IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/v51y2024i1p140-150..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Beyond Scarcity: A Social Value-Based Lens for NFT Pricing

Author

Listed:
  • Reto Hofstetter
  • Martin P Fritze
  • Cait Lamberton

Abstract

Over the last half-century, consumer research has often depicted scarcity as a dominant factor increasing price. But should we assume that scarcity’s upward pressure on price remains intact, in a world where novel forms of digital products proliferate? In this article, we propose that blockchain-encrypted digital goods, in particular, non-fungible tokens (NFTs), offer good reason to revisit this assumption. In this context, we argue and find that social value can outweigh intrinsic value as a determinant of willingness-to-pay. As a result, when scarcity threatens access to high levels of social value, its effect on price can be negative rather than positive—an inversion of a pattern typically observed for offline collectibles. Secondary data taken from the NFT platform Opensea and a set of experimental studies support this social value-based lens. Given these findings, we propose a research agenda to ground future work in this area. We also suggest that NFTs offer a laboratory in which past theories related to social value, scarcity, and price can be reconsidered and future theories developed, hopefully allowing consumer researchers to lead knowledge development in these domains over the next 50 years.

Suggested Citation

  • Reto Hofstetter & Martin P Fritze & Cait Lamberton, 2024. "Beyond Scarcity: A Social Value-Based Lens for NFT Pricing," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 51(1), pages 140-150.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:51:y:2024:i:1:p:140-150.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jcr/ucad082
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Friestad, Marian & Wright, Peter, 1994. "The Persuasion Knowledge Model: How People Cope with Persuasion Attempts," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(1), pages 1-31, June.
    2. Keith Wilcox & Andrew T. Stephen, 2013. "Are Close Friends the Enemy? Online Social Networks, Self-Esteem, and Self-Control," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 40(1), pages 90-103.
    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. Lee, Alice J. & Ames, Daniel R., 2017. "“I can’t pay more” versus “It’s not worth more”: Divergent effects of constraint and disparagement rationales in negotiations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 16-28.
    2. Liang Xiao & Linyong Luo & Tongping Ke, 2024. "The influence of eWOM information structures on consumers’ purchase intentions," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 1713-1735, September.
    3. Suwelack, Thomas & Hogreve, Jens & Hoyer, Wayne D., 2011. "Understanding Money-Back Guarantees: Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Outcomes," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 87(4), pages 462-478.
    4. Jong Yoon Lee & Jae Hee Park & Jong Woo Jun, 2019. "Brand Webtoon as Sustainable Advertising in Korean Consumers: A Focus on Hierarchical Relationships," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-10, March.
    5. Skarmeas, Dionysis & Leonidou, Constantinos N., 2013. "When consumers doubt, Watch out! The role of CSR skepticism," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(10), pages 1831-1838.
    6. Mark Groza & Mya Pronschinske & Matthew Walker, 2011. "Perceived Organizational Motives and Consumer Responses to Proactive and Reactive CSR," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(4), pages 639-652, September.
    7. Aaker, Jennifer L. & Brumbaugh, Anne M. & Grier, Sonya A., 2000. "Non-target Markets and Viewer Distinctiveness: The Impact of Target Marketing on Advertising Attitudes," Research Papers 1578, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    8. Ni Putu Ayu Wangi Diantini & Susanti & Waspodo Tjipto Subroto, 2021. "The effect of peer group, economic literacy, and use of social media on the consumption behavior of students social studies major grade XII SMAN 1 Negara in Jembrana," Technium Social Sciences Journal, Technium Science, vol. 21(1), pages 296-311, July.
    9. T. Poehlman & Ravi Dhar & John Bargh, 2016. "Sophisticated by Design: the Nonconscious Influence of Primed Concepts and Atmospheric Variables on Consumer Preferences," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 3(1), pages 48-61, March.
    10. Khantimirov, Denis & Karande, Kiran, 2018. "Complaint as a persuasion attempt: Front line employees’ perceptions of complaint legitimacy," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 68-76.
    11. Tuğba Koç & Aykut Hamit Turan, 2021. "The Relationships Among Social Media Intensity, Smartphone Addiction, and Subjective Wellbeing of Turkish College Students," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 16(5), pages 1999-2021, October.
    12. Puccinelli, Nancy M. & Goodstein, Ronald C. & Grewal, Dhruv & Price, Robert & Raghubir, Priya & Stewart, David, 2009. "Customer Experience Management in Retailing: Understanding the Buying Process," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 15-30.
    13. Simonson, Itamar & Drolet, Aimee L., 2003. "Anchoring Effects on Consumers' Willingness-to-Pay and Willingness-to-Accept," Research Papers 1787, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    14. repec:hal:journl:hal-04765223 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Román, Sergio & Riquelme, Isabel P. & Iacobucci, Dawn, 2023. "Fake or credible? Antecedents and consequences of perceived credibility in exaggerated online reviews," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    16. Inman, J.J. & Zeelenberg, M., 2002. "Regret in repeat purchase versus switching decisions : The attenuating role of decision justifiability," Other publications TiSEM 44060120-bd30-40e0-a97f-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    17. Rosbergen, Edward & Wedel, Michel & Pieters, Rik, 1997. "Analyzing visual attention tot repeated print advertising using scanpath theory," Research Report 97B32, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    18. Singh, Jaywant & Crisafulli, Benedetta & Quamina, La Toya & Xue, Melanie Tao, 2020. "‘To trust or not to trust’: The impact of social media influencers on the reputation of corporate brands in crisis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 464-480.
    19. Simona Romani & Silvia Grappi & Richard P. Bagozzi, 2016. "Corporate Socially Responsible Initiatives and Their Effects on Consumption of Green Products," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 253-264, May.
    20. Cade, Nicole L., 2018. "Corporate social media: How two-way disclosure channels influence investors," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 68, pages 63-79.
    21. Ryan W. Buell & Michael I. Norton, 2011. "The Labor Illusion: How Operational Transparency Increases Perceived Value," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(9), pages 1564-1579, February.

    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:oup:jconrs:v:51:y:2024:i:1:p:140-150.. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcr .

    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.