Skip to main content

How values of individualism and collectivism influence impulsive buying and money budgeting: the mediating role of acculturation to global consumer culture

Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 2020

Barbara Czarnecka, Bruno Schivinski, Serap Keles

Journal of Consumer Behaviour, volume 19, issue 5, pages 505–522, September 2020 (online 29 June 2020)

  • 594 immigrants in the UK
  • 35 nationalities
  • Online survey
  • Structural equation modelling
  • Mediation analysis
Download the accepted manuscript (PDF)Published version

Free full text: the authors’ accepted manuscript, identical in content to the published article. Please cite the published version.

Keywords
  • acculturation to global consumer culture
  • global consumer culture
  • impulsive buying
  • money budgeting
  • individualism
  • collectivism
  • vertical and horizontal individualism
  • vertical and horizontal collectivism
  • cultural values
  • consumer acculturation
  • immigrants
  • financial behaviour
  • materialism
  • globalisation
  • person-environment fit theory
  • acculturation theory
  • AGCC scale (Durvasula & Lysonski)
  • Sivadas et al. individualism–collectivism scale
  • online survey
  • confirmatory factor analysis
  • structural equation modelling (SEM)
  • mediation analysis
  • bootstrapping
  • lavaan
  • United Kingdom

Immigrants who value hierarchy, whether competing as individuals or deferring to their group, are the most open to global consumer culture, and that openness goes with more impulsive buying and poorer money budgeting. In 594 immigrants living in the UK, the vertical rather than the individualist or collectivist side of people’s values explained who acculturated to global consumer culture.

Key findings

  1. Vertical values drive acculturation to global consumer culture. Among 594 immigrants in the UK from 35 countries, vertical individualism (β = 0.44) and vertical collectivism (β = 0.30) were positively related to acculturation to global consumer culture; horizontal individualism was not (Czarnecka et al., 2020).
  2. Global consumer culture goes with impulsive buying. Consumers more acculturated to global consumer culture reported more impulsive buying (β = 0.60) and less money budgeting (β = −0.48) (Czarnecka et al., 2020).
  3. Acculturation carries the effect of vertical values. Acculturation to global consumer culture mediated the links of vertical individualism with impulsive buying (indirect β = 0.40) and money budgeting (−0.21), and of vertical collectivism with impulsive buying (0.27) and money budgeting (−0.14); the horizontal values showed no significant indirect effects (Czarnecka et al., 2020).
  4. Younger consumers and women are more acculturated. Younger participants (β = −0.28) and women (β = 0.18) were more acculturated to global consumer culture; length of stay in the UK made no difference (Czarnecka et al., 2020).

At a glance

Design
Online survey of immigrants recruited through social networking groups for national communities (e.g. ‘Poles in Luton’, ‘Nigerians in the UK’), InterNations and personal networks
Participants
594 adult immigrants from 35 non-Anglo-Saxon countries living in the UK (59% women; mean age 32.9, SD 9.4); 57.2% long-term residents and 38.8% students
Measures
Vertical and horizontal individualism and collectivism (Sivadas et al., 2008; 9-point scale); acculturation to global consumer culture (21 items, seven dimensions; Durvasula & Lysonski, 2015); impulsive buying (Ridgway et al., 2008); money budgeting (Luna-Arocas & Tang, 2004)
Controls
Age, gender and length of stay in the UK
Analysis
Confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modelling with FIML estimation and 5,000 bootstrap draws, in R (lavaan)
Model fit
CFA: χ²(896) = 2,612.87, CFI = 0.91, TLI = 0.90, RMSEA = 0.05. Structural model: χ²(914) = 2,401.98, CFI = 0.91, TLI = 0.90, RMSEA = 0.05; R² = .57 (AGCC), .53 (impulsive buying), .21 (money budgeting)

Figure 1. Conceptual model, with the estimates reported in Table 3

H1: β = 0.44***H2: −0.08 (n.s.)H3: β = 0.30** (positive)H4: −0.26 (p = .07)H5: β = 0.60***H6: β = −0.48***Controls:age, gender,length of stay in UKage −0.28***, gender 0.18***Indirect effects via AGCC (H7, H8):VI → impulsive buying 0.40***, → budgeting −0.21**VC → impulsive buying 0.27**, → budgeting −0.14*HI and HC: not significantVerticalindividualismHorizontalindividualismVerticalcollectivismHorizontalcollectivismAcculturation toglobal consumerculture (AGCC)ImpulsivebuyingMoneybudgeting
Standardised coefficients from Table 3 of the article; grey dashed paths are not significant at p < .05. Vertical collectivism was hypothesised to lower acculturation but raised it. * p ≤ .05, ** p ≤ .01, *** p ≤ .001 as printed; n = 594.

