- Log In/Sign Up
- P-ISSN1738-3110
- E-ISSN2093-7717
- SCOPUS, ESCI
ISSN : 1738-3110
Will More Expensive Gifts be More Appreciated?
BYUN, Sookeun
Abstract
Purpose: Will more expensive gifts be more pleasurable and appreciated? This is a general expectation of gift-givers. According to the previous study on Americans (Flynn and Adams 2009), recipients tend to appreciate gifts regardless of their price. It indicates that there is an interaction effect between position (giving / receiving) and gift price. This study expands the previous study and aims to answer the following two questions: "Are such an interaction effect observed in Korean, too?" and "What types of people prefer expensive gifts?" Research design, data, and methodology: Study 1 of the current research repeated the Study 3 of Flynn and Adams (2009), with an iPod (high-priced gift condition) and a music CD (low-priced gift condition). That is, a 2 (gift price: high / low) x 2 (position: giver / receiver) between-group design was used. Study 2 used gift certificates of 100,000 won (high-priced gift condition) and 5,000-won gift (low-priced gift condition). Unlike the previous study that measured only one dependent variable (gratitude), this study added five more dependent variables in an attempt to exclude alternative explanations, such as endowment effects or emotional conflicts. This study also measured individualism / collectivism, face sensitivity, and materialism to explore the types of people who prefer expensive gifts. Results: The interaction effect between gift price and position on the level of appreciation was not significant. Meanwhile the main effect of gift price and of position were significant. The gift-recipient was more appreciative than the gift-givers' expectation regardless of the price of gifts. To investigate individual differences, individualism/collectivism, face sensitivity, and materialism were examined, but none of these variables were significantly related to the preference for expensive gifts. Respondents who received gift certificates in Study 2 were less grateful than those who received iPods or music CDs in Study 1. Conclusions: This study found that Koreans tend to be more grateful if they receive expensive gifts, in contrast to the Flynn and Adams (2009)'s study with Americans. In addition, gift-recipients appreciated more than givers' expectation and were more grateful when they received tangible products rather than gift certificates.
- keywords
- Gift-giving, Gratitude, Perspective Taking, Replication Study
Reference
Adams, G. S., Flynn, F. J., & Norton, M. I. (2012). The gifts we keep on giving: Documenting and destigmatizing the regifting taboo. Psychological Science, 23(10), 1145-1150.
Banks, S. K. (1979). Gift-giving: A review and an interactive paradigm. Advances in Consumer Research, 6(1), 319-324.
Baskin, E., Wakslak, C. J., Trope, Y., & Novemsky, N.(2014). Why feasibility matters more to gift receivers than to givers: A construal-level approach to gift giving. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(1), 169–182.
Belk, R. W. (1993). Gift giving as agapic Love: An alternative to the exchange paradigm based on dating experiences. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(12), 393-417.
Belk, R. W., & Coon, G. S. (1991). Can't buy me love:Dating, money, and gifts. Advances in Consumer Research, 18(1), 521-527.
Caplow, T. (1982). Christmas gifts and kin networks. American Sociological Review, 47(6), 383-392.
Cheal, D. J. (1986). The social dimensions of gift behaviour. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 3(4), 423–439.
Cho, E. (2016). Making reliability reliable: A systematic approach to reliability coefficients. Organizational Research Methods, 19(4), 651–682.
Fischer, E., & Arnold, S. J. (1990). More than a labor of love: Gender roles and Christmas gift shopping. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(12), 333-345.
Flynn, F. J., & Adams, G. S. (2009). Money can't buy love:Asymmetric beliefs about gift price and feelings of appreciation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(2), 404-409.
Franke, R. H., & Kaul, J. D. (1978), The Hawthorne experiments: First statistical interpretations. American Sociological Review, 43(5), 623-643.
Gino, F., & Flynn, F. J. (2011). Give them what they want:The benefits of explicitness in gift exchange. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(5), 915-922.
Hubbard, R., & Armstrong, J. S. (1994). Replications and extensions in marketing: Rarely published but quite contrary. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 11(3), 233–248.
Joy, A. (2001). Gift giving in Hong Kong and the continuum of social ties. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(9), 239-256.
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1991). Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. The Journal of Economic Perspectives. 5(1), 193–206.
Kim, Y. (2019). An investigation of chemyon on cosumer behavior of Asian and Western consumers: Crosscultural comparative approach. International Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business, 10(5), 34-47.
Moore, T. E. (1982). Subliminal advertising: What you see is what you get. Journal of Marketing, 46(1), 38-47.
Oh, M-J., & Jung, J. C. (2018). Does social exclusion cause people to make more donations?. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 5(2), 129-137.
Park, S. (1998). A comparison of Korean and American gift-giving behaviors. Psychology & Marketing, 15(6), 577-593.
Richins, M. L. (2004). The material values scale:Measurement properties and development of a short form. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(1), 209–219.
Richins, M. L., & Dawson, S. (1992). A consumer values orientation for materialism and its measurement: Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 303-316.
Robben, H. S. J., & Verhallen, T. M. M. (1994). Behavioral costs as determinants of cost perception and preference formation for gifts to receive and gifts to give. Journal of Economic Psychology, 15(2), 333-350.
Simonsohn, U., Nelson, L. D., & Simmons, J. P. (2014). P-curve: A key to the file-drawer. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(2), 534–547.
Teigen, K. H., Olsen, M. V. G., & Solås, O. E. (2005). Giver-receiver asymmetries in gift preferences. The British Journal of Social Psychology, 44(1), 125-144.
Triandis, H. C., & Gelfland, M. J. (1998). Converging measurement of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(1), 118-128.
Triandis, H. C., Leung, K., Villareal, M. J., & Clack, F. I.(1985). Allocentric versus idiocentric tendencies:Convergent and discriminant validation. Journal of Research in Personality, 19(4), 395-415.
Waldfogel, J. (1993). The deadweight loss of Christmas. American Economic Review, 83 (Dec), 1328-1336.
Watkins, P.C., Scheer, J., Ovnicek, M., & Kolts, R. (2006). The debt of gratitude: Dissociating gratitude and indebtedness. Cognition and Emotion, 20(2), 217-241.
Webster, Jr., F. E. & von Pechmann, F. (1970). A replication of the “shopping list” study. Journal of Marketing, 34(2), 61-63.
Wolfinbarger, M. F. (1990). Motivations and symbolism in gift-giving behavior. Advances in Consumer Research, 17(1), 699-706.
Wooten, D. B. (2000). Qualitative steps toward and expanded model of anxiety in gift-giving. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(6), 84-95.
- Downloaded
- Viewed
- 0KCI Citations
- 0WOS Citations