Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

DİJİTAL PAZARLARDA LABUBU FİGÜRÜ FİYATLAMASI: BIR DAVRANIŞSAL İKTİSAT ANALİZİ

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2, 369 - 393, 31.12.2025
https://doi.org/10.61127/idusos.1820147

Öz

Bu çalışma, dijital pazarlardaki Labubu koleksiyon figürlerinin fiyat dinamiklerinin altında yatan davranışsal iktisat unsurlarını incelemekte ve psikolojik faktörlerin fiyatları geleneksel arz-talep modellerinin ötesinde anlamlı bir şekilde çarpıttığını savunmaktadır. Beklenti Teorisi, gösterişçi tüketim ve sürü davranışı çerçevesine dayanan araştırma, premium ve orijinal figürlerden oluşan özenle filtrelenmiş 2024 eBay veri setini analiz etmektedir. Ampirik bulgular, ortalama fiyatın (221.35 $) medyan fiyattan (180 $) kayda değer ölçüde yüksek olduğu, yüksek basıklık gösteren, normal olmayan ve sağa çarpık bir fiyat dağılımını ortaya koymuş; Shapiro-Wilk testinin normalliği reddetmesiyle bu çarpıklık doğrulanmıştır. Bu çarpıklık, büyük ölçüde yüksek değerli aykırı değerlerden kaynaklanmış, bu değerlerin çıkarılması ortalamanın 178.70 $'a düşmesine ve dağılımın normale yaklaşmasına neden olarak, algılanan "nadir" ürünler için ödenen aşırı fiyatların piyasa ortalamasını yapay olarak şişirdiğini göstermiştir. Bootstrap yöntemi kullanılarak yapılan ileri analiz, çekirdek piyasa fiyatı için [173.80 $, 183.50 $] aralığında sağlam bir %95 güven aralığı oluşturulmuş ve bu fiyatın davranışsal aşırılıklar olmadığında istikrarını vurgulamıştır. Görselleştirmeler, birincil kümesi 100-250 $, ikincil aykırı değer kümesi ise 400-600 $ civarında olan çok tepeli bir dağılımı doğrulayarak farklı tüketici segmentleri ve fiyat eşiklerine işaret etmiştir. Bu istatistiksel anomaliler davranışsal bir mercekle yorumlanmıştır: "sınırlı üretim" çerçevelemesi kayıptan kaçınma ve FOMO'yu (Fırsatı Kaçırma Korkusu) tetiklemekte, sosyal medya etkisi ve influencer kampanyaları spekülatif talebi körükleyen sürü davranışını yaymakta ve gösterişçi tüketim bu figürleri bir statü sembolüne dönüştürerek premium fiyatlandırmayı meşrulaştırmaktadır. Çalışma, Labubu piyasasının, dijital koleksiyon ürünlerinde fiyat oluşumunun salt ekonomik rasyonaliteden ziyade davranışsal ön yargılar tarafından nasıl yönetildiğinin tipik bir örneği olduğu sonucuna varmaktadır. Literatüre, davranışsal teoriyi ampirik piyasa verileriyle birleştiren özgün, veri odaklı bir çerçeve sunmakta ve modern dijital tüketici davranışı analizlerine psikolojik ve sosyal dinamiklerin entegre edilmesi gerekliliğinin altını çizmektedir.

Kaynakça

  • Abidin, C. (2020). Mapping internet celebrity on TikTok: Exploring attention economies and visibility labours. Cultural Science Journal, 12 (1), 77–103.
  • Ahmed, S. (2004). The Cultural Politics of Emotion. Edinburgh University Press.
  • Alt, D. (2015). College students’ academic motivation, media engagement, and fear of missing out. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, 111–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.057
  • Banerjee, A. V. (1992). A simple model of herd behavior. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107(3), 797–817. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118364
  • Baudrillard, J. (1998). The Consumer Society: Myths and Structures. Sage.
  • Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Harvard University Press.
  • Budiman, R. M., & Laili, U. (2024). Analisis perilaku konsumen trend pembelian produk viral Labubu
  • pada platform TikTok. JSKP, 1(2), 197–206. https://doi.org/10.3342/juskop.v1i2.369
  • Camerer, C. F. (2005). Behavioral economics. In J. Wang (Ed.), World Congress of the Econometric Society (pp. 1–49). London. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/294444849_behavioral_economics
  • Chung, Min, Zhi Meng, and Liang Wang. 2025. “Impact of Non-Fungible Token Digital Art Information on Intention to Purchase Digital Collectibles: An Extended Theory of Planned Behaviour Approach.” Frontiers in Communication 10: 1592446. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2025.1592446
  • Ebay. (2025). Labubu Pop Mart action figures – sold listings. https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_oaa=1&_dcat=261068&_fsrp=1&_udlo=85&_from=r40
  • Efron, B. (1979). Bootstrap methods: Another look at the jackknife. The Annals of Statistics, 7(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.2307/2958830
  • Erdoğan, A., Yılmaz, Y., & Hocaoğlu, Ç. (2021). The new disease of the modern age: What is the fear of missing out “FOMO”? A review. Cyprus Turkish Journal of Psychiatry & Psychology, 3(3), 217–222. https://doi.org/10.35365/ctjpp.21.3.23
  • Hardianti, F., Oktalisa, N. E., & Fatmawati. (2024). The FOMO Labubu in AISAS approach: Digital communication study of Instagram user behavior on Labubu dolls. International Conference on Communication and Media Digital, 1(1), 10–24. https://journal.uir.ac.id/index.php/icommedig/article/view/19367/7296
  • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291. https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185
  • Karaşahinoğlu, Ş., & Dönmez, A. (2025). The relationship between animation productions on digital platforms and the toy industry: Netflix example. Ordu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, 15(2), 1066–1097. https://doi.org/10.48146/odusobiad.1507790
  • Kartika, D., Fardhani, M. H., & Anggraeni, R. D. (2025). Hubungan FOMO boneka Labubu terhadap impulsif buying generasi Z di Kota Surabaya. AKADEMIK: Jurnal Mahasiswa Humanis, 5(1), 588–594. https://doi.org/10.37481/jmh.v5i1.1303 Long, S., & Xiaochen, T. (2025). Chasing the ghost: An autoethnography of scarcity, fandom, and value-making in the hunt for Labubu. Critical Humanistic Social Theory, 2(3), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.62177/chst.v2i3.487
  • Luftiani, D., Setiawan, A., Safitri, M., & Wibowo, M. E. (2025). Eksplorasi hubungan fear of missing out (FOMO), pengaruh selebriti, dan limited edition terhadap purchase intention boneka Labubu pada komunitas Labubu di media sosial. Jurnal Manajemen Sosial Ekonomi (Dinamika), 5(1), 89–101. https://doi.org/10.51903/dinamika.v4i2
  • Monica, A. R., Putri, H. R., & Musallina, B. R. (2024). Labubu sebagai fenomena budaya pop dalam konteks sastra: Kajian semiotik dan teori resepsi sastra. UPENSAL: Jurnal Pendidikan Universal, 1(4), 632–643. https://journalwbl.com/index.php/jupensal/article/view/386
  • Nur, F. H., & Jans, R. O. (2025). Pengaruh fenomena FOMO karakter Labubu terhadap penjualan produk berbasis tren pada Gen-Z. Journal Contribution, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28211459.v2
  • Przybylski, A. K., Murayama, K., DeHaan, C. R., & Gladwell, V. (2013). Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4), 1841–1848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.02.014
  • Putri, N. M., Ferlianti, R. A., & Zuhri, S. (2024). Analisis perilaku konsumtif pada tren pembelian boneka Labubu di kalangan Gen-Z. Komunika: Jurnal Ilmiah Komunikasi, 2(2), 18–24. https://doi.org/10.70437/komunika.v2i2.847
  • Shapiro, S. S., & Wilk, M. B. (1965). An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika, 52(3–4), 591–611. https://doi.org/10.2307/2333709
  • Syifaunisa, A., Citrawati, Subchan, H., & Ardiyanto, E. (2024). Representasi konsumerisme dalam konten media sosial (studi kasus dampak FOMO trend Labubu). Jurnal Ekonomi, Manajemen dan Akuntansi, 3(2), 207–217. https://repository.paramadina.ac.id/1743/1/jurnal%20mufakat%20%28repository%29.pdf
  • Tabassum, S., Khwaja, M. G., & Zaman, U. (2020). Can narrative advertisement and eWOM influence Generation Z purchase intentions? Information, 11(12), 545. https://doi.org/10.3390/info11120545
  • Tanhan, F., Özok, H. İ., & Tayiz, V. (2022). Fear of missing out (FOMO): A current review. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar, 14(1), 74–85.
  • Temel, Z. (2025). Tariffs, toys, and transnational youth: An IPE analysis of Pop Mart’s. International Journal of Social Science and Economic Research, 10(6), 1947–1964. https://doi.org/10.46609/ijssser.2025.v10i06.003
  • Thaler, R. (1985). Mental accounting and consumer choice. Marketing Science, 4(3), 199–214. https://doi.org/10.2307/183904
  • Thaler, R. (2016). Behavioral economics: Past, present, and future. American Economic Review, 106(7), 1577–1600. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.106.7.1577
  • Veblen, T. (1899). The theory of the leisure class. Journal of Political Economy, 7(4), 425–455. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1817954
  • Wang, Y. (2024). Overconsumption among young people in big cities: A research based on behavioral economics. Information Systems and Economics, 5, 98–105. https://doi.org/10.23977/infse.2024.050214
  • Yang, S., & Li, B. (2025). Study on Labubu explosion phenomenon and economics. Economics & Business Management, 2(2), 52–60. https://doi.org/10.63313/ebm.9079
  • Zheng, S. (2025). The driving mechanisms and psychological effects of surprise box consumption: A systematic review from a multidisciplinary perspective. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5333446
  • Zulli, D., & Zulli, D. J. (2022). Extending the Internet meme: Conceptualizing technological mimesis and imitation publics on the TikTok platform. New Media & Society, 24(8), 1836–1853. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820983603

PRICING OF LABUBU FIGURES IN DIGITAL MARKETPLACES: A BEHAVIORAL ECONOMICS ANALYSIS

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2, 369 - 393, 31.12.2025
https://doi.org/10.61127/idusos.1820147

Öz

This study investigates the behavioral economics underpinning the pricing dynamics of Labubu collectible figures in digital marketplaces, arguing that psychological factors significantly distort prices beyond traditional supply-demand models. Grounded in Prospect Theory, conspicuous consumption, and herding behavior, the research analyzes a curated 2024 eBay data set of premium, original figures. Empirical findings reveal a non-normal, right-skewed price distribution with high kurtosis, where the mean price ($221.35) substantially exceeded the median ($180), a disparity confirmed by the Shapiro-Wilk test's rejection of normality. This skew was primarily driven by high-value outliers, as their removal caused the mean to drop to $178.70 and the distribution to normalize, demonstrating that extreme prices for perceived "rare" items artificially inflate the market average. Further analysis using bootstrap methods established a robust 95% confidence interval of [$173.80, $183.50] for the core market price, highlighting its stability absent behavioral extremes. Visualizations confirmed a multimodal distribution, with a primary cluster at $100-250 and a secondary outlier cluster around $400-600, indicating distinct consumer segments and price thresholds. These statistical anomalies are interpreted through a behavioral lens: the "limited edition" framing triggers loss aversion and Fear of Missing Out (FOMO), social media influence and influencer campaigns propagate herding behavior that fuels speculative demand, and conspicuous consumption transforms the figures into status symbols, legitimizing premium pricing. The study concludes that the Labubu market is a quintessential example of how behavioral biases rather than pure economic rationality govern price formation in digital collectibles. It contributes an original, data-driven framework to the literature, bridging behavioral theory with empirical market data and underscoring the necessity of integrating psychological and social dynamics into analyses of modern digital consumer behavior.

Kaynakça

  • Abidin, C. (2020). Mapping internet celebrity on TikTok: Exploring attention economies and visibility labours. Cultural Science Journal, 12 (1), 77–103.
  • Ahmed, S. (2004). The Cultural Politics of Emotion. Edinburgh University Press.
  • Alt, D. (2015). College students’ academic motivation, media engagement, and fear of missing out. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, 111–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.057
  • Banerjee, A. V. (1992). A simple model of herd behavior. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107(3), 797–817. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118364
  • Baudrillard, J. (1998). The Consumer Society: Myths and Structures. Sage.
  • Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Harvard University Press.
  • Budiman, R. M., & Laili, U. (2024). Analisis perilaku konsumen trend pembelian produk viral Labubu
  • pada platform TikTok. JSKP, 1(2), 197–206. https://doi.org/10.3342/juskop.v1i2.369
  • Camerer, C. F. (2005). Behavioral economics. In J. Wang (Ed.), World Congress of the Econometric Society (pp. 1–49). London. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/294444849_behavioral_economics
  • Chung, Min, Zhi Meng, and Liang Wang. 2025. “Impact of Non-Fungible Token Digital Art Information on Intention to Purchase Digital Collectibles: An Extended Theory of Planned Behaviour Approach.” Frontiers in Communication 10: 1592446. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2025.1592446
  • Ebay. (2025). Labubu Pop Mart action figures – sold listings. https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_oaa=1&_dcat=261068&_fsrp=1&_udlo=85&_from=r40
  • Efron, B. (1979). Bootstrap methods: Another look at the jackknife. The Annals of Statistics, 7(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.2307/2958830
  • Erdoğan, A., Yılmaz, Y., & Hocaoğlu, Ç. (2021). The new disease of the modern age: What is the fear of missing out “FOMO”? A review. Cyprus Turkish Journal of Psychiatry & Psychology, 3(3), 217–222. https://doi.org/10.35365/ctjpp.21.3.23
  • Hardianti, F., Oktalisa, N. E., & Fatmawati. (2024). The FOMO Labubu in AISAS approach: Digital communication study of Instagram user behavior on Labubu dolls. International Conference on Communication and Media Digital, 1(1), 10–24. https://journal.uir.ac.id/index.php/icommedig/article/view/19367/7296
  • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291. https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185
  • Karaşahinoğlu, Ş., & Dönmez, A. (2025). The relationship between animation productions on digital platforms and the toy industry: Netflix example. Ordu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Sosyal Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, 15(2), 1066–1097. https://doi.org/10.48146/odusobiad.1507790
  • Kartika, D., Fardhani, M. H., & Anggraeni, R. D. (2025). Hubungan FOMO boneka Labubu terhadap impulsif buying generasi Z di Kota Surabaya. AKADEMIK: Jurnal Mahasiswa Humanis, 5(1), 588–594. https://doi.org/10.37481/jmh.v5i1.1303 Long, S., & Xiaochen, T. (2025). Chasing the ghost: An autoethnography of scarcity, fandom, and value-making in the hunt for Labubu. Critical Humanistic Social Theory, 2(3), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.62177/chst.v2i3.487
  • Luftiani, D., Setiawan, A., Safitri, M., & Wibowo, M. E. (2025). Eksplorasi hubungan fear of missing out (FOMO), pengaruh selebriti, dan limited edition terhadap purchase intention boneka Labubu pada komunitas Labubu di media sosial. Jurnal Manajemen Sosial Ekonomi (Dinamika), 5(1), 89–101. https://doi.org/10.51903/dinamika.v4i2
  • Monica, A. R., Putri, H. R., & Musallina, B. R. (2024). Labubu sebagai fenomena budaya pop dalam konteks sastra: Kajian semiotik dan teori resepsi sastra. UPENSAL: Jurnal Pendidikan Universal, 1(4), 632–643. https://journalwbl.com/index.php/jupensal/article/view/386
  • Nur, F. H., & Jans, R. O. (2025). Pengaruh fenomena FOMO karakter Labubu terhadap penjualan produk berbasis tren pada Gen-Z. Journal Contribution, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28211459.v2
  • Przybylski, A. K., Murayama, K., DeHaan, C. R., & Gladwell, V. (2013). Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4), 1841–1848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.02.014
  • Putri, N. M., Ferlianti, R. A., & Zuhri, S. (2024). Analisis perilaku konsumtif pada tren pembelian boneka Labubu di kalangan Gen-Z. Komunika: Jurnal Ilmiah Komunikasi, 2(2), 18–24. https://doi.org/10.70437/komunika.v2i2.847
  • Shapiro, S. S., & Wilk, M. B. (1965). An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika, 52(3–4), 591–611. https://doi.org/10.2307/2333709
  • Syifaunisa, A., Citrawati, Subchan, H., & Ardiyanto, E. (2024). Representasi konsumerisme dalam konten media sosial (studi kasus dampak FOMO trend Labubu). Jurnal Ekonomi, Manajemen dan Akuntansi, 3(2), 207–217. https://repository.paramadina.ac.id/1743/1/jurnal%20mufakat%20%28repository%29.pdf
  • Tabassum, S., Khwaja, M. G., & Zaman, U. (2020). Can narrative advertisement and eWOM influence Generation Z purchase intentions? Information, 11(12), 545. https://doi.org/10.3390/info11120545
  • Tanhan, F., Özok, H. İ., & Tayiz, V. (2022). Fear of missing out (FOMO): A current review. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar, 14(1), 74–85.
  • Temel, Z. (2025). Tariffs, toys, and transnational youth: An IPE analysis of Pop Mart’s. International Journal of Social Science and Economic Research, 10(6), 1947–1964. https://doi.org/10.46609/ijssser.2025.v10i06.003
  • Thaler, R. (1985). Mental accounting and consumer choice. Marketing Science, 4(3), 199–214. https://doi.org/10.2307/183904
  • Thaler, R. (2016). Behavioral economics: Past, present, and future. American Economic Review, 106(7), 1577–1600. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.106.7.1577
  • Veblen, T. (1899). The theory of the leisure class. Journal of Political Economy, 7(4), 425–455. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1817954
  • Wang, Y. (2024). Overconsumption among young people in big cities: A research based on behavioral economics. Information Systems and Economics, 5, 98–105. https://doi.org/10.23977/infse.2024.050214
  • Yang, S., & Li, B. (2025). Study on Labubu explosion phenomenon and economics. Economics & Business Management, 2(2), 52–60. https://doi.org/10.63313/ebm.9079
  • Zheng, S. (2025). The driving mechanisms and psychological effects of surprise box consumption: A systematic review from a multidisciplinary perspective. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5333446
  • Zulli, D., & Zulli, D. J. (2022). Extending the Internet meme: Conceptualizing technological mimesis and imitation publics on the TikTok platform. New Media & Society, 24(8), 1836–1853. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820983603
Toplam 34 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Davranışsal İktisat
Bölüm Araştırma Makalesi
Yazarlar

Çağatay Tunçsiper 0000-0002-0445-3686

Emine Örs 0009-0003-3274-1532

Gönderilme Tarihi 8 Kasım 2025
Kabul Tarihi 24 Kasım 2025
Yayımlanma Tarihi 31 Aralık 2025
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2025 Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

APA Tunçsiper, Ç., & Örs, E. (2025). PRICING OF LABUBU FIGURES IN DIGITAL MARKETPLACES: A BEHAVIORAL ECONOMICS ANALYSIS. Izmir Democracy University Social Sciences Journal, 8(2), 369-393. https://doi.org/10.61127/idusos.1820147