The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0265-1335.

htm

Consumers need for uniqueness: short-form scale development and cross-cultural validation
Ayalla Ruvio
Graduate School of Management, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel

Consumers need for uniqueness

33
Received August 2006 Revised January, March 2007 Accepted April 2007

Aviv Shoham
Graduate School of Management, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel and Faculty of Economics, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia, and

ic Maja Makovec Brenc

Faculty of Economics, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to develop and validate cross-culturally a short-form, consumers need for uniqueness (CNFU) scale. The length of the original scale (31 items) might have hindered its diffusion in research when questionnaire length and respondent fatigue are major considerations. Design/methodology/approach The paper uses survey-based data from Israel, Slovenia, and the Palestinian Authority and uses a combination of statistical techniques, such as EFA, CFA, and structural equation modeling. Findings In general, support was found for the cross-cultural reliability and validity of the new, short-form CNFU scale. Research limitations/implications Future research can use the short-form scale with additional condence in its cross-cultural reliability and validity. Practical implications First, since CNFU appears not to be culturally bound, marketers can identify cross-country segments of high-CNFU individuals and use standardized marketing campaigns to reach them. Second, marketers of unique products can use the antecedents identied in this study to develop and encourage CNFU. Third, the ndings can be used to design advertising campaigns such as by emphasizing the social context of consumption of high-uniqueness products. Originality/value An original and rst presentation of a cross-cultural validation of a parsimonious CNFU scale. Keywords Unique selling proposition, Consumer behavior, Product differentiation, Cross-cultural studies Paper type Research paper

Introduction All individuals crave uniqueness to some extent (Fromkin, 1972; Snyder, 1992; Snyder and Fromkin, 1977, 1980), making need for uniqueness (NFU) a universal trait (Burns and Brady, 1992). NFU affects consumers need for uniqueness (CNFU), exhibited through their acquisition and display of distinctive products (Lynn and Harris, 1997a, b;
evic a student at the Faculty of Economics at the University of The authors thank Maja Milos Ljubljana, for her help in data collection.

International Marketing Review Vol. 25 No. 1, 2008 pp. 33-53 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0265-1335 DOI 10.1108/02651330810851872

IMR 25,1

34

Snyder, 1992; Snyder and Fromkin, 1980; Tian et al., 2001). CNFU drives individuals to pursue dissimilarity through consumption in an effort to develop a distinctive self and social image (Tian et al., 2001). Thus, the display or use of products can serve as expressive symbols of uniqueness (Snyder and Fromkin, 1977). Consumers establish their uniqueness through various uniqueness-seeking behaviors in response to environmental inputs that increase or decrease their perceptions of similarity to others (Tian et al., 2001). Research has documented that NFU affects behaviors such as a desire for or customized scarce products, the pursuit of innovative consumption, and a preference for unique shopping venues (Lynn and Harris, 1997a, b). CNFUs outcomes include purchasing/displaying novelty, vintage, antique, personalized, or handcrafted goods, as well as purchasing in nontraditional outlets such as antique stores, garage sales, and swap meets (Tepper, 1997). CNFU has been operationalized with 31 items along three dimensions: creative choice counterconformity, unpopular choice counterconformity, and avoidance of similarity (Tian et al., 2001; Tian and Mckenzie, 2001). However, this extensive CNFU scale challenges scholars and respondents, which might have hindered further research on it. Also, with such a long scale, there is always a concern about redundancy between closely related items. In addition, Drolet and Morrison (2001, p. 201) argued that shorter scales reduce monotony, costs, and response bias, and more particularly an increase in the number of items encourages inappropriate response behavior and gives rise to positively correlated error term across items within respondents. Thus, there is a need to develop a short-form and parsimonious CNFU scale that will also adhere to its three-dimensional conceptualization (Steenkamp and Baumgartner, 1995). Additionally, since CNFU (like NFU) has been conceptualized as a universal cross-cultural trait (Tian et al., 2001; Tian and Mckenzie, 2001), it is essential to establish its scales cross-cultural validity for promoting cross-cultural research. Cross-cultural validation and measurement invariance are necessary for using scales across countries. Cross-country comparisons and generalized research conclusions depend on study constructs having the same meaning in different research contexts (Douglas and Craig, 1993; van Herk et al., 2005; Myers et al., 2000; Mullen, 1995; Sharma and Weathers, 2003; Steenkamp and Baumgartner, 1998). Previous CNFU studies have been mostly single-country-based and have used mostly US samples (Tian et al., 2001; Tian and Mckenzie, 2001), raising a concern about the cross-cultural validity of the ndings. Thus, there is a need to test the cross-country reliability and validity of the CNFU scale. To the extent that a short-form CNFU scale exhibits acceptable psychometrics, scholars would be able to use it with an added level of condence. In sum, this study was designed to contribute to CNFU research in two ways. First, it develops a short-form CNFU scale that meets the dual challenge of item parsimony and maintenance of the original conceptualization of the CNFU construct (Steenkamp and Baumgartner, 1995). Second, this study tests the cross-cultural reliability and validity of the short-form CNFU scale with data from Israel, the Palestinian authority (referred to as a country in this paper), and Slovenia (the choice of countries is explained in a later section).

Literature review Consumers need for uniqueness This section of the paper provides a brief overview of the CNFU concept. Notably, CNFU has been cited or used in a large number of papers. While a full discussion of these papers is beyond the scope of this paper, an examination of the literature shows that very few papers have actually used the CNFU scale or parts of it (Ruvio, 2008; Bertrandias and Goldsmith, 2006; Clark and Goldsmith, 2005; Goldsmith et al., 2006; Ling, 2005; Tian et al., 2001). Importantly, this situation might be indicative of a reication problem. Specically, when many papers (46 such papers were listed in Google Scholar) cite the original CNFU paper (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Donavan et al., 2004; Kim and Drolet, 2003) and only a few use it substantively, a reication problem may exist (Lane et al., 2006). Such scarcity of papers might be due to the scales length, further reinforcing the importance of developing a short version of this scale. The general NFU theory addressed peoples perceptions of their similarity to others and their reactions to such perceptions (Snyder and Fromkin, 1977, 1980). While not discussed in these original papers, NFU might be a universal need of individuals in different cultures. For example, McGuire (1976) recognized several psychological motives for individuals behavior. The one pertinent to NFU is the need for expression, according to which people need to express their individuality to others. At the cultural level, individualism (IND) is one of the ve core dimensions of culture recognized by Hofstede (2001). It refers to the relationship between the individual and the collectivity that prevails in a given society (p. 209). In both cases, NFU might arise either at the individual or societal level (in which case it would carry through to individual members). Thus, high levels of similarity/dissimilarity to others are perceived by individuals as unpleasant and reduce their self-esteem (Fromkin, 1970, 1972). Thus, people use affective and behavioral mechanisms to maintain moderate uniqueness. The extent to which these mechanisms are used depends on the strength of individuals NFU. For example, high NFU increases individuals sensitivity to similarity and the ensuing desire to differ from others (Snyder, 1992). However, this desire is constrained by the need for social approval (Snyder and Fromkin, 1980). Individuals in search of uniqueness will tend to exhibit it in a positive manner and avoid displays that might evoke social sanctions. Following the view of the extended self (Belk, 1988), CNFU recognizes that possessions can be used by individuals as an expression of uniqueness (Snyder, 1992). Tian et al. (2001, p. 52) dened CNFU as:
. . . the trait of pursuing differences relative to others through the acquisition, utilization, and disposition of consumer goods for the purpose of developing and enhancing ones self-image and social image.

