The Types and Management of Differentiating Consumption depends on the social class of Korean consumers

  • LEE, Jaemin (College of Business, SungKyunKwan University)
  • 투고 : 2019.05.23
  • 심사 : 2019.06.07
  • 발행 : 2019.03.30


This paper presents two social and academic studies on the boundary between cultural production and consumption. The first line of the study on cultural omnivore analyzes the choice of heterogeneous audiences in the face of various cultural offerings. The second line is a study of market categories, which analyzes the responses of peer audiences to objects with different levels of category code compliance. As such, this paper developed a heterogeneous audience model to evaluate objects of different types. This allows us to consider two dimensions of cultural preference: diversity and orientation of selection. To this end, this paper proposes a new analytical frame work to map consumption behavior on these two dimensions. The results suggest that one type of target that values diversity and transformation is particularly resistant to those that span boundaries. We test this argument in the analysis of two large data sets on film and restaurant reviews. Overall, our findings can extend beyond cultural consumption. Outline variability of contextual individuals or individuals in the same situation can cross cultural boundaries even if they are not intentionally pursuing such hybridism.



  1. Bayton, J. A. (1957). Motivation, cognition, learning-basic factors in consumer behavior. Journal of Marketing, 22(1), 283-287.
  2. Britt, C., & Steuart, H. (1950). The strategy of Consumer motivation. Journal of Marketing, 14(5), 668-674.
  3. Chen, Y. H., Hsu, I. C., & Lin, C. C. (2010). Website attributes that increase consumer purchase intention: A conjoint analysis. Journal of Business Research, 63(9-10), 1009-1014.
  4. Gonzalez, J. A., Ragins, B. R., Ehrhardt, K., & Singh, R. (2018). Friends and family: The role of relationships in community and workplace attachment. Journal of Business and Psychology, 33(1), 99-104.
  5. Hadar, L., & Sood, S. (2009). Comparative knowledge and consumer choice perspective. Advances in Consumer Research, 36, 1008.
  6. Ho-Dac, N. N., Carson, S. J., & Moore, W. L. (2013). The effects of positive and negative online customer reviews: Do brand strength and category maturity matter. Journal of Marketing, 77(6), 39-51.
  7. Lerner, J. S., Han, S., & Keltner, D. (2007). Feelings and consumer decision making: Extending the appraisaltendency framework. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(3), 184-187.
  8. Liu, L. A., Chua, C. H., & Stahl, G. K. (2010). Quality of communication experience: Definition, measurement, and implications for intercultural negotiations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(3), 472-487.
  9. Oyserman, D. (2009). Identity-based motivation and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(3), 276-279.
  10. Schroeder, J. B., & Janet, W. Z. (2014). A brand culture approach to brand literacy: Consumer co-creation and emerging Chinese luxury brands. Advances in Consumer Research, 42, 366-370.
  11. Stahl, F., Heitmann, M., Lehmann, D. R., & Neslin, S. (2012). The impact of brand equity on customer acquisition, retention, and profit margin. Journal of Marketing, 76(4), 46-61.
  12. Torres, A., & Tribo, J. A. (2011). Customer satisfaction and brand equity. Journal of Business Research, 64(10), 1091-1094.
  13. Williams, P., & Sprott, D. (2007). Did you know that questioning consumers can change behavior?: New research and future directions on the question-behavior effect. Advances in Consumer Research, 34, 487.