See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/350714127

Love is not blind: investigating a love-hate transition among luxury fashion

brand consumers

Article in Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management · April 2021

DOI: 10.1108/JFMM-04-2020-0058

CITATIONS READS

18 414

4 authors, including:

Muhammad Kashif Aisha Rehman

National University of Sciences and Technology 6 PUBLICATIONS 57 CITATIONS
89 PUBLICATIONS 1,777 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Muhammad Kashif on 11 June 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/1361-2026.htm

Love is not blind: investigating a Love is not

blind
love-hate transition among luxury
fashion brand consumers
Muhammad Kashif 625
Faculty of Management Sciences, GIFT University, Gujranwala, Pakistan
Received 29 October 2019
Tulay Korkmaz Devrani Revised 21 December 2020
Baskent University, Ankara, Turkey Accepted 16 January 2021

Aisha Rehman
GIFT University, Gujranwala, Pakistan, and
Sarminah Samad
Department of Business Administration, Collage of Business and Administration,
Princess Noura Bint Abdul Rahman University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Abstract
Purpose – There is extensive research where consumer emotions of brand love and brand hate are
investigated. However, the studies where a transition in consumer-brand emotions is explored are scant. This
paper aims to investigate the mediating effect of brand jealousy in the relationship between brand love and
brand hate among luxury fashion brand consumers. Also how value expressiveness moderates the relationship
between brand hate and negative word of mouth (NWOM) is examined.
Design/methodology/approach – The study is based on a cross-sectional survey conducted among 273
luxury fashion consumers from Pakistan. The structural equation modeling (SEM) technique is employed to
test the proposed hypotheses.
Findings – All the proposed hypotheses are supported. Brand jealousy mediates the relationship between
brand love and brand hate. Furthermore, value expressiveness buffers the relationship between brand hate
and NWOM.
Practical implications – The luxury fashion marketers should focus on strengthening the symbolic identity
of a luxury fashion brand via advocating its visual elements. Moreover, there is a need to advertise luxury
fashion brands as exclusive to individual customers. Finally, some rewards can be offered to consumers to
generate positive word of mouth (WOM) about luxury fashion brands.
Originality/value – The study of an emotional transition among luxury brand customers via a mediating role
of brand jealousy is a unique theoretical contribution. Moreover, the moderating role of the value-
expressiveness function examining the hate-to-NWOM path is also unique to this study.
Keywords Brand love, Brand hate, Brand jealousy, Luxury fashion brands, Social self, Pakistan
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
A strong consumer-brand relationship is a matter of primary concern for fashion marketers
(Samala and Singh, 2019). However, the development of this relationship is challenging
because the customers always seek exclusivity in a luxury fashion brand (Zhang and Cude,
2018). The consumption and possession of a luxury fashion brand enhances the social status
of individuals. The consumers try to impress other members of a reference group via
symbolic (i.e. brand name and logo) and functional (i.e. quality/durability) identification with
a luxury fashion brand (Cronje et al., 2016). When consumers notice a brand being
appreciated by other members as exclusive, it arouses positive emotions toward the brand Journal of Fashion Marketing and
Management: An International
(Goldsmith and Clark, 2012). Contrarily, when a brand falls short of consumer expectations, Journal
some negative feelings are aroused (Hegner et al., 2017). The positive and negative feelings Vol. 25 No. 4, 2021
pp. 625-643
toward brands are the consumer emotions of love and hate. Brand love is a positive consumer © Emerald Publishing Limited
1361-2026
emotion toward a brand and demonstrates their emotional attachment with a brand (i.e. the DOI 10.1108/JFMM-04-2020-0058
JFMM brand) (Carroll and Ahuvia, 2006). On the other side, hate is a negative consumer emotion and
25,4 reflects feelings of hatred among consumers, toward a brand (Wu et al., 2018). The luxury
fashion brand consumers are sensitive to the changes in brand performance and strategy
(Rodrigues and Rodrigues, 2019). Usually, the functional performance of a luxury fashion
brand is high and consumers have no complaints. However, the consumers being self-centric
expect brands to deliver some intangible benefits to raise their social status among others
(Cronje et al., 2016). This way they aim for self-expressive motives.
626 The self-expressive function is an important discourse in the study of consumer behavior
toward brands (Saenger et al., 2020). Self-expressiveness is divided into two elements, i.e. inner
self and the social self. The inner self is a perception that a brand is representative of an
individual’s personality and portrays a true self among others (Samala and Singh, 2019; Jin and
Ryu, 2019). On the other side, the social self is a perception among consumers that a brand
enhances their self-image by leaving a positive impact on others in the social circle (Lin and
Sung, 2014; Prentice et al., 2019). A positive self-expressive perception triggers positive
emotions and strengthens the engagement of luxury fashion consumers (Ki et al., 2017). This is
true because consumers of luxury pay a premium price for the exclusivity. The personality
congruity strengthens consumers’ attachment with the brand (Donvito et al., 2020). However,
when brands are unable to meet such an expectation, some negative feelings are aroused,
resulting in spreading negative word of mouth (NWOM) (Hegner et al., 2017). Previously, it was
believed that the poor functional performance (Bryson et al., 2013b), lack of social
expressiveness (Hegner et al., 2017) and exploitation of consumer sentiments (Kashif et al.,
2015) are the stronger reasons that consumers hate a brand and speak negatively about it.
However, contemporary researchers found consumers neglecting brands when it failed to serve
their need for uniqueness (Kauppinen-R€ais€anen et al., 2018). The study of nonfunctional cues
that can cause a shift in consumer emotions is an important area of inquiry (Sarkar et al., 2020).
In this regard, brand jealousy can be an important personal element that can shape up
consumer-brand relationships. Brand jealousy is a feeling among consumers that the brand
they consume is not exclusive because others in the social circle possess and consume similar
brands (Leventhal et al., 2014) and enjoy equal social status (Sarkar et al., 2014). The jealousy
associated with partner emotions of love/hate is an important discourse in family studies
tradition (Mullen, 1990), but has not been given proper attention and acknowledgment in the
marketing studies. In cases where consumers feel jealousy from others, they might hate
the brand and would like to spread NWOM about a brand (Alexandrov et al., 2013). The
consumers’ tendency to spread word of mouth (i.e. either positive or negative) (Einwiller et al.,
2017; Rageh Ismail and Spinelli, 2012) is an effort to assimilate themselves with other
members of a social group. This way they try enhancing their social image, referring to the
value-expressiveness function of a brand (Bearden et al., 1989).
This study contributes to the existing body of knowledge in several ways. First, the
antecedents and consequences of consumer emotions of brand love and hate are separately
discussed (Samala and Singh, 2019; Hegner et al., 2017), while an emotional transition is
common (i.e. from brand love to brand hate), yet neglected (Gumparthi and Patra, 2019). The
short-lived nature of emotion is discussed, but a transition has not been empirically
demonstrated. Our investigation will benefit luxury fashion marketers to strengthen
consumer-brand ties. We attempt to theoretically reposition brand jealousy as a construct –
framed already as a favorable element – leading to an increased consumer-brand connectivity
(Leventhal et al., 2014) and a willingness to pay the premium (Bıçakcıo glu et al., 2017). Based
on the tradition of family studies from where this construct was borrowed, there is stronger
evidence that jealousy between partners can lead to a weaker, yet destructive relationship
(Kim et al., 2018). The luxury brand consumers desire exclusivity (Zhang and Cude, 2018).
However, a situation where consumers observe other individuals using a similar brand;
seeking equal social status and identity can result in arousal of a feeling of jealousy.
In situations when consumers feel a discrepancy in the attainment of core brand value Love is not
(i.e. exclusivity/uniqueness), it is regarded as an identity loss, thus resulting in brand hate blind
(Hegner et al., 2017). However there is confusion as which personal elements weaken the
emotional transition between consumers and brands (Sarkar et al., 2020). This is where we
position brand jealousy as a mediating variable to result in arousal of negative consumer-
brand relationships.
Another unique contribution of this study is to examine the moderating role of value-
expressiveness among luxury fashion consumers to investigate the relationship between 627
brand hate and their intention to spread NWOM. The value-expressive function is studied in
brand-related investigations (Su and Reynolds, 2017), but so far its moderating role is missed
from literature which we think is important. For instance, younger consumers do not like to
re-purchase fashion brands that are incongruent to their personalities (Vigolo and Ugolini,
2016). When consumers feel their brand is not offering them value, they have this tendency to
spread the NWOM. However, is it true in the case of a luxury fashion brand that is respected
(not for its performance but also for its ability to enhance the social image of individuals) by
the members of a social group? Moreover, the dominant form of brand research advocates the
perspective of mature age cohorts (Rodrigues and Rodrigues, 2019; Samala and Singh, 2019).
The younger consumers also possess a need for uniqueness and aspire to relate themselves
with luxury fashion brands (Kauppinen-R€ais€anen et al., 2018), but still few confusions exist.
For instance, what do they feel about brands with lower levels of value-expressiveness
(Kauppinen-R€ais€anen et al., 2018)? The younger consumers have this tendency to spread
NWOM about brands (Yu et al., 2019), but we challenge this assumption via a moderating role
of value-expressiveness. We believe that younger luxury fashion consumers would like to
remain silent. This is mainly because luxury fashion brands have a very strong reputation
(Cronje et al., 2016). In case consumers intent to spread NWOM about luxury brands, they
might fear losing their credibility and social image which can hurt their efforts to be
acknowledged by a particular social group (Cronje et al., 2016). This would be an interesting
relationship to examine in the context of luxury fashion brands.
The study also has a contextual value. The context of luxury fashion branding from a
collectivist cultural context of Pakistan adds further value to the originality of this study.
High demand for luxury fashion brands (Ko et al., 2019) and a different family system
qualifies Pakistan as an important context. The younger children spend millions of money to
buy luxury items (SCMP, 2019). Other Asian countries such as Pakistan are no exception
where parents buy goods for their children. Pakistan as a country is a highly religious Islamic
nation, progressing well in the luxury fashion industry with almost 40 high-end luxury
brands and 32% of its population comprises of fashion-conscious, open-minded younger
consumers (Iriscommunications, 2016). The Pakistani consumers of luxury brands are highly
status-conscious and like to be recognized by the members of their social circle (Dawn, 2019).
According to the recent data about the evolving luxury niche in Pakistan, the consumers are
happy to pay higher prices for a brand that offers exclusivity (Dawn, 2019). Also, Pakistani
luxury fashion brands are struggling to convince consumers to pay the premium (Shaikh
et al., 2017). Culturally, people seek in-group identity via closer social interactions (Jain, 2019).
Since people live in close social proximity to each other and notice the possessions of others in
a social circle (Kemer et al., 2016), a feeling of jealousy can easily occur to cause an emotional
transition. Such an investigation is absolutely absent in collectivist cultural contexts (Shaikh
et al., 2017).