Consumers need for uniqueness

35

As such, CNFU allows individuals to enjoy improved self- and social-image. Consumers image is enhanced internally and externally through the use of products when they recognize some symbolic meanings in these products (Tian et al., 2001; Tian and Mckenzie, 2001). CNFU was conceptualized along three dimensions (Tian et al., 2001; Tian and Mckenzie, 2001). Creative choice counterconformity refers to individuals ability to use

IMR 25,1

36

products in creating personal styles and expressing self-image in a way that is viewed as socially acceptable (Lynn and Harris, 1997a; Tian et al., 2001). Creative choices are manifested by consumption selections that are likely to be valued as unique and approved by others in ones social contexts (Snyder and Fromkin, 1977, 1980). Unpopular choice counterconformity refers to consumers use of products deviating from social norms to some extent. Such choices entail a social disapproval risk but could still enhance self- and social-image (Tian et al., 2001). Additionally, such behaviors can gain social approval over time branding individuals as fashion leaders (Heckert, 1989). Finally, avoidance of similarity implies an effort to avoid using widely adopted products. It causes consumers to avoid buying or discontinue using products once they become diffused (Thompson and Haytko, 1997). Since, a unique image is considered desirable, choices (especially creative ones) made by unique individuals are often adopted by others wishing to develop their uniqueness. This shortens the time span during which CNFU-based products can be used (Tian et al., 2001). In sum, Tian et al. (2001) conceptualized CNFU as a three-dimensional consumption tendency through which individuals express their NFU, operationalized with a 31-item scale. Unfortunately, with questionnaire lengths at a premium, the existing scale might be too long in many research contexts and there could be some redundancy across closely related items. Additionally, no evidence of the scales cross-cultural reliability and validity is available. In the next section, antecedents and consequences of CNFU used to validate the short-form CNFU scale are discussed. Method Samples The study was conducted in Israel, Slovenia, and Palestine. The choice of these nations reects important difference. Briey, Israel represents a modern and developed country with mostly Jewish citizens; Slovenia is a country in transition from communism to a free market with mostly Christian citizens; and Palestine represents a poor and traditional/religious country with mostly Moslem citizens. Thus, the countries represent highly different cultural contexts. Data were collected by student teams thoroughly instructed in research methodology from convenience samples in shopping centers catering to the local middle-classes in these countries. The teams aimed to include respondents with demographics paralleling the national averages. In total, 467 questionnaires were distributed. In Israel, 200 were asked to ll out the questionnaire and 170 provided complete questionnaires (85.0 percent). In Slovenia, 117 were asked to ll out the questionnaire and 100 provided complete questionnaires (85.4 percent). In the Palestinian authority, 150 were asked to ll out the questionnaire and 113 provided complete questionnaires (75.3 percent). The overall response rate was 82.0 percent. The Israeli sample was 35 years old on average, close to the average age of the adult population (37.7). The ratio of females (53 percent) in the sample was also similar to that of the general population (51 percent). Education averaged 15 years and income (compared to the national average) was distributed such that 34 percent were around it, 36 percent below it, and 30 percent above it. The average age of the Palestinian sample was 29, a little below the populations average of 33.4. The percentage of females was 45 percent, close to the populations (49 percent) and education averaged close to 16 years. About 50 percent of the

respondents earned around the average country income, 35 percent below it, and 15 percent above it (Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, 2006). The average age of the Slovene sample was 31, lower than the populations (40), probably due to data being gathered in the younger Ljubljana area. The ratio of females (55 percent) was close to the populations (51percent). Education averaged 13.3 years, slightly higher than the nations (10.7) and income-wise, 17 percent were around the national average, 61 percent below it, and 22 percent above it, averages probably due to the young age of respondents (Institute for Macroeconomic Analysis and Development, 2006; www.sigov.si/zmar/; Statistical Ofce of the Republic of Slovenia, 2006; www.stat.si./eng/index.asp). Measures As was noted, this research aimed to test the nomological validity of the short-form CNFU scale (CNFU-S). Hence, two CNFU antecedents (CSII and public self-consciousness) and two CNFU consequences (unique consumption behavior and shopping innovativeness) were used to develop a nomological model for CNFU. These constructs were used based on their documented relationships with CNFU (discussed below). The scales are presented in Table I.
Conceptual denition No of Palestinian items Israela authoritya Sloveniaa Comments 31 8 0.94 0.81 0.93 0.80 0.94 0.73

Consumers need for uniqueness

37

Scalesa CNFU

Source

Tian et al. (2001) Bearden et al. Normative The degree to CSII which people are (1989) willing to conform to others expectation when making purchase decisions Public self The individuals Bearden and consciousness awareness of self Rose (1990) as a social object with an effect on others Raju (1980) Shopping The degree to innovativeness which a person is interested in trying new brands, products, and stores Developed Unique especially for consumption this research, behavior based on Tian et al. (2001) Note: aCronbachs a

0.84

0.74

0.62

10

0.70

0.62

0.70

Without items no 4,6

Table I. Psychometric description of research variables

IMR 25,1

38

Unique consumer behavior scale was the only scale developed for this research. First, we note here that a set of relevant items were used in two earlier studies in Israel (Ruvio, 2008). Since, these studies established that CNFU signicantly predicted the indexed scale, it was used as a basis for items in this study as well. Second, Israeli and Palestinian student teams visited several private homes, talked with their owners, and probed for possessions that the owners felt were indicative of their uniqueness as home-owners that were identical or similar in spirit to the original set of items. Third, the list was scanned by two consumer behavior scholars who selected ve items as potentially tting consumers of all ages in multi-cultural contexts, while maintaining the meaning of the original scale. A Slovene consumer behavior scholar was consulted about the relevancy of the items to the local context before using the scale in Slovenia. Responders were asked to indicate whether they did (1) or did not (0) own each item. The items were summed to form a measure of unique consumption, potentially ranging 0-5. The original scales were translated by bilingual individuals to the three local languages and back-translated to English by other bilinguals, blind to the originals. The three versions were assessed for translation and cultural accuracy in each country by the two translators and a third bilingual individual. Disagreements were resolved through discussions. Analysis The analysis included three phases, discussed in detail in the Results section. The rst assessed the psychometric properties of the original CNFU scale in all three countries. Based on these results, the scale was shortened. In the second and third phases, the short-form CNFU (CNFU-S) scale was tested for validity and cross-cultural invariance, respectively. Structural equation modeling (SEM) with maximum likelihood estimation was used in all the phases (Byrne, 2001). Goodness-of-t was assessed by normed-x 2, comparative t index (CFI), normed-t-index (NFI), non-normed-t-index (NNFI), and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA). Indices $ 0.90 and RMSEAs # 0.08 indicate good model t (Browne and Cudek, 1993; Hair et al., 1998). They are less sensitive to sample characteristics than the x 2 test and account for sample size and degrees of freedom. Results Phase I: psychometric assessment and scale reduction Bearden and Netemeyer (1999) described the fundamental criteria of good measures (reliability, dimensionality, and construct validity). These criteria were followed in evaluating the CNFU scale in each country through exploratory factor analyses, reliability tests, and SEM-based conrmatory factor analyses. The latter provide frameworks for assessing theory-driven measurement models and are rigorous tests of construct validity (Anderson and Garbing, 1988; Anderson et al., 1987; Garver and Mentzer, 1999; Gerbing and Anderson, 1988). Reliability. Cronbachs a was assessed for each CNFU dimension in each country. The as in the Israeli, Palestinian, and Slovene samples, respectively, were 0.91, 0.98, and 0.91 for creative choice; 0.84, 0.83, and 0.89 for unpopular choice; and 0.93, 0.95, and

0.93 for avoidance of similarity, all above the required 0.70 level (Nunnally, 1978). They indicate little variation in internal consistency across samples. Dimensionality. For a scale to be valid it must be structured like the original (Tian et al., 2001). SPSS-based conrmatory factor analyses (number of factors was constrained to three; Hair et al., 1998) with maximum likelihood and varimax rotation (eigenvalues $ 1.0) substantiated the three-dimensional structure of CNFU across countries. Overall explained variance was 54.99, 54.97, and 57.86 percent in Israeli, Palestine, and Slovenia, respectively. These, too, are very similar across samples (Hair et al., 1998). Construct validity. The full CNFU scale was subjected to CFA with SEM. Goodness-of-t statistics were satisfactory (NFI 0.897, NNFI 0.932, CFI 0.941, RMSEA 0.056, and x 2 2845.10 (df 1293; p # 0.001)) and some item loadings were low (Israel: 0.365-0.883; Palestine: 0.299-0.884; Slovenia: 0.239-0.886). A possible explanation for the low-item loadings may be the cultural specicity of certain items (Douglas et al., 2003). These results suggest that a reduction of the original scale is necessary.

Consumers need for uniqueness

39

Scale length reduction Initial guidelines for testing short-form scales were presented by Stanton et al. (2002) and Richins (2004). They offered three criteria: judgmental (an assessment of content validity and ease of use), internal (internal consistency and dimensionality), and external (external validity). Regarding the judgmental criterion, three consumer behavior experts reviewed the items and identied the most representative ones for each dimension. The experts aimed to select items that were generally phrased while preserving the broad denition of CNFU. Since, cross-cultural use requires that the content of the CNFU construct would be dened conceptually as broadly as possible, context-specic items (e.g. had to do with clothes or the way consumers dress) were dropped. In addition, items that appeared to be redundant or failed to lead to experts consensus were also eliminated. Next, the internal criterion was tested. All CNFU items were subjected to CFA using SPSS. Low-loadings items (# 0.70) were eliminated, as recommended by Garver and Mentzer (1999) to ensure that the explained variance by each latent variable will exceed 50 percent. About 12 items survived the judgmental and internal items quality criteria across countries, four for each dimension (Appendix). These sets conform to Bagozzi and Heathertons (1994) guideline for measurement models with 3-5 indicators per latent variable. Last, nomological models with the original CNFU and the 12-item CNFU-S scales were tested in line with the external criterion. Such tests are needed to assess redundant or narrower-content sets of items, which can reduce nomological validity (Boyle, 1991; Smith and Stanton, 1998; Stanton et al., 2002). Though high-internal consistency is essential, there may be a tradeoff between scales internal psychometric properties and their nomological validity (Bagozzi, 1980; Steenkamp and Baumgartner, 1995), stressing the importance of external criterion testing. The results for nomological validity are presented below.

IMR 25,1

40

Phase II: within-groups validity construct validity SEM CFAs were used to test the reliability, unidimensionality, convergent, discriminant, and nomological validity[1] of the CNFU-S scale (Anderson and Garbing, 1988; Anderson et al., 1987; deVellis, 1991; Garver and Mentzer, 1999; Gerbing and Anderson, 1988). All CFAs were tested separately in each country (deVellis, 1991; Garver and Mentzer, 1999), except for nomological validity, which was tested in one model for all three countries. Factors were modeled separately, then in pairs, and, nally, as a network (Segars and Grover, 1998). Unidimensionality and reliability. Unidimensionality is demonstrated when each item reects only one underlying construct (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Bollen, 1989; Gerbing and Anderson, 1988; Ping, 2004). Assessing reliability can serve as an indicator of unidimensionality (Bollen, 1989; Gerbing and Anderson, 1988; Ping, 2004). Standard factor loadings of observed variables can be used to estimate the reliability of the latent variables with values over 0.70 seen as acceptable (Garver and Mentzer, 1999). The high-estimated composite reliabilities of the sub-scales in the three countries (Table II; Israel: 0.83-0.90; Palestine: 0.84-0.92; Slovenia: 0.90-0.91) satised the required levels.
Israel Creative choice CC1 CC2 CC3 CC4 x 2 (df); sig. NFI, NNFI, CFI RMSEA Composite reliability AVE (percent) Unpopular choice UC1 UC2 UC3 UC4 x 2 (df); sig. NFI, NNFI, CFI RMSEA Composite reliability AVE (percent) Similarity avoidance SA1 SA2 SA3 SA4 x 2 (df); sig. NFI, NNFI, CFI RMSEA Composite reliability AVE (percent) 0.656 0.760 0.753 0.774 10.51 (2) 0.00 0.992; 0.968; 0.994 0.159 0.83 54.4 0.718 0.759 0.769 0.757 24.39 (2) 0.00 0.983; 0.921; 0.984 0.257 0.84 56.4 0.761 0.848 0.825 0.874 3.67 (2) 0.16 0.990; 0.977; 0.992 0.07 0.90 68.6 Palestinian authority 0.732 0.799 0.877 0.923 15.66 (2) 0.00 0.985; 0.956; 0.987 0.247 0.90 69.9 0.738 0.877 0.876 0.744 2.24 (2) 0.00 0.998; 0.999; 0.999 0.033 0.88 65.9 0.826 0.840 0.847 0.845 7.31 (2) 0.03 0.993; 0.973; 0.995 0.154 0.91 70.5 Slovenia 0.756 0.883 0.878 0.716 2.73 (2) 0.00 0.997; 0.996; 0.999 0.061 0.88 65.9 0.749 0.794 0.882 0.763 18.23 (2) 0.00 0.976; 0.992; 0.997 0.079 0.92 60.6 0.836 0.900 0.929 0.723 0.94 (2) 0.62 0.998; 0.998; 0.999 0.019 0.91 72.4

