Skip to main content
Heliyon logoLink to Heliyon
. 2022 Jun 8;8(6):e09672. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09672

Consumer impulse buying behavior: the role of confidence as moderating effect

Van Dat Tran 1,
PMCID: PMC9198328  PMID: 35721683

Abstract

Many indicators have been proposed that can contribute to impulse buying. However, few studies have examined the role of social comparison in impulse buying, materialism, and negative affect, and even less is known about the underlying processes that may moderate these relationships. The objective of this study was to create a framework that included social comparison, materialism, negative affect, impulse buying, and the moderator variable confidence in Vietnamese e-commerce. A total of 249 completed questionnaires were received from young people who frequently shop online. The study used a structural model and experimentally analyzed the links between materialism, social comparison, impulse buying, and negative affect, and how the moderating variable confidence influenced these interactions. The study finds that social comparison has a significant influence on materialism but has no impact on negative affect. However, negative affect significantly influences impulse buying. Materialism also has an impact on negative affect and impulse buying. Additionally, confidence has a beneficial moderating effect on the relationship between social comparison and impulse buying as well as social comparison and materialism. The limitations and implications of both the scientific and managerial aspects of the study were also addressed. The results will improve marketers’ understanding of impulse buying behaviors by evaluating the connection between materialism and negative affect, which will allow them to plan effective marketing strategies to increase future impulse buying and profits.

Keywords: Social comparison, Materialism, Negative affect, Impulse buying, Confidence


Social comparison, Materialism, Negative affect, Impulse buying, Confidence.

1. Introduction

In the contemporary century, impulse buying has become commonplace in both traditional and digital commerce (Yang et al., 2021). Along with findings from previous research articles, the actual growth of online shopping in Vietnam in recent years should be emphasized. The value of Vietnam's e-commerce market reached around 12 billion US dollars in 2020, and the current digital population and increasing Internet penetration provide favorable conditions for e-commerce enterprises to expand further (Statista, 2021). The tendency toward online consumption is growing among the younger generation, who are more susceptible to impulse buying for a variety of reasons. The primary drivers of impulse buying consist of characteristics (e.g., physical feelings, impulse-buying desires), reasons (e.g., practicality, emotionality), consumer assets (e.g., time, wealth), and sales promotions (Iyer et al., 2020). Initially, as Rook and Hoch, 1985 claimed, it was people, not products, who desired consumption. They also stated that impulsive individuals were more willing to make impulse purchases. Moreover, there has always been a long history of people comparing themselves to others, which later evolved into social comparative theory. This social behavior has facilitated people living together as cohesive groups, learning from others, and reaching their full potentials. Festinger's (1954) social comparison theory and Xia et al.’s (2004) study of price equity examined the causes of these behaviors. Individualized social comparison is common in human society (Coyne et al., 2017) and influences individual conduct. This dictates what people do and appear compelled to do. Therefore, it allows us to understand social group interactions (Want and Saiphoo, 2017). According to Le (2020), the connection between social comparison and materialism can lead to impulse buying behaviors. Tokgoz (2020) showed that materialistic values had significant and beneficial effects on status, impulsiveness, and compulsive consumption.

Studies focused on the effect of social comparison on materialism (Islam et al., 2018) and negative affect (Charoensukmongkol, 2018; Liu et al., 2019a, Liu et al., 2019b; Moyal et al., 2020). For example, Liu et al., 2019a, Liu et al., 2019b indicated that upward social comparison on social media can lead to a series of negative outcomes such as malicious envy (Charoensukmongkol, 2018; Moyal et al., 2020), depressive symptoms (Li, 2019), and social anxiety (Jiang et al., 2020). The explanation is that people who experience negative emotions are more likely to engage in impulse shopping (Liu et al., 2019a, Liu et al., 2019b). Feng et al., 2021. illustrated that in hospitality, a high similarity between a reviewer and readers increases the latter's social comparison tendencies, which induced malicious envy when the writer was considered undeserving of luxury hotel consumption. Islam et al. (2018) found that social comparison was a key determinant of materialistic values; however, they only focused on downward social comparisons among individuals. Several studies examined intrinsic factors that affect impulse buying such as materialism (Oztürk and Nart, 2016; Barakat, 2019; Mukhtar et al., 2021), shopping enjoyment tendencies (Badgaiyan and Verma, 2014; Barakat, 2019; Febrilia and Warokka, 2021), marketing-driven factors (Mehta and Chugan, 2013), price and product-related factors (Jones et al., 2003; Hasanpoor et al., 2019), and internal and external triggers (Chavosh et al., 2011; Iyer et al., 2020; Kimiagari and Malafe, 2021). Mukhtar et al. (2021) found that materialism had a significantly strong and positive influence on impulse buying. However, their research included women respondents only and was thus not entirely representative because it was one-sided. Furthermore, Oztürk and Nart (2016) conducted a study on university students and found that materialistic traits substantially and favorably impacted impulse buying. In terms of confidence, which was considered a moderating variable, Mukhtar et al. (2021) stated that confidence moderated the connection between materialism and impulse buying through depression. It was explained that more confident customers were less afraid to make purchasing decisions for themselves and were less influenced by contextual factors, which led to less depression and impulse buying.

This study, based on the previous theoretical background, and using solvable problems and actual situations, aims to determine the interplay between social comparisons, materialism, negative affectivity, and impulse buying as variables and uses confidence as the moderating variable in the context of online shopping in Vietnam. Specifically, this study's goal is to explore the impact of social comparison on materialism and the effect materialism has on impulse buying and whether it is positive or negative. It also examines the moderating effect of confidence on the relationship between social comparison and materialism and the link between social comparison and negative affect.

This study contributes in a variety of ways. First, a framework model was developed to empirically examine the relationships between materialism, social comparisons, impulse buying and negative affect and how the moderating variable confidence works. In particular, this study will explain why customers' social comparisons will positively or negatively affect their levels of materialism or have no affect at all. Additionally, it contributes to determining the effect of consumers' materialism on negative affect and impulse buying, and which additional factors affect impulse buying apart from social comparisons. It extends Brown's (2016) findings that highly materialistic Vietnamese customers are willing to spend more money than consumers who are less materialistic. Moreover, this study also contributes to the theoretical framework of how impulse buying is affected by consumers' negative affect and whether negative affect was the direct cause. It expands literature on negative affect by evaluating it as the mediating factor, which is a different perspective to that of Liu et al., 2019a, Liu et al., 2019b. This study also expands the literature on consumer behavior by exploring the factors that affect impulse buying behaviors in the south of Vietnam, which other authors have not yet discovered. Furthermore, the results of this study will help improve marketers' understanding of consumer impulse buying behaviors by understanding the relationship between materialism and negative affect, and to formulate effective marketing strategies to boost impulse buying to their benefit. Apart from these contributions, this study also has some limitations. The model's results may vary because of differences between regions; hence, the study's results might not be valid elsewhere. Additionally, the study's findings may differ depending on the target participants.

This paper is presented as follows: The theoretical foundation and a review of past studies are covered next. Thereafter, the data and techniques are presented and is followed by a summary of the empirical findings. Subsequently, the findings are discussed and the final section presents the managerial implications, research limitations, and conclusion.

2. Literature review and hypotheses

2.1. Social comparison theory

The term “social comparison” was originally coined by Festinger (1954), who was the first to develop a systematic framework. However, the basic principle has been around since social philosophy and scientists have been around. The process of thinking about some factor concerning another or several other people, in reference to the self, is defined as social comparison (Meier and Schäfer, 2018). Social comparison theory is based on the concept that people have internal needs to evaluate themselves by comparing their perspectives and abilities to those of others (Usmani and Ejaz, 2020). Individual conduct is influenced by social comparison, which dictates what a person can do and considers necessary to do. Therefore, it is easy to define a social group's interpersonal affects (Want and Saiphoo, 2017). Additionally, Liu et al. (2017) explained that individuals engage in social comparison because they have access to information on other people. Comparing yourself and your relative position to others has an impact on the other person’ self-concept, level of motivation, and sense of well-being, among other factors (Suls and Wheeler, 2000). There are two types of social comparisons: upward and downward. Upward comparisons are usually connected to negative self-affects (e.g., feeling inferior), whereas downward comparisons are usually related to positive self-affects, such as feeling morally superior (Buunk and Gibbons, 2007). In theory, upward social comparisons lead to people having many negative thoughts about themselves because it reinforces the belief that others are better off than them (Schmuck et al., 2019). This form of social comparison puts one's own self in jeopardy and elicits unpleasant feelings (Jankowski and Takahashi, 2014). In contrast, downward comparisons are most frequently performed for the sake of self-improvement (Luo et al., 2018). This form of comparison generates positive feelings (Jankowski and Takahashi, 2014).

2.2. Materialism

Materialism is defined as the value a person places on acquiring and having material possessions based on desires or needs, and the type of behavior they engage in to achieve the desired results (Richins and Dawson, 1992). Materialism was described by Belk (1984) as “the significance a consumer gives to worldly belongings.” Richins and Dawson (1992) adopted a different approach to materialism. They found that materialistic customers evaluated their achievements based on the merits of their belongings. Consumers who valued materialism, had lifestyles which centered on acquiring goods (Rokeach, 1973), and they defined their goals and objectives in life in accordance with their achievements (Daun, 1983). Additionally, the interplay between materialism, social stratification, post-materialism, and consumption were investigated (Wang, 2016). Pinto et al. (2017) pointed out that materialism developed during adolescence and was impacted by extrinsic variables such as sex, age, socioeconomic status, self-esteem, friends, and classmates. In the development of globalization, one of the most important rising movements in humanities and social sciences is new materialism. However, it is one of the least understood (Gamble et al., 2019).

2.3. Negative affect

Fear, anger, sadness, guilt, and disgust are examples of negative affect, which is an underlying feature of a wide range of emotional states (Wolniewicz et al., 2018). According to Bleil et al. (2008), negative affect has physiological correlations that are similar to sadness and anxiety, such as poor heart-rate variability. Thus, in this study, the term “negative affect” is defined as words indicating bad moods such as depression and stress. Liu et al., 2019a, Liu et al., 2019b examined the link between upward social comparison on social networking sites and impulse buying, as well as the mediating roles of negative affect and ruminating. This study emphasizes the interplay between social comparison, materialism, negative affect, impulse buying, as well as confidence, as the moderating variable between these relationships. First, it is considered whether social comparison has any impact on materialism and the negative influence of fierce competition in today's market economy. Examining these connections will help find a deeper connection between materialism and its negative influence on consumers' current impulse buying. O'Brien (2018) conducted a study in US and pointed out that food, clothing, personal care products, and shoes account for $5,400 in annual impulse expenditures. Furthermore, Verplanken et al. (2005) claimed that the objective of an impulse purchase was to make oneself feel much better. This may potentially boost chronic negative sensations. Negative affect has been demonstrated to contribute to both the cognitive and affective components of impulse buying.

2.4. Impulse buying

Consumers engage in impulsive consumption when they acquire something unintentionally, without thinking, and without planning (Serfas et al., 2014). Furthermore, unplanned, and unexpected buying, also known as impulse buying, are frequently accompanied by cognitive and emotional reactions (Rook, 1987). According to Beatty and Ferrell (1998), consumers took more care when purchasing highly expensive items, and were more likely to be impulsive when acquiring cheaper products. In general, consumers' impulse buying tendencies were instinctive, and indicated a general inclination for impulse buying. Previously, impulsive customers valued online reviews for their hedonic values, whereas now impulsive customers value online reviews for their utility values (Zhang et al., 2018). However, impulse buying was found to be similar to rational decision making, which had long been an assumption in consumer behavioral research (Verhagen and Van Dolen, 2011). According to previous research, many factors affect impulse buying. The four components that particularly contribute to impulse buying are external cues, internal stimuli, situational and product-related factors, and demographic and socio-cultural factors (Muruganantham and Bhakat, 2013). External stimuli are marketing indicators used by marketers to entice customers to make a purchase (Yoon and Faber, 2000), whereas internal stimuli are aspects of a person's personality (Luo et al., 2018). Furthermore, in the context of live-stream commerce, social presence also affects impulse buying (Ming et al., 2021). Mukhtar et al. (2021) also found that consumers' materialistic values predicted impulse buying and distress among consumers in Pakistan.

2.5. Confidence

According to Davis, a sense of faith in one's talents, traits, and judgment is characterized as confidence. Mukhtar et al. (2021) showed that risk, as well as psychological traits such as self-confidence and self-esteem, are all aspects that influence buying decisions. Consumers who lacked confidence depended more on external information obtained from others to evaluate products because their lack of confidence and risk aversions resulted in them being unable to assess matters for themselves (Khan et al., 2016). Moreover, self-confidence refers to how people feel about themselves, how they differ from others, and their talents and competencies in general. However, confidence is based on people's activities in which they demonstrate self-esteem through their actions. In addition, consumers bought on impulse when they experienced passionate afflictions, such as anxiety, mental distress, disappointment, agony, and stress (Weinstein et al., 2016). This shows that when people have high levels of product involvement or understanding of technical specifications, their emotions are activated, and product involvement becomes a significant component in encouraging impulse-buying behaviors (Mukhtar et al., 2021).

2.6. Research framework

The central research proposal of this study is based on a combination of the preceding findings and includes exploring the interaction of these variables, which are social comparison, materialism, and negative affect, on impulse buying and using confidence as the mediator. This model with the mediator variables and confidence is unique and will provide a deeper understanding of the relationship between materialism and negative affect on impulse buying. Liu et al., 2019a, Liu et al., 2019b examined the association between upward social comparison, materialism, and negative affect. In addition, potential factors, such as materialism, negative affect, and social comparison positively influenced impulse buying. However, this study also pointed out certain limitations other than those that are common in social research, such as a narrow research area and a small population size. The study mostly focused on the mediating effect of chronic negative emotions in the relationship between upward social comparison, on social networking sites, and impulse buying. Measuring upward social comparison on social networking sites and negative affect simultaneously may prime individuals’ emotional reactions to social comparison on social network sites, even though participants were instructed to indicate their general reactions. Additionally, other potential factors were considered as mediating factors within these relationships. Furthermore, this study examined the negative impact of social comparison, which could lead to depression (Lee et al., 2020; Pang, 2021), envy (Moyal et al., 2020; Latif et al., 2021) and the positive impact of social comparison on impulse buying (Beatty and Ferrell, 1998). Mukhtar et al. (2021) observed the moderated effect of confidence as a valuable reference. In particular, they found that confidence moderated the relationship between materialism and impulse buying through depression. However, previous studies have not studied the moderating effect of confidence between social comparison and materialism or how confidence affects the relationship between social comparison and negative affect. Therefore, this study proposes an appropriate conceptual framework (see Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Proposed model.

2.7. Hypothesis

According to Díaz and Arroyo (2017), social comparison has a significantly positive effect on materialism. In line with Gu and Hung's research (2009), social comparison, incorporating media celebrity imitation, is a fundamental driver of materialism. La Ferle and Chan (2005) also discovered that social comparison was a fundamental driver of materialistic values, and it is well recognized that materialistic tendencies affected compulsive buying among adolescents (Reeves et al., 2012). Furthermore, Zheng et al. (2018) pointed out that upward social comparisons increased both benign and malignant envy, resulting in increased materialism. Tatzel (2002) found that consumers had good attitudes toward debt and impulse shopping, and their spending requests and density of materialism were high. Belk (1995) found that materialistic consumers were fascinated by or addicted to spending, and this propensity implied buy now – think later behaviors. Furthermore, Chatterjee et al. (2019) discovered that upward social comparisons were associated with blatant materialism. Leavitt et al. (2019) gave an example of how social comparison could boost materialism. In their study, American and Brazilian women were shown items purchased by their families or friends, which led to them wanting to purchase similar items. Previous research mostly focused on adolescents; however, this study focused on adults' materialism, which can be construed as more representative of the whole population. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H1

Social comparison has a positive impact on materialism

Social comparisons can have several harmful consequences on social media. Robinson et al. (2019) indicated that online social comparison can have negative effects on an individual's self-evaluation and level of distress. In particular, Appel et al. (2015) showed that comparing oneself to the unrealistically positive profiles of others, on social networking sites, can cause depressive symptoms. However, the study did not clarify specific social comparisons, namely, upward, or downward comparisons. Nesi and Prinstein (2015) showed that upward social comparison on social media sites was linked to depressive symptoms. Furthermore, Liu et al., 2019a, Liu et al., 2019b focused on upward social comparison and showed that negative affect played a pivotal role in evaluating upward social comparison on online communication to forecast impulse buying. Additionally, Liu et al. (2017) revealed that upward social comparison on social networking sites was a significant predictor of depressive symptoms among Chinese undergraduate students. In terms of downward comparison, pleasurable feelings of pride and amusement (Smith, 2000) or the negative emotions of pity (e.g., Wood and Vander Zee, 1997) could emerge from downward comparison. People sensed pity, dread, anxiety, empathy (assimilative emotions), scorn, or pride after downward social comparisons (contrastive emotions) (Rosenthal et al., 2019). These studies show that there are not many studies on general social comparisons, which target the adult population. Therefore, this study hypothesizes that social comparison in general can cause negative affect such as pressure or feelings of inferiority, which will influence adults in making social comparisons. Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H2

Social comparison has a positive impact on negative affect

According to Buunk and Gibbons (2007), comparison targets suggest that individuals with similar connected traits were more likely to be compared. They showed that self-image comparison was a significant aspect of social comparison. In particular, those subjected to upward comparison were very anxious about their appearances and selves, which led to an upsurge in impulse buying. In contrast, Lucas and Koff (2017) discovered that comparing one's physical appearance to someone else's could enhance impulse buying. Additionally, impulse buying could be triggered by social comparisons, such as when customers observed their peers buying certain goods (Liu et al., 2019a, Liu et al., 2019b; Zafar et al., 2021). However, this study only looked at middle-school children rather than a clinical sample, which could be considered a limitation. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H3

Social comparison has a positive impact on impulse buying

Preliminary studies connected materialism to a slew of negative personal consequences, including unhappiness about life, poor marital satisfaction, overconsumption, and diminished well-being (Wang et al., 2017). Moreover, Roberts and Clement (2007) illustrated that negative affect from materialism included unhappiness with life in general, discontent with socialization, nervousness, excessive purchasing, low financial well-being, and so on. Furthermore, Muñiz et al. (2019) found that there was a positive relationship between materialism and depressive symptoms. However, despite the descriptive nature of their research methodology, they were unable to determine if materialism caused a greater inclination toward sadness and unhappiness, or the converse. Furthermore, studies on materialism mainly emphasized what people generally value in life or in specific life domains, such as athletics (Vansteenkiste et al., 2004b), education, and family (Vansteenkiste et al., 2004a). In addition, Dittmar et al. (2014) found that materialistic circumstances may have mitigated the negative impacts of individual materialistic values. Sirgy (1998) pointed out that the significant negative relationship between materialism and life happiness was mediated by evaluating the standards of living. Accordingly, it is reasonable to offer this hypothesis based on the above findings.

H4

Materialism has a positive impact on negative affect

According to several studies, highly materialistic consumers have distinct consumption patterns that are determined by their perceived social statuses. They have heightened senses of social status and consume status items. In other words, impulse buying is influenced by materialism, particularly among younger consumers, who have larger discrepancies between their actual and ideal selves and are more likely to buy to reinforce and affirm their self-concepts (Moran, 2015). According to Türk and Ercis (2017), impulse buying and its connection to materialism is a psychological phenomenon among young adults in Turkey. In particular, materialists have such a high proclivity for consumer buying because an increase in materialism leads to a corresponding increase in impulse buying. Similar to that study, Sen and Nayak (2019) discovered that Indian youngsters were materialistic and consequently engaged in impulse shopping. They claimed that materialism increased people's needs for material belongings and lured them to buy in excess, with a significant percentage being impulsive. However, the study was conducted in the Eastern market, which may differ from the Asian market. In addition, (Yi and Tai, 2020) indicated that those who envision unfavorable consequences purchasing an item would be less likely to engage in impulsive purchases in the future and could become less materialistic. In contrast those who imagine favorable outcomes for their purchase decisions would be more likely to buy impulsively again and become more materialistic. Thus, the hypothesis is as follows:

H5

Materialism has a positive impact on impulse buying

2.8. Negative affect

The link between negative mood and impulse buying has been validated by a large number of studies (Liu et al., 2019a, Liu et al., 2019b). Verplanken et al. (2005) claimed that negative affect contributed to both the cognitive and affective components of impulse buying. Depression and dissatisfaction were also found to be positively connected to impulse buying by Sneath, Lacey and Kennett-Hensel (2009). In terms of snack consumption, Romagnoli et al. (2021) discovered that negative affect was the main driver of occasional snack impulse buying. However, that study's main limitation was that it was conducted in the field of direct consumption, such as buying at the market or convenience stores, which might not represent other industries. The negative affect scale was used to assess participants' moods; however, performing this procedure might have influenced their subsequent conduct. Furthermore, Broadway et al. (2020) also showed that negative affect situations might trigger impulse buying, as evidenced by consumers who claimed to have used impulse shopping to alleviate their depressed mood states. However, this study highlighted their limitations as demographic gaps. In addition, Liu et al., 2019a, Liu et al., 2019b supported the earlier finding that negative affect, such as guilt and regret were linked to impulse buying. Many researchers discovered that negative affect predicted impulse buying as a way of dealing with negative emotions (Silvera et al., 2008). In other words, impulse buying results in people escaping from negative feelings (Liu et al., 2019a, Liu et al., 2019b). Hence, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H6

Negative affect has a positive impact on impulse buying

2.9. The moderating effect of confidence

Chuang et al. (2013), in a psychology study, found that confidence was an important component of any human mental state and was a significant feature in the customer purchasing decision-making process. Consequently, it is frequently utilized to analyze consumer behavior. Confidence is one of the most essential identity attributes, which determines how individuals react to circumstances. These reactions and activities then determine their mindsets (Benabou and Tirole, 2002). Thus, if shoppers had more confidence, they would be less afraid to make purchasing decisions for themselves and would be less influenced by outside information, which would reduce despair and impulse buying (Mukhtar et al., 2021). However, the more information a customer seemed to have, the more difficult it appeared for them to make decisions (Outreville and Desrochers, 2014). Thus, the question remains whether confidence influences the relationship between social comparison and impulse buying. In contrast, consumers who lack confidence depend more on external information obtained from others to assess factors because they are unable to rate objects owing to their lack of confidence and willingness to take risks. Under materialism, the question remains whether confidence moderates the relationship between materialism and social comparison. Therefore, these hypotheses are proposed:

H7a

Confidence moderates the relationship between materialism and social comparison

H7b

Confidence moderates the relationship between impulse buying and social comparison

3. Methodology

3.1. Methodology used

3.1.1. Participants and procedure

This study chose a youthful group of people aged 18–31 years as participants and divided them into two main groups: students from Banking University and office workers who engage in unplanned impulse buying. According to Nielsen's Vietnam study (2018), 60 percent of online buyers are women and 55 percent are between the ages of 25 and 29, which validates our choice of target respondents. Aside from associating this age group with social networking sites, shopping for products online has become extremely prevalent (Temkin, 2009). Hence, during June to August 2021, 400 potential respondents were contacted to complete the survey, which was written in Vietnamese, and asked for demographic information (such as name, gender, education, and income). Hair et al. (1998) recommended that the sample size should be at least five times larger than the number of variables in the factor analysis. Consequently, 249 valid responses were obtained. All respondents were residents of Ho Chi Minh city. The data was collected during the course of one month, starting from August 1, 2021.

Pilot and actual testing were conducted in two stages. The questionnaire was pilot tested with a sample of ten respondents over the course of two days prior to the actual testing. The primary goal of the pilot test was to detect troublesome questions. This is a chance for the questionnaire designer to learn whether there is any uncertainty about any of the items as well as whether participants have any recommendations on how the items can be improved (Tsang et al., 2017). Consequently, the author assessed the questionnaire, in the pilot test, based on a number of factors, including its relevance, conciseness, and practicality, as well as language and item sequencing (Buschle et al., 2021). Fortunately, there were no concerns about the clarity of the items or the questionnaire's acceptability. In terms of the official test, this study collected online responses from Vietnamese residents via social networking sites such as Zalo, Facebook, and Gmail. Online surveys were conducted because they are cost-effective and quick (Nayak and Narayan, 2019). Furthermore, because of the significant risk of transmitting COVID-19, this technique permitted the author to obey the government's admonition to stay at home. In terms of research area, this study was conducted in Ho Chi Minh city and it was chosen because in 2021 the city had 35.4 million e-commerce consumers in Vietnam, who made approximately 6.6 million worth of purchases online.

3.1.2. Questionnaire design

This study used existing measures and a 5-point Likert scale was used to measure these items. For demographic variables, gender, age, and monthly living expenses have all been linked to impulse buying (Coley and Burgess, 2003; Vohs and Faber, 2007). Consequently, these factors were used as control variables. To measure social comparison, modified items from the Likert scale developed by Liu et al., 2019a, Liu et al., 2019b and Wang et al. (2017) were used. Moreover, ten negative impact items were distributed randomly based on Watson et al. (1988). The impulse buying scale was used to assess impulse buying as developed by Verplanken and Herabadi (2001), Vazquez et al. (2020), and Zhang et al. (2018). Materialism was assessed using the 9-item scale developed by Mukhtar et al. (2021), Pradhan et al. (2018), and Le (2020). Moreover, confidence was observed using five items based on Dash et al. (1976). Some measurement items were the author's own creations based on the current situation in Vietnam and the author's own experience of Vietnamese people's ethnicity, culture, and characteristics. These measurements included: “I habitually compare myself to others,” “My regular topic of conversation is how I compare to others,” “I often think that other people are happier,” and “I am ashamed that I am less successful than my friends”. Table 1 will show all detailed measurement items.

Table 1.

Constructs and measurement items.

Construct Items Measures Supporting References
Social comparison SC1 I always compare the way I perform tasks to the way others perform tasks. Liu et al., 2019a, Liu et al., 2019b
SC2 In social situations, I am prone to comparing how I look to those who are more attractive than me.
SC3 I frequently compare my achievements in life to others.
SC4 I attempt to discover other people's views on things I want to learn more about.
SC5 I enjoy discussing common interests and experiences with others.
SC6 I am always fascinated by what others might do in a similar scenario.
SC7 I often compare myself to people close to me (boyfriends or girlfriends, family members, etc.) Wang et al. (2017)
SC8 I am obsessed with comparing myself to others. Author proposed
SC9 My regular topic of conversation is how I compare to others.
SC10 I habitually compare myself to others.
SC11 I often think that other people are happier.
Impulse buying IB1 I am extremely excited when I see something that I want to buy. Verplanken and Herabadi (2001)
IB2 When I buy something, it is usually spontaneous.
IB3 I often buy things online without thinking.
IB4 If I see something new, I want to buy it.
IB5 My purchases are always unplanned.
IB6 I occasionally feel bad about purchasing something. Vazquez et al. (2020)
IB7 I occasionally purchase items that I do not need because I enjoy buying them. Olsen et al. (2016)
IB8 I am defined by “If I see it, I buy it.” Zhang et al. (2018)
Materialism MAT1 I admire people who have luxury homes, automobiles, and clothing. Mukhtar et al. (2021)
MAT2 I enjoy owning items that make others notice me. Le (2020)
MAT3 I often worry about not being able to afford everything I want to buy.
MAT4 My possessions reveal a great deal about how well I am doing in life.
MAT5 I adore splurging on items that are not useful. Pradhan et al. (2018)
MAT6 I value material possessions less than most other people I know.
MAT7 I think my life would be better if I had some of the things, I do not have.
MAT8 I would not be much happier if I had nicer possessions.
MAT9 I have all I require to live a happy life.
Negative affect NE1 I become irritated when I see other people's accomplishments. Meier and Schäfer (2018)
NE2 It does not seem fair that some people appear to be having more fun than me. Tandoc et al. (2015)
NE3 It makes me nervous to realize that my peers are better than me. Charoensukmongkol (2018)
NE4 It is depressing to realize that my peers are more successful than me.
NE5 It hurts to realize that someone has a better life than me.
NE6 I do not like it when my peers are more attractive than me.
NE7 I am ashamed that I am less successful than my friends. Author proposed
NE8 I am jealous that my peers are more successful than me.
NE9 I harbor a grudge (resentment, malice) that my peers are more successful than me. Moyal et al. (2020)
NE10 I definitely want everything that someone else has.
Confidence CD1 In general, I am confident of my talents. Dash et al. (1976)
CD1 In general, I am confident in what I am currently doing.
CD1 I don't regret anything that has happened to me.
CD1 I am confident that I am better than others. Author proposed
CD1 In general, I am confident about my decisions.

4. Results and findings

4.1. Demographic statistics

The questionnaire was distributed to 260 respondents using a Google form and 249 valid responses were received. The 11 invalid responses were because the respondents incorrectly answered the reverse-scale questions. The genders were equally divided; however, most respondents were younger than 30 years. The random sample showed that men and women were equally impulsive, and those aged 31–40 years were most likely to make impulse purchases. The demographic statistics are shown in Table 2.

Table 2.

Response rate of groups.

Category Number of respondents Percentage
Gender
Male 115 46%
Female 134 44%
Age
Less than 20 17 7%
20–30 55 22%
31–40 65 26%
41–50 63 25%
51–60 30 12%
Above 60 19 8%
Occupation
Student 87 35%
Financial/insurance 67 27%
Education/culture 53 21%
Government 13 5%
Media 19 8%
Others 10 4%
Education
Senior High Diploma or Below 10 4%
Associate Bachelor Degree 93 37%
Bachelor Degree 87 35%
Master Degree 49 20%
PhD Degree 10 4%

4.2. Ethical approval

The author received ethical approval from the Banking University Research Ethical Board, and the study complied with ethical standards although a number was not allocated to the approval. Respondents were informed both verbally and in writing about the purpose of the research, and their consent was obtained before filling out the questionnaire. Respondents were aware that their participation in the research was voluntary. They were also assured that their responses would be kept confidential.

4.3. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)

Bagozzi and Foxall (1996) showed that confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) can be used to evaluate reliability and validity. The CFA's goodness-of-fit was used to further examine the construct's convergent validity. The following indices were used in the CFA: Chi-square/df (cmin/df) = 1.941, goodness of fit index (GFI) = 0.822, adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI) = 0.821, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.929, root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEM) = 0.062, and Tucker Lewis Index (TLI) = 0.923. These indicator results show that a GFI greater than 0.8 and less than 0.9 is considered acceptable according to two studies by Baumgartner and Homburg (1996) and Doll et al. (1994) because it significantly depends on the scale's measure, number of observations, and sample size. Consequently, all variables in this study were within the acceptable range (see Table 3).

Table 3.

Confirmatory factor analysis.

Measure Threshold Results Source
Chi-square/df (cmin/df) ≤2 good; ≤ 3 sometimes permissible 1.941 Hair et al. (2010)
Goodness of fit index (GFI) ≥0.9: acceptable; ≥ 0.8: marginal 0.822 Hair et al. (2010)
Adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI) ≥0.8 0.821 Hair et al. (2010)
Comparative fit index (CFI) ≥0.95 great; ≥0.90 traditional;
≥0.80 sometimes permissible
0.929 Hair et al. (2010)
Root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEM) ≤0.05 good; ≤0.08 moderate 0.062 Hair et al. (2010)
Tucker Lewis Index (TLI) ≥0.90 0.923 Hair et al. (2010)

Construct validity: According to Hair et al. (2009), average variance extracted (AVE) scores should be around 0.5 and should explain 50% or more of the variance. The reliability of all the variables, including social comparison, materialism, negative affect, and impulse buying, ranged from 0.912 to 0.944 (see Table 3). Therefore, the reliability of these findings is satisfactory. The factor loading of most items exceeded 0.5 (Hair et al., 2009). However, some items were rejected for being less than 0.5 including three social comparisons (SC), two materialisms, one negative affect, and one impulse buying. Moreover, AVE for each construct was greater than 0.5, and the construct reliability (CR) of all the latent variables was higher than 0.7. All indicators had significant loading into the respective latent constructs, with values between 0.588 and 0.707. Therefore, the results were acceptable and could explain over 50% of the variance (see Table 4).

Table 4.

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) fitting Indices.

Estimate Cronbach CR AVE
Social comparision 0.922 0.927 0.600
SC1 0.696
SC2 0.698
SC3 0.654
SC4 0.814
SC5 0.843
SC6 0.789
SC7 0.840
SC8 0.840
Materialism 0.912 0.907 0.588
MAT1 0.709
MAT2 0.604
MAT3 0.669
MAT4 0.709
MAT5 0.865
MAT6 0.883
MAT7 0.881
Negative affect 0.923 0.935 0.644
NE1 0.714
NE2 0.775
NE3 0.820
NE4 0.778
NE5 0.835
NE6 0.835
NE7 0.815
NE8 0.840
NE9 0.646
Impulse Buying 0.944 0.943 0.707
IB1 0.812
IB2 0.871
IB3 0.908
IB4 0.926
IB5 0.833
IB6 0.760
IB7 0.761

According to Hair et al. (2009), discriminant validity ensures that a concept measure is statistically distinctive and accurately depicts phenomena that other measures in a structural equation model miss. This was tested by comparing if the square root of AVE, in a latent construct, was higher than all the construct correlations. The results showed that the square of AVE values, for all the variables, social comparison, materialism, and negative affect were higher than the inter-construct correlations (see Table 5). Table 5 shows that the outer loading values of all indicators were higher than the values of all cross-loadings on the other constructs. Thus, the outcomes were considered appropriate.

Table 5.

Discriminant validity.

SC MAT NE IB
SC
MAT 0.60
NE 0.151 0.588
IB 0.180 0.501 0.644
IB6 0.123 0.034 0.134 0.707

The data analysis indicates that social comparison has a significant effect on materialism (β = 0.527, p < .001). The first hypothesis also has a t-value of 6,545, implying that people who frequently make social comparisons are also more materialistic. Thus, H1 is supported. However, social comparison does not have a significantly positive effect on negative affect (β = -0.33, t-value = -4.801), and H2 is unsupported in this study. This finding contradicts other research that if a person usually participates in social comparisons, it will not lead to negative affect, such as envy or pressure. In addition, social comparison (β = 0.370, p < .001) has a significantly positive impact on impulse buying. Highly impulsive buyers are directly affected by social comparisons. Thus, H3 is supported. Moreover, materialism is significantly positively related to negative affect (β = 0.150, t-value = 2.736) and impulse buying (β = 0.142, t-value = 2.611 p < .01). Therefore, H4 and H5 is also supported. Finally, impulse buying is positively predicted by negative affect (β = 0.177, t-value = 3.130, p < .01). Thus, H6 is also supported. Figure 2 shows the results of the model assessment and Table 6 represents the results briefing.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

The result of the model assessment (∗∗∗p < .001).

Table 6.

Results of hypothesis test.

Hypotheses Path Standardized path coefficient t-value Result
H1 Social comparison → Materialism 0.527∗∗∗ 6.545 Support
H2 Social comparison → Negative Affect -0.33 -4.801 Unsupported
H3 Social comparison → Impulse buying 0.370∗∗∗ 5.401 Support
H4 Materialism → Negative Affect 0.150∗∗ 2.736 Support
H5 Materialism → Impulse buying 0.142∗∗ 2.611 Support
H6 Negative Affect → Impulse buying 0.177∗∗ 3.130 Support

Note. N = 249, ∗p < .014; ∗∗p < .01; ∗∗∗p < .001

4.4. Moderation results

The author investigated whether the impact of social comparison on materialism could be examined through confidence (moderator) and if the results support the assumption of the hypothesized moderated model (H7a was supported). Specifically, a test was first conducted to determine whether the interaction between social comparison and confidence had a significant effect on materialism. A significant interaction effect was found, β = 0.294, p < 0.001. Social comparison and confidence also had a significant interaction effect on impulse buying (β = 0.209, p < 0.001; H7b was supported). In particular, social comparison interacted with confidence to the extent that those with lower levels of confidence have materialistic and impulse buying tendencies that are very similar across low and high levels of social comparison. When making more comparisons, those with higher levels of confidence indicated higher levels of materialism and impulse buying. Similarly, regardless of materialism levels, individuals who reported lower levels of confidence had reduced impulse-buying tendencies, whereas those with greater levels of confidence reported significant impulse buying due to strong materialism. The results can be interpreted that if shoppers were more confident, they would be less afraid to make purchasing decisions for themselves, which could lead to a rise in materialism, such as strong desires to own more things, and splurging on useless stuff. This would directly impact their impulse and spontaneous purchases. The results are shown in Figures 3 and 4.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Plotted interaction of social comparison and confident on materialism.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Plotted interaction of social comparison and confident on impulse buying.

5. Discussion

A total of 400 surveys were sent to young individuals via the Internet. Those who had done online shopping before were asked to participate in the study. However, only 249 surveys were valid of the 400 surveys and used in the analysis. In addition, this study relied on previously-published measurements. These items were assessed using a 5-point Likert scale. Demographic characteristics such as gender, age, and monthly living expenditures were previously connected to impulse buying (Coley and Burgess, 2003; Vohs and Faber, 2007). The other main measurement constructs were based on various authors such as Watson et al. (1988), Verplanken and Herabadi (2001), Vazquez et al. (2020), and Zhang et al. (2018). In addition, some of the measures were the author's own recommendations and based on current contextual factors in Vietnam, and the author's personal opinions of factors that would demonstrate the ethnicity, culture, and features of Vietnamese consumers.

The antecedents and implications of impulse buying and social comparisons have been studied in various fields. However, few studies have examined how materialism affects impulse buying or how it is influenced by social comparison. As a result, the goal of this study was to determine the link between social comparison, materialism, impulse buying, negative affect, and confidence as a moderating factor in the model by examining eight hypotheses. The results indicate that social comparison has a positive impact on materialism, leading individuals to purchase impulsively, which is consistent with the findings of Zheng and Peng (2018). They found that after making upward social comparisons, consumers placed higher values on material things and that people were more inclined to spend money on publicly visible products compared to those making downward or no social comparisons.

The result of the positive relationship between social comparison and materialism indicates that when people compare themselves socially to those who are better than them, they will admire the better lifestyles that create strong desires for them to buy similar luxury items. In contrast, if they compare themselves to people who are inferior to them, they are likely to feel confident and proud of themselves; thus, it is easier for them to make unplanned purchasing decisions. However, this study states that there is not a significant relationship between social comparison and negative affect. In contrast, Tandoc et al. (2015) found that upward social comparison, on social networking sites, can lead to a series of negative effects. For example, people's self-perceptions and evaluations are weakened when they are exposed to images of beautiful individuals (Fardouly et al., 2015). In particular, young adults are more inclined to compare themselves to others on social media and may be more negatively affected (Shaw et al., 2013).

However, this study, in the Vietnamese context, did not confirm that people who make upward social comparisons do not suffer any negative affect such as envy or pressure. A possible explanation for finding that social comparison is not linked to negative affect is that according to Wheeler's (1966), people do not consider upward comparisons a danger to their self-esteem, but rather as an opportunity to improve themselves. Moreover, when participants compared themselves to others, especially in upward comparisons, they were normally more joyful, experienced more schadenfreude, and felt superior, relieved, and better. They were also less envious, unhappy, and felt more worthy. Their desires to be like another person were diminished (Rosenthal et al., 2019). Another explanation in the Vietnamese context is that when people often compare themselves to others, they often feel anxious, sad, judged, and jealous and their personalities are actively being restricted. This is probably the main reason this study's results do not support Hypothesis H2.

Moreover, this study also finds that there is a significant relationship between social comparison and impulse buying. This contributes to understanding Vietnamese consumer behaviors. If people who usually buy impulsively also usually compare themselves to other people they interact with, they might highly desire the things that these other people own. This finding corroborates Liu et al., 2019a, Liu et al., 2019b research in which they illustrated that making upward comparisons on social media might lead to increased impulse buying among young individuals. In addition, impulse buying can be triggered by social comparisons, such as when customers observe their peers buying certain goods (Rook et al., 1995). Roberts and Manolis (2012) also found that impulse buying was frequently triggered by social comparisons. Furthermore, this study confirmed the impact of negative affect on impulse buying, in line with many existing studies. When people experience unpleasant emotions, they are more likely to engage in impulse shopping and see it as a method to enjoy themselves (Liu et al., 2019a, Liu et al., 2019b), and this tendency also exists in Vietnam. In Vietnam, the more people feel bad, because of pressure, stress, and so on, the more prone they are to shop impulsively to feel better. Therefore, this tendency is easy to understand in terms of basic human psychological desires, which considers that psychological behaviors cause people to splurge. This was researched, in psychology, by Park et al. (2006) and Naeem (2020).

Moreover, a recent study contributes to earlier findings that materialism increases impulse buying. For example, if people strongly desire something, they will not hesitate to buy it. This is in line with Moran (2015), who revealed that there was a strong correlation between materialism and impulse consumption among women college students aged 18 to 27. In addition, Vohra (2016) found that materialistic values have a major influence on impulse buying among young customers. Moreover, Yoon and Kim (2016) demonstrated the influence of materialistic ideals on impulse consumption by using qualitative and in-depth interviews and methods, and a sample of hypermarket customers and university undergraduate students. Moreover, the study also stated the relationship between materialism and negative affect, which has not been the focus of many previous studies. Alzubaidi et al. (2021) found that materialism significantly affected consumer intentions.

Furthermore, this study examined the unique feature of confidence in the direct and indirect links between social comparison on social media and impulse buying, as well as social comparison and materialism. Thus, these findings on the moderator variable consider new points that contribute to existing theories. In particular, people with lower levels of confidence have materialistic and impulse buying inclinations that are highly comparable across low and high levels of social comparison, indicating that social comparison interacts with confidence. Furthermore, those with higher levels of confidence expressed greater levels of materialism and impulse buying and made more comparisons. In accordance with this, individuals with lower levels of confidence participated less in impulse buying and this was not based on the degree of materialism. In contrast, those with higher levels of confidence strongly engaged in impulse buying due to strong materialism.

6. Conclusion

In a fiercely competitive world market, customers have increasingly more choices and power, and customer psychology changes accordingly. Impulse shopping has become increasingly popular. People buy something that is not based on their original intention. Impulse buying is influenced by many direct and indirect factors. Many previous studies have shown that social comparison, materialism, and negative affect directly influence direct shopping. Therefore, this study builds a model to determine the relationship between the following factors: social comparison, materialism, negative affect, and impulse buying, and the interplay between these factors. This study also identifies the role of confidence in moderating the relationship between social comparison and impulse buying, as well as social comparison and materialism. These results are most consistent with earlier studies that investigated such variables in the context of social comparison, such as Liu et al., 2019a, Liu et al., 2019b and Zheng et al. (2018). However, this study's results do not validate the research of Fardouly et al. (2015) and Liu et al., 2019a, Liu et al., 2019b because the results reject the relationship between social comparison and negative affect. Moreover, few studies examined whether confidence played a moderating role in the relationship between social comparison and materialism. This study illustrated that confidence moderates the relationship between impulse buying and social comparison and further pointed out that consumers could not rate items themselves, owing to their lack of confidence and willingness to take chances. Consumers with less confidence depended more on external information, obtained from others through social comparison, and made assessments accordingly.

6.1. Managerial implications

The major findings of this study have numerous crucial implications. First, people often tend to compare themselves to others to improve their understanding of themselves and their abilities (Festinger, 1954). Consequently, the findings of this study will assist marketing managers in identifying consumer impulse-buying decision-making processes based on social comparisons, particularly in terms of materialistic qualities that encourage consumers to purchase. Managers may utilize this information to develop new goods, modify presentation styles, and brainstorm new marketing strategies. Businesses involved in e-commerce should emphasize the status aspects of their products and services and focus on marketing creative communication messages during sales promotions or direct sales because materialism, including happiness, success, and popularity (Richins and Dawson, 1992) favorably influences impulse buying (Moran, 2015). Moreover, businesses should make genuine attempts to improve their social comparisons by encouraging influencers to promote their goods, which implies that when fans see them using something, they will buy it without hesitation. Negative affect also influences impulse buying positively. This finding provides managers with deeper insights into customers. Specifically, when customers feel depressed, anxious, or nervous, they are more likely to buy impulsively.

6.2. Limitations

The current study has some limitations. First, because the model's outcomes may change in different contexts, the study's conclusions have low external validity, and the study's findings may also differ with a different target demographic. In addition, the research was conducted during the height of COVID-19 in Vietnam and may therefore differ if conducted in other research times and areas. Second, this study relied on a quantitative approach, which limits the scope of our findings. Thus, scholars should focus on using qualitative and longitudinal data in future research to obtain more detailed results and a more accurate image of the target population. Qualitative research is intended to produce in-depth and subjective conclusions with a small sample size (Crick, 2021). However, if it is correctly conducted, it can yield unbiased, valid, credible, and rigorous results (Anderson, 2010). Furthermore, future studies should conduct in-depth interviews or host focus groups that target those who regularly buy impulsively to gain deeper insights. In addition, various talent elements impact impulse buying in both online and traditional channels, including promotional schemes (Cho et al., 2014), and perceived utilitarian and hedonic values (Yang et al., 2021). Thus, further research could consider examining other scenarios and potential determinants. In addition, this study did not specifically investigate the components that comprise negative affect, such as malicious envy and depression. Thus, future studies could research a certain type of negative affect to obtain more specific insights.

7. Ethical statement

My research does not use human or animal subjects.

Declarations

Author contribution statement

Van Dat Tran has done: Conceived and designed the experiments; Performed the experiments; Analyzed and interpreted the data; Contributed reagents, materials, analysis tools or data; Wrote the paper.

Funding statement

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Data availability statement

Data will be made available on request.

Declaration of interest’s statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

No additional information is available for this paper.

References

  1. Alzubaidi H., Slade E.L., Dwivedi Y.K. Examining antecedents of consumers’ pro-environmental behaviours: TPB extended with materialism and innovativeness. J. Bus. Res. 2021;122:685–699. [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson Indian J. Pharmaceut. Educ. Res. 2010;46(2):221. [Google Scholar]
  3. Appel H., Crusius J., Gerlach A.L. Social comparison, envy, and depression on Facebook: a study looking at the effects of high comparison standards on depressed individuals. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol. 2015;34(4):277–289. [Google Scholar]
  4. Badgaiyan A.J., Verma A. Intrinsic factors affecting impulsive buying behaviour—evidence from India. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 2014;21(4):537–549. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bagozzi R.P., Foxall G.R. Construct validation of a measure of adaptive-innovative cognitive styles in consumption. Int. J. Res. Market. 1996;13(3):201–213. [Google Scholar]
  6. Barakat M.A. A proposed model for factors affecting consumers' impulsive buying tendency in shopping malls. J. Market. Manag. 2019;7(1):120–134. [Google Scholar]
  7. Baumgartner H., Homburg C. Applications of structural equation modeling in marketing and consumer research: a review. Int. J. Res. Market. 1996;13(2):139–161. [Google Scholar]
  8. Bénabou R., Tirole J. Self-confidence and personal motivation. Q. J. Econ. 2002;117(3):871–915. [Google Scholar]
  9. Beatty S.E., Ferrell M.E. Impulse buying: modeling its precursors. J. Retailing. 1998;74(2):169–191. [Google Scholar]
  10. Belk R.W. Collecting as luxury consumption: effects on individuals and households. J. Econ. Psychol. 1995;16(3):477–490. [Google Scholar]
  11. Belk R.W. Three scales to measure constructs related to materialism: reliability, validity, and relationships to measures of happiness. ACR North Am. Adv. 1984;11:291–297. [Google Scholar]
  12. Bleil M.E., Gianaros P.J., Jennings J.R., Flory J.D., Manuck S.B. Trait negative affect: toward an integrated model of understanding psychological risk for impairment in cardiac autonomic function. Psychosom. Med. 2008;70(3):328–337. doi: 10.1097/PSY.0b013e31816baefa. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Broadway P.R., Carroll J.A., Burdick Sanche N.C., Cravey M.D., Corley J.R. Some negative effects of heat stress in feedlot heifers may be mitigated via yeast probiotic supplementation. Front. Vet. Sci. 2020;6:515. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2019.00515. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Brown K.W., Kasser T., Ryan R.M., Konow J. Materialism, spending, and affect: an event-sampling study of marketplace behavior and its affective costs. J. Happiness Stud. 2016;17(6):2277–2292. [Google Scholar]
  15. Buschle C., Reiter H., Bethmann A. The qualitative pretest interview for questionnaire development: outline of programme and practice. Qual. Quantity. 2021;56:823–842. [Google Scholar]
  16. Buunk A.P., Gibbons F.X. Social comparison: the end of a theory and the emergence of a field. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 2007;102(1):3–21. [Google Scholar]
  17. Charoensukmongkol P. The impact of social media on social comparison and envy in teenagers: the moderating role of the parent comparing children and in-group competition among friends. J. Child Fam. Stud. 2018;27(1):69–79. [Google Scholar]
  18. Chatterjee D., Kumar M., Dayma K.K. Income security, social comparisons and materialism: determinants of subjective financial well-being among Indian adults. Int. J. Bank Market. 2019;37(4):1041–1061. [Google Scholar]
  19. Chavosh A., Halimi A.B., Namdar J. The contribution of product and consumer characteristics to consumer’s impulse purchasing behaviour in Singapore. Proc. Int. Conf. Soc. Sci. Humanit. 2011;1:248–252. [Google Scholar]
  20. Cho J., Ching G.S., Luong T.H. Impulse buying behavior of Vietnamese consumers in supermarket setting. Int. J. Risk Saf. Med. 2014;3(2):33–50. [Google Scholar]
  21. Chuang S.C., Cheng Y.H., Chang C.J., Chiang Y.T. The impact of self-confidence on the compromise effect. Int. J. Psychol. 2013;48(4):660–675. doi: 10.1080/00207594.2012.666553. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Coley A., Burgess B. Gender differences in cognitive and affective impulse buying. J. Fash. Mark. Manag. 2003;7(3):282–295. [Google Scholar]
  23. Coyne S.M., McDaniel B.T., Stockdale L.A. Do you dare to compare?. Associations between maternal social comparisons on social networking sites and parenting, mental health, and romantic relationship outcomes. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017;70:335–340. [Google Scholar]
  24. Crick J.M. Qualitative research in marketing: what can academics do better? J. Strat. Market. 2021;29(5):390–429. [Google Scholar]
  25. Dash Joseph F., Leon G., Berenson C. Risk- and personality-related dimensions of store choice. J. Market. 1976;40(1):32–39. [Google Scholar]
  26. Daun A. The materialistic life-style: some socio-psychological aspects. Cons. Behav. Environ. Qual. 1983;1:6–16. [Google Scholar]
  27. Davis, B. T. How to Be More Confident: 15 Science-Based Tips & Exercises.
  28. Díaz R.P., Arroyo J.C. Material values: A study of some antecedents and consequences. Contaduría y administración. 2017 [Google Scholar]
  29. Dittmar H., Bond R., Hurst M., Kasser T. The relationship between materialism and personal well-being: a meta-analysis. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2014;107(5):879. doi: 10.1037/a0037409. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Doll W.J., Xia W., Torkzadeh G. A confirmatory factor analysis of the end-user computing satisfaction instrument. MIS Q. 1994:453–461. [Google Scholar]
  31. Fardouly J., Diedrichs P.C., Vartanian L.R., Halliwell E. Social comparisons on social media. Impact Facebook Young Women's Body Image Conc. Mood Body Image. 2015;13:38–45. doi: 10.1016/j.bodyim.2014.12.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Febrilia I., Warokka A. Consumer traits and situational factors: exploring the consumer's online impulse buying in the pandemic time. Soc. Sci. Humanit. Open. 2021;4(1):100182. [Google Scholar]
  33. Feng Wenting, Yang Morgan X., Yu Irina Y., Tu Rungting. When positive reviews on social networking sites backfire: The role of social comparison and malicious envy. J. Hosp. Market. Manag. 2021;30(1):120–138. [Google Scholar]
  34. Festinger L. A theory of social comparison processes. Hum. Relat. 1954;7(2):117–140. [Google Scholar]
  35. Gamble C.N., Hanan J.S., Nail T. What is new materialism? Angelaki. 2019;24(6):111–134. [Google Scholar]
  36. Gu F.F., Hung K. Materialism among adolescents in China: a historical generation perspective. J. Asia Business Stud. 2009;3(2):56–64. [Google Scholar]
  37. Hair J.F., Anderson R.E., Tatham R.L., Black W.C. Multivariate Data Analysis. 5th Edn Prentice Hall International; Upper Saddle River, NJ: 1998. [Google Scholar]
  38. Hair J.F., Black W.C., Babin B.J., Anderson R.E., Tatham R.L. Bookman editora; 2009. Análise multivariada de dados. [Google Scholar]
  39. Hair J., Black W.C., Babin B.J., Anderson R.E., Tatham R.L. 6th (ed.) Prentice-Hall; Upper Saddle River NJ: 2010. Multivariate Data Analysis. [Google Scholar]
  40. Hasanpoor H., Tojari F., Nikaeen Z. Validation of expanded scale of impulse buying in sports. Ann. Appl. Sport Sci. 2019;7(2):21–30. [Google Scholar]
  41. Islam T., Sheikh Z., Hameed Z., Khan I.U., Azam R.I. Social comparison, materialism, and compulsive buying based on stimulus-response-model: a comparative study among adolescents and young adults. Young Consum. 2018;19(1):19–37. [Google Scholar]
  42. Iyer G.R., Blut M., Xiao S.H., Grewal D. Impulse buying: a meta-analytic review. J. Acad. Market. Sci. 2020;48(3):384–404. [Google Scholar]
  43. Jankowski K.F., Takahashi H. Cognitive neuroscience of social emotions and implications for psychopathology: Examining embarrassment, guilt, envy, and schadenfreude. Psychiatr. Clin. Neurosci. 2014;65(5):319–336. doi: 10.1111/pcn.12182. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Jiang S., Ngien A. The effects of Instagram use, social comparison, and self-esteem on social anxiety: a survey study in Singapore. Social Media+ Society. 2020;6(2) [Google Scholar]
  45. Jones M.A., Reynolds K.E., Weun S., Beatty S.E. The product-specific nature of impulse buying tendency. J. Bus. Res. 2003;56(7):505–511. [Google Scholar]
  46. Khan N., Hui L.H., Chen T.B., Hoe H.Y. Impulse buying behaviour of generation Y in fashion retail. Int. J. Bus. Manag. 2016;11(1):144. [Google Scholar]
  47. Kimiagari S., Malafe N.S.A. The role of cognitive and affective responses in the relationship between internal and external stimuli on online impulse buying behavior. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 2021;61:102567. [Google Scholar]
  48. La Ferle C., Choi S.M. The importance of perceived endorser credibility in South Korean advertising. J. Curr. Issues Res. Advert. 2005;27(2):67–81. [Google Scholar]
  49. Latif K., Weng Q., Pitafi A.H., Ali A., Siddiqui A.W., Malik M.Y., Latif Z. Social comparison as a double-edged sword on social media: the role of envy type and online social identity. Telematics Inf. 2021;56:101470. [Google Scholar]
  50. Le Minh T.H. Social comparison effects on brand addiction: a mediating role of materialism. Heliyon. 2020;6(11) doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05460. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Leavitt C.E., Dew J.P., Allsop D.B., Runyan S.D., Hill E.J. Relational and sexual costs of materialism in couple relationships: an actor–partner longitudinal study. J. Fam. Econ. Issues. 2019;40(3):438–454. [Google Scholar]
  52. Lee Y., Ha J.H., Jue J. Structural equation modeling and the effect of perceived academic inferiority, socially prescribed perfectionism, and parents’ forced social comparison on adolescents’ depression and aggression. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2020;108:104649. [Google Scholar]
  53. Li Y. Upward social comparison and depression in social network settings: the roles of envy and self-efficacy. Internet Res. 2019;29(1):46–59. [Google Scholar]
  54. Liu P., He J., Li A. Upward social comparison on social network sites and impulse buying: a moderated mediation model of negative affect and rumination. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2019;96:133–140. [Google Scholar]
  55. Liu Q.Q., Zhou Z.K., Yang X.J., Niu G.F., Tian Y., Fan C.Y. Upward social comparison on social network sites and depressive symptoms: a moderated mediation model of self-esteem and optimism. Pers. Indiv. Differ. 2017;113:223–228. [Google Scholar]
  56. Liu Y., Liu H., Zhou H., Li T., Zhang L. A Z-scheme mechanism of N-ZnO/g-C3N4 for enhanced H2 evolution and photocatalytic degradation. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2019;466:133–140. [Google Scholar]
  57. Lucas M., Koff E. Body image, impulse buying, and the mediating role of negative affect. Pers. Indiv. Differ. 2017;105:330–334. [Google Scholar]
  58. Luo Y., Eickhoff S.B., Hetu S., Feng C. Social comparison in the brain: a coordinate-based meta-analysis of functional brain imaging studies on the downward and upward comparisons. Hum. Brain Mapp. 2018;39(1):440–458. doi: 10.1002/hbm.23854. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Mehta N., Chugan P.K. The impact of visual merchandising on impulse buying behavior of consumer: a case from central mall of Ahmedabad India. Univ. J. Manag. 2013;1(2):76–88. [Google Scholar]
  60. Meier A., Schäfer S. The positive side of social comparison on social network sites: how envy can drive inspiration on Instagram. Cyberpsychol., Behav. Soc. Netw. 2018;21(7):411–417. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2017.0708. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Ming J., Jianqiu Z., Bilal M., Akram U., Fan M. How social presence influences impulse buying behavior in live streaming commerce? The role of SOR theory. Int. J. Web Inf. Syst. 2021;17(4):300–320. [Google Scholar]
  62. Moran B. Effect of stress, materialism and external stimuli on online impulse buying. J. Res. Consumers. 2015;27:26–51. [Google Scholar]
  63. Moyal A., Motsenok M., Ritov I. Arbitrary social comparison, malicious envy, and generosity. J. Behav. Decis. Making. 2020;33(4):444–462. [Google Scholar]
  64. Mukhtar K., Abid G., Rehmat M., Butt T.H., Farooqi S. Influence of materialism in impulse buying. Moderated mediation model. Elem. Educ. Online. 2021;20(5):6104–6117. [Google Scholar]
  65. Muñiz-Velázquez J.A., Gomez-Baya D., Lopez-Casquete M. Implicit and explicit assessment of materialism: associations with happiness and depression. Pers. Indiv. Differ. 2017;116:123–132. [Google Scholar]
  66. Muruganantham G., Bhakat R.S. A review of impulse buying behavior. Int. J. Market. Stud. 2013;5(3):149. [Google Scholar]
  67. Naeem M. Understanding the customer psychology of impulse buying during COVID-19 pandemic: implications for retailers. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 2020;49(3):377–393. [Google Scholar]
  68. Nayak M.S.D.P., Narayan K.A. Strengths and weaknesses of online surveys. Technology. 2019;6:7. [Google Scholar]
  69. Nesi J., Prinstein M.J. Using social media for social comparison and feedback-seeking: gender and popularity moderate associations with depressive symptoms. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 2015;43(8):1427–1438. doi: 10.1007/s10802-015-0020-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Nielsen . 2018. Vietnam's E-Commerce May Reach 10 Billion USD | ANT Consulting.http://www.antconsult.vn/news/nielsen-vietnams-e-commerce-may-reach-10-billion-usd.html Retrieved 16 March 2022, from. [Google Scholar]
  71. O’Brien S. Vol. 23. CNBC. com; 2018. (Consumers Cough up $5,400 a Year on Impulse Purchases). [Google Scholar]
  72. Olsen S.O., Tudoran A.A., Honkanen P., Verplanken B. Differences and similarities between impulse buying and variety seeking: a personality - based perspective. Psychol. Market. 2016;33(1):36–47. [Google Scholar]
  73. Outreville J.F. Risk aversion, risk behavior, and the demand for insurance: a survey. J. Insur. Issues. 2014;37(2):158–186. [Google Scholar]
  74. Öztürk A., Sima N.A.R.T. Materyalizm-moda giyim ilgilenimi-plansız satına alma ilişkisi: Üniversite öğrencileri üzerine bir araştırma. Uluslararasi Ekon. Arastirmalar Derg. 2016;2(3):45–55. [Google Scholar]
  75. Pang H. Unraveling the influence of passive and active WeChat interactions on upward social comparison and negative psychological consequences among university students. Telematics Inf. 2021;57:101510. [Google Scholar]
  76. Park J., Lennon S.J. Psychological and environmental antecedents of impulse buying tendency in the multichannel shopping context. J. Consum. Market. 2006;23(2):56–66. [Google Scholar]
  77. Pinto M.R., Mota A.O., Leite R.S., Alves R.C. Investigating the influencers of materialism in adolescence. Tour. Manag. Stud. 2017;13(1):66–74. [Google Scholar]
  78. Pradhan D., Israel D., Jena A.K. Materialism and compulsive buying behaviour: the role of consumer credit card use and impulse buying. Asia Pac. J. Market. Logist. 2018;30(5):1239–1258. [Google Scholar]
  79. Reeves R.A., Baker G.A., Truluck C.S. Celebrity worship, materialism, compulsive buying, and the empty self. Psychol. Market. 2012;29(9):674–679. [Google Scholar]
  80. Richins M.L., Dawson S. A consumer values orientation for materialism and its measurement: scale development and validation. J. Consum. Res. 1992;19(3):303–316. [Google Scholar]
  81. Roberts J.A., Clement A. Materialism and satisfaction with over-all quality of life and eight life domains. Soc. Indicat. Res. 2007;82(1):79–92. [Google Scholar]
  82. Roberts J.A., Manolis C. Cooking up a recipe for self-control: the three ingredients of self-control and its impact on impulse buying. J. Market. Theor. Pract. 2012;20(2):173–188. [Google Scholar]
  83. Robinson A., Bonnette A., Howard K., Ceballos N., Dailey S., Lu Y., Grimes T. Social comparisons, social media addiction, and social interaction: an examination of specific social media behaviors related to major depressive disorder in a millennial population. J. Appl. Biobehav. Res. 2019;24(1):12158. [Google Scholar]
  84. Rokeach M. Free Press; 1973. The Nature of Human Values. [Google Scholar]
  85. Romagnoli R. 2021. The Role of Self-Control and Ego-Depletion in Impulse Buying: a Systematic Literature Review and an Experimental Paradigm. [Google Scholar]
  86. Rook D.W. The buying impulse. J. Consum. Res. 1987;14(2):189–199. [Google Scholar]
  87. Rook D.W., Fisher R.J. Normative influences on impulsive buying behavior. J. Consum. Res. 1995;22(3):305–313. [Google Scholar]
  88. Rook D.W., Hoch S.J. ACR North American Advances; 1985. Consuming Impulses. [Google Scholar]
  89. Rosenthal-von der Pütten A.M., Hastall M.R., Köcher S., Meske C., Heinrich T., Labrenz F., Ocklenburg S. Likes” as social rewards: their role in online social comparison and decisions to like other People's selfies. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2019;92:76–86. [Google Scholar]
  90. Schmuck D., Karsay K., Matthes J., Stevic A. Looking up and Feeling Down”. The influence of mobile social networking site use on upward social comparison, self-esteem, and well-being of adult smartphone users. Telematics Inf. 2019;42:101240. [Google Scholar]
  91. Sen S., Nayak S. Influence of materialism on impulse buying among Indian millennials: does income matter? Indian J. Market. 2019;49(12):47–60. [Google Scholar]
  92. Serfas B.G., Büttner O.B., Florack A. Eyes wide shopped: shopping situations trigger arousal in ımpulsive buyers. PLoS One. 2014;9:1–9. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0114593. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  93. Shaw J.D., Park T.Y., Kim E. A resource-based perspective on human capital losses, HRM investments, and organizational performance. Strat. Manag. J. 2013;34(5):572–589. [Google Scholar]
  94. Silvera D.H., Lavack A.M., Kropp F. Impulse buying, the role of affect, social influence, and subjective wellbeing. J. Consum. Market. 2008;25(1):23–33. [Google Scholar]
  95. Sirgy M.J. Materialism and quality of life. Soc. Indicat. Res. 1998;43(3):227–260. [Google Scholar]
  96. Smith R.H. Assimilative and contrastive emotional reactions to upward and downward social comparisons. Handbook of social comparison. Springer; Boston, MA: 2000. pp. 173–200. [Google Scholar]
  97. Sneath J.Z., Lacey R., Kennett-Hensel P.A. Coping with a natural disaster: losses, emotions, and impulsive and compulsive buying. Market. Lett. 2009;20(1):45–60. [Google Scholar]
  98. Statista . 2021. Topic: E-Commerce in Vietnam.https://www.statista.com/topics/5321/e-commerce-in-vietnam/ [Google Scholar]
  99. Suls J., Wheeler L., editors. Handbook of Social Comparison: Theory and Research. Springer US; Boston, MA: 2000. [Google Scholar]
  100. Tandoc E.C., Jr., Ferrucci P., Duffy M. Facebook use, envy, and depression among college students: is facebooking depressing? Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015;43:139–146. [Google Scholar]
  101. Tatzel M. Money worlds” and well-being: an integration of money dispositions, materialism and price-related behavior. J. Econ. Psychol. 2002;23(1):103–126. [Google Scholar]
  102. Temkin B.D. Forrester, June; 2009. Engage Gen Y Online with Social Interactivity. [Google Scholar]
  103. Tokgoz E. Impact of materialistic values on impulsive and compulsive consumption via status consumption: a research on young consumers. Bus. Econ. Res. J. 2020;11(1):261–278. [Google Scholar]
  104. Tsang S., Royse C.F., Terkawi A.S. Guidelines for developing, translating, and validating a questionnaire in perioperative and pain medicine. Saudi J. Anaesth. 2017;11:80–89. doi: 10.4103/sja.SJA_203_17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  105. Türk B., Erciş A. Materialism and its associated concepts. Int. J. Org. Leadership. 2017;6:444–455. [Google Scholar]
  106. Usmani S., Ejaz A. Consumer buying attitudes towards counterfeit and green products: application of social comparison theory and materialism. S. Asian J. Manag. 2020;14(1):82–103. [Google Scholar]
  107. Vansteenkiste M., Simons J., Lens W., Sheldon K.M., Deci E.L. Motivating learning, performance, and persistence: the synergistic effects of intrinsic goal contents and autonomy-supportive contexts. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2004;87(2):246. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.246. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  108. Vansteenkiste M., Simons J., Soenens B., Lens W. How to become a persevering exerciser? Providing a clear, future intrinsic goal in an autonomy-supportive way. J. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 2004;26(2):232–249. [Google Scholar]
  109. Vazquez D., Wu X., Nguyen B., Kent A., Gutierrez A., Chen T. Investigating narrative involvement, parasocial interactions, and impulse buying behaviours within a second screen social commerce context. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2020;53:102135. [Google Scholar]
  110. Verhagen T., Van Dolen W. The influence of online store beliefs on consumer online impulse buying: a model and empirical application. Inf. Manag. 2011;48(8):320–327. [Google Scholar]
  111. Verplanken B., Herabadi A. Individual differences in impulse buying tendency: feeling and no thinking. Eur. J. Pers. 2001;15:71–83. [Google Scholar]
  112. Verplanken B., Herabadi A.G., Perry J.A., Silvera D.H. Consumer style and health: The role of impulsive buying in unhealthy eating. Psychol. Health. 2005;20(4):429–441. [Google Scholar]
  113. Vohra A.V. Materialism, impulse buying and conspicuous consumption: a qualitative research. Glob. Bus. Rev. 2016;17(1):51–67. [Google Scholar]
  114. Vohs K.D., Faber R.J. Spent resources: self-regulatory resource availability affects impulse buying. J. Consum. Res. 2007;33(4):537–547. [Google Scholar]
  115. Wang J.L., Wang H.Z., Gaskin J., Hawk S. The mediating roles of upward social comparison and self-esteem and the moderating role of social comparison orientation in the association between social networking site usage and subjective well-being. Front. Psychol. 2017;8:771. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00771. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  116. Wang Y. Social stratification, materialism, post-materialism, and consumption values: an empirical study on a Chinese sample. Asia Pac. J. Market. Logist. 2016;28(4):580–593. [Google Scholar]
  117. Want S.C., Saiphoo A. Social comparisons with media images are cognitively inefficient even for women who say they feel pressure from the media. Body Image. 2017;20:1–6. doi: 10.1016/j.bodyim.2016.10.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  118. Watson D., Clark L.A., Tellegen A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1988;54(6):1063. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.54.6.1063. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  119. Weinstein A., Maraz A., Griffiths M.D., Lejoyeux M., Demetrovics Z. Compulsive buying—features and characteristics of addiction. Academic Press. 2016:993–1007. [Google Scholar]
  120. Wheeler L. Motivation as a determinant of upward comparison. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 1966;1:27–31. [Google Scholar]
  121. Wolniewicz C.A., Tiamiyu M.F., Weeks J.W., Elhai J.D. Problematic smartphone use and relations with negative affect, fear of missing out, and fear of negative and positive evaluation. Psychiatr. Res. 2018;262:618–623. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2017.09.058. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  122. Wood J.V., VanderZee K. In: Health, Coping, and Well-Being: Perspectives from Social Comparison Theory. Buunk B.P., Gibbons F.X., editors. 1997. Social comparisons among cancer patients: under what conditions are comparisons upward and downward? pp. 299–328. [Google Scholar]
  123. Xia L., Monroe K.B., Cox J.L. The price is unfair! A conceptual framework of price fairness perceptions. J. Market. 2004;68(4):1–15. [Google Scholar]
  124. Yang F., Tang J., Men J., Zheng X. Consumer perceived value and impulse buying behavior on mobile commerce: the moderating effect of social influence. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 2021;63:102683. [Google Scholar]
  125. Yi S., Tai T. Impacts of consumers’ beliefs, desires and emotions on their impulse buying behavior: application of an integrated model of belief-desire theory of emotion. J. Hosp. Market. Manag. 2020;29(6):662–681. [Google Scholar]
  126. Yoon F., Faber R.J. mpulse Buying: Its Relation to Personality Traits and Cues. UT : Association Consumer Res. 2000;27:179–185. [Google Scholar]
  127. Yoon S., Kim H.C. Keeping the American dream alive: the interactive effect of perceived economic mobility and materialism on impulsive spending. J. Market. Res. 2016;53(5):759–772. [Google Scholar]
  128. Zafar A.U., Qiu J., Li Y., Wang J., Shahzad M. The impact of social media celebrities' posts and contextual interactions on impulse buying in social commerce. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2021;115:106178. [Google Scholar]
  129. Zhang K.Z., Xu H., Zhao S., Yu Y. Online reviews and impulse buying behavior: the role of browsing and impulsiveness. Internet Res. 2018;28(3):522–543. [Google Scholar]
  130. Zhang K.Z., Zhao S., Yu Y. Online reviews and impulse buying behavior: the role of browsing and impulsiveness. Internet Res. 2018;28(3):522–543. [Google Scholar]
  131. Zheng X., Baskin E., Peng S. The spillover effect of incidental social comparison on materialistic pursuits: the mediating role of envy. Eur. J. Market. 2018;52:1107–1127. [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

Data will be made available on request.


Articles from Heliyon are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES