Conspicuous Consumption versus Charitable Behavior in Response to Social Exclusion: A Differential Needs Explanation

Social exclusion has been shown to produce a number of different responses. This research examines the proposition that social exclusion may produce either self-focused or prosocial responses, depending on which needs are threatened. Dif-ferent types of social exclusion threaten different needs, which in turn produce distinct outcomes (differential needs hypothesis). Social exclusion in the form of being implicitly ignored increased conspicuous consumption, whereas being ex-plicitly rejected increased helping and donation behavior. However, when efficacy needs (power, meaningful existence) were bolstered, the effects of being ignored were eliminated, whereas when relational needs (self-esteem) were bolstered, the effects of being rejected were eliminated. The results indicate that certain types of social exclusion produce prosocial responses, whereas others produce self-focused and attention-getting responses. It is well established that people have a fundamental needto belong (Baumeister and Leary 1995). Forming and maintaining relationships likely have survival benefits through resource sharing and mutual protection (Buss 1990). For this reason, the need to belong is considered to be uni-versal across cultures, and in fact cultures themselves may be considered manifestations of the need to belong. And marketers certainly seem well aware of this tendency toward affiliation. One need only look at the clothing of college