A framework for examining the role of culture in individuals likelihood to engage in self-gift behavior.

Weisfeld-Spolter, Suri ; Thakkar, Maneesh

INTRODUCTION

"Amy White is getting an early start on her holiday shopping list. The St. Louis attorney has already picked out a Harry Potter DVD, a $70 coffee-table book and a $39 Victoria's Secret sweater. There's even a $625 purple vase on the list. And the lucky recipient ... Ms. White herself" (Mechling, 2010).

Gift giving theory and research has primarily focused on interpersonal gifts (e.g. Belk, 1979). However, as demonstrated by the statement above, people may also give gifts to themselves, and it is believed that the self- gift phenomenon may be widely occurring in American society (Mick and DeMoss, 1990a, 1990b). In fact, previous self-gifting research has primarily focused on Western consumer behavior (e.g. self-gift motivations and occasions (Mick and eMoss, 1990a, 1990b), cognitive processes (Olshavsky and Lee, 1993), materialism (McKeage, Richins, and Debevec, 1993), attribution of achievement outcomes (Faure and Mick, 1993; Mick and Faure, 1998) etc.) However, it is well established that people with different cultural backgrounds may behave differently and have different reactions to similar situations. More specifically, research has shown that different cultural identifications have an impact on the way people think, feel, and behave (e.g. Markus and Kitayama, 1991). This leads to the question then of whether the results of previous self-gifting studies can be generalized to consumers living in other countries. More specifically, the first question we have to ask is does the concept of a self-gift even exist in other countries or is it one unique to the United States. This research proposes to answer this question by developing a theory that examines different types of consumers attitude and likelihood towards self-gift giving.

More specifically, to investigate potential individual differences (reflecting differences in culture) that may exist with regards to consumers attitude and behavior of self-gifting, the Theory of Reasoned Action, with its established usefulness for predicting and explaining behavior, combined with self-construal, one of the most popular constructs used to explain the effects of culture on a variety of outcomes, will be used to develop a theory to answer this question.

SELF-GIFTING AND ADVERTISING

"A new name has cropped up on holiday shopping lists: Me" (Mayk, 2009). Self-gifts are conceptualized as (1) personally symbolic self-communication through (2) special indulgences that tend to be (3) premeditated and (4) highly context bound (Mick and DeMoss 1990b, p.328). Previous research has substantiated the notion that self-gifts are a fairly common and important phenomenon particularly in western consumer behavior (e.g. Faure and Mick, 1993). According to social researchers, Western individuals have become increasingly self-oriented in their purchases and consumption behavior (Mick, DeMoss and Faber 1992), and an example of this phenomena has been labeled self-gifts. Similarly, McKeage et al. (1993) believe that people have been giving gifts to themselves since the early beginnings of self-indulgence.

Marketers have recognized this trend in the United States and have directed their product development efforts and advertising messages accordingly. For example, the diamond industry has caught onto the new "me" mood, with slogans like "Your left hand says 'we,' you're right hand says 'me'," urging women to buy diamonds for themselves. Slogans such as "You deserve a break today" (McDonald's) and "The perfect little thank-me" (Andes candies) present indulgences as personal rewards (Mick and DeMoss, 1990b).

American advertisers have been capitalizing on consumers' self-gift propensities for some time. The question then becomes whether the propensity to self gift is confined to the United States, or a more wide spread phenomenon. This has important managerial implications for marketers of self-gifts, particularly those in Western cultures that want to market their products abroad. Specifically, the question of which advertising strategy to pursue- one of customization or standardization arises. In other words, can they use the same "self-gift" message (standardization) that they use in the United States or do they need to develop a more tailored message (customization) for consumers in different countries stressing different benefits.

The controversy of choosing a standardization strategy versus a customization strategy is one that is heavily debated in the international marketing literature (e.g. Buzzel 1968; Levitt 1983; Onkvisit Shaw 1987; Yip 1989; Jain 1989; Saimee and Roth 1992; Szymanski et al. 1993 etc.). Proponents of standardization argue that consumers are becoming more homogeneous due to advances in technology and that standardization results in economies of scale which translate into higher profits. On the other hand, those that argue for customization claim that the world is not one big homogeneous market, and that for companies to succeed they have to "think local and act local." They believe that marketers need to segment their audience and target their products and strategy accordingly or risk losing out to local competitors who better meet their needs.

Research has been done in the United States regarding marketing strategies for self-gift retailers (Mick, DeMoss and Faber, 1992). For example, based on their study of women purchasing perfume for their own use, Mick, DeMoss and Faber (1992), suggested that advertising that emphasized message themes about the increasing professional and personal independence of women may heighten the self gift propensity of women. However, to date no studies have been conducted on the self-gift propensity of international consumers.

The primary goal of this research therefore is to identify if self-gifting is a universal phenomenon, and address the gap in the literature regarding self-gift behavior in a context other than the United States. The results of this research have important implications for managers, particularly when choosing an international advertising strategy. It will help companies who market their products in the United Sates using self-gift appeals in their advertisements decide whether they should use these messages in other countries or need to modify them to successfully sell their products.

SELF-CONSTRUAL AND SELF-GIFTING

Overall, it has been suggested that self-gifts represent a complex class of personal acquisitions that offer intriguing insights on self-directed consumer behavior (Mick and DeMoss 1990b). "Self gift theory will likely benefit from drawing on additionally relevant psychological research" (Mick and DeMoss, 1990b p. 329) since "with rich and complex qualities, self-gifts provide a window through which consumer behavior can be viewed in some of its most adaptive, dramatic and personal significant forms" (Mick and DeMoss, 1990b p.331).

As demonstrated by its name and definition, one of the predominant aspects of self-gifting is the direct focus and communication with the self. Self-concept, defined as ones beliefs of the images that he/she has about the self (Sirgy, 1982) is crucial to self-gifts in that self-gift giving is intertwined with self-concepts (Mick and DeMoss 1990a, 1990b; Mick, DeMoss and Faber, 1992). Clearly, if people view the self differently, they will react differently to self-gifting. Additionally, considerable evidence exists of cross-cultural differences in the nature of self-concept (e.g. Dhawan et al., 1995; Ip and Bond, 1995) and at least some of the self-concept differences between cultures can be explained by underlying cultural dimensions such as individualism and collectivism (Watkins et al. 2003). Triandis (1989, 1990) has proposed that in individualist cultures, idiocentric self-conceptions are more likely, whereas in collectivist cultures, the self is more likely to be relational in nature with group cognitions prominent.

Self construals are aspects of self-concept that have been advanced as individual level cultural dimensions that are thought to explain the effects of culture on a variety of outcome measures. They are considered to be individual differences that reflect cultural differences. Self-construal is conceptualized as "constellation of thoughts, feelings, and actions concerning one's relationship to others, and the self as distinct from others" (Singelis, 1994, p. 581). Taken together with the recommendation above by Mick and DeMoss (1990), we propose to draw on the psychological research of Markus and Kitayama (1991) who identified two dimensions of the self that can be used to characterize consumers self-construal as well as explain and identify differences between cultures: independence and interdependence.

According to Markus and Kitayama, self-construal can be conceptualized by the degree of independence/interdependence that a person possesses. They further state that all people contain both an independent and interdependent self, but that the culture in which they are bought up in influences which one dominates. For example, Europeans and Caucasian Americans are typically said to have an independent self because they tend to emphasize the individual whereas people from Asian cultures are typically interdependent because they tend to emphasize the group as more important than the individual. People with independent self-construals strive to develop and express their unique characteristics, whereas people with interdependent self-construals place value on harmonious relationships with others and acceptance in their community. Those with well-developed independent self-construals gain self-esteem through expressing the self and validating their internal attributes, whereas harmonious interpersonal relationships and the ability to adjust to various situations are sources of self esteem for the interdependent self-construal (Singelis 1994). After reviewing an extensive array of studies, Markus and Kitayama (1991) argue that these independent and interdependent views of the self influence cognition, emotion, and motivation and help to explain individual differences between cultural groups.

The influence of culture on behavior is supported empirically in various studies (e.g. Aaker and Maheswaran 1997). Triandis (1988) presented an explanation on the influence of culture on behavior by using the concept of the self as a mediating variable between culture and individual behavior. He concluded that culture affects behavior both by influencing self-image and by defining situations. Similarly, we propose that consumers self-construal will have an impact on their attitude and likelihood to self-gift as well as the type of self-gift. More specifically, it seems that people with an independent self-construal will be more likely to self-gift, as they tend to have self-benefiting motivations, such as the need to achieve and self-enhance. Conversely, people with an interdependent self-construal will be less likely to self-gift as they tend to derive their motivations from what benefits others and a group as a whole, such as the need to be agreeable to others, to accommodate to their needs, and to restrain one's own wishes or wants.

In short, self-construal as defined by independence versus interdependence is the construct that will be used as a determinant of consumers attitudes towards self-gifting, since it emphasizes differences of ones view of the self and may influence the cognition, emotion and motivation to self-gift. In addition, the Theory Of Reasoned Action (TRA) (Fishbein and Ajzen;1975, 1981), one of the most widely accepted and employed predictor of behavior theories in the social sciences (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1973; Ryan and Bonfield, 1975; Sheppard, Hartwick and Warshaw 1988) will be used to develop our theory on self-gift likelihood across cultures. The TRA has also been tested cross culturally and the findings have generally been consistent with the theory (e.g., Gidin et al., 1996).

The Theory of Reasoned Action predicts that a person's attitude and subjective norm both impact behavioral intent, which subsequently predicts behavior (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1970, 1974, 1980; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). The value of the attitudinal and normative components, as well as their relative weights in predicting behavioral intention, vary from person to person depending on a variety of social, cultural and individual factors. For example, self-related constructs (e.g. Miller and Grush, 1986), and culture (e.g. Lee and Green, 1991) are some of the factors that influence the relative weights of the two components in predicting behavioral intention. Charng, Piliavin and Callero (1988) suggest that "one might attain better prediction and better understanding of repeated behaviors if one were to add to the variables included in the theory of reasoned action some measure of the individual's self-concept in relation to the behavior one is trying to predict" (p.304). According to Park and Levine (1999) self-construals merit consideration as factors affecting the attitudinal and normative components. "Self-construals represent another branch in the study of self with an emphasis on how the self may differ in different cultural contexts."(Park and Levine, 1999, p.200). The conceptual model can be seen below.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT

According to our model, self-construal will influence people's subjective norm and attitude towards self-gifting. Together, the subjective norm and attitude towards self-gifting will be indicative of consumers intention to self-gift, and this intention according to the theory is the best predictor of what their actual behavior will be like. We also propose that their behavior will be moderated by the context of the self-gift, depending on whether they are self-gifting for reward or therapeutic reasons. This will be discussed below.

Self-Construal and Attitude

As mentioned earlier, it appears that self-gift purchasing may be linked to both cultural and personal values. For example, Shapiro (1993) suggested that self-gift behavior may be particularly linked to cultural beliefs that purchasing and consumption are appropriate to the pursuit of individual happiness. In addition, McKeage, Richins, and Debevec (1993) showed that materialists are more likely to self-gift than non-materialists due to their attitude of materialism as a personal value.

Clearly attitude is a key construct in determining self-gift behavior. We propose that self-construal will have an effect on the persons attitude towards self-gifting in general and towards self-gifting advertisements specifically. More specifically, since people with an independent self-construal place an emphasis on "a) internal abilities, thoughts and feelings, b) being unique and expressing the self, c) realizing internal attributes and promoting ones own goals, and d) being direct in communication" (Singelis 1994 p. 581) and people with an interdependent self-construal emphasize "a) external public features such as statuses, roles and relationships, b) belonging and fitting in, c) occupying one's proper place and engaging in appropriate action, and d) being indirect in communication" their attitude towards self-gifting will reflect these tendencies. People with an independent self-construal will have a more favorable attitude towards self-gifting, as they tend to have self-benefiting motivations, such as the need to achieve and self-enhance. Conversely, people with an interdependent self-construal will have a less favorable attitude towards self-gifting as they tend to derive their motivations from what benefits others and a group as a whole, such as the need to be agreeable to others, to accommodate to their needs, and to restrain one's own wishes or wants.

In addition, Park and Levine, (1999) found that the strength of an individuals independent self-construal was positively correlated with their personal attitude towards behavior and that the strength of an individuals interdependent self-construal was negatively related to ones personal attitude toward behavior. This is in support of our hypotheses.

More formally:

H1: Individuals with independent (interdependent) self-construals will have a more (less) favorable attitude towards self-gifting than individuals with interdependent (independent) self-construals.

Self-Gift Ads and attitude

Belk, Bryce, and Pollay (1985) suggest that in order for ads to be effective, they have to appeal to the values that are salient in the culture of its intended audience. Not surprisingly, ads emphasizing values that are consistent with the value orientation of the society tend to be more persuasive. It has also been shown that one very important dimension of culture to consider when developing international advertising messages is that of individualism-collectivism (Han and Shavitt, 1994; Zandpour et al., 1994). Similarly, Gregory and Munch (1997) found that cultural values (norms and roles) are important dimensions to consider when developing international advertisements.

In their 1994 study, Han and Shavitt showed that members of individualistic and collectivistic societies responded differently to ads emphasizing individualistic versus collectivistic appeals. They found that subjects in the United States were more persuaded overall by ads emphasizing individualistic benefits, whereas subjects in Korea tended to be more persuaded by ads emphasizing collectivistic benefits. "It is evident that cultural differences in individualism-collectivism play an important role in the persuasion processes both at the societal and the individual level, influencing the prevalence and effectiveness of different types of advertising appeals" (343).

Therefore, ads presenting norms and roles that are consistent with individuals' self-construal will be more persuasive. Self-gift appeals will be favored by individuals with independent self-construals but will not be responded to favorably by individuals with interdependent self-construals. Conversely, if self-gift advertisers can use an appeal not emphasizing the independence and deservingness of individuals, but rather something more inline with the subjective norm of interdependents, these ads will be responded to more favorably by interdependents and may increase the likelihood of their self-gift behavior. More specifically:

H2a: Individuals with independent self-construals (compared with interdependent self-construals) will respond more favorably to self-gift ads that present cultural norms consistent with an individualistic orientation. (e.g. "Because I'm worth it," Loreal)

H2b: Individuals with interdependent self-construals (compared with independent self-construals) will respond more favorably to self-gift ads that present cultural norms consistent with a collectivist orientation. (e.g. "Your family thinks your worth it")

Self-Construal and Subjective Norm

Subjective norm is composed of two components: normative beliefs and motivation to comply. Normative beliefs represent an individual's perception of what significant others would think about his/her performing behavior and the motivation to comply with others refers to ones willingness to follow others wishes. Because those with independent self-construals emphasize their own thoughts, feelings and actions, rather than others, and like to feel independent, they will most likely not feel compelled to comply with others thoughts on self-gifting, because it will be an invasion on their sense of independence. Conversely, individuals with interdependent self-construals who do not view conformity to what others think and feel in a negative light, but rather consider it rewarding to meet others expectations and maintain harmony with significant others, will be more likely to comply with the expectations of others.

This is in line with research done by Kim and Markus (1999) who did a study comparing values of uniqueness and conformity in East Asia and the United States. Referring to East Asians and their desire for conformity, they say "it is not that they conform because they experience social pressure to conform but that they actively like to conform in the sense of being connected to others, For east Asians, following norms validates the self as a good person" (p.786). In contrast, individuals in the United States believe that "attitudes, feelings, and behavior should be determined by the self without being controlled by any external cause.... conformity threatens the self as a worthy individual whereas uniqueness symbolizes the assertion of individuality and self-worth ..." (p.786).

