Heterogeneity of luxury value perception: a generational comparison in China
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Despite the growing research regarding consumer luxury value perception and their influence on luxury consumption behavior in different cultural contexts, there is little research investigating the cultural variation toward luxury within different generations in a given society. The purpose of this paper is to assess the relationships among Confucian propriety, luxury value perception, and purchase intention of luxury brands, and especially how these relationships differ between young and older consumers in a Chinese context. Design/methodology/approach Data were collected through a questionnaire survey in China. A multi-group structural equation model was used to test the conceptual model and research hypotheses. Findings The results show that the effects of functional value and social value on purchase intention of luxury brands are stronger for older generations than younger ones, while the effects of self-identity and hedonic value on purchase intention are stronger for younger generations than older ones. The Confucian propriety relates positively to the functional value and social value; however, these effects are more salient for older consumers. Originality/value The results of this study reveal the evolution of luxury consumption values and behaviors of Chinese consumers, suggesting that marketers should no longer label Chinese luxury consumers with common behaviors. It is also recommended that marketers of luxury brands in China should adapt this shifting attitude and respond actively to the expectations of different generations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it