Self-expressions and brand love

The consumers express their personalities via the acquisition and consumption of various
brands (Su and Reynolds, 2017). Ultimately, the brands high in self-expressive value are
preferred by consumers. This self-expressiveness function is understood as the degree to
JFMM which a brand contributes to one’s inner as well as the social self (Carroll and Ahuvia, 2006).
25,4 The social self is a feeling among consumers that a brand enhances their social status,
ultimately contributing to their self-image (Ki et al., 2017). The brands are supposed to
enhance the self-image of individuals – positively contributing to their social status (Islam
and Rahman, 2016a). On the contrary, the inner self is consumers’ belief that an object/brand
represents him/her from the inside is closer to the personality and is a true reflection of one’s
self-image. Once the luxury fashion brands help consumers to raise their social status,
628 positive emotions are aroused (Wade Clarke et al., 2012). The possession of a luxury fashion
brand is appraised by members of a social group (Kauppinen-R€ais€anen et al., 2018), while the
consumers’ personality congruity with the brand enriches the inner self. It is important in a
collectivist cultural system where people live in close social proximity to each other and
express their personality during close social interactions (Ioana-Daniela et al., 2018).
Furthermore, there is evidence that consumer-brand personality congruity triggers brand
love (Rodrigues and Rodrigues, 2019) and their self-concept congruity leads to arousal of
positive consumer emotions (Samala and Singh, 2019). There is some evidence that
personality congruity strengthens brand attachment (Donvito et al., 2020). Similarly, we
believe a positive perception of inner and social self among luxury fashion consumers can
trigger brand love. Thus we propose the following hypotheses:
H1. The perceived social self positively relates to brand love among luxury fashion
customers.
H2. The perceived inner self positively relates to brand love among luxury fashion
customers.

Brand love and brand jealousy

The consumer emotion of brand love is a romantic expression between consumers and
brands (Sarkar et al., 2014). Consumers spend a lot of time and effort to attain exclusive
luxury brands (Ko et al., 2019). They do not expect a lack of exclusivity and others using
equal social status (Kauppinen-R€ais€anen et al., 2018). Consumers usually are jealous when
they observe that other members of the social group are using similar brands (Leventhal
et al., 2014). This relationship is particularly important in a luxury fashion brand context
where consumers buy these brands to serve their status/ego needs and expect a certain
degree of uniqueness from brands in return (Cronje et al., 2016; Kauppinen-R€ais€anen et al.,
2018). Moreover, since luxury brands are high price brands, the consumers expect
exclusivity – a feeling of being unique among reference group members (Ioana-Daniela et al.,
2018). In a collectivist cultural context, people live in close social proximity to each other
and notice luxury brands possessed by members of a social group (Ngo et al., 2016). When
they notice others getting an equal social status, there are chances that the emotion of brand
love might lead to a feeling of jealousy. This is exactly based on the logic of familial ties
between love partners where a loss in identity results in emotional transitions (Kemer et al.,
2016). Theoretically, when there is love, possessiveness also exists that might trigger
emotional imbalance (Kim et al., 2018). Similarly, we perceive that emotional transition
occurs when consumers notice a loss in identity, particularly true for a luxury fashion
brand where higher amounts of money is paid to attain social value (Jain, 2019). Thus we
hypothesize:
H3. The feelings of brand love among luxury fashion consumers positively relate to
brand jealousy.
Brand jealousy and brand hate Love is not
It is a challenging task to bring some consistency in consumer emotions. These emotions blind
deteriorate over time due to negative consumer experiences with brands (Zarantonello et al.,
2018). A low self-brand connection might lead to consumers’ unfavorable response toward the
brand (Ferraro et al., 2013). The core reason is hidden in consumers’ possessiveness where they
cannot tolerate others enjoying equal social status through possession and consumption of a
similar brand (Leventhal et al., 2014; Kauppinen-R€ais€anen et al., 2018). This way, consumers feel
a threat to their identity (Cronje et al., 2016) and fear a loss of social image (Su and Reynolds, 629
2017). This observation of consumption of similar brand by others works as a threat to their
identity and may arouse a negative emotion of brand hate. Previously, consumer emotions of
guilt and pleasure have been associated with negative brand outcomes (i.e. weaker loyalties) (Ki
et al., 2017), while we replicate this logic to state that jealousy might result in a negative emotion
of hate among luxury fashion consumers. Notably, luxury fashion brand consumers are more
sensitive to identification with the brand as they have paid a huge amount of price to attain and
consume a particular brand that is exclusive (Ioana-Daniela et al., 2018). Thus we hypothesize:
H4. The perceptions of brand jealousy positively relate to brand hate among luxury
fashion brand customers.

Brand love to brand hate

The studies in consumer behavior are rich in advocating a short-term nature of consumer
emotions toward a brand (Zarantonello et al., 2016). Alongside managers, some researchers
have also indicated emotional transition among consumers as a potential area of inquiry
(Ki et al., 2017). So far, emotional transition among consumers is perceived as a function of
unexpected changes in brand strategy. Consumers sometimes do not like brand extensions
which can result in emotional imbalance among them (Lin and Sung, 2014), thus damaging
the consumer-brand relationship. This is an important research issue, as positive consumer
emotions toward brands result in brand preferences, while negative emotions can cause
brand failures (Gregoire et al., 2009). A change in brand elements can harm consumers’
identity perceptions, thus disengaging consumers to actively participate in activities of a
brand (Lin and Sung 2014). However, consumers wanted to see luxury fashion brands as
progressing nicely, adding new features and moving to other countries. This way they will
feel positive about the brand and would like to engage in its communications (Prentice et al.,
2019). On the contrary, when consumers feel that a brand is static and is not progressing, yet
static and myopic, a weak consumer-brand relationship exists (Johnson et al., 2019). The
consumers will keep on loving an exclusive luxury fashion brand, especially one which is
progressing and is congruent with their personalities (Rageh Ismail and Spinelli, 2012; Vigolo
and Ugolini, 2016). Thus we hypothesize:
H5. The brand love among luxury fashion consumers negatively relates to brand hate.

Brand hate and NWOM

The NWOM refers to the extent to which consumers spread negative information about a
brand (Bonifield and Cole, 2007). The consumers spread information about a brand via
multiple platforms (Jin and Ryu, 2019). Since the consumers’ feedback can influence loyalties,
it has its pragmatic value. Even for luxury fashion marketers who spend a lot of money to
positively influence their potential and actual customers (Shaikh et al., 2017). There are two
broader types of NWOM, i.e. complaining to friends and family about a brand and posting
some stuff via social media and websites to propagate negative opinions (Allsop et al., 2007).
Following the practice, we are using NWOM as comprising of both these aspects, i.e. private
JFMM as well as public complaining (Hegner et al., 2017). However, this relationship is not tested
25,4 among fashion consumers of luxury brands which is unique to this study. The need for
sharing is highlighted as an element of identity among consumers (Borrero and Kruger, 2015).
When consumers have some information, either positive or negative, they tend to spread it to
others to take some credit, and this way their identity within the social group is strengthened
(Einwiller et al., 2017). Naturally, it is the human tendency to share negative experiences most
often than positive experiences (Alexandrov et al., 2013). Some of them may think they are
630 alerting others – protecting them from harmful consequences (Chang et al., 2013). Thus
sharing feedback provides them with an upgraded social image among members of reference
group. Based on this logic, we hypothesize:
H6. The emotion of hate toward a brand positively relates to spreading NWOM
intentions among luxury fashion brand customers.

Mediation of brand jealousy

A threat to the consumer-brand relationship triggers negative feelings of jealousy among
consumers (Leventhal et al., 2014). The rationale of brand jealousy is rooted in family studies
where partner emotions of love/hate were discussed (Mullen, 1990). However, jealousy arising
out of brand love has not received much academic attention and is mostly linked to
consumers’ desire to acquire a brand (Sarkar et al., 2014). It is also studied as an antecedent to
customer engagement (Islam and Rahman, 2016b) as well as their willingness to pay a
premium price (Bıçakcıo glu et al., 2017). We respect but also contradict this argument that
brand jealousy can only be placed as a favorable issue while investigating positive outcomes
for the brand. This is because jealousy has been positioned as a primary condition to destruct
familial relationships (Kim et al., 2018). When people appraise one of the partners or interfere
in any other manner between them, a feeling of jealousy is aroused (Ezell, 2016).
In consumer behavior literature, consumption specific jealousy is associated with
negative outcomes of hate among consumers (Mino, 2008). In _ recent studies, researchers
noticed that consumer emotions fade away over time due to some brand-related changes
(Zarantonello et al., 2016). The consumers of luxury brands are so sensitive about their
relationships with the luxury brands that they do not tolerate a similar value is offered to
other members of a social group (Kang and Park, 2016). They consider it a loss to their social
status and identity within the group. The luxury brand promise is based largely on the
brand’s ability to be exclusive to an individual (Ko et al., 2019), while others using similar
brands can damage consumers’ positive spirit toward a luxury fashion brand. They do not
feel as being distinctive when they observe that others are also using similar brands. This
tendency to observe what others possess is most common in collectivist cultures, the
context of this study (Kemer et al., 2016; Ngo et al., 2016). This way we offer a new direction
to shift in the consumer-brand emotions by positing a mediating role of brand jealousy.
Thus we hypothesize:
H7. Brand jealousy mediates the relationship between brand love and brand hate among
luxury fashion consumers.

Moderation of value-expressiveness
When consumers hate brands they tend to spread NWOM (Alexandrov et al., 2013). However,
some conditions can twist this relationship. First, since possession and consumption of a
prestigious brand strengthens their identity as an important member of a social group
(Schade et al., 2016), the consumers while hating the brand can still feel that a brand is offering
functional value (Jung Choo et al., 2012). Such a phenomenon is discussed about selfish
motives among consumers (Kang and Park, 2016). This way, the consumers despite hating a Love is not
brand can still perceive high value-expressiveness based on the functional performance of a blind
brand. Second, the luxury fashion brand consumers may not be willing to spread NWOM and
might react differently. This can happen because the value-expressive function serves as a
stimulant to advocate the brand to others (Schade et al., 2016) and despite hating a brand they
might not share it with others. Moreover, sometimes the consumers feel others might not
agree which can prevent them to share NWOM despite hating the brand (Alexandrov et al.,
_ is evident that luxury brand users tend to spread NWOM about a brand when the
2013). It 631
performance of a brand falls short of expectations (Bryson et al., 2013a). When value-
expressiveness for luxury brands is perceived as high, it results in several positive outcomes
for a brand (Ioana-Daniela et al., 2018). Finally, we think that luxury fashion consumers might
not risk sharing NWOM about a luxury fashion brand. This is because luxury brands possess
a very strong reputation for being exclusive and high in performance (Jebarajakirthy et al.,
2020). Their comments might not receive expected responses from other members of a social
group and can damage their credibility (Cronje et al., 2016). However, the contradictory
evidence also exists where sharing of NWOM is associated with consumer efforts to be
acknowledged as a member of a social group (Einwiller et al., 2017). Based on this evidence we
hypothesize:
H8. Perceived value-expressiveness among luxury fashion consumers moderates the
relationship between brand hate and NWOM.
The hypotheses are presented as Figure 1 below:

Research methods
To strengthen the methodology of this study, a pilot study was conducted among 25
undergraduate students enrolled in a fashion design degree. The core aim was to identify any
language issues which respondents might face while filling up the questionnaire. A similar
approach was employed by fashion marketing researchers (Jain, 2019). Following their
guidelines, no statistical tests were performed and just language issues were observed.
Moreover, the statistical results of the pilot study are presented by fashion marketing

Value
expressiveness

Social self

H8
H1

Brand love H5 Brand hate Negave word

H6 of mouth

H2 H7

Inner self

H3 H4
Figure 1.
Brand jealousy The conceptual
research model
JFMM researchers when there is a choice to select constructs for the study (Kim and Jin, 2019). The
25,4 ease felt by respondents while understanding and filling the questionnaire led us to conduct
the main study. The sample of the pilot test was excluded from the main sample as per the
guidelines provided by researchers (Hair et al., 2014).
A cross-sectional design was followed to collect data from systematically selected luxury
fashion consumers in Pakistan. The brands were selected from a list of top ten Pakistani
fashion brands which are perceived as the most expensive retail clothing brands in the
632 country (DivaOnline, 2019). The managers of these luxury fashion brands were approached
by the research team to seek approval to collect data from retail shoppers. Among the few
approached, the managers of two brands gave approvals to collect data from customers
visiting their stores. The customers who visited retail outlets of these brands in the city of
Gujranwala and Sialkot were requested to fill in the questionnaire. Previously, researchers
collected data from Pakistani luxury consumers belonging to a Tier-1 city (i.e. Lahore) and
suggested that data can be collected from less developed cities (Shaikh et al., 2017). This
limitation is acknowledged while selecting less developed cities such as Gujranwala and
Sialkot. These two cities are the geographical areas where a lot of businesses exist and people
have the habit of consuming luxury brands. Finally, another strength of this sample is that it
goes beyond student samples which are widely employed by fashion marketers to investigate
luxury fashion branding issues (Samala and Singh, 2019).
The brand management researchers used the criteria of a minimum sample size of 200
respondents in recently held studies (Hegner et al., 2017). Almost a similar number of realized
sample are found in studies where luxury brand issues are investigated (Jain, 2019). The
suggestions and contemporary practice motivated us to approach 300 people as a potential
sample for this study. We randomly approached customers when they were coming out of the
shops after paying for their shopping and requested them to fill in the questionnaire. Since the
participation in this survey was voluntary, with a response rate of 90% we were able to collect
filled survey forms from 273 customers. The sample of 273 respondents is well beyond the
realized sample reported in studies to investigate luxury branding issues (Jain, 2019).
Moreover, few statistical remedies to evaluate sample size are also employed, discussed under
the results section.
The sample comprises 59.7% females while 95% of people aging between 18–28 years.
The sample consisted of younger customers because the target market of these two brands
selected for investigation is the younger crowd. In an Asian Muslim society, the mature-aged
luxury consumer market is such a smaller proportion of the whole population which is not
profitable for luxury brand marketers. Furthermore, the younger crowd is more open to
experience, is more fashion-conscious and their fashion sense is socially acceptable (Farrag,
2017). A demographic profile of the sample is summarized in Table 1.