Similarly, we predict that individuals with independent self-construals will not be motivated to comply with how significant others view self-gifting, though the normative belief will probably be positive, and that individuals with interdependent self-construals will be motivated to comply with the normative beliefs of others, and these normative beliefs about self-gifting will not be positive.

In sum:

H3a: Individuals with independent self-construals will have positive normative beliefs about self-gifting.

H3b: Individuals with interdependent self-construals will have negative normative beliefs about self-gifting.

H4a: Individuals with independent self-construals will not be motivated to comply with the thoughts of significant others

H4b: Individuals with interdependent self-construals will be motivated to comply with the thoughts of significant others.

Behavioral Intention

Based on the model, the attitude and subjective norm will indicate the behavioral intention of the individual to self-gift. The weights attached to these two constructs vary depending on the topic being investigated. Factors such as individual or cultural differences influence both a person's attitude toward behavior and subjective norm as well as the relative weights of the two. For example, subjective norm was found to be a stronger determinant of the intention to buy sneakers for Koreans, while attitude toward behavior was a better predictor of the behavioral intention for Americans ( Lee and Green, 1991).

We therefore propose that for individuals with independent self-construals, their own attitude (rather than the subjective norm) towards self-gifting will play a more influential role in predicting their intention to self-gift, and that for individuals with interdependent self-construals, the subjective norm (rather than attitude) will play a more influential role in determining their intention to self-gift.

More formally,

H5a: For individuals with independent self-construals, attitude, rather than subjective norm will be more influential in predicting individuals' behavioral intention to self-gift.

H5b: For individuals with interdependent self-construals, the subjective norm, rather than attitude will be more influential in predicting individuals' behavioral intention to self gift.

Self-gift Behavior: Moderated By Context

According to the model, the context of the self-gift will play a moderating role on individuals' self-gift behavior. These two contexts are reward (buying yourself a gift after a great accomplishment) and therapy (buying yourself a gift to cheer yourself up after a disappointment). These contexts and their role in the model will be discussed below.

Early research on self-gifts revealed that self-gifts appeared to be acquired within a relatively confined set of circumstances and motivations (Mick and DeMoss 1990a). More specifically, eight contexts for self-gifts were identified based on focus group discussions and prior qualitative survey research (Mick and DeMoss 1990a, 1990b): 1) to reward yourself, 2) to cheer yourself up, 3) because it was a holiday, 4) to relieve stress, 5) as an incentive to reach a personal goal, 6) because it was your birthday, 7) just to be nice to yourself, and 8)because you had extra money to spend (Mick and DeMoss 1992).

As mentioned above, eight contexts of self-gifts were identified, however the reward and therapy contexts appear to be the two predominant contexts of self-gifts (Mick and DeMoss 1990a, 1990b, 1992) and are the two contexts that this research will study. Specifically, we hypothesize that these two contexts will play a moderating role on self-gift behavior.

In their 1993 study, Faure and Mick suggest testing whether or not there are any differences between the types of self-gifts one buys after a success or after a failure. Mick and Faure (1998) also suggested that therapeutic self-gifts may result from a different type of psychological process than reward self-gifts. In keeping with this train of thought, we propose that the context of the self-gift may play a moderating role in consumers' likelihood to self-gift.

More specifically, previous research has shown that when self-gifting, there was a higher frequency of the reward motivation reported by males (Mick and DeMoss's 1990a) and Mick and DeMoss (1992) found that females were more likely to engage in self gift behavior in therapeutic and nice to self contexts, whereas males were more inclined in situations where the self gift served as an incentive to reach a goal. Similarly, Markus and Kitayama (1991) suggest that American men and women develop divergent self-construals similar to those observed cross-culturally. Men typically develop an independent self-construal, common in Western cultures, in which representations of others are separate from the self. Similar to Eastern societies, women typically develop an interdependent self-construal, in which others are viewed as part of the self (Cross & Madson, 1997).

Taken together, these results point to the following propositions:

H6a: Individuals with independent self-construals will be more likely to self-gift in reward contexts and less likely to self-gift in therapy contexts.

H6b: Individuals with interdependent self-construals will be more likely to self-gift in therapy contexts and less likely in reward contexts.

CONCLUSION

The purpose of this research was to propose a theory to investigate whether self-gifting is a universal phenomenon, or one confined to Western societies. Does everybody self-gift? What are the influences on self-gift behavior? In an attempt to establish who is most likely to self-gift, we have employed the Theory of Reasoned Action and incorporated self-construal to make various predictions. In short, it is hypothesized that individuals who possess a dominant independent self-construal will have more favorable attitudes towards self-gifting and be more likely to self-gift, whereas individuals with dominant interdependent self-construals will tend to have more negative attitudes towards self-gifting and a strong motivation to comply with references groups feelings about self-gifting, and consequently be less likely to self gift.

In addition, though the hypotheses predict that individual with independent self-construals will a more favorable attitude towards self-gifting and be more likely to self-gift than individuals with interdependent self-construals, this does not mean that individual with interdependent self-construals cannot be effectively targeted and motivated to self-gift. The right appeal combined with a positive subjective norm can encourage individuals with interdependent self-construals to self-gift as well. For example, rather than using slogans like those used in the United States that emphasizes the worth of the individual, (i.e. You deserve it), slogans that emphasize family and friends will be more effective for individuals with interdependent self-construals.

This research has contributed to the self-gifting literature by extending the self-gift research cross culturally, as well as by developing a theory that predicts self-gift attitude and behavior. In a recent study, based on empirical evidences, Tsai (2005) suggests that self-gifting behavior is a significant antecedent in individuals' likelihood of buying luxury brands. Further, it has important marketing implications for marketers of self-gift products and for marketers that use self-gift appeals in their advertisements that want to target consumers that are not the typical western independent individual.

REFERENCES

Aaker, J., & Maheswaran, (1997). The effect of Cultural Orientation on Persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (December) 241-261.

Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1970). The Prediction of Behavior for Attitudinal and Variables. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 5: 400-416

Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M (1973). Attitudinal and Normative Variables as Predictors of Specific Behaviors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6, 466-487.

Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1974). Factors Influencing Intentions and Intention-Behavior Relation. Human Relations 21: 1-15.

Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior" Englewood-Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Belk, Russel W. (1979). Gift-giving Behavior. In Research in Marketing, Vol. 2, ed. Jagdish Seth, Greewich, CT: JAI, 95-126.

Belk, R. W. and R. W. Pollay (1985). Images of Oursleves: The Good Life in Twentieth Century Advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(March): 887-897.

Belk, Russel W. (1988). Possessions and the Extended Self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (2), 139-168

Buzzell, R. (1968). Can You Standardize Multinational Marketing. Harvard Business Reviews, 46(6), November-December, 702.

Charng, H.W., Pillavin, J.A, and Callero, P.L. (1988). Role Identity and Reasoned Action in the Prediction of Repeated Behavior. Social Psychology Quarterly, Vol.51, No. 4, p. 303-317.

Cross, S.E. & Madson, L. (1997). Models of the Self: Self-construals and Gender. Psychological Bulletin, 122, 5-37.

Dhawan, N., Roseman, J., Naidu, R.K., Thapa, K., & Rettek, S.I. (1995). Self-concepts Across Two Cultures: India and the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 26, 606-621.

Faure, Corinne; Mick, David Glen (1993). Self-gifts Through the Lens of Attribution Theory. Advances in Consumer Research, 1993, Vol. 20 Issue 1, p553, 4p.

Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I (1975). Belief, Attiude Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading , MA: Addison- Wealey.

Fishbein, M., and Ajzen, I. (1981). On Construct Validity: A Critique of Miniard and Cohen's Paper. Journal of Social Psychology, 17: 340-350.

Godin, G. Maticka-Tynadale, E., Adrian, A., Manson Singer, S., Williams, D., and Cappon, P. (1996). Cross Cultural Testing of three Social Cognitive Theories: An application of condom use. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 1556-1586.

Gould, Stephen J. (1997). An interpretive study of purposeful, mood self-regulating consumption: The consumption and mood. Psychology & Marketing, Jul97, Vol. 14 Issue 4, p395, 32p.

Gregory, Gary and Munch, James (1997). Cultural Values in International Advertising: An Examination of Familial Norms and Roles in Mexico. Psychology and Marketing, March 1997, Volume 14 (2) P.99-119.

Han, S., & Shavitt, S. (1994). Persuasion and Culture: Advertising appeals in individualistic and collectivistic societies Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 326-350.

Hirschman Elizabeth C.; Morris B. Holbrook (1982). Hedonic Consumption: Emergent Concepts, Methods and Propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46 (Summer), 92-101.

Hofstede, G. (1980). Cultures consequences. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.

Hofstede, G. (1983) National Cultures in four dimensions, a research based theory on cultural differences among nations. International Studies in Management and Organizations, 14, 1-2, 46-74.

Hofstede, G. (1994). Cultures and Organizations: Intercultural Cooperation and its Imprtance For Survival. McGraw-Hill, UK, 1994.

Ip, G.W.M., & Bond, M.H. (1995). Culture, Values and the Spontaneous Self-Concept. Asian Journal of Psychology, 1, 29-35.

Jain, Subhash C. (1989). Standardization of International Marketing Strategy: Some Research Hypotheses. Journal of Marketing, 53(1), January, 70-79.

Kim, H., & Markus, H.R. (1999). Deviance or Uniqueness, Harmony or Conformity? A Cultural Analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 77 (4) 785-800.

Lee, C. and Green, R.T. (1991). Cross Cultural Examination of the Fishbein Behavioral Intentions Model. Journal of International business Studies, second quarter, 289-309.

Levitt, Theodore (1983). The Globalization of Markets. Harvard Business Review, 61(3), May-June, 92-102.

Luomala, Harri T.; Laaksonen, Martti (1997). Mood-regulatory self-gifts: Development of a conceptual framework. Journal of Economic Psychology, Jun97, Vol. 18 Issue 4, p407, 28p.

Luomala, Harri T.; Laaksonen, Martti (1999). A qualitative exploration of mood-regulatory self-gift behaviors. Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol 20(2), Apr 1999. pp. 147-182.

Markus, H.R., and Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self-implications for cognition, emotion and motivation. Psychological Review, 20, 568-579.

Mayk, Lauren; (2009). Looking out for number one; Survey: Consumers plan to shop for themselves this holiday season. Sarasota Herald-Tribune, October 2009, D1.

McGrath, Mary Ann; Sherry Jr., John F.; Levy, Sidney J. (1993). Giving Voice to the Gift: The Use of Projective Techniques to Recover Lost Meanings. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1993, Vol. 2 Issue 2, p171, 21p.

McKeage, Kim K.R.; Richins, Marsha L (1993). Self-gifts and the manifestation of material values. Advances in Consumer Research, 1993, Vol. 20 Issue 1, p359, 6p.

Mechling, Lauren (2010). The Me Christmas. The Wall Street Journal, November 2010 A1.

Mick, David Glen; DeMoss, Michelle (1990a). To Me From Me: A Descriptive Phenomenology of Self-Gifts. Advances in Consumer Research, 1990, Vol. 17 Issue 1, p677, 6p.

Mick, David Glen; DeMoss, Michelle. (1990b). Self-Gifts: Phenomenological Insights from Four Contexts. Journal of Consumer Research, Dec90, Vol. 17 Issue 3, p322, 11p.

Mick, David Glen; DeMoss, Michelle (1992). Further findings on self-gifts: Products, qualities, and socioeconomic correlates. Advances in Consumer Research, 1992, Vol. 19 Issue 1, p140, 7p.

Mick, David Glen; DeMoss, Michelle; Faber, Ronald J. (1992). A Projective Study of Motivations and Meanings of Self-Gifts: Implications for Retail Management. Journal of Retailing, Summer 92, Vol. 68 Issue 2, p122, 23p.

Mick, David (1993). Self-gifts: An emerging category of consumer behavior from multiple perspectives. Advances in Consumer Research, 1993, Vol. 20 Issue 1, p546, 1p.

Mick, David Glen; Faure, Corinne (1998). Consumer self-gifts in achievement contexts: The role of ... International Journal of Research in Marketing, Oct98, Vol. 15 Issue 4, p293, 15p.

Miller, L.E., and Grush, J.E. (1986). Individual differences in attitudinal versus normative determination of behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 190-202.

Minowa, Yuko; Gould, Stephen J (1999). Love My Gift, Love Me or is it Love Me, Love My Gift: A Study of the Cultural Construction of Romantic Gift Giving among Japanese Couples. Advances in Consumer Research, 1999, Vol. 26 Issue 1, p119, 6p.

Olshavsky, Richard W.; Lee, Dong Hwan (1993). Self-gifts: A metacognition perspective. Advances in Consumer Research, 1993, Vol. 20 Issue 1, p547, 6p.

Onkvisit, Sak and John J. Shaw (1987). Standardized International Advertising: A Review and Critical Evaluation of the Theoretical and Empirical Evidence. Columbia Journal of World Business, 22(3), Fall, 43-55.

Park, Hee and Levine, Timothy (1999). The Theory of Reasoned Action and Self-Construal: Evidence from Three Cultures. Communication Monographs, Volume 66, p. 199-218.

Ryan, M.J., and Bonfield, E.H. (1975). The Fishbein extended model and Consumer Behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 2, 118-136.

Samiee, Saeed, and Kendell Roth (1992). The Influence of Global Marketing Standardization on Performance. Journal of Marketing, 56, April 1-17

Sayre, Shay; Horne, David, (1996). I shop, therefore I am: The role of possessions for self definition. Advances in Consumer Research, 1996, Vol. 23 Issue 1, p323, 6p.

Shapiro, John M (1993). Compulsive buying and self-gifts: A motivational perspective. Advances in Consumer Research, 1993, Vol. 20 Issue 1, p557.

Sheppard, B.H., Hartwick, J., and Warshaw, P.R. (1988). The Theory of Reasoned Action: A Meta Analysis of Past Research with recommendations for Modification and Future Research. Journal of Consumer Research 15, 325-343.

Singelis, T.M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 580-591

Sirgy, M. Joseph (1982). Self Concept in Consumer Behavior: A Critical Review. Journal of Consumer Research, December, Volume 9 Issue 3, P287 14p.

Szymanski, David M., Sundar G. Bharadwaj, and P. Rajan Varadarajan (1993). Standardization versus Adaptation of international Marketing Strategy: An Empirical Investigation. Journal of Marketing, 57 (October), 1-17.

Triandis, H.C. (1989) The Self and Social Behavior in Differing Cultural Contexts. Psychological Review, 96, 3, 506-520.

Tsai, Shu-pei. (2005). Impact of personal orientation on luxury-brand purchase value: An international investigation. International Journal of Market Research, .Vol 47(4), p. 429.

Triandis, H. C. (1990). Cross-cultural studies of individualism and collectivism. In J. Berman (Ed.) Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1989. (pp. 41-133) Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press.

Watkins, D., Cheng, C., Mpofu, E., Olowu, S., Singh-Sengupta, S., & Regmi, M., Gender differences in Self-Construal: How Generalizable are Western Findings? Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 143, 4, p501, 19p.

Williams, Laura A.; Burns, Alvin C (1994). The halcyon days of youth: A phenomenological account of experiences and feelings accompanying. Advances in Consumer Research, 1994, Vol. 21 Issue 1, p98, 6p.

Yip, George S., Pierre M. Loewe, and Michael Y. Yoshino (1988). How to Take your Company to the Global Market, Columbia Journal of World Business, 23(4), Winter, 37-47.

Zandpour, F., Campos, V., Catalano, J., Chang, C., Cho, Y., Hoobyar, R., Jiang, S., Lin, M., Madrid, S., Scheidler, H., & Osborn, S. (1994). Global reach and Local Touch: Achieving Cultural fitness in TV advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, 35-63.

Suri Weisfeld-Spolter, Nova University

Maneesh Thakkar, Radford University