Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Purpose Buyers in China often communicate positive and negative purchasing experiences through word‐of‐mouth (WOM), which creates special problems and opportunities for marketers. Price mavenism, which is associated with price‐information searching and price‐sharing behavior, is often considered a negative dimension of price. The purpose of this paper, however, is to propose price mavenism as an outcome variable arising from both positive perceptions of price (prestige sensitivity) and negative perceptions (price and value consciousness) and examine that the “know” (price mavenism) will positively impact the “glow” (shopping hedonism) among the Chinese. Design/methodology/approach Data were collected through a survey in Shanghai, China. The conceptual model was tested using structural equation modeling. Findings This study found that prestige sensitivity, price consciousness and value consciousness shaped price mavenism among the Chinese, supporting the idea that price mavenism arises from both positive and negative perceptions of price. In addition, for the Chinese, being a source of price information and sharing the knowledge with their social groups fulfill a hedonic motivation for shopping. While value consciousness was positively associated with shopping hedonism, price consciousness per se was not. Research limitations/implications This study challenges the idea that price mavenism is mainly explained by a negative perception of price. Practical implications By understanding the drivers of price mavenism and their impacts on shopping hedonism, international marketers can fine‐tune their marketing strategies to appeal more effectively to price mavens in China. Originality/value This study highlights the importance of cultural perspectives in understanding the structure of price mavenism and its theoretical and marketing foundations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Byun et al. (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: