Next Article in Journal
AI Carbon Footprint Management with Multi-Agent Participation: A Tripartite Evolutionary Game Analysis Based on a Case in China
Previous Article in Journal
Trends in and Future Research Direction of Antimicrobial Resistance in Global Aquaculture Systems: A Review
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 11
10.3390/su15119015
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

How Can Conspicuous Omni-Signaling Fulfil Social Needs and Induce Re-Consumption?

by
Ahmad Hamdani
*,
Idris Gautama So
*,
Amalia E. Maulana
and
Asnan Furinto
Management Department, BINUS Business School, Doctor of Research in Management, Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta 11480, Indonesia
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(11), 9015; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15119015
Submission received: 21 February 2023 / Revised: 2 May 2023 / Accepted: 3 May 2023 / Published: 2 June 2023
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study investigated consumer behaviors in conspicuous omni-signaling—its internal motivations and its consequences on social needs fulfilment and re-consumption intention in the context of luxury fashion. A phenomenon of conspicuous consumption is identified with the consumption and display of conspicuous goods to signal status, wealth, and prestige. Digital development has made conspicuous signaling radically emerge in social media through the posting of photos, videos, or stories of luxury goods. This drives an emerging phenomenon of conspicuous omni-signaling, the use of both offline and online media to signal conspicuous consumption hybridlike. As a new phenomenon, little is known of consumer behaviors related to conspicuous omni-signaling. To facilitate the investigation, an online survey was conducted to collect data from 474 valid respondents across eight cities representing various conspicuous consumption characteristics of Indonesian consumers. Veblen’s conspicuous consumption and Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theories were employed as the main lens for analysis. PLS-SEM technique was employed as the research model uses mixed reflective and formative constructs. WarpPLS 7.0 was then used for data analysis. The results indicated that luxury values and fashion consciousness positively affect conspicuous omni-signaling. This study also found that conspicuous omni-signaling affects conspicuous re-consumption both directly and indirectly through social needs fulfilment. This study contributes to extend the concept of conspicuous offline consumption and conspicuous online consumption to conspicuous omni-signaling. This study also confirms conflicting results in the effect of conspicuous consumption on social needs fulfilment, and conflicting results in the effect of conspicuous consumption on conspicuous re-consumption.

1. Introduction

Conspicuous goods, in contrast to inconspicuous goods, refers to any goods which are highly visible, observable, and noticeable, that attract attention of others and are designed to signal self-identity, status, wealth, and prestige—with the main purposes to obtain respect, admiration, authority, and relationship [1]. Meanwhile conspicuous consumption refers to the purchase, consumption, or use of goods to wastefully signal self-identity, wealth, status, and prestige rather than to satisfy utilitarian needs or the real needs of consumers [2].
Several theories exist as to explain the reasons why individuals consume conspicuously. Some theorists suggest that it is due to the competitive nature of individuals as the ownership of conspicuous goods signals the superiority of the possessors and their status in society over the non-possessors [3]. Conspicuous consumption involves the display of “pecuniary strength” and hence social standing in a competitive social system [4]. Some other theorists claim that it is due to the insecurity of individuals that drives them to consume conspicuously as people use conspicuous goods to hide their personal insecurities, and they believe their conspicuous product possessions define their public image and mask their shortcomings [3]. Hence, conspicuous consumption is deeply associated with psychological and social perspectives.
Fashion, particularly luxury fashion, is merely a product of social demands and is highly associated with conspicuous consumption. George Simmel [5] argued that fashion is a product of double function: as a social class, equalization signifies union with those in the same class in which the uniformity of a circle characterized by it, but, paradoxically, at the same time emphasizing it as a social class distinction, differentiates one social stratum to another. Hence, fashion unites individuals from a certain social class and segregates them from others.
Luxury fashion generally refers to premium, branded or luxury apparels, watches, handbags, shoes, eyewear, beauty products, perfumes, cosmetics, accessories, and jewelry [6]. Ever since Veblen and Simmel, luxury fashion has been synonymous with conspicuous consumption, in which the raison d’être of a luxury brand is its visibility and ability to signal and convey its perceived values.
Kapferer and Bastien [7] suggested two uses of luxury: luxury as a badge (or luxury for others) and luxury for oneself. In luxury as a badge, luxury is a social marker for social stratification. The meaning of luxury is essentially on the symbolic desire to belong to a superior social class. Hence, luxury is an ordinary item for extraordinary people which is at the same time as an extraordinary item for ordinary people [7]. Therefore, consumers using luxury as a badge have substantial needs to consume it conspicuously to signal social status and prestige. On the other hand, in luxury for oneself, luxury is more about personal and hedonistic feeling and experiences. Hence, luxury becomes more subtle or inconspicuous in its branding as a possible means for extraordinary luxury consumers who are usually at the very high end of the society and tend to hide their social status [8]. The subtle signal in inconspicuous luxury is unidentifiable by mainstream consumers but is easily observable to those from the same social group.
Alleres [9] developed the hierarchy model of luxury goods which consists of three levels: inaccessible luxury, intermediate luxury, and accessible luxury. Inaccessible luxury is absolute luxury, old-luxury, meta-luxury, and extremely highly priced fashion products such as Haute-Couture and Hermes—that is only accessible for elite classes. The second level is intermediate luxury or affordable luxury such as LV, Chanel, Versace, YSL, Gucci—which is accessible to large groups of professional classes, therefore called masstige or massive-prestige. The lowest luxury in the hierarchy is accessible luxury or new-luxury, which is affordable branded products such as Guess, Michael-Kors, and Coach—accessible to mass-market of middle-class segment. The scope of luxury fashion in this study includes all three levels of Alleres’ luxury, i.e., inaccessible, masstige, and accessible luxury.
Globally, rising consumer living standards supported with increasing disposable income levels have been the key growth driver of the sales of luxury fashion. This has made luxury fashion consumption one of the key pillars of global economy. In the last twenty five years, luxury fashion enjoyed a rapid sales growth at +6% CAGR since 1996 and reached €267 billion in 2021, with global fashion sales at €3 trillion and employs 33 million people [10]. Unfortunately, the COVID-19 pandemic has caused a −22% contraction of global luxury fashion sales in 2020.
In Indonesia, luxury fashion development is further accelerated with the growing number of high-net-worth individuals that are affluent and brand savvy professionals, and increasing celebrity culture and social media awareness that have made consumers engaged and investing in their appearance [11]. This resulted in a consistent 8–10% annual growth of luxury fashion sales between 2010–2019, and is projected to reach €9.3 billion in 2025 at +4.2% CAGR [12].
Recent internet development which allows user generated content (UGC) has fostered consumers to easily share their photos, videos, and experiences in digital world. As much as 6.9 billion photos were uploaded on WhatsApp, 3.6 billion on Snapchat, and 2.1 billion on Facebook every day in 2022, while in 2020 there were 500 h of video uploaded in YouTube every minute and more than 5 billion videos watched every day in You Tube [13]. At the same time information and communication technology (ICT) and mobile connectivity in Indonesia have been rapidly developing, with 203 million internet users representing 77% population reach (+16%) in 2021 [14], and 345 million mobile connectivity representing 126% population [15]. This triggered an alternative from a traditional way of offline conspicuous signaling to online conspicuous signaling [16]. Studies suggested that an increasing usage of visual representations (image/photo and video) on social media tends to increase the focus of consumers alike on conspicuous signaling [17]. Recent social and mobility restriction due to the COVID-19 pandemic has further accelerated the development of online conspicuous signaling [18], triggering the emergence usage of offline and online conspicuous signaling hybridlike [19], and resulting in the new era of conspicuous omni-signaling phenomena.
As an emerging phenomenon, there is still a lack of studies in understanding consumer behaviors regarding conspicuous omni-signaling. The existing literature mainly studied offline conspicuous consumption as the traditional way of signaling conspicuous goods to others other [20,21]. The literature in online conspicuous consumption is growing, particularly focusing on the roles of social media to signal conspicuous consumption [22,23]. Moreover, the current literature studying omni-channels is mainly focused on omni-sales channels in relation to consumer-brand/product-seller. However, a visible gap is noticeable in the literature examining conspicuous omni-signaling in relation to consumer-brand/product-audience.
Hence, little is known in consumer behaviors related to conspicuous omni-signaling, including its motivation and its consequences. This study therefore aims to answer the following objectives:
  • How consumers’ psychological motives affect conspicuous omni-signaling;
  • How consumers’ fashion consciousness affects conspicuous omni-signaling;
  • How conspicuous omni-signaling affects social needs fulfillment which would then lead to conspicuous re-consumption;
  • How conspicuous omni-signaling induces conspicuous re-consumption.
Investigating this emerging phenomenon of conscious omni-signaling may help in extending conspicuous consumption theory into conspicuous omni-consumption and have managerial benefits for fashion practitioners.
To facilitate the investigation, an online consumer survey was conducted in eight metropolitan cities across Indonesia. Nine hundred and twenty-five respondents participated in the survey and were asked to evaluate their perceived values on luxury fashion, perception of their fashion consciousness, their attitude towards conspicuous omni-signaling, and their behaviors related to social needs fulfilment and conspicuous re-consumption. Four hundred and seventy-four valid data were analyzed using PLS-SEM method utilizing WarpPLS 7.0. The results provide theoretical explanations as to how consumer’s psychological motives affect conspicuous omni-signaling, and in turn how conspicuous omni-signaling affects social needs fulfillment and conspicuous re-consumption.

