University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Faculty Publications Marketing Department 6-2001 Consumer Self-Confidence: Refinements in Conceptualization and Measurement William O. Bearden University of South Carolina - Columbia, [email protected] David M. Hardesty Randall L. Rose University of South Carolina - Columbia, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/mark_facpub Part of the Marketing Commons Publication Info Journal of Consumer Research, Volume 28, Issue 1, 2001, pages 121-134. http://jcr.wisc.edu/ © 2001 by Journal of Consumer Research, Inc. This Article is brought to you by the Marketing Department at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Consumer Self-Confidence: Refinements in Conceptualization and l\/leasurement WILLIAM O. BEARDEN DAVID M. HARDESTY RANDALL L. ROSE* The development and validation of measures to assess multiple dimensions of consumer self-confidence are described in this article. Scale-development pro- cedures resulted in a six-factor correlated model made up of the following dimen- sions: information acquisition, consideration-set formation, personal outcomes, so- cial outcomes, persuasion knowledge, and marketplace interfaces. A series of studies demonstrate the psychometric properties of the measures, their discrimi- nant validity with respect to related constructs, their construct validity, and their ability to moderate relationships among other important consumer behavior variables. eneral self-confidence has been frequently cited as an uals high in self-esteem are more difificult to persuade than G important construct for understanding consumer behav- are low-self-esteem individuals. ior. For example, self-confidence has been hypothesized a.s Wood and Stagner (1994) suggest that the explanation for an antecedent to subjective product knowledge (Park. Moth- this assumption is twofold. First, high-self-e.steem persons ersbaugh. and Feick 1994). as a determinant of product-spe- are thought to be more confident of their own judgments cific self-confidence (Locander and Hermann 1979). as a dis- and consequently less infiuenced by others" opinions. Sec- tinguishing characteristic of market-segment profiles (Darden ond, high-self-esteem individuals are more likely to believe and Ashton 1974), and as an influence on external search others think well of them, and hence, are less concerned (Wells and Prensky 1996). Much ofthe extant consumer be- with social rejection than are low-self-esteem persons. Each havior research regarding the role of self-confidence has em- of these explanations provides impetus for the use of self- ployed measures of self-esteem borrowed from psychology esteem scales to reflect general feelings of self-confidence. (e.g., Coopersmith 1967; Rosenberg 1965). Self-confidence However, and as explained below, the use of .self-esteem issues (and the related self-esteem measures) have been stud- measures to reflect consumer self-confidence has resulted in ied principally from two perspectives in the marketing and an equivocal pattern of effects. At least two reasons may consumer research literature: (1) laboratory experiments in- account for these mixed results. First, self-esteem is a global volving investigations of advertising and interpersonal influ- personal trait that may have only limited correspondence ences and (2) field survey tests in which self-confidence is with self-confidence as related to consumer and marketplace depicted as an antecedent of some marketing-related individ- phenomena. Second, the dimensionality and validity of the ual characteristic or knowledge attribute. Regarding the for- most frequently employed measures have been questioned mer, the use of self-esteem measures in studies of persuasion (Tomas and Oliver 1999). For example, the Janis and Field and group influence is based on the assumption that individ- (1959) Feelings of Inadequacy (FIS) scale was originally developed to quantify a person "s feelings of inadequacy, self-con.sciousness, and social anxiety. Ques- tions about the dimensionality of the FIS and the low item- *Williani O. Bearden is the Bank of America Chaired Professor of to-total correlations for some items in the scale have been Marketing at the University of South Carolina, the Darla Moore School i)f Busines.s. Columbia. SC 29208 (bhearden^darla.hadm.sc.edu); David raised (Fleming and Courtney 1984). The Rosenberg mea- M. Hardesty is assistant professor of marketing at the University of Miami. sure was originally designed to measure adolescents" global Sch(K)l of Business Administration. Coral Gables. FL 3.^124-6.').S4: and feelings of self-worth. The measure has been criticized for Randall L. Rose is associate professor of marketing al the University of being susceptible to social desirability bias and for often South Carolina, the Darla Moore School of Business. Columbia. SC 29208 being so skewed as to produce low tripartite-split groups (roserC^darlabadm.sc.edu). The authors would like to thank the editor, the associate editor, and the three reviewers, as well as Rick Nelemeyev. Terry that are still relatively high in self-esteem (Blascovich and Shimp, Kelly Tepper. and Stacy Wood, for their helpful comments and Tomaka 1991). Moreover, questions regarding the dimen- direction. sionality of the scale, as well as the pre.sence of methods 121 C 201)1 by JOURNAL OF CONStrMER RESEARCH Ine • Vol :K • June 2001 122 JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH effects, have been raised (Tomas and Oliver 1999). Finally, confidence are still capable of differentiating among indi- Blascovich and Tomaka (1991) note that the Coopersmith viduals within product-decision categories and purchase ex- (1967) Self-Esteem Inventory (SEI) measure, which was periences. Moreover, like other consumer measures, general developed originally for use with children, is highly cor- consumer self-confidence should be able to predict tenden- related with social desirability bias and lacks stable factor cies. For example, correlations with a summed index of structure. Our premise, then, is that measures more closely specific self-confidence items assessed across a series of tied to consumer phenomena may prove useful in efforts to products would provide evidence of criterion validity (Ob- investigate the role of confidence in the understanding of ermiller and Spangenberg 1998). And, even in instances consumer behavior. As such, this effort is consistent with where the level of product- or situation-specific confidence the frequently cited admonition of Kassarjian (1971) that may be low for most consumers, consumer self-confidence consumer researchers need to develop measures more rel- will still vary across individuals. In addition, purchase-spe- evant to consumer issues. cific factors, such as product expertise, can moderate the The purpose, then, of this article is twofold. First, we strength of the relationship between self-confidence and sev- offer a conceptual definition of consumer self-confidence, eral outcomes. For example, greater expertise should along with a description of the nomological network in strengthen the positive relationship between consumer self- which consumer self-confidence (CSC) is embedded and a confidence and the exertion of influence on others and the brief discussion of related but different concepts. Our second negative relationships with persuasibility and perceived risk. objective is the development and validation of scales to Consumer self-confidence is related to but differs from measure the various dimensions that underlie consumer self- self-esteem, experti.se, and product knowledge. Briefly, and confidence. We offer the measures as altematives for use in considering each concept in tum, the concept of self-esteem the study of consumer-related phenomena, including both goes by a variety of names (e.g., self-worth, self-respect, tests of consumer behavior theory and applied issues. Con- and self-acceptance), and it is assumed to represent the ev- sumer self-confidence is important, too, both because it may aluative component of one's self-concept (Bla.scovich and serve as a protector against marketplace stress (Luce 1994) Tomaka 1991), Self-esteem is the overall affective evalua- and because it pro\ides motivation for consumers to seek tion of one's own worth, value, or imp<mance. As such, assistance when confronted with complex or uncertain de- self-esteem is a broad concept, and confidence about one's cisions. Moreover, the measures should prove useful as an- abilities and performance in the marketplace may or may i tecedents and moderators of relationships among other im- not be related to self-esteem. In general, high self-esteem | portant consumer behavior constructs. Finally, we hope that should enhance consumer self-confidence, and thus self-es- our conceptualization and measures will enhance research teem scales should have a modest, positive relationship with that seeks to identify factors that increase or improve con- measures of consumer self-confidence. sumer self-confidence. Consumer expertise represents the individual's ability to perform product-related tasks successfully (Alba and Hutch- inson 1987). Product expertise includes both the cognitive CONSUMER SELF-CONFIDENCE AND structure and the processes required to effectively use prod- RELATED CONCEPTS uct infonnation and beliefs stored in memory. As such, ex- pertise, which