IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/manmar/v12y2017i4p697-709n10.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The influence of relationship beliefs on gift giving

Author

Listed:
  • Rai Dipankar
  • Kulick George

    (Le Moyne College, Syracuse, New York, USA)

  • Lin Chien-Wei

    (State University of New York at Oneonta, Oneonta, New York, USA)

  • Hong JungHwa

    (University of Texas-Tyler, Tyler, TX, USA)

Abstract

People have fundamental beliefs about what constitutes a good relationship, known as implicit theories of relationship, where some people have destiny beliefs whereas others have growth beliefs. People with destiny beliefs believe that potential partners are meant either for each other or not, whereas people with growth beliefs believe that successful relationships are cultivated and developed. This research shows that different implicit theories of relationship influence consumers’ gift choice to their significant others. We demonstrate, through two studies, that consumers with destiny beliefs prefer giving gifts that are more feasible in nature, whereas consumers with growth beliefs prefer giving gifts that are more desirable in nature. We show that this effect is mediated by desirability-feasibility considerations. Specifically, consumers with destiny beliefs focus on feasibility considerations, which leads them to choose a highly feasible gift. Conversely, consumers with growth beliefs focus on desirability considerations, which leads them to choose a highly desirable gift. We also discuss the theoretical and managerial implications of our research.

Suggested Citation

  • Rai Dipankar & Kulick George & Lin Chien-Wei & Hong JungHwa, 2017. "The influence of relationship beliefs on gift giving," Management & Marketing, Sciendo, vol. 12(4), pages 697-709, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:vrs:manmar:v:12:y:2017:i:4:p:697-709:n:10
    DOI: 10.1515/mmcks-2017-0040
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/mmcks-2017-0040
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/mmcks-2017-0040?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sherry, John F, Jr, 1983. "Gift Giving in Anthropological Perspective," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 10(2), pages 157-168, September.
    2. Morgan K. Ward & Susan M. Broniarczyk, 2011. "It's Not Me, It's You: How Gift Giving Creates Giver Identity Threat as a Function of Social Closeness," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 38(1), pages 164-181.
    3. Xinshu Zhao & John G. Lynch & Qimei Chen, 2010. "Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and Truths about Mediation Analysis," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(2), pages 197-206, August.
    4. Ernest Baskin & Cheryl J. Wakslak & Yaacov Trope & Nathan Novemsky, 2014. "Why Feasibility Matters More to Gift Receivers than to Givers: A Construal-Level Approach to Gift Giving," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 41(1), pages 169-182.
    5. Prendergast, Canice & Stole, Lars, 2001. "The non-monetary nature of gifts," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 1793-1810, December.
    6. Nguyen, Hieu P. & Munch, James M., 2011. "Romantic gift giving as chore or pleasure: The effects of attachment orientations on gift giving perceptions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 113-118, February.
    7. Wendy Liu, 2008. "Focusing on Desirability: The Effect of Decision Interruption and Suspension on Preferences," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 35(4), pages 640-652, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Luo, Biao & Fang, Wenpei & Shen, Jie & Cong, Xue Fei, 2019. "Gift–image congruence and gift appreciation in romantic relationships: The roles of intimacy and relationship dependence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 142-152.
    2. Cavanaugh, Lisa A. & Gino, Francesca & Fitzsimons, Gavan J., 2015. "When doing good is bad in gift giving: Mis-predicting appreciation of socially responsible gifts," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 178-189.
    3. Mehmet Bac, 2019. "Gift policy, bribes and corruption," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 255-275, April.
    4. Hu, Miao & Chen, Jie & Chen, Qimei & He, Wei, 2020. "It pays off to be authentic: An examination of direct versus indirect brand mentions on social media," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 19-28.
    5. Cheng, Andong & Meloy, Margaret G. & Polman, Evan, 2021. "Picking Gifts for Picky People," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 97(2), pages 191-206.
    6. Reshadi, Farnoush, 2023. "Failing to give the gift of improvement: When and why givers withhold self-improvement gifts," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    7. Troebs, Cord-Christian & Wagner, Tillmann & Heidemann, F., 2018. "Transformative retail services: Elevating loyalty through customer well-being," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 198-206.
    8. Givi, Julian, 2020. "(Not) giving the same old song and dance: Givers’ misguided concerns about thoughtfulness and boringness keep them from repeating gifts," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 87-98.
    9. Carolina Rezende Pereira & Suzane Strehlau, 2016. "Social Bond Development Through Continuous Indebtedness," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 241-259, June.
    10. Daum-Avital, Liora & Azar, Ofer H., 2023. "Courtesy versus efficiency: Personal gifts and monetary gifts – Preferences and norms in Israeli society," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    11. Pez, Virginie & Butori, Raphaëlle & de Kerviler, Gwarlann, 2015. "Because I'm worth it: The impact of given versus perceived status on preferential treatment effectiveness," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2477-2483.
    12. Guido, Gianluigi & Pino, Giovanni & Peluso, Alessandro M., 2016. "Assessing individuals' re-gifting motivations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 5956-5963.
    13. de Hooge, Ilona E., 2014. "Predicting consumer behavior with two emotion appraisal dimensions: Emotion valence and agency in gift giving," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 380-394.
    14. Hee-Woong Kim & Atreyi Kankanhalli & So-Hyun Lee, 2018. "Examining Gifting Through Social Network Services: A Social Exchange Theory Perspective," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 805-828, December.
    15. Wang, Lili & You, Yanfen & Yang, Chun-Ming, 2020. "Restrained by resources: The effect of scarcity cues and childhood socioeconomic status (SES) on consumer preference for feasibility," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 557-571.
    16. Liu, Chihling & Hogg, Margaret K., 2018. "Using attachment theory to understand consumers' tensions between their sense of self and goal-pursuits in relationships," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 197-209.
    17. Natter, Martin & Kaufmann, Katharina, 2015. "Voluntary market payments: Underlying motives, success drivers and success potentials," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 149-157.
    18. Nguyen, Stephanie & Didi Alaoui, Mohamed & Llosa, Sylvie, 2020. "When interchangeability between providers and users makes a difference: The mediating role of social proximity in collaborative services," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 506-515.
    19. Didi Alaoui, Mohamed & Valette-Florence, Pierre & Cova, Véronique, 2022. "How psychological distance shapes hedonic consumption: The moderating role of the need to justify," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 57-69.
    20. Kessous, Aurélie & Valette-Florence, Pierre & De Barnier, Virginie, 2017. "Luxury watch possession and dispossession from father to son: A poisoned gift?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 212-222.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vrs:manmar:v:12:y:2017:i:4:p:697-709:n:10. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.