Table II. Measures of uni-dimensionality and convergent validity

Convergent validity. Convergent validity is established based on the relationships between latent variables and their indicators. A single latent variable must underlie each set of items in a separate model for each construct (Anderson et al., 1987; Garver and Mentzer, 1999). Convergent validity is shown when high and signicant parameters are estimated between latent variables and their indicators and with a high level of t of the measurement model for all latent variables. The factor loadings of all items for all latent variables in the three countries were signicant and high (0.656-0.929). Goodness-of-t statistics for the measurement models were high (NFI, NNFI and CFI $ 0.90; Doll et al., 1995). While ve out of the nine RMSEAs values were higher than desirable, these results were expected due to the fact that the models were tested only one latent variable at a time (Byrne, 2001). Nevertheless, in general, the models demonstrated acceptable t to the data. Finally, average variance extracted (AVE total variance explained by a latent variable in comparison to its measurement error) was used as another indicator for unidimensionality and convergent validity (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Fornell and Larcker, 1981; Ping, 2004). AVEs $ 50 percent are acceptable as they indicate that the variance of the measurement error is smaller than the variance captured by the construct (Fornell and Larcker, 1981; Garver and Mentzer, 1999). AVEs for the CNFU-S sub-dimensions were 55.9-66.9 percent, 66.2-69.6 percent, and 60.6-70.4 percent in Israel, Palestine, and Slovenia, respectively. In short, all scales captured signicant variations in the latent CNFU-S sub-dimensions and all were cross-country unidimensional. Discriminant validity. Discriminant validity refers to the extent to which constructs are distinct. Correlations # 0.90 indicate distinct constructs and low correlations indicate discriminant validity (Bagozzi et al., 1991; Fornell and Larcker, 1981). Discriminant validity was tested by constraining the correlations for all latent variables pairs (Anderson and Garbing, 1988) and comparing the x 2 of the constrained and unconstrained models. A x 2 difference should be signicant for discriminant validation (Anderson et al., 1987; Bagozzi et al., 1991; Garver and Mentzer, 1999; Gerbing and Anderson, 1988). Three constrained and three unconstrained covariance structures were estimated and three x 2-differences were tested for each country (Table III). All x 2-differences were signicant ( p , 0.001), indicating that each scale was signicantly different from all others. In support of their discriminant validity, the estimated correlations between all construct pairs were 0.58-0.59 in Israel, 0.19-0.57 in Palestine, and 0.34-0.53 in Slovenia. Another discriminant validity test is the normed x 2 (x 2 over its degree of freedom) of an unconstrained model. All the normed x 2 were below the suggested cutoff of 5.0, indicating internally and externally consistent scales (Segars and Grover, 1998, 1999). Assessing the overall model. Table IV reports the results of the overall measurement models of the CNFU-S, which mirror those reported earlier. All loadings were high (0.660-0.870 in Israel; 0.744-0.913 in Palestine; 0.701-0.925 in Slovenia); correlations ranged 0.58-0.59 in Israel, 0.18-0.59 in Palestine, and 0.34-0.53 in Slovenia; and t measures ranged 0.967-0.981, with RMSEA 0.057, x 2 343.57 (df 153; p # 0.01), and normed x 2 2.2. These ndings conrm the measurement quality of the items, the stability of the factor solution, and the unidimensionality and discrimination of the scales. Notably, second-order factor models are needed when latent variables

Consumers need for uniqueness

41

42

IMR 25,1

Israel Creative choice with Unpopular choice Similarity avoidance Similarity avoidance Unpopular choice Similarity avoidance Similarity avoidance 0.21 0.57 0.19 70.5 (20) 43.3 (20) 82.8 (20) 0.59 0.59 0.59 92.7 (20) 66.8 (20) 88.0 (20)

Unpopular choice with Palestinian authority Creative choice with

Unpopular choice with Slovenia Creative choice with Unpopular choice Similarity avoidance Similarity avoidance 0.51 0.53 0.34 56.5 (20) 24.7 (20) 70.1 (20)

Unpopular choice with

Notes: Signicant at *p , 0.01; * *p , 0.05

Table III. Measures of discriminant validity Correlation estimate * 63.1 (19) 49.6 (19) 63.7 (19) 38.2 (19) 39.1 (19) 54.7 (19) 49.5 (19) 18.5 (19) 53.6 (19) Constrained model x 2(df) Unconstrained model x 2(df) D x 2(1) 29.5 * 17.2 * 24.3 * 32.3 * 4.2 * * 28.1 * 7.0 * 7.0 * 16.5 * Unconstrained normed x2 3.32 2.61 3.35 2.01 2.06 2.89 2.60 0.97 2.82

Israel Factor loadings * CR1a CR2 CR3 CR4 OP1a OP2 OP3 OP4 FO1a FO2 FO3 FO4 Correlations Creative choice Creative choice Unpopular choice Fit measures for all three countries ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Creative choice 0.660 0.750 0.771 0.762 0.731 0.750 0.757 0.765 0.772 0.851 0.817 0.870

Palestinian authority Slovenia 0.744 0.807 0.876 0.913 0.739 0.881 0.870 0.748 0.819 0.833 0.857 0.847 0.21 0.57 0.18 0.860 0.888 0.872 0.713 0.765 0.780 0.859 0.709 0.836 0.901 0.925 0.730 0.51 0.53 0.34

Consumers need for uniqueness

43

Unpopular choice

Similarity avoidance

Unpopular choice 0.59 Similarity avoidance 0.59 Similarity avoidance 0.58 x 2 (df) 343.57 (153) NFI 0.967 NNFI 0.971 CFI 0.981 RMSEA 0.057

Notes: *All factor loadings and correlations were signicant at p , 0.001; aloading that set to be equal to one

Table IV. Factor loadings and constructs correlations

correlations exceed 0.70 (Garver and Mentzer, 1999). Since, all correlations were below 0.70 in all countries, no second-order analysis was performed. Nomological validity. As discussed earlier, two antecedents (normative CSII and public self consciousness) and two consequences (unique consumption behavior and shopping innovativeness) of CNFU were tested to assess the nomologic validity of CNFU-S. Based on previous NFU and CNFU studies, positive relationships were expected between CNFU-S and its antecedents (Ruvio, 2008; Lynn and Harris, 1997b; Harris and Lynn, 1996). Lynn and Harris (1997b, p. 611) explained the positive relationship between CNFU and normative CSII using Brewers (1991) ODT theory and argued that:
. . . people need to t in and belong as well as to be distinctive and unique. Apparently, people who satisfy one of these needs through consumer products also use consumer products to satisfy the other need.

The same explanation underlies the relationship between CNFU-S and public self-consciousness. CNFU research also demonstrates that high-CNFU people express their need behaviorally (Ruvio, 2008; Tian et al., 2001; Tian and Mckenzie, 2001). Hence, unique consumption behavior and shopping innovativeness were used as behavioral outcomes. Goodness-of-t measurers indicated good nomological model t

IMR 25,1

44

( x 2 352.61 [df 186, p # 0.001]; normed-x 2 1.90; NFI 0.971; NNFI 0.979; CFI 0.9986; RMSEA 0.05). The data fully supported the expected relationships. Positive and signicant paths were found between normative CSII and CNFU-S in Israel (g 0.57), Palestine (g 0.40), and Slovenia (g 0.30). Similarly, positive and signicant paths were found between public self consciousness and CNFU-S in Israel (g 0.22), Palestine (g 0.33), and Slovenia (g 0.25). As for CNFU-Ss consequences, the data was in line with expectations. Signicant and positive paths were found between CNFU-S and unique consumption behavior (g Israel 0.36, g Palestine 0.30, and g Slovenia 0.27), as well as with shopping innovativeness (g Israel 0.66, g Palestine 0.56, and g Slovenia 0.59). These support the nomological validity of the CNFU-S scale. Next, the same model with the original CNFU scale was estimated. The results mirror those for the CNFU-S scale. The goodness-of-t measures indicated good model t (x 2 372.77 (df 186, p # 0.001); normed-x 2 2.00; NFI 0.970; NNFI 0.978; CFI 0.985; RMSEA 0.05). A comparison of the two models indicated very minor differences. Hence, the CNFU-S is an attractive alternative and cross-cultural invariance was tested next. Phase III: cross-cultural invariance of the CNFU-S scale Cross-cultural invariance was tested with established procedures (Table V; Mullen, 1995; Myers et al., 2000; Steenkamp and Baumgartner, 1998). In testing congural invariance to assess if the same simple factor loadings structure is obtained in all countries, no cross-nation constraints were imposed. Metric invariance was assessed by constraining the factor loadings to cross-country equality, designed to identify translation equivalence and compare cross-country items scores (Mullen, 1995; Steenkamp and Baumgartner, 1998). Factor invariance was tested by constraining cross-latent-variables correlations to equality to assess normative validity and overall measurement structure consistency (Myers et al., 2000). Testing for error invariance was not needed since the objective was to test theory across countries (Sharma and Weathers, 2003; Steenkamp and Baumgartner, 1998). Congural invariance was tested by model 1, in which no constraints were imposed across groups. As noted in the overall assessment of the mutli-group model, this procedure resulted in acceptable model t statistics. The data supported the short-form, three-factor model in all countries, indicating that they exhibit the same simple factor structure. Metric invariance (model 2) was tested by constraining the factor loadings of the indicators to equality across countries. This procedure also resulted in acceptable t ( x 2 515.1 (df 244), normed-x 2 2.11, NFI 0.958, NNFI 0.971, CFI 0.977, and RMSEA 0.054). The x 2 difference between the simple structure model and the equal-loading model (26.5; 22 df) was not signicant ( p . 0.05). Hence, the unconstrained simple structure model was rejected in favor of the constrained one. Factor loadings are cross-country invariant, indicating improbable translation problems ( Mullen, 1995). Factor invariance was tested by constraining the correlations between latent variables to equality across nations (model 3). Model 3 yielded x 2 499.1 (df 228), normed-x 2 2.12, NFI 0.959, NNFI 0.969, CFI 0.977, and RMSEA 0.054. The x 2 difference between this model and the simple structure model was not

x 2*
df 51 51 51 153 171 157 177 (2)-(1) (3)-(1) (4)-(2) (2)-(1) (3)-(1) (4)-(2) 153 171 157 175 2.24 2.12 2.16 2.12 0.967 0.965 0.965 0.964 0.971 0.974 0.971 0.974 0.981 0.981 0.980 0.980 0.057 0.054 0.057 0.054 2.24 2.12 2.16 2.14 0.967 0.965 0.965 0.963 0.971 0.974 0.971 0.973 0.981 0.981 0.980 0.980 0.057 0.054 0.057 0.055 19.6 7.6 16.0 19.6 7.6 8.3 18 4 6 18 4 4 2.76 2.02 1.95 0.969 0.968 0.962 0.969 0.974 0.971 0.980 0.983 0.981 0.097 0.096 0.099 NFI NNFI CFI RMSEA Ddf

x 2/df

Model comparison Dx 2

Dp-value

Conclusion

0.36 0.11 0.01 0.23 0.11 0.09

Supported Supported Not supported Supported Supported Supported

Factorial validation Israel 140.8 Palestinian authority 103.9 Slovenia 99.6 Cross cultural invariant Model1 Unconstrained 343.6 Model2 l constrained 363.2 Model3 f constrained 351.2 Model4 f, l constrained 379.2 Cross cultural invariant after modication a Model1 Unconstrained 343.6 Model2 l constrained 363.2 Model3 f constrained 351.2 Model4 f, l constrained 371.5

Notes: *All signicant at p , 0.01; amodication includes unconstrained correlation between avoidance of similarity and unpopular choice

Consumers need for uniqueness

Table V. Measurement equivalence tests (constrained CFAs at several levels)

45

IMR 25,1

46

signicant (Dx 2 10.5; 6 df), supporting a rejection of the unconstrained model in favor of the constrained model and indicating invariant factor correlations. In model 4, factor loadings and correlations between the factors were constrained. Fit statistics were x 2 529.6 (df 250), normed-x 2 2.12, NFI 0.957, NNFI 0.970, CFI 0.977 and RMSEA 0.054. The difference (Dx 2 14.5, 6 df) between the model in which factor correlations were constrained to equality and the model in which the loadings and the factor correlations were constrained to equality was signicant. The correlation between unpopular choice and avoidance of similarity was the largest cross-country difference. This correlation was unconstrained and the model was re-estimated. The revised model t the data (x 2 522.7 (df 248), normed-x 2 2.11, NFI 0.957, NNFI 0.971, CFI 0.977 and RMSEA 0.054) and the x 2 difference between the simple structure model and the semi-constrained, equal-loading and equal-correlations model was 7.6 (4 df). This non-signicant difference ( p $ 0.05) leads to accepting the semi-constrained model. In sum, except for one correlation, the factor structure is consistent across countries and the latent constructs are composed similarly with respect to the measured variables. These results indicate that, in general, Israeli, Slovene, and Palestinian consumers hold the same factor and correlation CNFU structure, which is invariant with regards to the internal structure of the constructs. Discussion This paper sought to develop a short-form version of Tian et al.s CNFU scale and to determine its cross-cultural invariance in Israel, Palestine, and Slovenia. In general, the data support the within-group validation and the cross-national equivalency of the new CNFU-S scale through SEM models, a powerful and rigorous test of within- and between-groups validation (Sharma and Weathers, 2003; Steenkamp and Baumgartner, 1998). The reduced scale also exhibited the same nomological validity as the original. Thus, the improved psychometrics of the reduced scale did not harm the nomological validity of CNFU. Theoretical implications While the role of NFU has been supported cross-culturally, some variations across cultures have been reported (Burns and Brady, 1992; Snyder and Fromkin, 1980). Hence, the derived concept of CNFU might also hold different meanings across cultures. However, no previous research has systematically studied CNFU cross-culturally. The CNFU-S scale presented here makes two contributions. First, it was the rst reported cross-cultural test of a CNFU nomological model. Second, its documented validity and psychometric properties suggest that it does not have distinct culture-dependent meanings. Thus, CNFU-S can be used safely in future CNFU research, enabling generalized and meaningful comparisons, especially in Western societies (Douglas and Craig, 1993; Steenkamp and Baumgartner, 1998). However, it could also be used in Asian cultures to identify and measure individuals tendency to refrain from expressing their individuality via unpopular choices. Our ndings suggest few cross-country differences. Lower correlations were found between unpopular choices and the other CNFU dimensions in Palestine than in Slovenia and Israel. These imply that CNFU is represented mainly by its socially safe manifestation for Palestinians, but not for Slovenes and Israelis. Creative choices and avoidance of similarity are considered as positive facets of CNFU devoid of social sanctions.

These ndings can be attributed to the traditional nature of the Palestinian society. Specically, Hofstede (2001) reported that people from Arab countries (used as proxy for Palestinians here) are more collectivistic than Israelis. Hence, social safe behaviors should be more important to them than to Israelis. Additionally, Arabs are much more accepting of power distance (PD) than Israelis (Hofstede, 2001). Hence, they should be more reluctant to exhibit risky social behaviors in the presence of higher-authority individuals than Israelis. Methodological contributions The CNFU-S scale developed here has several advantages. First, the reduced questionnaire length resulting from its use should allow researchers to use a more elaborate set of scales for other constructs with minimal respondents fatigue risk than possible with the original scale. Second, the reduced form is easier to disguise in surveys by embedding it among other measures, thus decreasing potential demand effects and hypothesis guessing. Establishing the cross-country reliability and validity of the CNFU-S scale is a third methodological contribution. In order for consumer behavior theories and their associated constructs to be used across countries and carry the same meaning, cross-cultural equivalence must be achieved. Lacking such evidence can lead to weak, ambiguous, or erroneous conclusions (Horn and McArdle, 1992; Myers et al., 2000; Sharma and Weathers, 2003; Steenkamp and Baumgartner, 1998; van Herk et al., 2005). Beyond its advantages discussed above, the validated CNFU-S scale should facilitate consistency in operationalization and development of cumulative research. Using the CNFU-S scale should encourage future research on the relationships between CNFU and new related constructs (e.g. opinion leadership and market mavenship), resulting in broader investigations. In sum, scholars could use CNFU-S with condence in future research. Practical contributions The ndings have several practical implications. First, a short scale, such as developed here, should be simpler and easier to use for companies. It will make it easier for companies to embed the shorter scale in market studies and enable them to include additional constructs in the freed questionnaire space. Second, while the construct of CNFU and its dimensions, as measured by the CNFU-S, are invariant across cultures, individuals from some cultures may still have higher CNFU levels than individuals from other cultures. Marketers can identify cultures with high or low CNFU and use standardized marketing campaigns to reach them as groups of nations. Alternatively, international marketers could segment by CNFU and use cross-country segmentation and positioning based on within- and cross-country similarities. Naturally, such campaigns have to be designed cleverly because high-CNFU consumers might avoid buying such advertised products precisely because they are mass-advertised for fear of becoming similar to others if they buy these products. Accordingly, such campaigns should stress that the products will only be used by discerning individuals striving for unique expression of their individuality. Finally, since the relationships between the antecedents and CNFU mostly generalized across cultures, marketers of unique products can use these antecedents to develop and encourage CNFU with added condence. Specically, given the positive

Consumers need for uniqueness

47

IMR 25,1

impacts of public self consciousness and susceptibility to interpersonal inuence on CNFU, marketers could, for example, depict the exhibition and use of unique products and services in socially accepted situations (e.g. a group admiring an individual using a unique product). Such advertising campaigns should enhance CNFU and, through it, its behavioral manifestations. Limitations One potential limitation of this study concerns the possibility of the CNFU-S scale to be narrower in scope than the original. However, the impact of this limitation should be minimal because the nomological validity of the reduced and full CNFU scales did not differ. Additionally, the data validated the within- and cross-culture properties of the CNFU-S version using rigorous methodological approaches. Another potential limitation concerns the samples. The survey targeted convenience samples of consumers in the three countries. Since, minor demographic differences were identied between the samples and populations, more rigorous sampling should be used in future studies. Additionally, the single-scale SEM resulted in a few cases of higher than desirable RMSEA levels, an issue discussed earlier. Notably, SEM is usually used to evaluate models with at least two unobservable constructs and at least three indicators for each. This is not the case for uni-construct models such as the one used here. Furthermore, all other t indexes were excellent in these models. Moreover, the purpose of this phase was to assess uni-dimensionality and convergent validity, which were demonstrated by high loadings, other t statistics, and high levels of explained variance. However, future research should identify the reasons for the RMSEA values in some countries. Finally, the shopping innovativeness scale had slightly lower reliability levels than traditionally expected. These levels suggest that additional research is needed to develop improved scales with cross-cultural samples. Future challenges This study raises several future research challenges. First, the manifestations of uniqueness in different cultures could be further explored as research in this area is surprisingly scant. Societys impact on expressions of uniqueness is intriguing and worthy of future research. While this study established the cross-cultural validity of the nomological model in three countries, a question arises about the ndings generalizability to other cultures. The discussion here is based on Hofstedes (2001) ek et al. (2004) and cultural dimensions with Slovenias scores based on Zagors Palestines on the original scores for Arab Countries as a proxy. The three relevant dimensions are PD, uncertainty avoidance (UA), and IND. The Palestine and Slovenia have similar high-PD scores (80 and 71, respectively) and Israel has a low one (13). Since, CNFU manifestations might include unique status symbols, they should be more acceptable in the two high-PD countries than in Israel. However, further research is needed in medium-PD countries. Since, the three countries have relatively high-UA scores (Israel 81, Slovenia 88, and the Palestinian authority 68), consumers in them should exhibit similar uncertainty avoiding behaviors. Notably, using products to display uniqueness entails some risk of social reactions. Hence, further research is needed in low-UA countries. Finally, high-IND countries should be tolerant of individual exhibition of uniqueness and Western

48

cultures (but not collectivist ones) embrace and value unique and individualistic appearance (Kim and Markus, 1999). The countries studied here have low-medium IND scores (Israel 54, Slovenia 27, and the Palestinian Authority 38). Thus, further research is needed in high-IND countries. Future research should widen the nomological network of CNFU. For example, future CNFU examinations should extend the range of outcomes beyond mostly material products to include additional manifestations of the extended self, such as unique places (in the context of tourism) and risky sports (in the context of leisure). Another avenue for future research concerns dimensional combinations. For example, do varying combinations of levels (low/high) on the three CNFU dimensions lead to different consumption behaviors? Additionally, would a high level on one dimension compensate for a low level on another? These are empirical questions best answered by future research.
Note 1. The establishment of validity also requires a determination of content and substantive validity, issues covered in the original CNFU paper (Tian et al., 2001). References Anderson, J.C. and Garbing, D.W. (1988), Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103 No. 3, pp. 411-23. Anderson, J.C., Gerbing, D.W. and Hunter, J.E. (1987), On the assessment of unidimensional measurement: internal and external consistency criteria, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 432-7. Arnold, M.J. and Reynolds, K.E. (2003), Hedonic shopping motivations, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 79, pp. 77-95. Bagozzi, R.P. (1980), Causal Methods in Marketing, John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY. Bagozzi, R.P. and Heatherton, T.F. (1994), A general approach to representing multifaceted personality constructs: application to state self-esteem, Structural Equation Modeling, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 35-67. Bagozzi, R.P., Phillips, Y.Y. and Lynn, W. (1991), Assessing construct validity in organizational research, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 421-58. Bearden, W.O. and Netemeyer, R.G. (1999), Handbook of Marketing Scales: Multi-Item Measures for Marketing and Consumer Behavior Research, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA,. Bearden, W.O. and Rose, R.L. (1990), Attention to social comparison information: an individual difference factor affecting consumer conformity, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 16, pp. 461-71. Bearden, W.O., Netemeyer, R.G. and Teel, J.E. (1989), Measurement of consumer susceptibility to interpersonal inuence, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 473-81. Belk, R.W. (1988), Possessions and the extended self, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 139-68. Bertrandias, L. and Goldsmith, R.E. (2006), Some psychological motivations for fashion opinion leadership and fashion opinion seeking, Journal of Fashion Marketing & Management, Vol. 10, pp. 25-40. Bollen, K.A. (1989), Structural Equations with Latent Variables, Wiley-Interscience Publications, New York, NY.

Consumers need for uniqueness

49

IMR 25,1

50

Boyle, G.J. (1991), Does item homogeneity indicate internal consistency or item redundancy in psychometric scales?, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 291-4. Brewer, M.B. (1991), The social self: on being the same and different at the same time, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 17, pp. 475-82. Browne, M.W. and Cudek, R. (1993), Alternative ways of assessing model t, in Bollen, K.A. and Long, J.S. (Eds), Testing Structural Equation Models, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 136-62. Burns, D.J. and Brady, J. (1992), A cross-cultural comparison of the need for uniqueness in Malaysia and the United States, The Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 132 No. 2, pp. 487-95. Byrne, B.M. (2001), Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. Clark, R.A. and Goldsmith, R.E. (2005), Market mavens: psychological inuences, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 22, pp. 289-312. deVellis, R.F. (1991), Scale Development: Theory and Applications Applied Social Research Methods, Series 26, Sage, Newbury Park, CA. Doll, W.J., Raghunathan, T.S., Lim, J-S. and Gupta, Y.P. (1995), A conrmatory factor analysis of the user information satisfaction instrument, Information Systems Research, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 177-88. Donavan, D.T., Brown, T.J. and Mowen, J.C. (2004), Internal benets of service-worker customer orientation: job satisfaction, commitment, and organizational citizenship behaviors, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 68 No. 1, pp. 128-46. Douglas, S.P. and Craig, S.C. (1993), International Marketing Research, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Douglas, S.P., Craig, S.C. and Nijssen, E.J. (2003), On the use of borrowed scales in cross-national research: a cautionary note, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 621-43. Drolet, A.L. and Morrison, D.G. (2001), Do we really need multiple-item measures in service research?, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 196-205. Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50. Fromkin, H.L. (1970), The effect of experimentally aroused feelings of undistinctiveness upon valuation of scarce and novel experiences, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 521-9. Fromkin, H.L. (1972), Feelings of interpersonal undistinctiveness: an unpleasant affective state, Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, Vol. 6, pp. 178-82. Garver, M.S. and Mentzer, J.T. (1999), Logistics research methods: employing structural equation modeling to test for construct validity, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 33-57. Gerbing, D.W. and Anderson, J.C. (1988), An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 186-92. Goldsmith, R.E., Clark, R.A. and Goldsmith, E.B. (2006), Extending the psychological prole of market mavenism, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 5 No. 5, pp. 411-20. Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1998), Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th ed., Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Harris, J. and Lynn, M. (1996), Manifestations of the desire for unique consumer products, paper presented at the American Marketing Associations Winter Educators Conference, Hilton Head, SC. Heckert, D.M. (1989), The relativity of positive deviance: the case of the French impressionists, Deviant Behavior, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 131-44. Hofstede, G. (2001), Cultures Consequences, Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage. Horn, J.L. and McArdle, J. (1992), A practical and theoretical guide to measurement invariance in aging research, Experimental Aging Research, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 117-44. Institute for Macroeconomic Analysis and Development (2006), available at: www.sigov.si/zmar/ Kim, H.S. and Drolet, A. (2003), Choice and self-expression: a cultural analysis of variety seeking, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 85, pp. 373-82. Kim, H.S. and Markus, H.R. (1999), Deviance or uniqueness, harmony or conformity? A cultural analysis, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 77 No. 4, pp. 785-800. Lane, P.J., Koka, B.R. and Pathak, S. (2006), The reication of absorptive capacity: a critical review and rejuvenation of the construct, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 833-63. Ling, I-L. (2005), An attribution model of the consumers conformity behaviour, paper presented at the International Conference on Business and Information, Hong Kong, July 14-15, 2005. Lynn, M. and Harris, J. (1997a), Individual differences in the pursuit of self-uniqueness through consumption, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 27 No. 21, pp. 1861-83. Lynn, M. and Harris, J. (1997b), The desire for unique consumer products: a new individual differences scale, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 601-16. McGuire, W.J. (1976), Some internal psychological factors inuencing consumer choice, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 2, pp. 302-19. Mullen, M.R. (1995), Diagnosing measurement equivalence in cross national research, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 573-96. Myers, M.B., Calantone, R.R., Page, T.G. and Taylor, C.R. (2000), Academic insight: an application of multiple-group causal models in assessing cross-cultural measurement equivalence, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 108-21. Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (2006), available at: www.pcbs.gov.ps/ Ping, R.A. (2004), On assuring valid measures for theoretical models using survey data, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 57 No. 2, pp. 125-41. Raju, P.S. (1980), Optimum stimulation level: its relationship to personality, demographics, and exploratory behavior, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 272-82. Richins, M.L. (2004), The material values scale: a re-inquiry into its measurement properties and the development of a short form, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 209-19. Ruvio, A. (2008), Unique like everybody else? The social context of consumers need for uniqueness, Psychology and Marketing, forthcoming. Segars, A.H. and Grover, V. (1998), Strategic information systems planning success: an investigation of the construct and its measurement, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 139-63. Segars, A.H. and Grover, V. (1999), Proles of strategic information systems planning, Information Systems Research, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 199-232.

Consumers need for uniqueness

51

IMR 25,1

52

Sharma, S. and Weathers, D. (2003), Assessing generalizability of scales used in cross-national research, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 287-95. Smith, P.C. and Stanton, J.M. (1998), Perspectives on the measurement of job attitudes: the long view, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 367-86. Snyder, C.R. (1992), Product scarcity by need for uniqueness interaction: a consumer catch-22 carousel?, Basic and Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 9-24. Snyder, C.R. and Fromkin, H.L. (1977), Abnormality as a positive characteristic: the development and validation of a scale measuring need for uniqueness, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 86 No. 5, pp. 518-27. Snyder, C.R. and Fromkin, H.L. (1980), Uniqueness: The Human Pursuit of Difference, Plenum, New York, NY. Stanton, J.M., Sinar, E.F., Balzer, W.K. and Smith, P.C. (2002), Issues and strategies for reducing the length of self-report scales, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 167-93. Statistical Ofce of the Republic of Slovenia (2006), available at: www.stat.si./eng/index.asp Steenkamp, J.B.E.M. and Baumgartner, H. (1995), Development of cross-national validation of a short form of CSI as a measure optimum stimulation level, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 97-104. Steenkamp, J.B.E.M. and Baumgartner, H. (1998), Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 78-93. Tepper, K. (1997), Categories, contexts, and conicts of consumers nonconformity experiences, in Belk, R.W. (Ed.), Research in Consumer Behavior, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 209-45. Thompson, C.J. and Haytko, D.L. (1997), Speaking of fashion: consumers uses of fashion discourses and the appropriation of countervailing cultural meanings, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 15-42. Tian, K.T. and Mckenzie, K. (2001), The long-term predictive validity of consumers need for uniqueness, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 1971-3. Tian, K.T., Bearden, W.O. and Hunter, G.L. (2001), Consumers need for uniqueness: scale development and validation, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 50-66. van Herk, H., Poortinga, Y.H. and Verhallen, M.M. (2005), Equivalence of survey data: relevance for international marketing, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 39 Nos 3/4, pp. 251-364. ek, H., Jaklic, M. and Stough, S.J. (2004), Comparing leadership practices between the Zagors United States, Nigeria, and Slovenia: does culture matter?, Cross Cultural Management, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 16-34. Appendix CNFU S Creative choice 1. I often combine possessions in such a way that I create a personal image that cannot be duplicated. 2. I often try to nd a more interesting version of run-of-the-mill products because I enjoy being original. 3. I actively seek to develop my personal uniqueness by buying special products or brands. 4. Having an eye for products that are interesting and unusual assists me in establishing a distinctive image. Unpopular choice 5. When it comes to the products I buy and the situations in which I use them, I have broken customs and rules.

6. I have often violated the understood rules of my social group regarding what to buy or own. 7. I have often gone against the understood rules of my social group regarding when and how certain products are properly used. 8. I enjoy challenging the prevailing taste of people I know by buying something they would not seem to accept. Avoidance of similarity 9. When a product I own becomes popular among the general population, I begin to use it less. 10. I often try to avoid products or brands that I know are bought by the general population. 11. As a rule, I dislike products or brands that are customarily bought by everyone. 12. The more commonplace a product or brand is among the general population, the less interested I am in buying it. Unique consumption behavior 1. I have decorative walls in my house like brick stones, plaster walls, etc. 2. I have a wet bar in my kitchen. 3. I have a tattoo on my body. 4. I own a pure-bred cat, or dog, or horse. 5. I own a unique collection (knifes, stamps, coins, etc) Corresponding author Ayalla Ruvio can be contacted at: aruvio@gsb.haifa.ac.il

Consumers need for uniqueness

53

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints