Desire to Acquire: Powerlessness and Compensatory Consumption

By Derek D. Rucker, Adam D. Galinsky. 2008

930 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Marketing, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6d6a9c846c97ee4f43ac2c00184161fb7ed4ae60

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Marketing

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Materialism: the good, the bad, and the ugly (2014, background): “Thus, when people feel threats to personal power, they are willing to pay more for high-status products (Rucker & Galinsky, 2008) and have a greater preference for conspicuous, high-status logos than those who do not feel such threats to their power (Lee & Shrum, 2012; Rucker & Galinsky, 2009).”
Getting Ahead of the Joneses: When Equality Increases Conspicuous Consumption among Bottom-Tier Consumers (2011, background): “…consumer research on the effects of status and social comparisons on consumption (Amaldoss and Jain 2005; Berger and Heath 2007; Drèze and Nunes 2009; Frank 1985a; Griskevicius et al. 2007; Leclerc, Hsee, and Nunes 2005; Mandel, Petrova, and Cialdini 2006; Richins 1994; Rucker and Galinsky 2008).”
The effect of social exclusion on consumer preference for anthropomorphized brands (2017, result): “The present research also adds to a growing body of compensatory consumption research which demonstrates that social motivations guide consumption decisions (Rucker & Galinsky, 2008).”
Fundamental motives: How evolutionary needs influence consumer behavior (2013, background): “Accordingly, a status motive leads people to pay more for luxurious and prestigious goods (Ivanic, Overbeck, & Nunes, 2011; Rucker & Galinsky, 2008), which are to be displayed to others (Berger &Ward, 2010; Han, Nunes, & Drèze, 2010).”
Explaining variation in conspicuous luxury consumption: An individual differences' perspective (2014, background): “Rather, existing studies treat luxury consumption restrictively as the outcome of people's search for status (Berger & Ward, 2010; Han et al., 2010; Nelissen & Meijers, 2011; Rucker & Galinsky, 2008).”
The Nonconscious Nature of Power: Cues and Consequences (2010, background): “Many studies have explicitly demonstrated no relation between priming manipulations of power and changes in affective states (e.g., Galinsky et al., 2003; Rucker & Galinsky, 2008; Smith & Bargh, 2008; Smith & Trope, 2006; Weick & Guinote, 2008).”
Interpersonal Power (2015, background): “Power thus plays a vital role in economic, political, and social interactions and is an omnipresent force in organizations (Fehr, Herz, & Wilkening, 2013; Rucker & Galinsky, 2008).”
All That Glitters Is Not Gold: How Others’ Status Influences the Effect of Power Distance Belief on Status Consumption (2016, neutral): “One way they can do so is by consuming status products, which serve as an effective means to signal their higher status under upward social comparison (Hopkins and Kornienko 2004; Rucker and Galinsky 2008, 2009).”