What drives acculturation to global consumer culture, and what it drives

Values → acculturationVertical individualism0.44Vertical collectivism0.30Acculturation → behaviourImpulsive buying0.60Money budgeting−0.48
Standardised coefficients from Table 3 of the article (n = 594). Money budgeting (−0.48) and horizontal collectivism (−0.26, p = .07) are negative; horizontal individualism (−0.08) was not significant.

Tables

Table 1. Nationalities included in the study
Country Frequency %
Pakistan 41 6.91
Poland 38 6.41
Germany 28 4.72
Netherlands 28 4.72
India 26 4.38
Italy 26 4.38
Nigeria 24 4.05
Ghana 23 3.88
Greece 23 3.88
Portugal 23 3.88
Saudi Arabia 21 3.54
Slovakia 18 3.04
Bangladesh 17 2.87
Philippines 17 2.87
China 16 2.70
Spain 16 2.70
Latvia 15 2.53
Sri Lanka 15 2.53
Egypt 14 2.36
Jamaica 13 2.19
Vietnam 13 2.19
Argentina 12 2.02
Belgium 12 2.02
Bahrain 11 1.85
Cyprus 11 1.85
Iran 11 1.85
Iraq 11 1.85
Myanmar 11 1.85
Rep. of the Congo 11 1.85
Romania 11 1.85
Zimbabwe 11 1.85
Bulgaria 10 1.69
Brazil 8 1.35
Chile 6 1.01
France 3 0.51

Table 2. Reliability and validity scores of the conceptual model

Construct α CR AVE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. VI 0.74 0.75 0.50 0.71 0.22*** 0.63*** 0.11** 0.44*** 0.11** 0.05
2. HI 0.73 0.75 0.52 0.72 0.03 0.66*** −0.14** −0.14** 0.13**
3. VC 0.79 0.82 0.54 0.73 0.21*** 0.43*** 0.11** 0.09*
4. HC 0.80 0.82 0.54 0.73 −0.21*** −0.29*** 0.28***
5. AGCC – – – – 0.47*** −0.22**
6. Impulsive buying 0.86 0.86 0.67 0.82 −0.51***
7. Budgeting 0.85 0.86 0.61 0.78
Age – – – −0.14** −0.16*** −0.13** −0.08** −0.18** −0.24*** 0.12**
Gender – – – −0.28*** −0.08** −0.26*** −0.14** −0.11** 0.25*** −0.11*
Length of stay – – – −0.13** −0.08** −0.13** −0.13** −0.11** −0.04 −0.05

VI/HI = vertical/horizontal individualism; VC/HC = vertical/horizontal collectivism; gender ref: 0 = male. Square roots of the average variance extracted on the diagonal (in italics). Cronbach’s alpha, CR and AVE for AGCC were calculated for each individual dimension. FIML χ²(896) = 2,612.87, CFI = 0.91, TLI = 0.90, RMSEA = 0.05 (90% CI [0.05–0.05]); ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.10 (as printed); n = 594. CR = composite reliability; AVE = average variance extracted.

Table 3. Standardized structural coefficients

Hypothesis β t p Supported
H1. Vertical individualism → AGCC 0.44 3.16 .001 Supported
H2. Horizontal individualism → AGCC −0.08 −0.60 .54 Not supported
H3. Vertical collectivism → AGCC 0.30 2.39 .01 Not supported
H4. Horizontal collectivism → AGCC −0.26 −1.80 .07 Supported
H5. AGCC → impulsive buying 0.60 4.52 .001 Supported
H6. AGCC → money budgeting −0.48 −3.34 .001 Supported
Control variables
Age → AGCC −0.28 −4.13 .001 –
Gender → AGCC 0.18 3.73 .001 –
Length of staying in the UK → AGCC 0.04 0.83 .40 –
Indirect effects (specific indirect β)
H7a. Vertical individualism → AGCC → impulsive buying 0.40 2.97 .001 Supported
H7b. Vertical individualism → AGCC → money budgeting −0.21 −2.52 .01 Supported
H7c. Vertical collectivism → AGCC → impulsive buying 0.27 2.39 .01 Supported
H7d. Vertical collectivism → AGCC → money budgeting −0.14 −2.21 .02 Supported
H8a. Horizontal individualism → AGCC → impulsive buying −0.07 −0.60 .54 Not supported
H8b. Horizontal individualism → AGCC → money budgeting 0.04 0.59 .55 Not supported
H8c. Horizontal collectivism → AGCC → impulsive buying −0.23 −1.84 .06 Not supported
H8d. Horizontal collectivism → AGCC → money budgeting 0.12 1.75 .07 Not supported
Total effects
Vertical individualism → impulsive buying −0.39 −2.61 .01 –
Vertical individualism → money budgeting 0.26 2.10 .03 –
Horizontal individualism → impulsive buying 0.24 1.51 .12 –
Horizontal individualism → money budgeting −0.19 −1.45 .14 –
Vertical collectivism → impulsive buying −0.06 −0.48 .62 –
Vertical collectivism → money budgeting 0.12 1.20 .22 –
Horizontal collectivism → impulsive buying −0.19 −1.26 .20 –
Horizontal collectivism → money budgeting 0.27 2.24 .02 –

FIML χ²(914) = 2,401.98, CFI = 0.91, TLI = 0.90, RMSEA = 0.05 (90% CI [0.05–0.06]); gender ref: male = 0; n = 594; 5,000 bootstrap draws. Values and support decisions as printed.

Table A1. Descriptive statistics for the constructs and measurements
Constructs and measurements Loading Mean SD Skewness Kurtosis
Vertical individualism (Sivadas, Bruvold, & Nelson, 2008)
I enjoy working in situations involving competition with others. 0.69 5.67 2.14 −0.21 −0.66
Competition is the law of nature. 0.70 6.22 2.03 −0.55 −0.12
Without competition, it is not possible to have a good society. 0.73 5.95 2.31 −0.48 −0.58
Vertical collectivism
I would do what would please my family, even if I detested that activity. 0.78 5.39 2.35 −0.29 −0.93
I usually sacrifice my self-interest for the benefit of my group. 0.83 5.69 2.26 −0.35 −0.73
Children should feel honored if their parents receive a distinguished award. 0.60 7.27 1.99 −1.19 0.78
I would sacrifice an activity that I enjoy very much If my family did not approve of it. 0.71 5.50 2.52 −0.26 −1.06
Horizontal individualism
I enjoy being unique and different from others in many ways. 0.91 6.69 2.23 −1.04 0.37
I often “do my own thing.” 0.61 6.68 1.81 −0.64 0.22
I am a unique individual. 0.60 7.17 1.65 −0.74 0.20
Horizontal collectivism
My happiness depends very much on the happiness of those around me. 0.60 6.02 2.38 −0.60 −0.53
The well-being of my co-workers is important to me. 0.89 6.49 2.10 −0.88 0.26
If a co-worker gets a prize, I would feel proud. 0.82 6.47 2.09 −0.81 0.11
I feel good when I cooperate with others. 0.60 6.56 1.88 −0.70 0.33
AGCC – Self-identification with global consumer culture (Durvasula & Lysonski, 2015)
The way that I dress is influenced by the advertising activities of foreign or global companies. 0.82 3.01 1.99 0.63 −0.93
Advertising by foreign or global brands has a strong influence on my clothing choices. 0.88 3.05 1.96 0.59 −0.95
I pay attention to the fashions worn by people in my age group that live in other countries. 0.60 3.04 1.96 0.59 −0.94
AGCC – Global mass media exposure
I enjoy watching Hollywood films at the theatre. 0.78 4.69 2.22 −0.62 −1.15
I enjoy watching Hollywood movies that are in English. 0.85 5.10 2.20 −0.98 −0.61
Some of my favorite actors/actresses are from Hollywood. 0.70 4.68 2.29 −0.60 −1.23
AGCC – Exposure to marketing activities
In my city, there are many billboards, and advertising signs for foreign and global products. 0.68 4.00 2.27 −0.14 −1.55
It is quite common to see ads for foreign or global products in local media. 0.75 4.42 2.27 −0.43 −1.40
When I read a newspaper, I come across many advertisements for foreign or global products. 0.69 4.03 2.23 −0.12 −1.55
AGCC – English language usage and exposure
I feel very comfortable speaking in English. 0.80 6.03 1.78 −2.12 2.14
I often speak English with family or friends. 0.68 5.35 2.22 −1.12 −0.39
I speak English regularly. 0.82 6.04 1.78 −2.10 3.07
AGCC – Openness to and desire to emulate GCC
I think people my age are basically the same around the world. For example, a 20-something in Nigeria is basically the same as a 20-something in the U.S., Germany, or anywhere else. 0.76 2.88 1.91 0.76 −0.68
I think that my lifestyle is almost the same as those of my age group in other countries. 0.88 2.97 1.90 0.67 −0.79
I think my lifestyle is almost the same as those of people of my social class in other countries. 0.82 3.08 2.02 0.52 −1.12
AGCC – Social interactions
I prefer spending my vacations outside of the country that I live in (reverse). 0.63 5.55 1.57 −1.24 1.00
Visiting foreign countries is one of my favorite things. 0.80 5.22 2.03 −1.03 −0.29
I often think about going to different countries and doing some traveling. 0.82 5.42 1.97 −1.30 0.40
AGCC – Cosmopolitanism
I am interested in learning more about people who live in other countries. 0.86 5.85 1.21 −1.42 2.50
I like to learn about other ways of life. 0.89 5.99 1.11 −1.76 2.38
I enjoy being with people from other countries to learn about their views and approaches. 0.87 5.97 1.16 −1.57 2.29
Impulsive buying (Ridgway et al., 2008)
I consider myself an impulse purchaser. 0.79 3.18 2.03 0.43 −1.13
I buy things I do not need. 0.85 3.19 1.85 0.54 −0.87
I buy things I did not plan to buy. 0.83 3.74 1.85 0.13 −1.08
Money budgeting (Luna-Arocas & Tang, 2004)
I budget my money very well. 0.88 3.65 1.05 −0.41 −0.48
I use my money very carefully. 0.86 3.66 1.04 −0.48 −0.41
I pay my bills immediately to avoid interest or penalties. 0.61 4.28 0.87 −1.31 1.65
I do financial planning for the future. 0.76 3.69 1.08 −0.52 −0.51

Standardised factor loadings, means, standard deviations, skewness and kurtosis as printed in Table A1 of the article (the article spells the first source ‘Sivadasa’).

The question

Global consumer culture promotes spending, but people differ in how far they embrace it. Drawing on person-environment fit and acculturation theory, we asked whether immigrants whose cultural values fit global consumer culture are more likely to acculturate to it, and whether that acculturation leads to more impulsive buying and poorer money budgeting.

Implications

Practical implications

Consumer organisations and social marketers can target consumers highly acculturated to global consumer culture, and those with vertical values, with financial education and budgeting tools. Financial services providers can offer such consumers products that encourage budgeting and long-term planning, framing messages around individual achievement for vertical individualists and around the group for vertical collectivists.

Theoretical implications

It is the vertical–horizontal distinction, not individualism versus collectivism, that explains the acceptance of global consumer culture: accepting inequality between individuals or within groups goes with acculturation. The fit between values, acculturation and consumption behaviours supports person-environment fit theory in consumer research.

Limitations and future research

  • The cross-sectional, non-experimental design does not allow causal inference, and the survey was in English only.
  • Immigrants are exposed at the same time to the host (British) culture and to global consumer culture, which are hard to separate.
  • Future work could study other consumption behaviours and replicate the model in other countries.

Questions this paper answers

Does global consumer culture make people buy impulsively?

Among 594 immigrants in the UK, those more acculturated to global consumer culture reported more impulsive buying (β = 0.60) and less money budgeting (β = −0.48) (Czarnecka et al., 2020).

Which cultural values go with acculturation to global consumer culture?

Vertical individualism and vertical collectivism, the values that accept hierarchy between individuals or within groups; horizontal individualism did not (Czarnecka et al., 2020).

What is acculturation to global consumer culture?

The extent to which people adopt the knowledge, skills and behaviours of a global consumer culture, measured by cosmopolitanism, exposure to global marketing and media, English use, social interactions, openness and self-identification with global consumer culture.

Who is most acculturated to global consumer culture?

In this sample, younger people and women; how long immigrants had lived in the UK made no difference (Czarnecka et al., 2020).

Key concepts

Global consumer culture (GCC)
A Western-style culture of consumption spread by global brands, media and mobility.
Acculturation to global consumer culture (AGCC)
How far an individual adopts the knowledge, skills and behaviours of global consumer culture (Durvasula & Lysonski, 2015).
Vertical and horizontal individualism and collectivism
Cultural values that combine independence or interdependence with acceptance of hierarchy (vertical) or equality (horizontal).
Money budgeting
A tendency to plan, budget and use money carefully (Luna-Arocas & Tang, 2004).
Person-environment fit
The degree of match between a person’s characteristics and those of their environment.

Open science and materials

Study materials

Scale items
All items with standardised loadings, means, standard deviations, skewness and kurtosis are in Table A1 below.
Nationalities
The 35 nationalities in the sample, with frequencies, are in Table 1 below; the largest groups were from Pakistan (41), Poland (38), Germany (28) and the Netherlands (28).

How to cite

Czarnecka, B., Schivinski, B., & Keles, S. (2020). How values of individualism and collectivism influence impulsive buying and money budgeting: the mediating role of acculturation to global consumer culture. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 19(5), 505–522. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1833

Related publications

All publications