Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 229

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Long-Term Predictive Validity of the Consumers' Need for Uniqueness Scale

Tian, Kelly Tepper, McKenzie, Karyn·2001·Journal of Consumer Psychology

Abstract

This research examines the long‐term ability of the consumers’ need for uniqueness measure to predict consumers’ valued possessions, shopping behaviors, and experiences. Consumers’ need for uniqueness reflects individual differences in counterconformity motivation (i.e., the pursuit of differentness relative to others) that is manifest in consumer responses. This research reports on 2 longitudinal assessments of the scale's predictive validity using data collected at 4 stages from a consumer mail‐survey sample. One year following initial responses to the trait measure, respondents participated in a second survey in which they photographed and rank ordered their valued possessions. In a third survey, the photographs served as cues to obtain responses to ratings of possession benefits and to questions regarding acquisition of the possession. Overall, the results support a number of hypotheses regarding the relation of consumers’ need for uniqueness to salient possession benefits, types of goods comprising consumers’ valued possessions, and shopping behaviors associated with acquiring valued possessions. Two years following initial responses to the trait measure, members of the consumer mail panel completed a fourth survey, indicating their participation in various uniqueness‐enhancing consumer activities. Results support the stability and predictive validity of the measure over the 2‐year period. Because the design of possessions and endorsed uniqueness‐enhancing activities considered in the consumer mail panel studies varied across individuals, an additional study was conducted that demonstrated the scale's ability to predict individuals’ counterconformity responses to the same choice situation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1207/153276601750132731

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 229

Metadata

Authors
Tian, K. T., & McKenzie, K.
Venue
Journal of Consumer Psychology
Published
2001-05-01
Volume
10
Issue
3
Pages
171-193
ISSN
  • 1057-7408 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7663
OpenAlex
W2020174683
Cited by
229
References
6
FWCI
4.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Long-Term Predictive Validity of the Consumers' Need for Uniqueness Scale. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/153276601750132731
The paper
Tian, K. T., & McKenzie, K. (2001). The Long-Term Predictive Validity of the Consumers' Need for Uniqueness Scale. Journal of Consumer Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1207/153276601750132731

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.