CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 361Consumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and IdentificationConsumer behavior in food and healthEthics in Business and Education

Consumer Identity Work as Moral Protagonism: How Myth and Ideology Animate a Brand-Mediated Moral Conflict

Open access
Luedicke, Marius K., Thompson, Craig J., Giesler, Markus·2010·Journal of Consumer Research
DOI 10.1086/644761
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Consumer researchers have tended to equate consumer moralism with normative condemnations of mainstream consumer culture. Consequently, little research has investigated the multifaceted forms of identity work that consumers can undertake through more diverse ideological forms of consumer moralism. To redress this theoretical gap, we analyze the adversarial consumer narratives through which a brand‐mediated moral conflict is enacted. We show that consumers’ moralistic identity work is culturally framed by the myth of the moral protagonist and further illuminate how consumers use this mythic structure to transform their ideological beliefs into dramatic narratives of identity. Our resulting theoretical framework explicates identity‐value–enhancing relationships among mythic structure, ideological meanings, and marketplace resources that have not been recognized by prior studies of consumer identity work.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/644761

Cites

88 of 88 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • International K-pop fans who engage in reforming are not responding to 'outside-in' attacks, as in the case of the Hummer brand community responding to attacks from oppositional groups, gay consumers living with stigmatizing representations, or indie consumers responding to devaluing hipster stereotypes.

    “Importantly, however, international K-pop fans who engage in reforming are not responding to 'outside-in' attacks, as in the case of the Hummer brand community responding to attacks from oppositional groups (Luedicke et al. 2010), gay consumers living with stigmatizing representations (Eichert and Luedicke 2022; Kates 2002), or indie consumers responding to devaluing hipster stereotypes (Arsel and”

    From Between Cultural Appreciation and Cultural Appropriation: Self-Authorizing the Consumption of Cultural Difference (2024) · cites this paper as Luedicke et al. 2010

  • Consumers' subject position when reforming resembles an archetypical 'morality play myth in which a moral protagonist is called upon to defend the sacrosanct virtues and ideals from the transgressive actions of an immoral adversary'.

    “Consumers' subject position when reforming thus resembles an archetypical 'morality play myth in which a moral protagonist is called upon to defend the sacrosanct virtues and ideals from the transgressive actions of an immoral adversary' (Luedicke, Thompson, and Giesler 2010)”

    From Between Cultural Appreciation and Cultural Appropriation: Self-Authorizing the Consumption of Cultural Difference (2024) · cites this paper as Luedicke, Thompson, and Giesler 2010

  • Consumer self-authorization strategies do not only recharge the meanings of a consumption practice by linking it with heroic discourses or uncoupling it from culturally devaluing discourses; they also reconfigure the relationship between the consuming self and the others whose cultures are consumed.

    “Importantly, consumer self-authorization strategies do not only recharge the meanings of a consumption practice by linking it with heroic discourses (Luedicke et al. 2010) or uncoupling it from culturally devaluing discourses (Arsel and Thompson 2011); they also reconfigure the relationship between the consuming self and the others whose cultures are consumed.”

    From Between Cultural Appreciation and Cultural Appropriation: Self-Authorizing the Consumption of Cultural Difference (2024) · cites this paper as Luedicke et al. 2010

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 89 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Luedicke, M. K., Thompson, C. J., & Giesler, M.
Affiliations
  • Universität Innsbruck (AT)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Consumer Research
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2010-04
Volume
36
Issue
6
Pages
1016-1032
ISSN
  • 0093-5301 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5277
DOI
10.1086/644761
OpenAlex
W2042390782
Cited by
361
References
89
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 17
FWCI
40.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Consumer Research (publishedVersion)
  • City Research Online (City University London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Harvard Business School
  • Johns Hopkins University
  • York University
  • University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Consumer behavior in food and health
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Ethics in Business and Education
Keywords
ideology, consumer narratives, mythological structure, consumerism

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review