2. Literature Review and Hypotheses Development

2.1. Theoretical Framework

This research uses the Stimuli–Organism–Response (S-O-R) model as the framework and employs two theories: Veblen’s conspicuous consumption theory and Maslow’ human motivation theory. Conspicuous consumption theory is used to analyze overall consumer behaviors and to analyze the relationships between constructs in the research model. Meanwhile, Maslow’s human motivation theory is used to explain the motivation for conspicuous omni-signaling and its consequences.
In S-O-R model, stimulus includes both individual/internal factor (such as perceived values, consciousness) and external factors (such as environment) that stimulate individuals affecting their decision making [24]. Organism is represented by cognitive and affective intermediary states and processes (reflected by feeling pleasure, arousal, proud, prestige, and acceptable) that mediate the relationships between the stimulus and the individual’s responses [25]. While response refers to all physical, verbal, and nonverbal behavioral responses, in which previous research have measured purchase intention, re-consumption or revisit intention, and loyalty as responses [26]. In this study, the stimuli consist of consumers’ psychological motives and consumers’ fashion consciousness. The organism in is reflected in experiences, cognitive, affective, and psychology states and processes emerge from conspicuous omni-signaling. While the responses are consumers’ social needs fulfillment, and conspicuous re-consumption.
According to conspicuous consumption theory, people do wasteful spending to show off and expose wealth [27]. Instead of maximizing the utilizations of the products, the theory suggests that individual’s preferences on conspicuous consumption are determined socially in relation to the individual hierarchical position. This differentiates conspicuous products from routine or regular products, in which conspicuous product’s satisfaction comes not merely from the material utilization, but more from explicit comparisons to others when consuming goods, services and leisure to portray actual and aspirational status [28]. Moreover, conspicuous consumption is a source of self-expression of democratic, individuality, creativity, pleasure, lifestyle, and self-identity [29]. In this study, consumers’ perception of luxury consumption values and fashion consciousness are investigated as motivating factors to signal their conspicuous consumption to others to build social status, social image, prestige, and self-identity.
Costly signaling theory suggests that individuals often engage in behaviors that are costly (involves significant amount of money, resources, energy, risk, or time) as a way of signaling useful information about themselves to others [30]. In this study, conspicuous signaling is a costly signal behavior as it requires wasting money to possess conspicuous goods, is easily observable to others as the goods is shown off to others, the display of goods is to signal goods possession, and the signal is an indicator to others of wealth, status, and prestige.
Maslow’s human motivation theory or hierarchy of needs theory [31] suggests five basic needs driving or motivating human behaviors, represented in an iconic pyramid: physiological, safety/security, belonging, esteem, and self-actualization needs. The theory describes the psychological needs consist of belongingness and love needs, and esteem needs. Self-esteem and self-actualization are located at the top of the pyramid, in which self-esteem can be achieved through personal achievement, while self-actualization may be fulfilled via personal growth up to a mature person and to live up to one’s own full potential [32].
Recognizing different cultures between Western and Asia, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs level 3, 4 (psychological needs), and 5 (self-fulfillment needs) were adopted into Asia context as shown in Figure 1 [33] becoming social needs. Hence, belongingness and love needs (level 3) become affiliation needs, while esteem needs (level 4) become admiration needs. Finally, self-actualization needs (level 5) become status needs. In this study, the satisfaction of conspicuous signaling does not arise only from functional needs as the conventional goods, but rather from the satisfaction of symbolic values and desire [34]. Hence, motivation for conspicuous signaling is related more to fulfilment of social needs, located at level 3, 4, and 5 of Maslow’s pyramid (Asia).
Prior studies in conspicuous signaling have primarily focused on offline signaling through meeting in person or online signaling through social media. While conspicuous omni-signaling is emerging, there is still a lack of study focusing on this phenomenon. Table 1 summarizes differences between previous studies and this study, in which this study fills the gap in conspicuous omni-signaling. Independent variables studied in previous research in conspicuous offline or conspicuous online signaling were analyzed and this study pitched to examine fashion consciousness (FC) and luxury values (LV) as antecedents of conspicuous omni-signaling (CS). Simultaneously, dependent variables studied in previous research as consequences of conspicuous offline or conspicuous online signaling were compared, and this study pitched to investigate social needs fulfilment (SF) and conspicuous re-consumption (RI) as the consequences of conspicuous omni-signaling. Figure 2 illustrates the conceptual framework of this study.

2.2. Hypothesis Development

2.2.1. Conspicuous Omni-Signaling

Although consumers’ needs and wants influence consumption, much of modern consumption behaviors are driven more by social considerations. What products or brands we consume say about us, therefore people consume different products or brands to signal identity, status, and values [44]. Conspicuous consumption may be a prevalent way of signaling such that consumption decisions are motivated not only by the direct value of a product, but by the indirect value gained from what the product might communicate to others. Consumers indeed tend to display their conspicuous goods or experiences such as consuming a certain luxury brand to signal social status, and their group they belong to to satisfy social needs, gain recognition, or social affirmation [4].
A theory that may help explain such expensive behaviors is costly signaling theory which suggests that individuals often engage in costly behaviors as a way of signaling to others useful information about themselves [30]. Using a costly signaling theory, conspicuous signaling is an act of conspicuous display of resources that signals an individual’s ability to incur costs by even wasting money and time—serves to increase status and prestige [45].
Wallace et al. defined two constructs related to conspicuous signaling, i.e., self-oriented conspicuous virtue signaling (CVS) and others-oriented CVS [40]. Self-oriented CVS referred to virtue signaling behavior to achieve intrinsic benefits and allows the individual to enhance their public profile which makes them feel good. Others-oriented CVS is virtue signaling behavior focused on signaling virtuous behavior to others. This study defines conspicuous omni-signaling as the extent of consumer psychological, affective, and cognitive internal processes emerged from using, wearing, showing, sharing, or displaying luxury fashion brands offline (face to face meeting) and online (social media), hybridlike, with the purpose of signaling social status, wealth, prestige, taste, self-image, and identity to their reference groups [40].

2.2.2. Luxury Values

The concept of “luxury value” was first systematically introduced by Veblen through his seminal work “the theory of the leisure class”. He postulated that achieving social status and demonstrating wealth are major motivators for luxury consumption, with the main objectives to belong to a certain reference group, and to differentiate from lower class group. This Veblen’s postulate is later known as conspicuous value. Luxury value therefore refers to consumer’s perception on conspicuous value of luxury goods that motivate them for conspicuous consumption [4].
Wiedmann et al. developed value-based segmentation of luxury consumption behaviors, in which luxury values was defined as consumers perception of and motives for purchase of luxury brands, including functional value, individual value, social value, and financial value [46]. Zhang and Zhao defined luxury value as the values consumers attach to luxury consumption and access to luxury brands, including uniqueness, quality, usability, and social [47]. Meanwhile, Choo et al. defined luxury values for luxury fashion as the basic features of luxury fashion brands which implies the reason and desire a customer seeks through luxury consumption, and propose luxury customer values to include utilitarian, hedonic, symbolic, and economy [48]. This study defines luxury values as the consumers’ perception on functional, experiential, personal, and social values of luxury fashion that motivate them to signal their consumption to others [46].

2.2.3. Fashion Consciousness

Self-consciousness may be approached from two angles: private self-consciousness and public self-consciousness, in which the private consciousness reflects the latent side of a consumer and not visible to others, while the public consciousness indicates the way a consumer reflects him/herself to others and how others perceive them [49]. Prior studies argued that public fashion consciousness is related to fashion involvement and fashion-ability [50]. Furthermore, past studies also suggested that highly public fashion-conscious consumers tend to be highly concerned about their fashion appearance, highly related to fashion opinion leadership, fashion perceived ability, and fashion involvement [50].
Nam et al. defined fashion consciousness as a consumer’s degree of involvement with the styles, fashion, or clothing—characterized by an interest in clothing, fashion, and in one’s appearance [51]. Fashion consciousness also refers to fashion involvement to the perceived personal relevance to or interest in fashion clothing [52] or a person’s degree of involvement with clothing styles or fashion and implies an interest in fashion styles and someone’s appearance [50]. This study refers fashion consciousness to public self-consciousness and is defined as consumer’s degree of involvement with the styles or fashion or clothing, characterized by an interest in fashion styles and his/her appearance [51].

2.2.4. Social Needs Fulfilment

In the consumerism era, fulfilling social needs is one of the most important motivations in human life. Maslow defined social needs as the human basic needs for love, belonging, relationship, acceptance, esteem, prestige, status, and feeling of accomplishment [53]. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs levels 3, 4, and 5, which were later adapted for Asian collectivist culture into social needs, consist of affiliation, admiration, and social status [33]. Fulfilling social needs protects against feeling loneliness and social isolation, and at the same time found to have a positive contribution on self-esteem, life-fulfilment, and well-being [54].
According to SPF theory (Social Productivity Function)—needs refer to a restricted set of basic physical and social needs that have to be at least minimally fulfilled for an individual to experience overall well-being [55]. Besides two basic physical needs (comfort and stimulation), the theory defines three basic social needs consist of affection, behavioral confirmation, and social status. Fulfillment of these social needs leads to an increase in well-being and happiness. Affection refers to the sense that others care about us—which can be fulfilled with love, trust, understanding, intimacy, and belonging [56]. Moreover, behavioral confirmation refers to the sense that we do appropriate things as what people do in our social community—which can be fulfilled with approval, appreciation, encouragement, and being part of a group. While social status refers to the sense that we achieve more than others, known for our achievements, skill, or assets—which can be fulfilled with respect, praise, and influence. Hence, social needs fulfilment in this study refers to the consumers’ fulfilment of social needs (including affiliation, admiration, and social status) in Maslow’s hierarchy of basic needs as a result of conspicuous omni-signaling of luxury fashion [33].

2.2.5. Conspicuous Re-Consumption Intention

Repetition is a process of reclamation rather than recurrence as it reopens the past and translates it into new possibilities [57]. In the context of luxury fashion re-purchase intention refers to a consumer’s interest in and the possibility of purchasing the product or brand again and found that consumers’ positive emotions (such as enjoyment and happiness) lead to their post-purchase commitment, indicated by their repurchase intention or brand loyalty [58]. Hedonic or volitional re-consumption is defined as experiences that consumers actively and consciously seek to experience again due to its emotional rich, cognitive, and sensorial responses, the sheer pleasure, and inherent satisfaction they provide [59]. In this study, conspicuous re-consumption intention is defined as consumers’ willingness to repeat consumption of luxury fashion again in the future to signal social status, wealth, prestige, taste, self-image, and identity to their reference groups [59].

2.2.6. The Effect of Luxury Values on Conspicuous Omni-Signaling

Individuals tend to be motivated to consume products that they perceive will signal and symbolize status for them [60]. Hence, an individual’s needs for status may drive conspicuous consumption as it serves as motivation to look prestigious to others. Therefore, luxury values affected stronger desires for self-promotion and conspicuous signaling [42].
Consumption of conspicuous goods such as luxury brands is the most common to use for signaling uniqueness to enhance individual’s image. Social comparison individuals are more likely to believe that others judge them by their consumption, therefore they tend to conform their social groups by consuming product/brand that most of his/group members consume [23]. Hence, needs for uniqueness and social comparison (luxury values) may positively influence conspicuous signaling. Moreover, perception of pride, need for uniqueness, and desire for access to elite social status (luxury values) are antecedents of conspicuous consumption [61]. Therefore, this hypothesis is proposed:
H1: 
Luxury values positively affect conspicuous omni-signaling.

2.2.7. The Effect of Fashion Consciousness on Conspicuous Omni-Signaling

Fashion consciousness is usually used to assess an individual’s beliefs and attitudes towards fashion, which affects his/her decision to consume fashion products. Fashion is classified as a high involvement product. Consumer involvement in fashion indicates their preference in fashion orientation and highlights their interest in physical appearance and how others perceive them [62]. Past studies suggested that highly public fashion conscious consumers tend to be highly concerned about their fashion appearance, highly related to fashion opinion leadership, fashion perceived ability, fashion involvement, and conspicuous consumption [50]. In the context of fashion consumption, therefore fashion consciousness arguably positively affects conspicuous consumption.
Fashion consciousness, as a dimension of lifestyle is related to a desire for up-to-date styles, frequent changes, and pleasurable consumption experience, in which highly fashion-conscious consumers are adventurous and eager to attract attention [63]. A new lifestyle or fashion relies on consumers’ keen insights to follow and embrace new trends. Highly fashion-conscious individuals desire to learn and adopt the latest fashion trend [64], hence determines purchase and consumption behavior. Additionally, past studies also confirmed that fashion consciousness is related to purchase behaviors [65]. Therefore, this hypothesis is proposed:
H2: 
Fashion consciousness positively affects conspicuous omni-signaling.

2.2.8. The Effect of Conspicuous Omni-Signaling on Social Needs Fulfilment

Conspicuous consumption has been inherently associated with motives to fulfil social needs, in which conspicuous consumption as status signals is related to consumers’ actual or desired position in the social hierarchy. Past studies placed pursuit for fulfilling social needs (such as social status, respect, and admiration from others) as the central of consumers’ motive for conspicuous consumption [17]. Indeed, consumers’ satisfaction or needs fulfilment in conspicuous consumption does not merely arise from functional needs, but rather from others’ reactions from the display of the consumption [66].
Social signal and auto signal were found as motivation for conspicuous consumption. Social signal contends that consumers tend to imitate the consumption of a higher class, differentiate from the lower class, and conform with their reference groups which therefore conspicuous consumption can fulfil social needs with sense of belonging, self-esteem, recognition, and respect; while auto signal is related to consumers themselves that conspicuous consumption can provide them with satisfaction, happiness, and a sense of achievement [27]. Moreover, conspicuous consumption results in multiple benefits for the consumer, including social needs fulfilment such as social recognition and compliance from others [67]. Conspicuous consumption also results in social needs fulfilment such as social status [36,68]. However, past studies also argued that conspicuous consumption is negatively correlated with meaning in life hence social needs fulfilment, particularly in collectivist culture [69]. To confirm these conflicting results, these hypotheses are proposed:
H3: 
Conspicuous omni-signaling positively affects social needs fulfilment.

2.2.9. The Effect of Conspicuous Omni-Signaling on Re-Consumption Intention

Studies on decision making and choice model suggested that re-consumption is affected by prior consumption as people tend to enjoy the status quo, which is the tendency for people to maintain their current or previous decisions, or, other words, people tend to repeat it once decided [59]. Thus, previous choices reinforce subsequent ones, hence when consumers faced with options, they tend to stick with status quo alternative such as consuming the same brand or wearing the same clothing. Moreover, recent studies suggested that the association between self and object (such as brand) is built through series of consumptions, hence it triggers consumers to repeat consumptions [70].
Consumption is not just about cognitive in nature, but as an affective, experiential process, and a flow of fantasies and feelings, which can be both positive and negative emotions of pleasure and guilt. Hence, conspicuous consumption provides consumers with a sense of pleasure derived from feelings of achievement, success, and satisfaction from quality and utility of the product, which may lead to brand loyalty and re-consumption, while negative consumer experience may lead to an adverse impact of post-consumption behaviors [71]. Conspicuous consumption has also been proven significantly influences repurchase intention in the context of branded footwear/fashion [72].
However, several other studies argued that the relationship between conspicuous consumption and re-consumption intention is indirect and mediated by consumption related emotions such as pleasure and guilt [58], consumers’ emotion [73], and consumers’ engagement [74]. To confirm these conflicting results, these hypotheses are proposed:
H4: 
Conspicuous omni-signaling positively affects re-consumption intention directly.
H5: 
Conspicuous omni-signaling positively affects re-consumption intention indirectly through social needs fulfilment.

2.2.10. The Effect of Social Needs Fulfilment on Re-Consumption Intention

Recent studies in consumer behaviors showed the relationship between social needs fulfilment and consumers-brand engagement, brand loyalty, repurchase, and repeat consumption. Satisfaction or needs fulfilment was found to positively influences customers’ revisit intention in the context of luxury restaurants [75], green cruise lines [76], and cruise tours [77]. Prior studies in tourism and hospitality also suggested that customers’ satisfaction predicts the level of revisit intention toward cruise tours [78]. Thus, studies confirmed the focal point of consumers needs fulfilment or satisfaction in inducing re-consumption. Hence, this hypothesis is proposed:
H6: 
Social needs fulfilment positively affects re-consumption intention.

2.3. Methods

2.3.1. Sample Design and Data Collection

Indonesian consumers engaged in luxury fashion are likely from the middle and upper classes of the population living in urban areas [79]. To provide insights into the relationship between variables in the research model, an online survey was employed to collect respondents from 8 metropolitan cities (Jakarta, Bodetabek, Bandung, Semarang, Surabaya, Medan, Makassar, and Manado) representing various conspicuous characteristics of Indonesian consumers. A stratified disproportionate sampling method was used, and non-probability purposive sampling was applied in each stratum. The survey leveraged targeted social media groups (particularly WhatsApp) with snowball effects from early-October 2022 to early-December 2022. The first 3 questions in the survey were used to filter validity of respondents representing adult luxury fashion consumers from middle and upper class, i.e., (i) has purchased luxury fashion item at least once in the last 1 year, (ii) age 25 years and above, (iii) monthly disposable income of 10 IDR million (700 USD) and above. A total of 925 persons participated in the survey with 740 completed responses, which resulted in 474 or 51% valid respondents as the sample. In the introduction section prior to the filter questions, a paragraph explaining product types of luxury fashion (such as apparels, handbags, and shoes) and examples of the brands were provided (covering 3 levels of Alleres’ luxury in the hierarchy model).

2.3.2. Sample Characteristics

Table 2 illustrates demographic profile of respondents, with female majority (76%) reflecting female as the main consumers of luxury fashion; however, all genders are represented sufficiently in the sample. A total of 69% respondents were 40 years of age and above and 31% were 25–40 years, explained partially due to filter questions particularly the minimum of 10 IDR million (700 USD) disposable income level. However, all age groups of respondents were represented sufficiently. A total of 67% respondents had monthly disposable income at 10–25 IDR million (700–1750 USD), 24% at 26–50 IDR million (1751–3500 USD), and 9% at above 50 IDR million (3500 USD). All disposable income groups were represented sufficiently.
Table 2 also shows purchase behaviors of respondents. A total of 65% respondents purchased luxury fashion 1 or 2 times, 23% purchased 3–5 times, and 11% purchased more than 5 times in the last 1 year—which may be partially affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. The value of luxury fashion purchased by respondents spreads almost equally, ranging from 1–2.5 IDR million or 70–175 USD (22%), 2.5–5 IDR million or 176–350 USD (27%), 5–10 IDR million or 351–700 USD (24%), and above 10 IDR million or 700 USD (25%). Moreover, handbag is the most frequently purchased luxury fashion product by respondents, followed by shoes, apparel, perfume, and watches—as these products are the most visible to others and represent lifestyle, mode, trend, and reflect personality of consumers (Figure 3).

2.3.3. Measurement of Variables

This study employs existing scales from the previous literature to measure the constructs, in which all the scale items were translated into Indonesian. The scale types of all constructs are ordinal and the Likert scale is used to measure, as it is the most frequently and broadly used to measure consumers’ perception, attitudes, and behaviors in business research [80]. Six points on the Likert scale are used, as Matell and Jacoby suggested, to minimize response uncertain or neutral is to use balanced even-numbered scales [81]. The measurement model of conspicuous omni-signaling construct is formative, while the other constructs are reflective.
Luxury value (LV) measurement is adapted from Han and Kim [26] and Wiedmann et al. [82] employs five indicators such as “luxury fashion is considered as symbol of prestige”. Fashion consciousness (FC) measurement is based on Nam et al. [51] consists of four indicators such as “I usually have one or more outfits that are of the very latest style”. Conspicuous omni-signaling (CS) is formative variable in which the measurement is adopted from Lewis and Moital [83] and Burnasheva and Suh [22] including offline and online dimensions. Offline dimension consists of 3 indicators such as “wearing luxury fashion increased my status and prestige”. Online dimension consists of 3 indicators such as “posting luxury fashion in social media increased my self-esteem”. Social needs fulfilment measurement is based on Taormina and Gao [84] using 5 indicators such as “I am completely satisfied with the prestige I have in the eyes of other people”. Finally, conspicuous re-consumption intention (RI) measurement is adopted from Han and Kim [26] and Kim et al. [85] employs 5 indicators such as “I will purchase additional items from the same brand(s) of luxury fashion in the next 1 year”. Table 3 summarizes measurement items of this study.

2.3.4. Data Analysis

This study employs PLS-SEM technique as it is suitable for mixed reflective and formative measurement model. To analyze the relationships between variables in the model, this study uses WarpPLS 7.0 due to its benefits of being non-linear regression, stable algorithm, and reliable for small and large samples [86].

2.3.5. Descriptive Analysis

Table 4 summarizes descriptive analysis of the variables in the study. Luxury values (LV) and conspicuous re-consumption intention (RI) have the highest means at 3.95 and 3.81, respectively, reflecting high perception of Indonesian consumers on luxury consumption values of fashion products, and high intention to re-consume it. On the other hand, fashion consciousness (FC) has the lowest mean at 3.16 reflecting lower fashion perceived ability and involvement compared to means of the other variables. All standard errors are at acceptable level. Skewness and Kurtosis of all variables are at acceptable level between −2.0 and +2.0 suggesting data normality [87].

3. Results

3.1. Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Table 5 illustrates confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using WarpPLS 7.0 in which PLS regression algorithm was performed to assess reliability, validity, and multicollinearity of the scales. All indicators show loading factors above threshold of 0.50 and significant (p-value ≤ 0.05), suggesting convergence validity [87]. Similarly, the discriminant validity test also shows that all indicators are valid as the factor loading (bold) ≥ cross loadings or correlation between the indicator with the rest of latent variables.
CFA procedure (Table 6) found that all constructs are reliable, valid, and no multicollinearity based on references from Hair and Brunsveld [87], i.e., Cronbach’s alpha above 0.70, CR above 0.70, and AVE above 0.50. Convergence validity test using factor loading and AVE suggests that all the measurements are valid. Reliability test using Cronbach’s Alpha and composite reliability (CR) also suggests that all constructs are reliable as all the scores are above threshold of 0.70. The analysis also suggests that there is no identified multicollinearity as VIF values for all variables are below 5.
Moreover, discriminant validity test (Table 7) using Fornell-Larcker crterion is valid as the square root of the AVE (in the diagonal) is greater than the correlation between the construct and the rest of the constructs in the model. Additionally, discriminant validity test using HTMT ratio also suggests that all variables are valid as all values are <0.90 [86].
Several parameters and indices (Table 8) were used to ensure good fit of this research model. The coefficient of determination (R2) reflects how well the regression model explains observed data [87]. The adjusted R2 of CS at 0.636 means that 63.6% of the variability observed in CS is explained by the regressions (variable LV and FC). Adjusted R2 of SF at 0.340 essentially indicates that 34.0% of SF variance is explained by the variance of CS. Subsequently adjusted R2 of RI at 0.255 indicates that 25.5% of RI variance is explained by the variance of CS and SF. As adjusted R2 of CS, S F, and RI are above 0.2 the research model indicates good fit [87].
The predictive relevance (Q2) in this study is to establish the predictive relevance of the endogenous constructs (CS, SF, RI) and to measure whether the research model has predictive relevance or not, in which >0 is good fit. Q2 score of 0.02–0.15 is considered that the predictive strength of endogenous variable from exogenous variables is weak, 0.15–0.35 is moderate, and >0.35 is strong [87]. Results from this study show that Q2 of CS at 0.638 indicates a strong predictive of CS from LV and FC. Similarly, Q2 of SF and RI at 0.342 and 0.257 respectively, indicate a moderate predictive of SF from CS, and a moderate predictive of RI, from CS and SF. Hence, the Q2 results indicate that the research model has good fit.
Moreover, the model fit and quality indices also suggest that the research model has good fit [86]. APC, ARS, and AAR indices are significant with p < 0.001 indicating that the research model has good fit. The score of AVIF at 1.45 is better than the ideal level of <3.3; the score of GoF at 0.52 is better than the ideal level of >0.36, and the R2 contribution ratio of 1.0 is at the ideal level of 1.0. The SRMR at 0.10 and SMAR at 0.08 are at the acceptable level of 0.1 which suggest the research model has good fit.

3.2. Structural Model and Hypothesis Test

To test the hypothesis, structural equation modeling was employed using WarpPLS 7.0, in which warp2 (U-curve) algorithm was performed to assess the path coefficients (β), and corresponding T-ratio and p-value to determine the path significance, as well as effect size (f2) to determine the individual construct power and impact on endogenous latent variable. By convention, effect size of 0.02, 0.15, and 0.35 are considered as weak effect, moderate effect, and strong effect, respectively,—while acceptable threshold of T-ratio and p-value used in this study are ≥1.96 and ≤0.05, respectively [87]. Figure 4 illustrates the structural model results including path coefficients and p-values. The significance of the path coefficient is shown in p < 0.001 (***), p < 0.01 (**), and p < 0.05 (*).
The results of all hypothesis tests are summarized in Table 9. The analysis indicates that both luxury values and fashion consciousness positively and significantly affect conspicuous omni-signaling (β = 0.414; p < 0.001 ***, T = 9.489, f2 = 0.272; and β = 0.515, p < 0.001 ***, T = 11.956, f2 = 0.366), providing supports for both H1 and H2, respectively. Moreover, conspicuous omni-signaling found positively and significantly affects social needs fulfilment (β = 0.584; p < 0.001 ***, T = 13.679, f2 = 0.341), providing supports for H3.
The analysis also suggests that conspicuous omni-signaling positively and significantly affects conspicuous re-consumption intention directly (β = 0.340, p < 0.001 ***, T = 7.718, f2 = 0.161) and indirectly through social needs fulfilment (β = 0.131, p < 0.001 ***, T = 4.094, f2 = 0.062), providing supports for H4 and H5, respectively. Subsequently, the findings show that social needs fulfilment positively and significantly affects conspicuous re-consumption intention (β = 0.225, p < 0.001 ***, T = 5.039, f2 = 0.096), providing supports for H6.

4. Conclusions

4.1. Discussion and Theoretical Contribution

The findings of this study extend the concept of conspicuous offline-signaling and conspicuous online-signaling into conspicuous omni-signaling and conspicuous omni-consumption in general. Luxury values and fashion consciousness were both empirically shown as antecedents to conspicuous omni-signaling. While social needs fulfilment and conspicuous re-consumption were shown as consequences of conspicuous omni-signaling. Moreover, insights into antecedents and consequences of conspicuous omni-signaling were also revealed.
First, this study identified that luxury values positively affect conspicuous omni-signaling. The existing literature suggested that luxury values (such as superior quality, pleasure, symbol of self-identity, social status, and prestige) motivate conspicuous consumption in both offline conspicuous consumption [60,61,69,88,89] and online conspicuous consumption [22,23,42]. The results validate the existing literature and extend it into conspicuous omni-signaling. Veblen’s conspicuous consumption theory suggests that people consume luxury goods is mainly motivated to display wealth, status, and prestige rather than the real needs of individuals. The finding of this study supports this theory in conspicuous omni-consumption. Hence, high perception in luxury values motivates consumers to form favorable attitudes toward conspicuous omni-signaling as a means for showing off their individual and social image to others.
Second, this study found that fashion consciousness positively affects conspicuous omni-signaling. Past studies found that fashion consciousness influences conspicuous consumption [50,64,65]. The finding strengthens validity of past studies and extends it into conspicuous omni-signaling. Fashion adoption theory suggests that interests in fashion styles and self-appearance influence consumers’ perception on the purpose of consuming a new fashion style, thus conspicuous consumption [90]. The findings support this theory in conspicuous omni-signaling. Hence, the higher the fashion consciousness, the higher the interest in fashion style and self-appearance resulting higher motivation to adopt, consume, and conspicuously omni-signal a new luxury fashion.
Third, this study identified conspicuous omni-signaling positively affects social needs fulfilment. The existing literature showed that conspicuous consumption has been inherently associated with motivation to fulfil social needs, and pursuit for fulfilling social needs as the central of consumers’ motivation for conspicuous consumption [17]. The finding confirms conflicting results from past studies that conspicuous consumption positively influences social needs fulfilment [36,67,68] and extends it into conspicuous omni-signaling, but in contrast to Zhu et al. [69] who suggested conspicuous consumption as negatively correlated with social needs fulfilment. Zhu’s finding may be due to specific collectivist culture in China.
Maslow’s human motivation theory argues that individuals consume luxury fashion is essentially driven by deficiency in social needs. Positive experiences from consuming luxury fashion and positive response from others positively affect fulfilment of the individuals’ social needs. The findings of this study support this theory in conspicuous omni-consumption as conspicuous omni-signaling found positively affects social needs fulfilment. Similarly, conspicuous consumption theory argues that the main purpose of conspicuous consumption is on the social satisfaction from the consumption when showing off to signal personal and social image to others. The findings also support this theory in conspicuous omni-signaling. Hence, positive experiences arise from conspicuous omni-signaling induces fulfilment of social needs.
Fourth, this study found conspicuous omni-signaling positively affects conspicuous re-consumption intention directly and indirectly through social needs fulfilment in one a research model. Past studies suggested that re-consumption is affected by prior consumption as consumers enjoy status quo [59]. The existing literature in conspicuous offline and online consumption showed the direct impact [70,71,72] and the indirect impact [50,73,74] of conspicuous consumption on re-consumption intention. The finding extends results of past studies into conspicuous omni-signaling and enhances analysis of the direct and indirect impact of conspicuous omni-signaling on re-consumption in one research model. Conspicuous consumption theory suggests that consumers’ efforts to create or maintain individual and social image to others are conducted repeatedly and consistently [4]. Positive experiences from conspicuous consumption induce consumers to repeat the consumption. The findings extend this theory in conspicuous omni-signaling.
Fifth, this study identified that social need fulfilment positively affects conspicuous re-consumption intention. The existing literature showed that social needs fulfilment induces re-consumption intention [75,76,77,78]. The results validate the existing literature and extends it into conspicuous omni-signaling. Using Maslow’s human motivation theory to analyze, consumption is motivated by discrepancy in needs satisfaction due to (fully or partially) unmet needs, hence unfulfilled social needs may induce re-consumption. The findings extend this theory in conspicuous omni-signaling.

4.2. Managerial Contribution

Several important insights and managerial implications arise from this study which may be beneficial for luxury fashion practitioners and luxury goods marketers in general. First, this study found that consumers do actively adopt omni-channels (offline and social media) hybridlike to conspicuously signal their luxury fashion consumption. Revisiting marketing strategy to align with and leverage this new phenomenon could be beneficial to stay closed and relevant with target consumers.
Second, the mean of LV1 (excellent quality and aesthetics) at 4.3 is higher than the personal and social measures (LV2–5). This indicates that while symbolic values or brand image is certainly the essence of luxury fashion; however, superior quality and aesthetic are fundamental defaults that consumers expect luxury fashion must not be compromised. Additionally, this also confirms that luxury fashion seems to be closely related to trend in mode or style. Therefore, nurturing a classic design to keep a timeless nature, be in the trend, innovating in the new trend, or setting the trend—are critical for luxury fashion to keep relevant to the target consumers.
Third, luxury values (such as excellent quality, superior aesthetic, pleasure, self-reward, prestige, self-esteem, and social status) motivate conspicuous omni-signaling. Therefore, building brand image of luxury fashion associated with superior quality, self-esteem, social status, and prestige are essential to keep relevant to target consumers. Hedonic, pleasure or self-reward (LV2) found to be a strong motivation for people to conspicuously signaling luxury fashions offline and online. Hence, luxury fashion marketers to build brand image to be worth and priceless for self-reward and pleasure.
Fourth, fashion consciousness positively affects conspicuous omni-signaling. The higher the fashion consciousness, the higher the motivation to engage in conspicuous omni-signaling. Hence, building fashion consciousness level of targeted consumers is highly beneficial to induce luxury fashion consumption, which may be done through education engagement offline and online in social media. The role of fashion influencers may be considered to both build brand awareness and image as well as to build fashion consciousness.
Fifth, positive experiences from luxury fashion omni-signaling induce re-consumption and contribute to fulfilment of social needs which in turn also induces re-consumption. Indeed, experiences have been always intrinsic to luxury goods, in which this intangible characteristic is fundamental to creating luxury values and to induce consumption. Therefore, creating engaging experiences for target consumers through conspicuous omni-signaling with the brand is fundamentally critical.

4.3. Limitation and Future Research Direction

While this study provides some new insights, there are limitations to this study. First, the focus of this study was conspicuous omni-signaling in relation to its antecedents and its consequences. However, what antecedents affect more on conspicuous offline signaling compared to conspicuous online signaling was not investigated in this study. Similarly, how conspicuous offline compared to online signaling affects social needs fulfilment and re-consumption was not examined. Subsequently, how conspicuous online signaling affects conspicuous offline signaling (or vice versa) was not investigated. Future research to explore this conspicuous offline compared to online signaling, and to explore how offline and online signaling interact is therefore suggested.
Motivation for consumers to engage in conspicuous consumption may include internal factors, external factors, and interaction between internal and external. This study focuses on investigating internal factors as the antecedents to conspicuous omni-signaling, including perception on luxury values and fashion consciousness. External stimuli were not investigated as antecedents to conspicuous omni-signaling in this study. Future research is suggested to include external factors (such as brand power, digital adoption) and interaction between internal and external factor (such as self-brand congruence) as antecedents of conspicuous omni-signaling in the research model.
Second, the online dimension of conspicuous omni-signaling in this study focuses on conspicuous signaling in social media, even though the scope of social media in this digital era is wider and extensive. The emerging phenomenon of virtual meetings using collaborative apps (such as MS-Teams and Zoom) was not investigated in this study. Future research is encouraged to extend conspicuous omni-signaling to include this virtue signaling dimension.
Third, the scope of luxury fashion in this study covers all three levels of luxury including inaccessible luxury, masstige (affordable luxury), and accessible luxury (mass market). The existing literature showed that these luxury classes have different characteristics, while consumer behaviors in each class of luxury fashion are also different. Hence, future research is suggested to evaluate the suitable research model for conspicuous omni-signaling in each luxury class (with masstige as the priority as an emerging phenomenon) and to examine the respective consumer behaviors.
Fourth, the sampling procedure of this study was carried out conveniently by leveraging social media contacts and networks of the authors and then gaining snowball effects which may risks of some representative sample. However, the potential bias was minimized as respondents were recruited from eight metropolitan cities across Indonesia with each city has more than 35 respondents. Geographically the cities are widely spread, i.e., 2000 km to west and 3350 to east from Jakarta where the authors live, resulting less possibilities of homogeneity of respondents related to profile of the authors. This is confirmed with profile of respondents in Table 2 reflecting heterogeny profiles of the respondents such as in ages, disposable income levels, and luxury fashion purchase behaviors.

Author Contributions

The research conceptualization, methodology, and results analysis were performed by A.H., I.G.S., A.E.M. and A.F. The research software, validation, data analysis, investigation, resources, data curation, writing original, editing, and visualization were performed by A.H. The research was under review and supervision of I.G.S., A.E.M. and A.F. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study did not require ethical approval.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Data supporting reported results are available upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Perez-Truglia, R. A test of the conspicuous-consumption model using subjective well-being data. J. Socio Econ. 2013, 45, 146–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Eckhardt, G.M.; Belk, R.W.; Wilson, J.A.J. The rise of inconspicuous consumption. J. Mark. Manag. 2015, 31, 807–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Zahirovic-Herbert, V.; Chatterjee, S. What is Conspicuous Consumption? CFI—Corporate Finance Institute: Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2020; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  4. Veblen, T.B. The Theory of Leisure Class. J. Political Econ. 1899, 7, 425–455. [Google Scholar]
  5. Simmel, G. Fashion. Am. J. Sociol. 1957, 62, 541–558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Statista; Hirschmann, R. Indonesia: Contribution to GDP by Industry 2019. 2020. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1019099/indonesia-gdp-contribution-by-industry/ (accessed on 28 January 2022).
  7. Kapferer, J.N.; Bastien, V. The specificity of luxury management: Turning marketing upside down. J. Brand Manag. 2009, 16, 311–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Kilsheimer Eastman, J.; Iyer, R.; Babin, B. Luxury not for the masses: Measuring inconspicuous luxury motivations. J. Bus. Res. 2022, 145, 509–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Alleres, D. Luxe-Strategies Marketing; Economica: Paris, France, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  10. Bain & Company. Global Personal Luxury Goods Market Grew 0–1% in Q1 2021: Bain. Fibre2Fashion, 18 May 2021. [Google Scholar]
  11. BCG. Turn the Tide: Unlock the New Consumer Path to Purchase; BCG: Boston, MA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  12. Statista. Fashion eCommerce Report 2021; Statista Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  13. Broz, M. Number of Photos (2022): Statistics, Facts, & Forecasts. Available online: https://photutorial.com/photos-statistics/ (accessed on 23 April 2022).
  14. APJJI. “Profil Internet Indonesia 2022”, Asosiasi Penyelenggara Jasa Internet Indonesia, No. June. 2022. Available online: http://apjii.or.id/v2/upload/Laporan/Profil Internet Indonesia 2012 %28INDONESIA%29.pdf (accessed on 24 August 2022).
  15. Digital in Indonesia: All the Statistics You Need in 2021. Available online: https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2021-indonesia (accessed on 10 October 2021).
  16. Sopadjieva, E.; Dholakia, U.M.; Benjamin, B. A Study of 46,000 Shoppers Shows That Omnichannel Retailing Works. Harvard Business Review, 3 January 2017; 7–10. [Google Scholar]
  17. Dubois, D. Fulfilling social needs through luxury consumption. In Research Handbook on Luxury Branding; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2020; pp. 75–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Antal, G. COVID-19′s Impact on Consumer Behavior_ What Now_—ConvertSquad, 24 June 2021. Available online: https://convertsquad.com/blog/covid-19s-impact-on-consumer-behavior-what-now/ (accessed on 23 March 2022).
  19. Sheth, J. Impact of Covid-19 on consumer behavior: Will the old habits return or die? J. Bus. Res. 2020, 117, 280–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ajitha, S.; Sivakumar, V.J. Understanding the effect of personal and social value on attitude and usage behavior of luxury cosmetic brands. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2017, 39, 103–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Jain, S. Role of conspicuous value in luxury purchase intention. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2021, 39, 169–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Burnasheva, R.; Suh, Y.G. The influence of social media usage, self-image congruity and self-esteem on conspicuous online consumption among millennials. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logist. 2020, 33, 1255–1269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Wallace, E.; Buil, I.; Catalán, S. Facebook and luxury fashion brands: Self-congruent posts and purchase intentions. J. Fash. Mark. Manag. 2020, 24, 571–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Satyavani, B.; Chalam, P.G. V Online Impulse Buying Behaviour—A Suggested Approach. J. Bus. Manag. 2018, 20, 77–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Hsu, L.C.; Wang, C.H. Clarifying the Effect of Intellectual Capital on Performance: The Mediating Role of Dynamic Capability. Br. J. Manag. 2012, 23, 179–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Han, S.L.; Kim, K. Role of consumption values in the luxury brand experience: Moderating effects of category and the generation gap. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2020, 57, 102249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Trigg, A.B. Veblen, Bourdieu, and conspicuous consumption. J. Econ. Issues 2001, 35, 99–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Fitzmaurice, C.J. Conspicuous consumption and distinction, history of. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2015; Volume 4, ISBN 9780080970875. [Google Scholar]
  29. Edgell, S. Veblen and Post-Veblen Studies of Conspicuous Consumption: Social Stratification and Fashion. Int. Rev. Sociol. 1992, 3, 205–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Zahavi, A.; Zahavi, A. The Handicap Principle, A Missing Piece of Darwin’s Puzzle Amotz Zahavi Avishag Zahavi. Auk 1998, 115, 544–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Hung, K. Consumption of luxury hotel experience in contemporary China: Causality model for conspicuous consumption. Tour. Rev. Int. 2018, 22, 171–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Montag, C.; Sindermann, C.; Lester, D.; Davis, K.L. Linking individual differences in satisfaction with each of Maslow’s needs to the Big Five personality traits and Panksepp’s primary emotional systems. Heliyon 2020, 6, e04325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Schütte, H.; Ciarlante, D. An Alternative Consumer Behaviour Theory for Asia. In Consumer Behaviour in Asia; Palgrave Macmillan: London, UK, 1998; pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Huang, W. The way to create symbolic value of luxury good—Take the Chanel No.5 perfume for a case. In Proceedings of the 2011 4th International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering, ICIII 2011, Shenzhen, China, 26–27 November 2011; Volume 2, pp. 142–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Shukla, P.; Rosendo-Rios, V.; Trott, S.; Lyu, J.; Khalifa, D. Managing the Challenge of Luxury Democratization: A Multicountry Analysis. J. Int. Mark. 2022, 30, 44–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Ho, F.N.; Wong, J.; Brodowsky, G. Does masstige offer the prestige of luxury without the social costs? Status and warmth perceptions from masstige and luxury signals. J. Bus. Res. 2023, 155, 113382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Panchal, S.; Gill, T. When size does matter: Dominance versus prestige based status signaling. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 120, 539–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Shan, J.; Jiang, L.; Cui, A.P. A double-edged sword: How the dual characteristics of face motivate and prevent counterfeit luxury consumption. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 134, 59–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Kassim, N.; Bogari, N.; Salamah, N.; Zain, M. The Relationships between Collective Oriented Values and Materialism, Product Status Signaling and Product Satisfaction: A Two-City Study. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logist. 2016, 28, 807–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Wallace, E.; Buil, I.; de Chernatony, L. Consuming Good’ on Social Media: What Can Conspicuous Virtue Signalling on Facebook Tell Us About Prosocial and Unethical Intentions? J. Bus. Ethics 2020, 162, 577–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Wallace, E.; Buil, I. Seeking Likes while saving the planet: Extending the Theory of Planned Behaviour to investigate the relationship between climate-related Instagram posts and Pro-Environmental Behaviours. In Proceedings of the 50th Annual EMAC Conference, Madrid, Spain, 25–28 May 2021. [Google Scholar]
  42. Taylor, D.G.; Strutton, D. Does Facebook usage lead to conspicuous consumption? The role of envy, narcissism and self-promotion. J. Res. Interact. Mark. 2016, 10, 231–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Chen, M.; Zhang, J.; Xie, Z.; Niu, J. Online low-key conspicuous behavior of fashion luxury goods: The antecedents and its impact on consumer happiness. J. Consum. Behav. 2021, 20, 148–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Yu, H.; Vul, E. Status Signalling in the Market for Consumer Goods. psyarXiv 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Griskevicius, V.; Tybur, J.M.; Sundie, J.M.; Cialdini, R.B.; Miller, G.F.; Kenrick, D.T. Blatant Benevolence and Conspicuous Consumption: When Romantic Motives Elicit Strategic Costly Signals. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 2007, 93, 85–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Wiedmann, K.P.; Hennigs, N.; Siebels, A. Value-based segmentation of luxury consumption behavior. Psychol. Mark. 2009, 26, 625–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Zhang, L.; Zhao, H. Personal value vs. luxury value: What are Chinese luxury consumers shopping for when buying luxury fashion goods? J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2019, 51, 62–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Choo, H.J.; Moon, H.; Kim, H.; Yoon, N. Luxury customer value. J. Fash. Mark. Manag. 2012, 16, 81–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Talaat, R.M. Fashion consciousness, materialism and fashion clothing purchase involvement of young fashion consumers in Egypt: The mediation role of materialism. J. Humanit. Appl. Soc. Sci. 2020, 4, 132–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Casidy, R.; Nuryama, A.N.; Hati, S.R.H. Linking fashion consciousness with Gen Y attitude towards prestige brands. Asia Pacfic J. Mark. Logist. 2015, 27, 406–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Nam, J.; Hamlin, R.; Gam, H.J.; Kang, J.H.; Kim, J.; Kumphai, P.; Starr, C.; Richards, L. The fashion-conscious behaviours of mature female consumers. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2007, 31, 102–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Koksal, M.H. Psychological and behavioural drivers of male fashion leadership. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logist. 2014, 26, 430–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Maslow, A.H. A theory of human motivation. Psychol. Rev. 1943, 50, 370–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Bruggencate Ten, T.; Luijkx, K.G.; Sturm, J. Social needs of older people: A systematic literature review. Ageing Soc. 2018, 38, 1745–1770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Steverink, N.; Lindenberg, S. Which social needs are important for subjective well-being? What happens to them with aging? Psychol. Aging 2006, 21, 281–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Buijs, V.L.; Jeronimus, B.F.; Lodder, G.M.A.; Steverink, N.; de Jonge, P. Social Needs and Happiness: A Life Course Perspective. J. Happiness Stud. 2021, 22, 1953–1978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Heidegger, M. Being and Time. Available online: https://books.google.co.id/books?hl=id&lr=&id=2P-Lc872b1UC&oi=fnd&pg=PR3&dq=being+and+time+heidegger&ots=3x5qMZXNUk&sig=3thxBtBNox6Xmdzg8Kqrj7JG6to&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=being and time heidegger&f=false (accessed on 5 February 2022).
  58. Ki, C.; Lee, K.; Kim, Y.K. Pleasure and guilt: How do they interplay in luxury consumption? Eur. J. Mark. 2017, 51, 722–747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Russell, C.A.; Levy, S.J. The temporal and focal dynamics of volitional reconsumption: A phenomenological investigation of repeated hedonic experiences. J. Consum. Res. 2012, 39, 341–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Johnson, C.M.; Tariq, A.; Baker, T.L. From Gucci to Green Bags: Conspicuous Consumption as a Signal for Pro-Social Behavior. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 2018, 26, 339–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Kumar, B.; Bagozzi, R.P.; Manrai, A.K.; Manrai, L.A. Conspicuous consumption: A meta-analytic review of its antecedents, consequences, and moderators. J. Retail. 2021, 98, 471–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Hasbullah, N.N.; Sulaiman, Z.; Mas’od, A.; Ahmad Sugiran, H.S. Drivers of Sustainable Apparel Purchase Intention: An Empirical Study of Malaysian Millennial Consumers. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Walsh, G.; Mitchell, V.-W.; Hennig-Thurau, T. German Consumer Decision-Making Styles. J. Consum. Aff. 2021, 35, 73–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Summers, J.O. The Identity of Women’s Clothing Fashion Opinion Leaders. J. Mark. Res. 1970, 7, 178–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Adeola, O.; Moradeyo, A.A.; Muogboh, O.; Adisa, I. Consumer values, online purchase behaviour and the fashion industry: An emerging market context. PSU Res. Rev. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Amaldoss, W.; Jain, S. Pricing of conspicuous goods: A competitive analysis of social effects. J. Mark. Res. 2005, 42, 30–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Dubois, D.; Jung, S.J.; Ordabayeva, N. The psychology of luxury consumption. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 2021, 39, 82–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Sahin, O.; Nasir, S. The effects of status consumption and conspicuous consumption on perceived symbolic status. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 2022, 30, 68–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Zhu, C.; Su, R.; Zhang, X.; Liu, Y. Relation between narcissism and meaning in life: The role of conspicuous consumption. Heliyon 2021, 7, e07885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. O’Cass, A.; McEwen, H. Exploring consumer status and conspicuous consumption. J. Consum. Behav. 2004, 4, 25–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Hollbrook, M.B.; Hirschman, E.C. Experiential aspects of consumption, holbrook.pdf. J. Consum. Res. 1982, 9, 132–140. [Google Scholar]
  72. Kiranmayi, G.R. The Role of Customer’s Status Consumption and Satisfaction on Repurchase Intention. Int. J. Bus. Manag. Res. 2019, 9, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Peng, N.; Chen, A. Examining consumers’ luxury hotel stay repurchase intentions-incorporating a luxury hotel brand attachment variable into a luxury consumption value model. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2019, 31, 1348–1366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  74. Teng, H.Y. Can film tourism experience enhance tourist behavioural intentions? The role of tourist engagement. Current Issues Tour. 2021, 24–18, 2588–2601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Cakici, A.C.; Akgunduz, Y.; Yildirim, O. The impact of perceived price justice and satisfaction on loyalty: The mediating effect of revisit intention. Tour. Rev. 2019, 74, 443–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Han, H.; Eom, T.; Chung, H.; Lee, S.; Ryu, H.B.; Kim, W. Passenger repurchase behaviours in the green cruise line context: Exploring the role of quality, image, and physical environment. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  77. Ahn, J.; Back, K.-J. Cruise brand experience: Functional and wellness value creation in tourism business. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2019, 31, 2205–2223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Cronin, J.J.; Brady, M.K.; Hult, G.T.M. Assessing the effects of quality, value, and customer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environments. J. Retail. 2000, 76, 193–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. The World Bank. Aspiring Indonesia—Expanding the Middle Class; The World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Sekaran, U.; Bougie, R. Research Methods for Business; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  81. Matell, M.S.; Jacoby, J. Is there an optimal number of alternatives for Likert-scale items? Effects of testing time and scale properties. J. Appl. Psychol. 1972, 56, 506–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  82. Wiedmann, K.-P.; Hennigs, N.; Siebels, A. Measuring Consumers’ Luxury Value Perception: A Cross-Cultural Framework; Academy of Marketing Science Review; Academy of Marketing Science: Ruston, LA, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  83. Lewis, A.; Moital, M. Young professionals’ conspicuous consumption of clothing. J. Fash. Mark. Manag. 2016, 20, 138–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Taormina, R.J.; Gao, J.H. Maslow and the motivation hierarchy: Measuring satisfaction of the needs. Am. J. Psychol. 2013, 126, 155–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  85. Kim, D.J.; Ferrin, D.L.; Rao, H.R. A trust-based consumer decision-making model in electronic commerce: The role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents. Decis. Support Syst. 2008, 44, 544–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Kock, N. WarpPLS User Manual: Version 7.0; ScriptWarp Systems: Laredo, TX, USA, 2021; pp. 1–122. [Google Scholar]
  87. Hair, J.F.; Brunsveld, N. Essentials of Business Research Methods; Routledge: Milton Park, UK, 2019; ISBN 9780429511950. [Google Scholar]
  88. Shahid, S.; Paul, J. Intrinsic motivation of luxury consumers in an emerging market. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2021, 61, 102531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Jebarajakirthy, C.; Das, M. Uniqueness and luxury: A moderated mediation approach. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2021, 60, 102477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Sproles, G.B. Fashion Theory: A Conceptual Framework. Adv. Consum. Res. 1974, 1, 463–472. [Google Scholar]
Sustainability 15 09015 g001 550
Figure 1. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs [33].
Figure 1. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs [33].
Sustainability 15 09015 g001
Sustainability 15 09015 g002 550
Figure 2. Conceptual Framework.
Figure 2. Conceptual Framework.
Sustainability 15 09015 g002
Sustainability 15 09015 g003 550
Figure 3. Most Frequently Purchased Luxury Fashion.
Figure 3. Most Frequently Purchased Luxury Fashion.
Sustainability 15 09015 g003
Sustainability 15 09015 g004 550
Figure 4. Estimates Structure Model.
Figure 4. Estimates Structure Model.
Sustainability 15 09015 g004
Table
Table 1. Comparison of Past Studies and This Study.
Table 1. Comparison of Past Studies and This Study.
StudiesOnline/
Offline		Independent VariableMediating VariableDependent Variable
[35]OfflineConspicuous SignalingPositive AffectLuxury Purchase Intention
[36]OfflineLuxury SignalingImpression Management.
Envy		Status
[37]OfflineStatus SignalingHubristic PrideProduct Preference
[38]OfflineBrand social PowerSignaling EffectivenessLuxury brand purchase intention
[39]OfflineMaterialism (luxury values)Status SignalingProduct Satisfaction
[40]OnlineNFU, ATSC (luxury values)Conspicuous Virtue SignalingPurchase Intention
[41]OnlineLike Seeking Behaviors.
Subjective norms		Conspicuous Virtue SignalingPro-environmental behaviors
[42]OnlineEnvy, Narcissism (luxury values)Desire for Self-promotionConspicuous Online Consumption
[43]OnlineSelf-presentation, Avoidance of negative commentsOnline LK Conspicuous BehaviorsImage, interpersonal relationship, Happiness
This StudyOmni
(Offline + Online)		Fashion Consciousness, Luxury ValuesConspicuous Omni-signaling,
Social Needs Fulfilment		Conspicuous Re-consumption Intention
Table
Table 2. Profile of Respondents.
Table 2. Profile of Respondents.
SubgroupFreq%
Gender     Female36276
          Male11224
Age        25–29 years4710
          30–399921
          40–4914631
          ≥5018238
Disp. Income   700–175031567
(~USD)     1751–350011524
          >3500449
Purchase Freq.  1–2x31065
          3–5x
          >5s		110
54		23
11
Purchase Value  <7092
(~USD)     71–17510622
          176–35013027
          351–70011224
          >70011725
Table
Table 3. Measurement Items.
Table 3. Measurement Items.
VariableDimensionCodeItemReferences
Luxury Values (LV) LV1Luxury fashion offers excellent quality and aesthetics[24,46]
LV2Luxury fashion as self-gift to reward myself for important events or achievements.
LV3Luxury fashion helps me to express myself
LV4Luxury fashion is considered as symbol of prestige
LV5Luxury fashion is considered as reflective of social status
Fashion Consciousness (FC) FC1I usually have one or more outfits that are of the very latest style[51]
FC2When I must choose between the two, i.e., dress for fashion or dress for comfort—I usually choose dress for fashion, not dress for comfort
FC3An important part of my life and activities is dressing smartly
FC4It is important to me that my clothes be of the latest style
Conspicuous Omni-signaling (CS)OfflineCS1Wearing luxury fashion increased my status and prestige[20,81]
CS2Attending party with luxury fashion increased my status and prestige
CS3Attending social/community gathering with luxury fashion increased my status and prestige
OnlineCS4Posting luxury fashion on social media increased my self-esteem
CS5Pressing “like” and writing “comment” about luxury fashion in social media increased my self-esteem
CS6I follow social media account of fashion influencer to increase my self-esteem
Social Needs Fulfilment (SF) SF1I am completely satisfied with how much I am welcomed in my community[84]
SF2I am completely satisfied with the feeling of togetherness I have with my friends
SF3I am completely satisfied with the prestige I have in the eyes of other people
SF4I am completely satisfied with the social status I have in the eyes of other people
SF5I am completely satisfied with the high esteem that other people have for me
Conspicuous Re-consumption Intention (RI) RI1I am likely to repurchase the same brand(s) of luxury fashion in the next one year[85,26]
RI2I will purchase additional items from the same brand(s) of luxury fashion in the next 1 year
RI3I will continue to use this brand
RI4I will convey positive opinions about experiences with this brand
RI5I am willing to recommend this brand to others
Table
Table 4. Means, Standard Deviation, Skewness, and Kurtosis.
Table 4. Means, Standard Deviation, Skewness, and Kurtosis.
VariableNMeanMinMaxSESDSkewnessKurtosis
LV4743.951.45.00.030.60−0.611.40
FC4743.161.05.00.040.80−0.55−0.16
CS4743.211.05.00.040.88−0.45−0.23
SF4743.651.05.00.040.79−1.261.90
RI4743.811.65.00.020.54−0.671.85
Table
Table 5. CFA: Factor Loading and Significance of Indicators.
Table 5. CFA: Factor Loading and Significance of Indicators.
VariableDimensionItemLVFCCSSFRIp ValueConvergenceDiscriminant
Luxury Values (LV) LV10.5760.112−0.3990.0410.084<0.001ValidValid
LV20.5520.241−0.614−0.130.032<0.001ValidValid
LV30.7760.158−0.107−0.0080.011<0.001ValidValid
LV40.842−0.2420.4410.021−0.001<0.001ValidValid
LV50.841−0.1390.3340.043−0.087<0.001ValidValid
Fashion Consciousness (FC) FC10.0990.743−0.163−0.1130.245<0.001ValidValid
FC2−0.2020.8010.234−0.047−0.095<0.001ValidValid
FC30.1340.754−0.1440.141−0.109<0.001ValidValid
FC4−0.0140.8770.0480.017−0.027<0.001ValidValid
Conspicuous Omni-signaling (CS)OfflineCS10.0170.0340.936−0.015−0.024<0.001ValidValid
CS2−0.0450.0060.9470.033−0.005<0.001ValidValid
CS30.028−0.0400.948−0.0180.029<0.001ValidValid
OnlineCS40.027−0.1790.8930.045−0.032<0.001ValidValid
CS5−0.0650.0270.936−0.033−0.006<0.001ValidValid
CS60.0400.1490.901−0.0100.038<0.001ValidValid
Social Needs Fulfilment (SF) SF10.0510.059−0.2310.8570.082<0.001ValidValid
SF2−0.10.058−0.2160.8320.003<0.001ValidValid
SF30.044−0.1220.2770.8430.005<0.001ValidValid
SF40.06−0.0760.1730.896−0.049<0.001ValidValid
SF5−0.060.085−0.0120.859−0.039<0.001ValidValid
Re-consumption Intention (RI) RI10.128−0.04−0.166−0.1180.771<0.001ValidValid
RI20.240.135−0.422−0.0980.745<0.001ValidValid
RI30.084−0.025−0.1360.0110.703<0.001ValidValid
RI4−0.268−0.0580.4750.10.644<0.001ValidValid
RI5−0.248−0.0220.3510.140.659<0.001ValidValid
Table
Table 6. CFA: Validity, Reliability, and Multicollinearity of Variables.
Table 6. CFA: Validity, Reliability, and Multicollinearity of Variables.
VariableDimensionAVE (≥0.50)ValidityC. Alpha (≥0.70)CR (≥0.70)ReliabilityVIF (≤5)Multicollinearity
LV 0.53Valid0.770.85Reliable1.80No
FC 0.63Valid0.810.87Reliable2.23No
CS 0.83Valid0.80.91Reliable2.95No
Offline0.89Valid0.940.96Reliable2.76No
Online0.83Valid0.900.94Reliable2.64No
SF 0.74Valid0.910.93Reliable1.63No
RI 0.50Valid0.750.83Reliable1.41No
Table
Table 7. CFA: Discriminant Validity of Variables.
Table 7. CFA: Discriminant Validity of Variables.
Fornell-Larcker CriterionHTMT Ratio
LVFCCSSFRI LVFCCSFSRI
LV0.73 LV
FC0.470.80 FC0.59
CS0.660.710.91 CS0.810.88
SF0.450.530.580.86 FS0.520.620.68
RI0.370.500.470.400.71RI0.480.650.610.49
Table
Table 8. CFA: Good of Fit.
Table 8. CFA: Good of Fit.
Endogen VariableR2 (≥0.2)Adj. R2 (≥0.2)Q2 (>0)Good Fit
CS0.6380.6360.638Strong
SF0.3410.3400.342Moderate
RI0.2580.2550.257Moderate
IndicesScoreAcceptableValueNotes
Average path coefficient (APC)0.415p < 0.05p < 0.001Good Fit
Average R squared (ARS)0.412p < 0.05p < 0.001Good Fit
Average adjusted R squared (AARS)0.410p < 0.05p < 0.01Good Fit
Average block FIV (AVIF)ideal ≤ 3.31.45Good Fit
Average full collinearity VIF (AFVIF)ideal ≤ 3.42.00Good Fit
Tenenhaus GoF (GoF)ideal ≥ 0.360.52Good Fit
Sympson’s paradox ratio (SPR)Acceptable 0.7– 1.01.00Good Fit
R-squared contribution ratio (RSCR)\Acceptable 0.9–11.00Good Fit
Statistical suppression ratio (SSR)Acceptable ≥ 0.701.00Good Fit
Non-linear bivariate causality direction ratio (NLBCDR)Acceptable ≥ 0.701.00Good Fit
Standardized root mean squared residual (SRMR)Acceptable ≤ 0.10.10Good Fit
Standardized mean absolute residual (SMAR)Acceptable ≤ 0.10.08Good Fit
Standardized threshold difference count ration (STDCR)Acceptable ≥ 0.7; Ideal = 10.94Good Fit
Table
Table 9. Hypothesis Test Results.
Table 9. Hypothesis Test Results.
HPathβp Value (≤0.05)Standard Error (≥0.02)T-Ratio (≥1.96)f2 (≥0.02)SupportedPast Studies
(Effect)		This Study
(Effect)
H1LV→CS0.414<0.001 ***0.0449.4890.272YesPositivePositive
H2FC→CS0.515<0.001 ***0.04311.9460.366YesPositivePositive
H3CS→SF0.584<0.001 ***0.04313.6790.341YesConflicting: positive, negativePositive
H4CS→RI0.340<0.001 ***0.0447.7180.161YesPositivePositive (direct)
H5CS→SF→RI0.131<0.001 ***0.0324.0940.062YesPositivePositive (indirect)
H6SF→RI0.225<0.001 ***0.0455.0390.096YesPositivePositive
Note: *** p ≤ 0.001.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Hamdani, A.; So, I.G.; Maulana, A.E.; Furinto, A. How Can Conspicuous Omni-Signaling Fulfil Social Needs and Induce Re-Consumption? Sustainability 2023, 15, 9015. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15119015

AMA Style

Hamdani A, So IG, Maulana AE, Furinto A. How Can Conspicuous Omni-Signaling Fulfil Social Needs and Induce Re-Consumption? Sustainability. 2023; 15(11):9015. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15119015

Chicago/Turabian Style

Hamdani, Ahmad, Idris Gautama So, Amalia E. Maulana, and Asnan Furinto. 2023. "How Can Conspicuous Omni-Signaling Fulfil Social Needs and Induce Re-Consumption?" Sustainability 15, no. 11: 9015. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15119015

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop