A Conceptual Analysıs Of Symbolıc Consumptıon And Self-Identıty

Öz

This study is a conceptual research that analyses the evolving comprehension and actions of humans around consuming. Consumers acquire products and services in order to convey their identity and status, as well as to align themselves with their ideal self. In this study, studies on symbolic consumption and the self were examined and it was concluded that the underlying reason for the individual's self-presentation is to create the desired impression during social interaction and to shape his/her self according to the expectations of other individuals. In the current landscape characterised by numerous and diverse competitors, marketers must distinguish themselves by providing unique advantages to customers. The region where the distinction will be established is the symbolic advantage segment. Consequently, marketers, producers, and brand managers must account for this element while creating and presenting their products. This study aims to analyse research on symbolic consumption and self-identity, and to elucidate the perspectives of the researchers. A suggestion for future studies is to examine the issue of symbolic consumption and the self in a multidisciplinary manner with the science of psychology.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Symbolic consumption
• Self-Identity
• Consumer behaviour
• Consumption.

Etik Beyan

The study is not a study that requires ethics committee permission. is a review study.

Sembolik Tüketim ve Benlik Üzerine Kavramsal Bir İnceleme

Öz

Bu makale bireylerin değişen tüketim anlayışını ve davranışlarını ele alan çalışmaların incelendiği kavramsal bir çalışmadır. Tüketiciler, benliklerini ve statülerini ifade etmek ve benliklerini ideal benliğe ulaştırma amacıyla ürün ve hizmetler satın almaktadır. Bu çalışmada, sembolik tüketim ve benlik üzerine yapılan çalışmalar incelenmiş ve bireyin benlik sunumu gerçekleştirmesinin altında yatan nedenin sosyal etkileşim sırasında istediği izlenimi yaratmak ve diğer bireylerin beklentilerine göre benliğini şekillendirmek olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Rakiplerin çok ve çeşitli olduğu günümüz şartlarında pazarlamacıların tüketicilere farklı bir fayda sunarak fark yaratması gerekmektedir. Farkın yaratılacağı alan ise sembolik fayda kısmıdır. Bu nedenle pazarlamacıların, üreticilerin ve marka yöneticilerinin ürünlerini tasarlayıp sunarken bu faktörü göz ününde bulundurması gerekmektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı sembolik tüketim ve benlik konusunda yapılmış çalışmaların incelenmesi ve araştırmacıların fikirlerinin ortaya konulmasıdır. Gelecekteki çalışmalar için öneri ise; sembolik tüketim ve benlik konusunun psikoloji bilimi ile multidisipliner bir şekilde incelenmesidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sembolik tüketim
• Benlik
• Tüketici davranışları
• Tüketim.

Etik Beyan

Çalışma etik kurul izni gerektiren bir çalışma değildir. bir derleme çalışmasıdır.

Kaynakça

1. Allen, M.W., Ng, S.K. and Wilson, M. (2002). “A functional approach to instrumental and terminal values the value-attitude-behavior system of consumer choice”, European Journal of Marketing, 36 (1), pp. 111-135.
2. Armutlu, C. ve Üner, M. (2009). Benlik İmajı Uyumu, Tüketici Tatmini ve Marka Sadakati İlişkisi Üzerine Görgül Bir Araştırma. Gazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(3), 1-26.
3. Aronson, E., Wilson, T.D. and Akert, R.M., (2012). Social Psychology (Sosyal Psikoloji), (Çev. O. Gündüz), 1. Baskı, İstanbul: Kaknüs Yayınları, (Orijinal Baskı: 2010).
4. Azizağaoğlu, A., & Altunışık, R. (2012). Postmodernizm, sembolik tüketim ve marka. Tüketici ve Tüketim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(2), 33-50.
5. Belk, R. W. (1984). “Three Scales To Measure Constructs Related To Materialism: Reliability, Validity, And Relationships To Measures Of Happiness”, Advances İn Consumer Research, (11) 291-297.
6. Belk, R.W. (1984). Three Scales to Measure Constructs Related to Materialism: Reliability, Validity, and Relationships to Measures of Happiness, in NA-Advances in Consumer Research, Volume 11, Eds. Thomas C. Kinnear, Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 291-297.
7. Belk, W. R. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (2), 139-168.
8. Benedict R. (1966), Wzory Kultury, PWN, Warszawa.

9. Britt, S. H. (1966). Consumer behavior and the behavior sciences: Theories and applications. New York: Wiley.
10. Bujok, A. M. (2007). The importance of hedonism in consumer behaviour and its implications for the affordable fashion apparel industry in Poland. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi), Poland: The University of Nottingham.
11. Carroll, B. A., Ahuvia, A. C. (2006). Some Antecedents and Outcomes of brand love. Market Letter, 17(2), 79-89.
12. 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.
13. Coşkun, Y. ve Altay, C.A. (2009). Lise öğrencilerinde yabancılaşma ve benlik algısı ilişkisi. M.Ü. Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Sayı 29, 41-56.
14. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Halton, E. (1981). The meaning of things: Domestic symbols and the self. Cambridge university press.
15. Dittmar, H. (1992). The social psychology of material possessions: To have is to be. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
16. D'Souza, C. (2015). Marketing challenges for an eco-fashion brand: A case study. Fashion Theory, 19(1), 67-82.
17. Duesenberry J.S. (1952), Income, Saving and the Theory of Consumer Behavior, 2nd ed., Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
18. Edson Escalas, J. ve Bettman, J. (2005). “Self-construal, reference groups, and brand meaning” Journal of Consumer Research. 32:378-389.
19. Elliott, R. ve Wattanasuwan, K. (1998). Brands as symbolic resources for the construction of identity. International Journal of Advertising, 17 (2), 131144.
20. Elliott, R. (1999), “Symbolic meaning and postmodern consumer culture”, in Brownlie, D., Saren, M., Wensley, R. and Wittington, R. (Eds), Rethinking Marketing: Towards Critical Marketing Accountings, Sage Publications, London, pp. 112-125.
21. Flügel, J. C. (1930). The psychology of clothes. London: London Press.
22. Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in consumer research. Journal of consumer research, 24(4), 343-373.
23. Ger, G., & Belk, R. W. (1996). Cross-cultural differences in materialism. Journal of economic psychology, 17(1), 55-77.
24. Goldsmith, R. E., Flynn, L. R., & Moore, M. A. (1996). The self-concept of fashion leaders. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 14(4), 242-248.
25. Graeff, T. R. (1996), “Using Promotional Messages To Manage The Effects Of Brand And Selfimage On Brand Evaluations” Journal Of Consumer Marketing, 13(3), S. 4-18.
26. Grubb, E.L. and Grathwohl, H.L. (1967). Consumer self-concept, symbolism and market behavior: A theoretical approach. The Journal of Marketing, 31, 22-27.
27. Hawkins, D. I., Mothersbaugh, D. L. ve Mookerjee, A. (2009). Consumer behavior: building marke-ting strategy (11. baskı). New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill.
28. Hawkins, D.I., and Mothersbaugh, D.L. (2009). Consumer behavior: Building marketing strategy (11th Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
29. İslamoğlu, A. H. ve R. Altunışık (2008), Tüketici Davranışları, 2. Baskı, İstanbul: Beta Yayınları.
30. James, W. (1890). Principles of psychology. New York: Holt.
31. James, W. (1950). The principles of psychology. New York: Dover Publications.
32. Kim, J. H. (2015). Self‐congruity effects: A critical review and an integrative model. Japanese Psychological Research, 57(4), 348-362.
33. Kozak, N. (2010). Turizm Pazarlaması, Detay Yayıncılık, Ankara
34. Landon Jr, E. L. (1974). Self concept, ideal self concept, and consumer purchase intentions. Journal of consumer research, 1(2), 44-51.
35. Lee, E. J. (2013). A prototype of multicomponent brand personality structure: A consumption synmbolism approach. Psychology & Marketing, 30(2), 173-186.
36. Levy, B. (1959). Symbols for sale. Harvard Business Review 37 (4), 117–124.
37. Levy, Sidney J. (1981), “Symbols, Selves, and Others”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 10, s. 542-543.
38. Luna, D.& Gupta, S.F (2001). An integrative framework for cross-cultural consumer behavior, International Marketing Review, 18(1), 45-69.
39. McCracken, G. (1987). The history of consumption: a literature review and consumer guide. Journal of Consumer Policy, 10(2), 139-166.
40. Noh, M., & Mosier, J. (2014). Effects of young consumers’ self-concept on hedonic/utilitarian attitudes towards what is ‘cool’. International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, 7(3), 163-169.
41. Odabaşı, Y. (2006), Tüketim Kültürü-Yetinen Toplumdan Tüketen Topluma, 2.b., Sistem Yayıncılık, İstanbul.
42. Odabaşı, Y. ve Barış, G. (2002). Tüketici davranışı (4. Basım). İstanbul: MediaCat.
43. Park, C. W., MacInnis, D. J., Priester, J., Eisingerich, A. B., & Iacobucci, D. (2010). Brand attachment and brand attitude strength: Conceptual and empirical differentiation of two critical brand equity drivers. Journal of marketing, 74(6), 1-17.
44. Piacentini, M. and Mailer, G. (2004), “Symbolic consumption in teenagers’ clothing choices”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 251-262.
45. Rogers, C. R. (1951). Client centered therapy, Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
46. Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self. New York: Basic Books.
47. Simmel, G. (1903). Fashion. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
48. Sirgy, M. J. (1982). Self-concept in consumer behavior: A critical review. Journal of consumer research, 9(3), 287-300.
49. Sun, X., Wang, P., Lepp, A., & Robertson, L. (2014). Symbolic consumption and brand choice: China’s youth hostels for the international travel market. Journal of China Tourism Research, 10(1), 51-68.
50. Tektaş, Ö. Ö. ve Uğur, B. (2018), "Benlik Uyumu ve Fonksiyonel Uyumun Tüketici Marka Bağı Üzerindeki Etkisi: Cep Telefonu Kullanıcıları Üzerine Bir Çalışma", Pazarlama ve Pazarlama Araştırmaları Dergisi, 11 (22), 249-272.
51. TTDK, 2025, https://sozluk.gov.tr/ (Erişim Tarihi: 18. 01.2025).
52. Veblen, T. (1994). The theory of the leisure class: An economic study of institutions. London: Unwin Books, 1899; reprinted 1990. New York: Dover Publications.
53. Wattanasuwan, K. (2005), “The self and symbolic consumption”, Journal of American Academy of Business, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 179-184.
54. Woodside Arch G., Suresh Sood ve Kenneth E. Miller (2008). “When Consumers and Brands Talk: Storytelling Theory and Research in Psychology and Marketing”, Psychology and Marketing, 25(2), 97-145.