Social Media Marketing and Luxury Consumption: A Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
People and companies worldwide are by now involved and attached to web 2.0 technologies and in particular to social media platforms. In this context, these digital technologies and social media have modified and improved the way to communicate and collaborate between companies and customers in all sectors through by implementing effective interaction mechanisms. However, the approach to social media and digital technologies in sectors such as luxury has been slower. Therefore, the main aim of this study is firstly to systematically examine and review the current studies conducted on the related area of social media and luxury marketing. Secondly, in addition to providing an overview of the main themes and trends covered by the relevant literature, this review has focused on the consumption of luxury and the dual dimension that it can take in a social media context. Third, a systematic review of the literature on academic research on social media marketing in luxury brands was conducted to collect, examine and synthesize the reactive studies. This review also provided important insights on social media marketing in luxury brands and key research topics were classified into three insights, on consumer behavior, brand awareness and advertising activities in a social media context. Therefore, this study, for both academics and marketer manager, could represent a solid theoretical basis for empirical studies on the phenomenon of social media marketing in the field of luxury marketing and luxury brands.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.022 | 0.071 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".