and vice versa — and which pathway results in greater elevation for the identity in question? To what extent will misattribution of the emotion linked to the identity impede the elevation process and under what circumstances?
When do threats encourage customers to re-organize the prominence of their identities? Are such cross-identity elevations more or less likely when sets of identities can serve as substitutes for one another? How do consumers respond to threats that challenge multiple identities simultaneously? Do individual difference variables influence the underlying flexibility of identities and thereby influence threat response?
(E) Suppression
Are there individual differences in the propensity to suppress certain identities in memory? If so what are moderators of this process? How stable are the memory structures that organize consumer identity hierarchies? What are the implications of identities that inhibit each other in memory on marketing messages that are linked to them? How do consumers respond to messaging that targets multiple identities that vary in selfconcept centrality?
Are conflicting identities more likely to be structured apart from each other so as to minimize conflict? How do conflicting emotional profiles create psychological distance between important and less important identities? What role do emotions like guilt and shame play in the suppression of specific identities? Can marketers use user imagery connected to suppressed identities to signal that specific products are associated with newly formed out-groups?
How quickly does consumer sensitivity to identity threats diminish after past suppression of the identity? What other psychological benefits accrue from threat-induced identity suppression? How does identity suppression influence consumer satisfaction and loyalty to products connected to other non-suppressed identities?
Current Opinion in Psychology 2016, 10:94–100
www.sciencedirect.com
Consumer identity processes Reed and Forehand 99
Table 1 (Continued )
(F) Expulsion
Memory
Emotions
Threats
After an identity is expelled from a consumer’s repertoire, how quickly do clusters of experiences and their memory trace decay? Does the selfschema maintain association to expelled identities in negation form? When do expelled identities become clustered around ‘not me’ social selfschemas that are effectively the negation of traditional self-concept associations?
If an emotional profile is linked to an expulsed identity, will it be more difficult for consumers to experience that emotion outside of any identity relevant processing? Does identity expulsion elicit discrete emotional states within the consumer? What types of messages can marketers create to lessen any negative emotions associated with consumers getting rid of certain identities?
Once an identity has been expelled, how do subsequent valence threats against that identity influence consumers? Do consumers process information related to expelled identities differently than to information related to never possessed identities? How much cognitive effort is dedicated to maintaining separation from previously expelled identities? How does any existing cognitive load influence response to messaging targeting other, non-expelled identities?
for specific research questions within each process and domain) — all in the service of painting a richer picture of identity in the context of the role that it plays in consumers’ everyday lives.
Conflict of interest statement
6.
Shang J, Reed A, Croson R II: Identity congruency effects on donations. J Mark Res 2008, 45:351-361 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1509/jmkr.45.3.351.
7.
White K, Dahl DW: Are all out-groups created equal? Consumer identity and dissociative influence. J Consum Res 2007, 34:525536 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/520077.
8.
McAlexander JH, Dufault BL, Martin DM, Schouten JW: The marketization of religion: field, capital, and consumer identity. J Consum Res 2014, 41:858-875 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/677894.
9.
Kettle KL, Ha¨ubl G: The signature effect: signing influences consumption-related behavior by priming self-identity. J Consum Res 2011, 38:474-489 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/659753.
Nothing declared.
References and recommended reading Papers of particular interest, published within the period of review, have been highlighted as: of special interest of outstanding interest 1.
Reed A II: Activating the self-importance of consumer selves: exploring identity salience effects on judgments. J Consum Res 2004, 31:286-295 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/422108.
2.
Reed A, Forehand MR II, Puntoni S, Warlop L: Identity-based consumer behavior. Int J Res Mark 2012, 29:310-321 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2012.08.002. This article synthesizes the literature. Importantly it establishes a concise definition of identity as any stable, objective (e.g. mother, daughter, friend, African-American, etc.) or transitory, subjective (e.g. Republican, athlete, lawyer, Mac-user, etc.) category label to which a consumer selfassociates either by endowment or choice. For a category label to rise to the level of being a potential identity, the category label must invoke a mental representation (i.e. a clear picture) of what that ‘kind’ of person looks like, thinks, feels, and does. Although consumers can potentially self-identify with (or in opposition to) every possible category label, not all category labels will be equally important. In this definition the category label becomes an identity once the consumer is endowed with or adopts it, and begins to try to become that kind of person.
3.
4.
Forehand MR, Deshpande´ R: What we see makes us who we are: priming ethnic self-awareness and advertising response. J Mark Res 2001, 38:336-348 http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.38. 3.336.18871. Lenoir A-S, Puntoni S, Reed A II, Verleghcenoir PWJ: The impact of cultural symbols and spokesperson identity on attitudes and intentions. Int J Res Mark 2013, 30:426-428.
5.
Forehand MR, Deshpande R, Reed A II: Identity salience and the influence of differential activation of the social self-schema on advertising response. J Appl Psychol 2002, 87:1086-1099. This early research on the effects of identity salience on advertising response observed that identity congruent processing was a by-product of both the momentary salience of the identity and the consumer’s chronic level of social distinctiveness. Using a multi-city quasi-experiment design, identity primes were shown to improve response to subsequently viewed in-group members in advertising provided that the consumer was socially distinctive.
www.sciencedirect.com
10. Greenwald AG, Banaji MR, Rudman LA, Farnham SD, Nosek BA, Mellott DS: A unified theory of implicit attitudes stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept. Psychol Rev 2002, 109:3-25 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0033-295X1091.3. 11. Winterich KP, Mittal V, Ross WT Jr: Donation behavior toward in-groups and out-groups: the role of gender and moral identity. J Consum Res 2009, 36:199-214 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1086/596720. This research is the first to study gender identity and moral identity. Their studies that a stronger moral identity (only in women, but not men) causes consumers to give more money to out-groups (Iraq, Indonesia) and not to in-groups (London, New Orleans). Men with a strong moral identity give more to the in-group but not the out-group. These effects appear to be driven by the extent to which a consumer includes psychologically distant others within their circle of moral concern. 12. Aquino K, Reed A II, Thau S, Freeman D: A grotesque and dark beauty: how moral identity and mechanisms of moral disengagement influence cognitive and emotional reactions to war. J Exp Soc Psychol 2007, 43:385-392. 13. Finnel S, Reed A, Aquino K: Promoting multiple policies to the public: the difficulties of promoting war and promoting foreign humanitarian aid at the same time. J Public Policy Mark 2011, 30:246-263. 14. Reed A, Mark R II: Forehand Six Processes of Identity Working Paper. The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania; 2015. 15. Burnkrant RE, Rao Unnava H: Effects of self-referencing on persuasion. J Consum Res 1995, 22:17-26 http://www.jstor.org/ stable/24896971995. 16. Anderson JR, Bowe GH: Human Associative Memory. Washington, DC: Winston; 1973. 17. Mercurio KR, Forehand MR: An interpretive frame model of identity-dependent learning: The moderating role of contentstate association. J Consum Res 2011, 38:555-577 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1086/660837. This research investigated the role of identity activation during the encoding and retrieval of advertising content that varied in its degree of identity association. Identity activation during both encoding and retrieval improved later recognition of advertising with moderate identity association, but had no influence on advertising unrelated to the identity. Current Opinion in Psychology 2016, 10:94–100
100 Consumer behavior
Identity activation during retrieval improved recognition of advertising with strong identity association regardless of whether the identity was activated during encoding. This research strongly supports the conceptualization of identities as components of self-schemas that are processed in accordance with traditional associative network models of memory. 18. Hugenberg K, Bodenhausen GV: Category membership moderates the inhibition of social identities. J Exp Soc Psychol 2004, 40:233-238. 19. Dalton AN, Huang L: Motivated forgetting in response to social identity threat. J Consum Res 2014, 40:1017-1038 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1086/674198. 20. Lasaleta JD, Sedikides C, Vohs KD: Nostalgia weakens the desire for money. J Consum Res 2014, 41:713-729 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1086/677227. 21. Zauberman G, Rebecca K, Ratner B, Kim K: Memories as assets: strategic memory protection in choice over time. J Consum Res 2009, 35:715-728. 22. Mercurio K, Forehand M, Reed A II: Savoring Through Avoidance: Identity Based Strategic Memory Protection. Working Paper, The Wharton School; 2015. In this research, the authors find that although consumers generally have a desire to repeat past special experiences that are linked to an important identity, they prefer to delay this repeat consumption. The delay is driven by a desire to savor identity-linked memories and thereby reinforce the focal identity. 23. Coleman NV, Williams P: Feeling like myself: emotion profiles and social identity. J Consum Res 2013, 40:203-222 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1086/669483. In this ground breaking paper, the authors show that a consumer’s identity can contain specific discrete emotion profiles providing ‘whatto-feel’ information when a person is doing things as part of expressing that identity. Consumers prefer emotional stimuli consistent with their salient identity, make product choices and emotion regulating consumption decisions to enhance (reduce) their experience of identity-consistent (inconsistent) emotions. In terms of reinforcement identity-consistent emotions helps to do things that are relevant to being that kind of person. 24. Coleman NV, Williams P: Looking for my self: identity-driven attention allocation. J Consum Psychol 2015, 25:504-511. 25. Chugani SK, Irwin JR, Redden JP: Happily ever after: The effect of identity-consistency on product satiation. J. Consum. Res. 2015, 42:564-577 (in press). This research shows that consumers with a salient identity have stronger endurance to be able to engage in an activity that is identity relevant. A strong identity leads consumers to see an identity related task as more central, and so they are able to persist at the task longer, and become satiated on the task at a much slower rate. 26. Reed A II, Kay A, Finnel S, Aquino K, Levy E: I don’t want the money, I just want your time: how moral identity overcomes the aversion to giving time to pro-social causes. J Pers Soc Psychol 2015. This research shows that moral identity can overcome negative aspects of giving time vs. money, even when time is scarce, or when giving time consists of an unpleasant act. In other words, moral identity helps overcome the natural aversion to giving time as compared to money. 27. Lee S, Winterich KP, Ross WT Jr: I’m moral, but I won’t help you: the distinct roles of empathy and justice in donations. J Consum Res 2014, 41:678-696 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/677226. 28. Zhou X, Wildschut T, Sedikides C, Shi K, Feng C: Nostalgia: the gift that keeps on giving. J Consum Res 2012, 39:39-50 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1086/662199. 29. Hattula JD, Herzog W, Dahl DW, Reinecke S: Managerial empathy facilitates egocentric predictions of consumer preferences. J Mark Res 2015, 52:235-252 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1509/jmr.13.0296. 30. Blair S, Roese NJ: Balancing the basket: the role of shopping basket composition in embarrassment. J Consum Res 2013, 40:676-691 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/671761. 31. Bhattacharjee A, Berger J, Menon G: When identity marketing backfires: consumer agency in identity expression. J Consum Res 2014, 41:294-309 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/676125.
Current Opinion in Psychology 2016, 10:94–100
This research shows that consumers will reject persuasive communications directed toward their identities when the messages are explicit because these messages imply less control over their behavior in enacting the identity, reducing agency and acceptance of the message. These findings illustrate the importance of considering the need for self-control in how a consumer perceives the self-regulation of their identities within a multiple identity system. 32. Bartels DM, Urminsky O: On intertemporal selfishness: how the perceived instability of identity underlies impatient consumption. J Consum Res 2011, 38:182-198 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1086/658339. 33. Saboo AR, Kumar V, Ramani G: Evaluating the impact of social media activities on human brand sales. Int J Res Mark 2015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2015.02.007. 34. Parmentier M, Fischer E: Things fall apart: the dynamics of brand audience dissipation. J Consum Res 2015, 41:1228-1251 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/678907. 35. White K, Argo JJ: Social identity threat and consumer preferences. J Consum Psychol 2009, 19:313-325 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2009.03.007. 36. White K, Argo JJ, Sengupta J: Dissociative versus associative responses to social identity threat: the role of consumer selfconstrual. J Consum Res 2012, 39:704-719 Retrieved from: http:// search.proquest.com/docview/1324549186?accountid=14707. This research shows that consumer with a more independent sense of overall identity avoid identity-linked products when that identity is threatened. Those with more collective sense of overall identity approach identity-linked products when that aspect is called into question. This is an important paper because it links underlying needs of esteem, agency as well as belongingness and inclusion to responses to signals in the feedback loop that my drive reinforcement/elevation vs. diffusion/suppression processes. 37. Angle JW, Forehand MR: It’s not us, it’s you: how threatening self-brand association leads to brand pursuit. Int J Res Mark 2015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2015.08.003. (forthcoming). This research develops a typology of identity threats. In a branding domain, threats that challenged the positivity of an identity produced avoidance of identity-linked brands while threats that challenged a consumer’s self-association with an identity produced approach to identitylinked brands. This latter approach effect is shown to be an anxietymediated process that is strongest when one possesses high levels of apriori identity association. 38. Ward MK, Broniarczyk SM: It’s not me, it’s you: how gift giving creates giver identity threat as a function of social closeness. J Consum Res 2011, 38:164-181 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/658166. 39. Dahl DW, Argo JJ, Morales AC: Social information in the retail environment: the importance of consumption alignment, referent identity, and self-esteem. J Consum Res 2012, 38:860871 Retrieved from: http://search.proquest.com/docview/ 922502690?accountid=14707. 40. McShane BB, Bradlow ET, Berger J: Visual influence and social groups. J Mark Res 2012, 49:854-871 http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/ jmr.11.0223. 41. Dimofte CV, Goodstein RC, Brumbaugh AM: A social identity perspective on aspirational advertising: implicit threats to collective self-esteem and strategies to overcome them. J Consum Psychol 2015, 25:416-430 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.jcps.2014.12.0012015. 42. Chan C, Berger J, Van Boven L: Identifiable but not identical: combining social identity and uniqueness motives in choice. J Consum Res 2012, 39:561-573 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/664804. This research shows the interplay of identity regulation on the need to belong vs. the need to fit in — in terms of reinforcement and dilution of identities a consumer may hold. Consumers pursue assimilation and differentiation goals at the same time but on different dimensions of a single behavioral decision. Assimilation with the in-group on attributes occurs (e.g. brand choice) while they distinguish themselves on uniqueness of the attributes chosen (e.g. color). Ironically, stronger desire for uniqueness leads to choice of less popular in-group preferred option. This research explores how multiple identity motivations influence consumer behavior.
www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect The ebb and flow of consumer identities: the role of memory, emotions and threats Americus Reed II1,3 and Mark R Forehand2,3 It is well established that consumers use their product and brand choices to signal and reinforce identities. More recently, consumer researchers have begun to focus on the dynamic nature of identity. Moving beyond the momentary effect of a given identity on behavior, newer research investigates how a constellation of identities influence each other and how this interface drives long-term consumption and behavioral patterns. Of particular interest are the processes by which an identity becomes strengthened and weakened over time — both in isolation and also with respect to other identities the consumer may hold. We review these psychological processes based on recent consumer research in the areas of memory, emotions, and threats to identity. Addresses 1 Whitney M. Young Jr. Professor of Marketing, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States 2 Pigott Family Professor of Marketing, Michael G. Foster School of Business, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, United States Corresponding authors: Reed, II Americus ([email protected]) and Forehand, Mark R ([email protected]) 3 The authors contributed equally to this article and are listed in reverse alphabetical order. Current Opinion in Psychology 2016, 10:94–100 This review comes from a themed issue on Consumer behavior Edited by Jeff Joireman and Kristina Durante
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.12.015 2352-250/Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Prior research has shown that identities, whether objective and relatively stable (e.g. father, son, millennial, Hispanic, etc.), or transitory and fluid (e.g. Apple user, Democrat, lawyer, athlete, etc.) are organized as selfschemas [1,2]. When a given identity is top of mind for a consumer, identity relevant actions follow [1,3,4,5]. For example, if an ‘athlete’ identity is salient, one may be more likely to observe stronger liking of athlete-focused products like Gatorade (vs. Coca Cola); more positive reactions to pro-athlete spokespeople (vs. award-winning actors) in advertisements; more attention paid to identityrelevant media like ESPN (vs. CNN); and more frequent engagement in consumption behaviors that symbolize the identity like wearing a fit-bit (vs. an Apple Watch). It is often argued that this occurs because the self-schemas are Current Opinion in Psychology 2016, 10:94–100
constellations of thoughts, emotions, attitudes, judgements, and behaviors that define particular identities [2]. Motivational principles of consistency ensure that when these identities are top of mind [1,3], consumers conform to the normative proscriptions that signal and embody the identity [1–3,6] and avoid those that embody and signal dissociative identities [7]. These cognitive inputs to identity are well understood and have been well documented for various different types of identities [2,8]. More recently, identity scholars have argued that identity research should go beyond the simple premise that if a dimension of identity is made salient [1,3] or activated in the overall self-concept [9], attitudes, judgements, and choices consistent with the identity should follow. These theorists have argued that it is also important to deeply explore the inputs and processes by which identities interact and vie for dominance. Such an endeavor sees its origins in traditional models of the self-concept. These models have long proposed that a consumer’s myriad identities not only differ in their strength of association with the core self-concept, but are often associated (or disassociated) with one another [10]. For example, a consumer may strongly identify with being gay and being Republican despite a broader disassociation between the two identities. Although this proposition is relatively noncontroversial, the potential interplay of multiple-identity systems has received scant attention within the consumer research literature relative to extensive work on the processing of solitary identities. On the rare occasions that multiple identities have been considered in concert, the results suggest a more nuanced view where the various identities compete or interact with one another [11,12,13].
A framework of consumer identity To frame the current discussion of multiple-identity processing, we first present a conceptual framework that distinguishes between the processes that influence solitary identities and the processes that influence the interplay between multiple identities. This framework identifies six fundamental processes (as depicted in Figure 1), including: (A) Adoption — the process of bringing a new identity into the self-schema, (B) Reinforcement — the process of strengthening an identity over time, (C) Dilution — the process of weakening an identity over time, (D) Elevation — the process of increasing the prominence of a given identity within a hierarchy of identities, (E) Suppression — the process of reducing the prominence of a given identity within www.sciencedirect.com
Consumer identity processes Reed and Forehand 95
Figure 1
Environmental Inputs
Priming Centrality Relevance
Adoption
(+)
Single Social Identity Maintenance
Dilution
Reinforcement
(+) (+)
Multiple Social Identity Systems
CONSUMER IDENTITY
Elevation
(–) (–)
Suppression
(–)
Expulsion Current Opinion in Psychology
Framework of identity processes based on single and multiple identity maintenance. Source: original, based on Ref. [14].
a hierarchy of identities, and (F) Expulsion — the process of dispossession of an existing identity [14]. Although most of these processes influence the centrality of the identity within the self-concept at an absolute level, elevation and suppression are unique in their focus on the relative status of one’s various identities (see Figure 1). It should also be noted that these six processes do not work in isolation from one another. For example, any activity that prompts reinforcement of an identity and thereby strengthens its association with the selfconcept may simultaneously elevate the identity relative to other unaffected identities. Alternatively, repeated suppression of a given identity relative to a consumer’s full identity set may not only alter its relative prominence, but may also lead to dilution at an absolute level — dilution that may be so onerous, it may trigger expulsion of that identity. In this article, we review and comment on recent research that has implications for this framework [2,14]. To organize this review, this article focuses on three relatively new streams of consumer identity research: firstly, the role of memory in shaping identity development and expression, secondly, the interplay of emotion and identity as drivers of consumer behavior, and finally, the effects of external feedback regarding one’s identity (in the form of threats to the identity per se). We have www.sciencedirect.com
ordered these streams from an inward perspective to an outward perspective. At the most inward level, the selfconcept is a memory structure composed of many identities. Memory processes therefore play a significant role in the ebb and flow of individual identities. Moving beyond this core identity structure, emotions provide a key input and feedback process that influences each of the aforementioned identity processes. Finally, at the most external level, identity threats have been shown to have discrete effects on the prominence and expression of identities.
Memory and identity Memory is the fundamental building block upon which identity is built. It is ironic that memory has received relatively little attention within the consumer identity domain given that an entire literature in psychology has documented that self-relevant information in memory is easier to encode and retrieve [15]. In fact, one of the primary models of the self-concept is premised on the associative network model of memory [16]. Implicit in this model is the idea that a consumer’s various identities are interconnected with one another and hence may interact in both activation and expression. In an early investigation on this interplay, it was observed that salient identities influence both the encoding and retrieval of identity-linked information [17]. This work found that when an identity is top of mind at both encoding and Current Opinion in Psychology 2016, 10:94–100
96 Consumer behavior
retrieval, consumers are better at recalling and recognizing advertising content that is moderately connected to the identity in question. Specifically, if a consumer’s gender identity was activated prior to exposure to a vitamin advertisement, the consumer’s subsequent recognition of the vitamin’s gender-related benefits (e.g. skin health) increased provided that gender identity was simultaneously activated at recognition. However, such activation had no effect on recognition when the vitamin’s benefits were very strongly connected to gender (e.g. reduction in menstrual pain) as these benefits served to activate gender identity independent of external cues. Such effects in memory not only influence short-term recall, but also contribute over time to the reinforcement and elevation of core identities within the overall set of identities a consumer holds. Memory also shapes the full range of identity processes via both implicit and explicit inhibitory effects. At an implicit level, one study found that when individuals had their ‘Greek’ identities activated, thoughts regarding conflicting identities (e.g. ‘university students’) were inhibited. However, this pattern emerged only for those who strongly identified with the activated identity — even though all participants were equally familiar with both [18]. At an explicit level, information that is inconsistent with an identity a consumer holds may motivate her to suppress thoughts related to the identity including persuasive appeals linked to the identity in question [19]. Specifically, university students who viewed a long series of advertisements and then encountered negative information about their university were less likely to recognize previously viewed ads that targeted their university identity. Past identities can also be the target of discrete retrieval attempts and express themselves in the form of nostalgia. When retrieved in this manner, attention to past identities increases one’s social connectedness, with downstream consequences for consumer willingness to pay for a wide variety of both durable and non-durable products [20]. Finally, consumers explicitly and strategically guide their behavior in order to protect their memories [21]. In some cases, consumers will delay repeating previous special consumption episodes so that they may savor the episode and continue to reinforce the identity that was activated during the episode [22]. For example, consumers with a strong romantic identity were more likely to want to go back to a honeymoon destination that was ‘special’ (vs. not special) but they preferred to wait longer to actually go. This was particularly true for consumers who had higher dispositional tendencies to want to savor the past.
Emotion and identity Whereas memory serves as the core foundation of identity, recent research shows that emotions can help a consumer embody a salient identity. This happens because specific ‘emotion profiles’ become part of what it means to Current Opinion in Psychology 2016, 10:94–100
have specific identities [23]. To support the identity, consumers try to keep feeling the emotion to maintain consistency. For example, consumers with a salient athlete (vs. volunteer) identity chose to listen to more angry (vs. sad) music and were willing to pay more money to purchase tickets to attend a concert that predominately featured angry (vs. sad) music [24]. In these situations, emotions activate related identities and help consumers perform better in identity-related domains. Consumers engaged in an online activity that was framed as either an athletic or volunteer relevant task (‘Click for Fitness’ vs. ‘Click for Charity’) subsequently gave more effort (i.e. they clicked more) when a consistent identity was made salient prior to the task [23,24]. Additional research has shown that consumers keep trying to experience emotions (e.g. happiness) to stave off satiation when they engage in a behavior that is consistent with a strongly held identity that is currently salient [25]. For example, in one experiment, when university-identity was primed, compared to a control group participants reported more sustained happiness when they consecutively viewed (for ten times) a painting framed as done by an artist inspired by a campus visit. In another experiment, when university-identity was primed participants continuously ate more chocolates when they were told the chocolates were being considered as part of a gift basket for campus visitors [25]. Other research found that strong identities can overcome negative emotions associated with an act that will reinforce the identity. A strong moral identity reduces the aversion to give time (vs. money) especially when giving time is associated with the negative emotions of disgust and unpleasantness (e.g. helping to clean up after a sick, bed-ridden hospital patient) [26]. Several other recent findings demonstrate the critical role of how emotions mediate reinforcement/elevation and dilution/suppression. Moral identity increases donations through the experience of empathy when the recipient’s plight is perceived to not be their own fault [27]. This can occur when certain categories of identity (e.g. identity as a ‘volunteer’) have emotional profiles associated with empathy [23,24]. Relatedly, empathy has also been found to indirectly mediate the effects of social emotions like nostalgia on charitable behaviors [28]. Identities linked to the nostalgia of a valued past experience triggers charitable giving that is mediated by empathy with the beneficiary. Finally, empathy can lead to managers deviating away from their managerial identity to take on more of a consumer identity — and this leads to less desire to do marketing research. When managers are taught to overcome this bias, they make better decisions on how to serve customers in developing new products, managing communications, making pricing decisions, and choosing brand sponsorship [29]. Each of the aforementioned emotions are important in the experience of the identity, in that they mutually reinforce each other. www.sciencedirect.com
Consumer identity processes Reed and Forehand 97
Emotions can also motivate behavior that suppresses an undesirable identity (e.g. negative emotions, such as embarrassment, can spur purchases that attenuate the discomfort triggered by activation of an undesirable identity) [30]. Compared to a control group of consumers purchasing a black T-shirt, embarrassment experienced when purchasing an anti-foot odor product was reduced when consumers also purchased a pair of underwear. However, that same purchase of underwear increased embarrassment when consumers also purchased anti-diarrheal medicine, compared to purchasing only the anti-diarrheal medicine. This effect was strengthened when consumers had higher levels of public self-consciousness. Hence consumers change their behavior to mitigate anticipated embarrassment to the extent that the behavior is perceived to dilute the undesired identity communicated during purchase. There has been very little work specifically linking emotions to identity. Research is beginning to recognize that consumers pay attention to the relevant reinforcement and dilution signals that accompany emotions that come to define identities, as well as emotions that are both antecedents and consequence of having multiple-identities as part of who they are.
Identity threats At an external level, perhaps the largest driver of identityshaping is threats to specific identities within a consumer’s self-schema. External consumer identity threats come in many forms including perceptions of self-control over the identity [31] and its stability [32]. However, the most onerous threats usually originate from external feedback from other consumers or the media [2]. At a population level, such feedback can prompt broader product adoption [33] or avoidance [34]. At an individual level, such feedback often threatens specific identities a consumer may hold, with dramatic effects on personal reinforcement and dilution. Much of the early research on identity threat found that consumers tended to avoid products linked to a threatened identity. In a notable example of this, consumers were less likely to choose a magazine targeting their gender (Cosmopolitan or Sports Illustrated) if they had previously learned that their gender tends to perform worse on a variety of tasks including analytical reasoning and social intelligence [35]. Alternatively, there is newer evidence that suggests that threats can also cause consumers to purchase products linked to the threatened identity [36,37]. For example, giving a gift that represents a salient outgroup can threaten an individual’s self-association with an identity and lead consumers to reinforce the identity through purchasing products that signal commitment to the identity [38]. The key difference between these two types of threats is that the former introduce new negative information about the identity (e.g. ‘your gender is bad’) while the latter challenge how strongly the individual exemplifies the identity (e.g. ‘your behavior is inconsistent with your gender’). In general, threats that challenge the www.sciencedirect.com
association of an identity with positive valence (e.g. ‘your gender is bad’) prompt subsequent identity diffusion and suppression while threats challenging self-association with an identity prompt subsequent identity reinforcement and elevation [37]. Individual differences in threat response
Reaction to both valence threats and self-association threats is influenced by the individual’s identity confidence and self-esteem. Specifically, valence threats increase dilution/suppression more for consumers with a weak self-identity association [35] whereas self-association threats increase reinforcement/elevation more for consumers who possess a strong self-identity association [37]. As a case in point of the former, consumers weakly identified with a particular dimension of identity (e.g. low body esteem) are more readily affected by negative external threats to their identity (e.g. social comparisons to relevant attractive in-group referents in a retail environment) and this is worsened when the consumption behaviors are public [39,40], highly visible [39], or otherwise easily observable in the market place [39,40]. Such effects are also more likely when the identities in question are distinctly objective (e.g. gender based) rather than transitory. Research also shows that consumers with an independent self-construal are more likely to avoid identity-relevant products when their in-group identity is threatened — with the opposite being true for consumers with an interdependent self-construal. This distinction is attributed to a greater need to restore self-worth in the former case and to an increased need to establish belongingness and group affiliation in the latter case [36]. These effects clearly demonstrate that conflicting motives can influence how consumers respond to threat [41]. In some cases, consumers may trade off the need to distinguish themselves vs. fit in. In others, consumers can choose a product that is less popular within their in-group to achieve uniqueness within their in-group [42]. These dual needs encourage product customization. For example, a consumer can choose to purchase Nike products to signal his or membership within a sport-connected identity, but then use a service like NIKEiD to specify materials and designs so that the resulting apparel is unique within that identity group.
Conclusions and future directions To summarize, in this review we have responded to the call for future identity research to reflect the complex and dynamic nature of processes that influence multipleidentity systems. In our framework, particular attention is directed to the processes that influence the relative stature of an identity either in isolation or in relation to other identities. Memory, emotions, and external feedback in the form of threats are three emerging areas where such efforts are beginning to take shape — (see Table 1 Current Opinion in Psychology 2016, 10:94–100
98 Consumer behavior
Table 1 Directions for future research on the influence of memory, emotion and threats on identity processes. Memory
Emotions
Threats
(A) Adoption
Are there differences in memory effects for identities that are endowed vs. externally chosen? What is the relationship between these memory effects and the identity adoption probabilities over time? What types of internal and external cues are particularly effective at triggering identity schemas that impact adoption? How should marketers deploy these cues as part of messaging strategies?
How does a consumer ‘learn’ about what emotion profiles are connected to which identities prior to adoption? What impact does this have on the probability of adoption? Are there specific emotions that consistently impede the adoption process (fear, anxiety) — and under what processes of thought does this occur? Can marketers affect the process of connecting certain emotional profiles to their brands?
Are consumers aware of the likelihood of threats to identities that they adopt prior to adoption? How do they conceptualize the forecasted ‘threat assessment’? How do they rationalize these potential threats in the decision to pursue a particular identity? Are there specific types of threats that differentially impact the adoption of a given identity? How can marketers inoculate threats to ensure adoption of an identity linked to their brand?
(B) Reinforcement
What motivated reasoning processes potentially bias how memories related to identity are called to mind and reconsumed? What differences exist in reinforcement properties of short vs. longer delays between re-living an existing memory? Are consumers good at forecasting the time required to savor an identity reinforcing memory? How can marketers best insert their brands into the experiences that are reinforced identity-relevant memories?
If an emotion profile is strongly linked to a particular central identity, does that emotion differentially affect other identities the consumer has that are not linked to it? What role does ambivalence play in determining the reinforcement of a particular identity? How do emotional profiles dissociate over time from particular identities? What can marketers do to elicit the correct emotional profiles linked to identities that they want to connect to their brand?
Are the effects of threats to one’s identities on identity reinforcement influenced by the source of the threat? What are the long-term implications of repeated threat exposure? At what point do threats become internalized and lead to dilution instead of reinforcement? What coping mechanisms do consumers use to mitigate the effects of threat and do these strengthen or weaken the effects of threats on identity reinforcement?
(C) Dilution
How do consumers encode a negative experience and how does that turn into a memory that if accessed, results in the dilution of the identity? What types of biases occur at recall that differentially impact the dilution process? Are consumers more likely to selectively forget such experiences and if so, under what conditions? How can marketers facilitate ‘forgetting’ when it involves brand crises?
What is the relationship between emotional intelligence and the extent to which poor facilitation of identities and emotional profiles weaken particular identities? If a particular identity becomes sufficiently weak within the hierarchy of identities, will the ability to express the corresponding emotion profile that is linked to it also degrade? How can marketers use emotion profiles to protect against dilution of identities linked to their brands?
What factors determine whether threatinduced dilution is gradual or discrete — specifically, when do threats produce complete expulsion rather than dilution? Do consumer desires for cognitive consistency increase or decrease the effects of threats on dilution? (Consistency with the threat may encourage dilution, while consistency with past selfconception may decrease dilution). How can marketers counteract the effects of threat-based dilution?
(D) Elevation
On average, how many identities can a person hold as part of their self-schema in memory? What is the rate at which these identities need to be reinforced in memory to increase their relative position in the hierarchy? Is there an ‘optimal’ number of identities in the hierarchy that maximizes psychological well-being? How can marketers use memories around aspirational experiences to elevate the identities that are linked to their brands?
Do specific emotions that are linked to very important identities elicit different physiological responses when those emotions are being expressed by the consumer? Under what circumstances can the emotion trigger the identity and vice versa — and which pathway results in greater elevation for the identity in question? To what extent will misattribution of the emotion linked to the identity impede the elevation process and under what circumstances?
When do threats encourage customers to re-organize the prominence of their identities? Are such cross-identity elevations more or less likely when sets of identities can serve as substitutes for one another? How do consumers respond to threats that challenge multiple identities simultaneously? Do individual difference variables influence the underlying flexibility of identities and thereby influence threat response?
(E) Suppression
Are there individual differences in the propensity to suppress certain identities in memory? If so what are moderators of this process? How stable are the memory structures that organize consumer identity hierarchies? What are the implications of identities that inhibit each other in memory on marketing messages that are linked to them? How do consumers respond to messaging that targets multiple identities that vary in selfconcept centrality?
Are conflicting identities more likely to be structured apart from each other so as to minimize conflict? How do conflicting emotional profiles create psychological distance between important and less important identities? What role do emotions like guilt and shame play in the suppression of specific identities? Can marketers use user imagery connected to suppressed identities to signal that specific products are associated with newly formed out-groups?
How quickly does consumer sensitivity to identity threats diminish after past suppression of the identity? What other psychological benefits accrue from threat-induced identity suppression? How does identity suppression influence consumer satisfaction and loyalty to products connected to other non-suppressed identities?
Current Opinion in Psychology 2016, 10:94–100
www.sciencedirect.com
Consumer identity processes Reed and Forehand 99
Table 1 (Continued )
(F) Expulsion
Memory
Emotions
Threats
After an identity is expelled from a consumer’s repertoire, how quickly do clusters of experiences and their memory trace decay? Does the selfschema maintain association to expelled identities in negation form? When do expelled identities become clustered around ‘not me’ social selfschemas that are effectively the negation of traditional self-concept associations?
If an emotional profile is linked to an expulsed identity, will it be more difficult for consumers to experience that emotion outside of any identity relevant processing? Does identity expulsion elicit discrete emotional states within the consumer? What types of messages can marketers create to lessen any negative emotions associated with consumers getting rid of certain identities?
Once an identity has been expelled, how do subsequent valence threats against that identity influence consumers? Do consumers process information related to expelled identities differently than to information related to never possessed identities? How much cognitive effort is dedicated to maintaining separation from previously expelled identities? How does any existing cognitive load influence response to messaging targeting other, non-expelled identities?
for specific research questions within each process and domain) — all in the service of painting a richer picture of identity in the context of the role that it plays in consumers’ everyday lives.
Conflict of interest statement
6.
Shang J, Reed A, Croson R II: Identity congruency effects on donations. J Mark Res 2008, 45:351-361 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1509/jmkr.45.3.351.
7.
White K, Dahl DW: Are all out-groups created equal? Consumer identity and dissociative influence. J Consum Res 2007, 34:525536 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/520077.
8.
McAlexander JH, Dufault BL, Martin DM, Schouten JW: The marketization of religion: field, capital, and consumer identity. J Consum Res 2014, 41:858-875 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/677894.
9.
Kettle KL, Ha¨ubl G: The signature effect: signing influences consumption-related behavior by priming self-identity. J Consum Res 2011, 38:474-489 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/659753.
Nothing declared.
References and recommended reading Papers of particular interest, published within the period of review, have been highlighted as: of special interest of outstanding interest 1.
Reed A II: Activating the self-importance of consumer selves: exploring identity salience effects on judgments. J Consum Res 2004, 31:286-295 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/422108.
2.
Reed A, Forehand MR II, Puntoni S, Warlop L: Identity-based consumer behavior. Int J Res Mark 2012, 29:310-321 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2012.08.002. This article synthesizes the literature. Importantly it establishes a concise definition of identity as any stable, objective (e.g. mother, daughter, friend, African-American, etc.) or transitory, subjective (e.g. Republican, athlete, lawyer, Mac-user, etc.) category label to which a consumer selfassociates either by endowment or choice. For a category label to rise to the level of being a potential identity, the category label must invoke a mental representation (i.e. a clear picture) of what that ‘kind’ of person looks like, thinks, feels, and does. Although consumers can potentially self-identify with (or in opposition to) every possible category label, not all category labels will be equally important. In this definition the category label becomes an identity once the consumer is endowed with or adopts it, and begins to try to become that kind of person.
3.
4.
Forehand MR, Deshpande´ R: What we see makes us who we are: priming ethnic self-awareness and advertising response. J Mark Res 2001, 38:336-348 http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.38. 3.336.18871. Lenoir A-S, Puntoni S, Reed A II, Verleghcenoir PWJ: The impact of cultural symbols and spokesperson identity on attitudes and intentions. Int J Res Mark 2013, 30:426-428.
5.
Forehand MR, Deshpande R, Reed A II: Identity salience and the influence of differential activation of the social self-schema on advertising response. J Appl Psychol 2002, 87:1086-1099. This early research on the effects of identity salience on advertising response observed that identity congruent processing was a by-product of both the momentary salience of the identity and the consumer’s chronic level of social distinctiveness. Using a multi-city quasi-experiment design, identity primes were shown to improve response to subsequently viewed in-group members in advertising provided that the consumer was socially distinctive.
www.sciencedirect.com
10. Greenwald AG, Banaji MR, Rudman LA, Farnham SD, Nosek BA, Mellott DS: A unified theory of implicit attitudes stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept. Psychol Rev 2002, 109:3-25 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0033-295X1091.3. 11. Winterich KP, Mittal V, Ross WT Jr: Donation behavior toward in-groups and out-groups: the role of gender and moral identity. J Consum Res 2009, 36:199-214 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1086/596720. This research is the first to study gender identity and moral identity. Their studies that a stronger moral identity (only in women, but not men) causes consumers to give more money to out-groups (Iraq, Indonesia) and not to in-groups (London, New Orleans). Men with a strong moral identity give more to the in-group but not the out-group. These effects appear to be driven by the extent to which a consumer includes psychologically distant others within their circle of moral concern. 12. Aquino K, Reed A II, Thau S, Freeman D: A grotesque and dark beauty: how moral identity and mechanisms of moral disengagement influence cognitive and emotional reactions to war. J Exp Soc Psychol 2007, 43:385-392. 13. Finnel S, Reed A, Aquino K: Promoting multiple policies to the public: the difficulties of promoting war and promoting foreign humanitarian aid at the same time. J Public Policy Mark 2011, 30:246-263. 14. Reed A, Mark R II: Forehand Six Processes of Identity Working Paper. The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania; 2015. 15. Burnkrant RE, Rao Unnava H: Effects of self-referencing on persuasion. J Consum Res 1995, 22:17-26 http://www.jstor.org/ stable/24896971995. 16. Anderson JR, Bowe GH: Human Associative Memory. Washington, DC: Winston; 1973. 17. Mercurio KR, Forehand MR: An interpretive frame model of identity-dependent learning: The moderating role of contentstate association. J Consum Res 2011, 38:555-577 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1086/660837. This research investigated the role of identity activation during the encoding and retrieval of advertising content that varied in its degree of identity association. Identity activation during both encoding and retrieval improved later recognition of advertising with moderate identity association, but had no influence on advertising unrelated to the identity. Current Opinion in Psychology 2016, 10:94–100
100 Consumer behavior
Identity activation during retrieval improved recognition of advertising with strong identity association regardless of whether the identity was activated during encoding. This research strongly supports the conceptualization of identities as components of self-schemas that are processed in accordance with traditional associative network models of memory. 18. Hugenberg K, Bodenhausen GV: Category membership moderates the inhibition of social identities. J Exp Soc Psychol 2004, 40:233-238. 19. Dalton AN, Huang L: Motivated forgetting in response to social identity threat. J Consum Res 2014, 40:1017-1038 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1086/674198. 20. Lasaleta JD, Sedikides C, Vohs KD: Nostalgia weakens the desire for money. J Consum Res 2014, 41:713-729 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1086/677227. 21. Zauberman G, Rebecca K, Ratner B, Kim K: Memories as assets: strategic memory protection in choice over time. J Consum Res 2009, 35:715-728. 22. Mercurio K, Forehand M, Reed A II: Savoring Through Avoidance: Identity Based Strategic Memory Protection. Working Paper, The Wharton School; 2015. In this research, the authors find that although consumers generally have a desire to repeat past special experiences that are linked to an important identity, they prefer to delay this repeat consumption. The delay is driven by a desire to savor identity-linked memories and thereby reinforce the focal identity. 23. Coleman NV, Williams P: Feeling like myself: emotion profiles and social identity. J Consum Res 2013, 40:203-222 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1086/669483. In this ground breaking paper, the authors show that a consumer’s identity can contain specific discrete emotion profiles providing ‘whatto-feel’ information when a person is doing things as part of expressing that identity. Consumers prefer emotional stimuli consistent with their salient identity, make product choices and emotion regulating consumption decisions to enhance (reduce) their experience of identity-consistent (inconsistent) emotions. In terms of reinforcement identity-consistent emotions helps to do things that are relevant to being that kind of person. 24. Coleman NV, Williams P: Looking for my self: identity-driven attention allocation. J Consum Psychol 2015, 25:504-511. 25. Chugani SK, Irwin JR, Redden JP: Happily ever after: The effect of identity-consistency on product satiation. J. Consum. Res. 2015, 42:564-577 (in press). This research shows that consumers with a salient identity have stronger endurance to be able to engage in an activity that is identity relevant. A strong identity leads consumers to see an identity related task as more central, and so they are able to persist at the task longer, and become satiated on the task at a much slower rate. 26. Reed A II, Kay A, Finnel S, Aquino K, Levy E: I don’t want the money, I just want your time: how moral identity overcomes the aversion to giving time to pro-social causes. J Pers Soc Psychol 2015. This research shows that moral identity can overcome negative aspects of giving time vs. money, even when time is scarce, or when giving time consists of an unpleasant act. In other words, moral identity helps overcome the natural aversion to giving time as compared to money. 27. Lee S, Winterich KP, Ross WT Jr: I’m moral, but I won’t help you: the distinct roles of empathy and justice in donations. J Consum Res 2014, 41:678-696 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/677226. 28. Zhou X, Wildschut T, Sedikides C, Shi K, Feng C: Nostalgia: the gift that keeps on giving. J Consum Res 2012, 39:39-50 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1086/662199. 29. Hattula JD, Herzog W, Dahl DW, Reinecke S: Managerial empathy facilitates egocentric predictions of consumer preferences. J Mark Res 2015, 52:235-252 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1509/jmr.13.0296. 30. Blair S, Roese NJ: Balancing the basket: the role of shopping basket composition in embarrassment. J Consum Res 2013, 40:676-691 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/671761. 31. Bhattacharjee A, Berger J, Menon G: When identity marketing backfires: consumer agency in identity expression. J Consum Res 2014, 41:294-309 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/676125.
Current Opinion in Psychology 2016, 10:94–100
This research shows that consumers will reject persuasive communications directed toward their identities when the messages are explicit because these messages imply less control over their behavior in enacting the identity, reducing agency and acceptance of the message. These findings illustrate the importance of considering the need for self-control in how a consumer perceives the self-regulation of their identities within a multiple identity system. 32. Bartels DM, Urminsky O: On intertemporal selfishness: how the perceived instability of identity underlies impatient consumption. J Consum Res 2011, 38:182-198 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1086/658339. 33. Saboo AR, Kumar V, Ramani G: Evaluating the impact of social media activities on human brand sales. Int J Res Mark 2015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2015.02.007. 34. Parmentier M, Fischer E: Things fall apart: the dynamics of brand audience dissipation. J Consum Res 2015, 41:1228-1251 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/678907. 35. White K, Argo JJ: Social identity threat and consumer preferences. J Consum Psychol 2009, 19:313-325 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2009.03.007. 36. White K, Argo JJ, Sengupta J: Dissociative versus associative responses to social identity threat: the role of consumer selfconstrual. J Consum Res 2012, 39:704-719 Retrieved from: http:// search.proquest.com/docview/1324549186?accountid=14707. This research shows that consumer with a more independent sense of overall identity avoid identity-linked products when that identity is threatened. Those with more collective sense of overall identity approach identity-linked products when that aspect is called into question. This is an important paper because it links underlying needs of esteem, agency as well as belongingness and inclusion to responses to signals in the feedback loop that my drive reinforcement/elevation vs. diffusion/suppression processes. 37. Angle JW, Forehand MR: It’s not us, it’s you: how threatening self-brand association leads to brand pursuit. Int J Res Mark 2015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2015.08.003. (forthcoming). This research develops a typology of identity threats. In a branding domain, threats that challenged the positivity of an identity produced avoidance of identity-linked brands while threats that challenged a consumer’s self-association with an identity produced approach to identitylinked brands. This latter approach effect is shown to be an anxietymediated process that is strongest when one possesses high levels of apriori identity association. 38. Ward MK, Broniarczyk SM: It’s not me, it’s you: how gift giving creates giver identity threat as a function of social closeness. J Consum Res 2011, 38:164-181 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/658166. 39. Dahl DW, Argo JJ, Morales AC: Social information in the retail environment: the importance of consumption alignment, referent identity, and self-esteem. J Consum Res 2012, 38:860871 Retrieved from: http://search.proquest.com/docview/ 922502690?accountid=14707. 40. McShane BB, Bradlow ET, Berger J: Visual influence and social groups. J Mark Res 2012, 49:854-871 http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/ jmr.11.0223. 41. Dimofte CV, Goodstein RC, Brumbaugh AM: A social identity perspective on aspirational advertising: implicit threats to collective self-esteem and strategies to overcome them. J Consum Psychol 2015, 25:416-430 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.jcps.2014.12.0012015. 42. Chan C, Berger J, Van Boven L: Identifiable but not identical: combining social identity and uniqueness motives in choice. J Consum Res 2012, 39:561-573 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/664804. This research shows the interplay of identity regulation on the need to belong vs. the need to fit in — in terms of reinforcement and dilution of identities a consumer may hold. Consumers pursue assimilation and differentiation goals at the same time but on different dimensions of a single behavioral decision. Assimilation with the in-group on attributes occurs (e.g. brand choice) while they distinguish themselves on uniqueness of the attributes chosen (e.g. color). Ironically, stronger desire for uniqueness leads to choice of less popular in-group preferred option. This research explores how multiple identity motivations influence consumer behavior.
www.sciencedirect.com