Gender Frequency Percentage

Male 110 40.3

Female 163 59.7
Total 273 100
Age
Table 1. 18–28 260 95.2
Demographic profile of 29–40 13 4.8
participants Total 273 100
Measures Love is not
Already established scales were used to measure the constructs of this study. For all the blind
variables, a five-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (þ1) to strongly agree (þ5)
was used. The measures of social self (four-items), inner self (four-items) and brand love
(10-items) were adopted from a recently held study (Khandeparkar and Motiani, 2018). The
brand hate (si-items) and the NWOM (5-items) were measured by the scales developed by
Hegner et al. (2017). The brand jealousy was measured by three items obtained from the study
of Sarkar et al. (2014). Finally, the four-item scale for value-expressiveness was adopted from 633
the study of (Laroche et al., 2005). The measures were adopted due to the high-reliability
scores reported in these studies. The questionnaire items did not refer to any brand. The
research team verbally shared the brand under investigation. Moreover, it was easy for
respondents to spot the brand, as they were just coming out after spending some time inside
the retail outlet.

Common method biases

We collected data for both the dependent as well as the independent variables from the same
respondent. Keeping in view the best practices, we opted for a common method bias
assessment through the Harman one-factor test (Podsakoff and Organ, 1986). A principal
component analysis on all measurement items was performed. The analysis extracted seven
factors with eigenvalues greater than 1 accounted for 61.53 of the variance. The first factor
accounted for 25.69% of the variance which eliminated the chances that data are affected by
common method bias issues.

Data analysis and results

In the first stage, we evaluated scales by using exploratory as well as confirmatory analysis
techniques to assess reliability, dimensionality and validity. In the exploratory factor
analyses, the self-expressive brand was confirmed as a multidimensional construct,
consisting of two factors, i.e. social self and inner self – consistent with the suggestions
made by Carroll and Ahuvia (2006). The social self accounted for 30.79% and the inner self
accounted for 30.29% of the variance.
Brand love provided a single factor structure, accounting for 50.89% of the variance
explained. The items of brandlove4 and brandlove7 were removed from the study because of
low factor loadings of less than 0.50. All other items were retained. The Cronbach’s alpha
coefficients for each variable ranged from a value of 0.760–0.915, indicating that all multi-item
constructs are internally consistent. The items and loadings for factor analysis of the study
variables and Cronbach’s alpha coefficients are presented in Table 2.
We used SEM to test the proposed hypotheses. The two-stage model building process for
applying SEM was followed as suggested (Hair et al., 2014). In the first stage, the CFA was
conducted to test the measurement model. One item in the brand love (Brandlove1) and one
item in the value-expressive (Valexpressive1) was removed from the study due to model fit
discrepancies. These items belonged to large latent reflective factors and were somewhat
redundant. A good fit for a model requires that the obtained TLI, NFI and CFI values should
be greater than or equal to 0.90 and the RMSEA should be in the range from 0.05 to 0.08. The
overall measurement model fit statistics for the data indicated a good fit with χ 2 5 691.044
degrees of freedom (df.) 5 437, p < 0.001; CFI 5 0.946; TLI 5 0.938, IFI 5 0.946;
RMSEA 5 0.046. All the values were within the acceptable range as recommended (Hair
et al., 2014).
All the factor loadings were above 0.5 and statistically significant which suggested the
convergent validity of factors. The average variance extracted (AVE) ranged between a value
JFMM Factor Cronbach
25,4 Constructs and scale items loadings Alpha

Social self 0.760

1. The fashion brand I use contributes to my image 0.776
2. The fashion brand I use adds to the social role I play 0.647
3. The fashion brand which I use has a positive impact on what others think 0.781
634 of me
4. This fashion brand which I use improved the way society views me 0.672
Inner self 0.802
5. This fashion brand which I use symbolizes the kind of person I really am 0.744
from the inside
6. This fashion brand which I use truly reflects my personality 0.648
7. This fashion brand which I use is an extension of my inner self 0.756
8. This fashion brand which I use mirrors the real me 0.817
Brand love 0.860
9. The fashion brand which I use is a wonderful brand** –
10. This fashion brand which I use makes me feel good 0.762
11. This fashion brand which I use makes me feel awesome 0.700
12. I have neutral feelings about the fashion brand which I use* –
13. This fashion brand which I use makes me very happy 0.755
14. I love the fashion brand which I use 0.722
15. I have no particular feeling about fashion brand which I use* –
16. This fashion brand which I use is a pure delight 0.678
17. I am passionate about the fashion brand which I use 0.702
18. I am very much attached to the fashion brand which I use 0.647
Brand jealousy 0.798
19. I feel hurt when I see that others are using the same fashion brand which I 0.842
use
20. I feel very possessive about the fashion brand which I use and now others 0.849
are using the same brand
21. The thought that others are also using the same fashion brand which I 0.842
use worries me
Brand hate 0.915
22. Because others use this fashion brand, I feel insulted 0.829
23. Because others use this fashion brand, I do not tolerate this fashion brand 0.878
and its company
24. The world would be a better place without this fashion brand because 0.797
now others use it
25. Because others are using this brand, I’m totally angry about this fashion 0.862
brand
26. Because others are now using this fashion brand, I feel it as awful 0.866
27. Because others are using it for their advantage, I hate this fashion brand 0.788
Value-expressiveness 0.777
28. I like to know what brands and products make good impressions on –
others**
29. I achieve a sense of belonging by purchasing the same products that 0.813
others purchase
30. If I want to look like someone, I often try to buy the same brands that they 0.800
buy
31. I often identify with other people by purchasing the same products and 0.758
Table 2. brands they purchase
Factor analysis of
variables (continued )
 Factor Cronbach
Love is not
Constructs and scale items loadings Alpha blind
Negative word of mouth 0.912
Because others are also using the same fashion brand and it has become very
common in my circles, I will
32. Spread the negative word of mouth about this fashion brand 0.873
33. Criticize this fashion brand in front of my friends 0.857 635
34. Tell my friends not to buy anything from this fashion brand 0.846
35. Always share my feelings about this fashion brand 0.867
36. Try to influence a lot of people to reject this fashion brand 0.860
Note(s): *removed items from the model after EFA
**removed items from the model during the CFA process Table 2.

of 0.50–0.71. These values are above the recommended value score of 0.50 (Fornell and
Larcker, 1981). Furthermore, to verify the discriminant validity, values of AVE and squared
correlation of constructs were compared for each pair of constructs. As presented in Table 3,
discriminant validity is achieved, as the AVE is greater than the square root of the correlation
estimate. The composite reliability (CR) values ranged between 0.81 and 0.93, higher than the
recommended level of 0.7 (Fornell and Larcker, 1981).

Hypotheses testing
In the next stage, the structural model was analyzed. The fit index for the structural model
indicated an acceptable range (χ 2 5 21.31 (df. 5 7); p-value<0.003; CFI 5 0.978; TLI 5 0.954,
GFI 5 0.975; NFI 5 0.969; IFI 5 0.979; RMSEA 5 0.087). The hypotheses (H1-H6) of the
proposed model were tested and as presented in Table 4, all the proposed relationships are
supported. Both inner self (β 5 0.372, p < 0.001) and social self (β 5 0.200, p < 0.001) had a
significant positive effect on brand love. Brand love had a significant positive effect on brand
jealousy (β 5 0.867, p < 0.001), while brand jealousy was positively related to brand hate
(β 5 0.712, p < 0.001). Brand love had a negative significant effect on brand hate (β 5 0.127,
p < 0.05). Finally, brand hate had a significant positive effect on NWOM (β 5 0.684, p < 0.001).
Mediation effect: There was a significant effect of brand love on brand hate (β 5 0.317,
SE 5 0.122, p 5 0.002). According to the analysis results, 95% bootstrap confidence interval
for the indirect effect of brand love on brand hate was 0.398–0.872. Since “0” did not fall
between the lower bound and upper bound of the confidence interval, we inferred that the
indirect effect of brand love on brand hate was found as statistically significant. Thus H7 was
supported.
Moderation effect: The researchers recommend the employment of a product term
approach when both the interaction variables are continuous (Fassott et al., 2016). Therefore,
we used the product-indicator approach to test the moderating effect of value-expressive on
the relationship between brand hate and NWOM. To test the moderation effect of value-
expressiveness, we standardized the value-expressiveness and brand hate variables. Then
we multiplied these two standardized variables to obtain the interaction term. We found that
the moderating effect of value-expressiveness on the relationship between brand hate and
NWOM is statistically significant (β 5 0.128, t 5 2.978, p 5 0.003). However, the beta
coefficient is negative. It seems value-expressiveness normalizes the consumer emotion of
hate and marginalizes their tendency to spread NWOM. The results of moderation effects are
presented in Figure 2 below:
 25,4

636
JFMM

Table 3.
Convergent and
discriminant validity
Construct CR AVE Socialself Innerself Brandlove Br.Jealous Brandhate Value-expressive NWOM

Socialself 0.81 0.50 0.50

Innerself 0.83 0.55 0.604** (0.36) 0.55
Brandlove 0.88 0.50 0.546** (0.30) 0.577** (0.33) 0.50
Br.Jealous 0.88 0.71 0.186** (0.04) 0.406** (0.16) 0.216** (0.05) 0.71
**
Brandhate 0.93 0.70 0.02 (0.00) 0.217 (0.05) 0.068 (0.01) 0.708** (0.50) 0.70
Value-expressive 0.83 0.63 0.254** (0.07) 0.368** (0.14) 0.342** (0.12) 0.447** (0.20) 0.540** (0.29) 0.63
NWOM 0.93 0.62 0.004 (0.00) 0.186** (0.04) 0.024 (0.00) 0.525** (0.28) 0.680** (0.46) 0.355** (0.13) 0.62
Note(s): Notes: **Significant at 0.01 level
Squared correlations are given in parenthesis and AVE estimates are presented on the diagonal
Discussion Love is not
The results indicate that consumers’ emotion of love is aroused when they perceive that the blind
luxury fashion brand represents their inner and social self. These results are in line with the
previously held studies where congruence between brands and consumers is found to
strengthen consumer’s attachment (Samala and Singh, 2019) and love with the brand (Carroll
and Ahuvia, 2006). These researchers also found a positive relationship between
self-expressiveness and arousal of positive emotions of love. There are several reasons
that the results of our study are in line with previously held studies. Since the consumers from 637
collectivist societies (such as Pakistan) seek in-group identity (Zhang and Cude, 2018) and
wanted to present their personality through acquisition and consumption of the brands they
possess, the brand love for self-congruent brands is understandable. Moreover, since the
dominant sample came from the younger luxury brand consumer belonging to a collectivist
society, these results can be attributed to luxury consumers’ sensitivity and the need to be
acknowledged as exclusive in their social groups (Ko et al., 2019).
This study is one of the earliest investigations where a transition from brand love to brand
hate in a mediating role of brand jealousy is examined. The results of this study provide
empirical support for the mediation of brand jealousy. Although it is said that brand love
precludes negative feelings for the brand in general (Carroll and Ahuvia, 2006), a feeling like
jealousy can change this situation. When consumers are jealous of each other, their positive
feelings about brands can turn into negative feelings. Our findings strengthen the belief that
consumer emotions change over time (Zarantonello et al., 2018). This change is a consequence
of identity loss among consumers. The luxury fashion brand consumers cannot tolerate when
others enjoy similar social status, as they fear a threat to their social identity (Cronje et al.,
2016) and loss of social image (Su and Reynolds, 2017). Contextually, the results are

Sr Hypothesis Estimate SE t-values Probability (significance) Decision

H1 Socialself → Blove 0.200 0.050 4.031 ** Supported

H2 Innerself → Blove 0.372 0.044 8.473 ** Supported
H3 BL → Bjealous 0.867 0.149 5.828 ** Supported
H4 Bjealous → Bhate 0.712 0.043 16.727 ** Supported Table 4.
H5 Blove → Bhate –0.127 0.062 2.039 * Supported Structural model and
H6 Bhate → NWOM 0.684 0.045 15.278 ** Supported hypotheses
Note(s): *p < 0.05, **p < 0.001 relationships

4.5

3.5
NWOM

Low Value
3 expressiveness
2.5 High Value
expressiveness
2
Figure 2.
1.5
Moderation effect of
1 value-expressiveness
Low Brand hate High Brand hate on NWOM
JFMM understandable in the context of young luxury fashion consumers belonging to a collectivist
25,4 society. Since luxury consumers desire uniqueness, and they are emotionally involved in
consumption, they are less tolerant (Ki et al., 2017). In collectivist cultures where people live
close social proximity to each other and notice the brands possessed by others in a social
group (Zhang and Cude, 2018), a loss of social status is not acceptable. When they notice
others possess similar brands and are enjoying equal social status, their feelings transit from
an emotion of love to hate toward a brand.
638 The results further explain that luxury fashion brand customers, despite hating the brand
would not like to spread NWOM. These results challenge the previous assumption related to
brand hate and consumers’ tendency to spread NWOM (Chang et al., 2013). The consumer
emotions and their perceptions are separate issues of identity. This entails that consumers’
perceptions of value-expressiveness can be high, despite they hate the brand (Jung Choo et al.,
2012). We positioned brand hate as a function of a loss in identity perceptions instead of the
poor functional performance of a brand. Thus customers hating the brand can still perceive
high value-expressiveness. The luxury consumers spread NWOM in circumstances where
the performance of a brand is low (Bryson et al., 2013a), but high value-expressiveness for
luxury brands might result in positive outcomes for a brand (Ioana-Daniela et al., 2018).
Moreover, since the reputation of luxury fashion brands is high (Jebarajakirthy et al., 2020),
speaking negatively about a highly reputed brand might adversely affect the credibility of an
individual. This could be another reason that this relationship is found insignificant. Also, it
is a case of some.

Theoretical contributions
The study contributes to advance theory in the field of luxury fashion branding. There is
extant literature where consumer emotions of hate, as well as love, are discussed, but in
isolation from each other, thus missing the transition from positive to negative emotions
(Samala and Singh, 2019; Hegner et al., 2017). The identification and empirical testing of the
boundary conditions which trigger an emotional transition among consumers remained a
practically relevant, but scantly investigated area of inquiry among brand management
scholars (Grace et al., 2018). Recently researchers highlighted that emotional transition
among consumers of a brand lacks empirical evidence (Gumparthi and Patra, 2019). By this
study, empirical evidence for the emotional transition among luxury fashion brand
consumers is now available. Another important contribution stems from the positioning of
brand jealousy as a negative element to cause this emotional transition. The family studies
scholars highlighted a negative, yet destructive role of jealousy which has the potential to
sabotage partner relationships (Kim et al., 2018). However, brand management researchers
were investigating its positive role, i.e. to advocate increased consumer-brand connectivity
(Leventhal et al., 2014) and as a motivator to strengthen consumers’ willingness to pay a
premium (Bıçakcıo glu et al., 2017).
Finally, another contribution is empirical evidence to address whether consumers’
perceptions of value-expressiveness prevent them from spreading NWOM? This was
highlighted as an important question to be addressed by researchers (Su and Reynolds, 2017).
Contextually, the research is unique which investigates a transition in consumer emotions
and conditions which trigger NWOM in a collectivist cultural setting. The results can be
understood in the light of theory and context.

Managerial implications
There are several managerial implications to address the issues facing luxury fashion brand
marketers. First, since the inner self perceptions more significantly contribute to brand love
among luxury fashion consumers, fashion marketers need to strengthen consumer
perceptions of inner self-expressiveness. This can be achieved by strengthening the symbolic Love is not
identity perceptions among consumers. Recently, the enhancement of symbolic value is blind
associated with strengthening consumer-brand relationships (Saenger et al., 2020). It means
that the visual elements of a luxury brand such as logo, name and packaging should be more
strongly communicated among customer groups. In addition to these visual elements, the
celebrities endorsing the brand also need to highlight these visual elements through various
communication platforms, including social media. The importance of celebrity endorsements
is also highlighted in studies (Jin and Ryu, 2019). Another approach to strengthen consumers’ 639
inner self-expressive perceptions is to conduct segmentation research to better understand
various dimensions of consumer personality. This way brand elements can be made
congruent with consumers’ personalities. A strong congruence between consumer
personalities and the brand results in sustainable consumer-brand relationships (Su and
Reynolds, 2017).
Second, luxury fashion marketers need to correctly understand the role brand jealousy
can play to damage consumer-brand relationships. As informed through already published
research, the marketers were envisioning a positive role of brand jealousy to trigger
consumption and brand advocacy (Bıçakcıo glu et al., 2017). Our results challenged this
assumption which calls for a careful re-thinking of advertising campaigns designed to attract
and motivate luxury fashion brand consumers. The elements such as exclusivity, personality
development through possession and consumption of luxury brands, and an enhanced social
image can be advocated through various advertising campaigns. The importance of these
elements is highlighted in previously held studies (Samala and Singh, 2019). Since the
younger crowd is more tech-savvy, luxury brands can approach customers by using social
media campaigns, as advocated by fashion researchers (Jin and Ryu, 2019).
Third, results indicate when consumers hate the brand, they like to spread NWOM
however, when they perceive that a luxury fashion brand is highly value-expressive, the
tendency to spread NWOM is low. It indicates careful assessment of consumer feelings
toward a brand as well as appropriate management of their word of mouth. The luxury
fashion marketers can assess the brand hate perceptions via different scales used in this
study. Moreover, to convince consumers for a positive WOM, some incentives can be offered
to consumers to advocate for the brand. In collectivist societies, people live in close social
proximity to each other; their positive WOM can further strengthen consumer-brand ties and
also can motivate other consumers to start using a particular luxury brand.

Limitations and future research directions

The study has theoretical and methodological limitations which offer exciting avenues for
future research. Theoretically, the framework is based on an identity perspective to examine
love-hate relationships. It served the purpose of this study, as the identity-driven love-hate
transition is not studied extensively, but future researchers can bring a congruity perspective
to examine a similar shift in consumer emotions (Su and Reynolds, 2017). In continuation of
this suggestion, we believe an opposite emotional transition, i.e. from consumer emotion of
hate to a feeling of love can also be studied. It is suggested by keeping in view the existing
positioning of brand jealousy as a construct to supercharge consumer favorability toward a
brand (Bıçakcıo glu et al., 2017). It would be particularly helpful for the brands which are
struggling to establish their foothold in the market. Another theoretical limitation is that
consumer emotions are not linked to some marketing outcomes, i.e. purchase intentions
(Prentice et al., 2019). It would be interesting to understand if a transition in consumer
emotions results in a shift in purchase intentions and loyalty.
Methodologically, data are cross-sectional with common method biases which are
understandable in survey research studies. Interestingly, it has not affected the popularity of
JFMM cross-sectional survey research and it can be noticed in studies where luxury branding issues
25,4 are addressed (Samala and Singh, 2019). However, to minimize the impact of common method
biases, care was taken while conducting the survey and also the score for the Harman one-
factor test was reported. However, it does not eliminate the possibility of social bias. Hence
future studies are suggested to collect data at different time intervals to more accurately
predict the time and boundary conditions which cause a transition in consumer emotions. In
terms of the sample, the data are dominantly collected from a younger audience, as they are
640 the customers for most of the luxury brands offered in Pakistan. One reason is the family
system where parents buy expensive brands for their children and also allow them to buy
themselves. The target market of these very expensive brands is the independent Pakistani
youth, financially supported by their parents. This way the sample truly represented an
accurate picture of luxury brand customers in Pakistan. However, future researchers can
collect data from the mature age population which might produce different results. Another
limitation is that brands selected to survey for this research are retail fashion brands and not
designer brands. Designer brands produce more exclusive designs for individual customers.
However, the approvals and data collection time was a big challenge since designer brands
have only a few customers as their primary target market. The researchers with sufficient
time can collect data from those individual customers. Another related suggestion for future
research is the product category. The data for this study are collected for products that
comprise of party dress and casual wear while most designers deal in bridal dresses. The
researchers can select products other than the clothing such as wristwatches and handbags.

References
Alexandrov, A., Lilly, B. and Babakus, E. (2013), “The effects of social-and self-motives on the
intentions to share positive and negative word of mouth”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Vol. 41 No. 5, pp. 531-546.
Allsop, D.T., Bassett, B.R. and Hoskins, J.A. (2007), “Word-of-mouth research: principles and
applications”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 398-411.
Bearden, W.O., Netemeyer, R.G. and Teel, J.E. (1989), “Measurement of consumer susceptibility to
interpersonal influence”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 473-481.
Bonifield, C. and Cole, C. (2007), “Affective responses to service failure: anger, regret, and retaliatory
versus conciliatory responses”, Marketing Letters, Vol. 18 Nos 1-2, pp. 85-99.
Borrero, L. and Kruger, T.M. (2015), “The nature and meaning of identity in retired professional
women”, Journal of Women and Aging, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 309-329.
Bryson, D., Atwal, G. and Hulten, P. (2013a), “Toward the conceptualisation of the antecedents of
extreme negative affect toward luxury brands”, Qualitative Market Research: An International
Journal, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 393-405.
Bryson, D., Atwal, G. and Hulten, P. (2013b), “Toward the conceptualisation of the antecedents of
extreme negative affect toward luxury brands”, Qualitative Market Research: An International
Journal.
Bıçakcıo €
glu, N., Ogel, _ and Ilter, B. (2017), “Brand jealousy and willingness to pay premium: the
I.Y.
mediating role of materialism”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 33-48.
Carroll, B.A. and Ahuvia, A.C. (2006), “Some antecedents and outcomes of brand love”, Marketing
Letters, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 79-89.
Chang, A., Hsieh, S.H. and Tseng, T.H. (2013), “Online brand community response to negative brand
events: the role of group eWOM”, Internet Research, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 486-506.
Cronje, A., Jacobs, B. and Retief, A. (2016), “Black urban consumers’ status consumption of clothing
brands in the emerging South African market”, International Journal of Consumer Studies,
Vol. 40 No. 6, pp. 754-764.
Dawn (2019), Luxury Fashion Consumers in Pakistan. Love is not
DivaOnline (2019) . blind
Donvito, R., Aiello, G., Grazzini, L., Godey, B., Pederzoli, D., Wiedmann, K.-P., Halliburton, C., Chan, P.,
Tsuchiya, J. and Skorobogatykh, I.I. (2020), “Does personality congruence explain luxury brand
attachment? The results of an international research study”, Journal of Business Research,
Vol. 120, pp. 462-472.
Einwiller, S.A., Laufer, D. and Ruppel, C. (2017), “Believe me, I am one of you! the role of common 641
group affiliation in crisis communication”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 43 No. 5, pp. 1007-1015.
Ezell, M.J. (2016), “Late seventeenth-century women poets and the anxiety of attribution”, Early
Modern Women and the Poem, Manchester University Press.
Farrag, D.A. (2017), “The young luxury consumer in Qatar”, Young Consumers.
Fassott, G., Henseler, J. and Coelho, P.S. (2016), “Testing moderating effects in PLS path models with
composite variables”, Industrial Management and Data Systems.
Ferraro, R., Kirmani, A. and Matherly, T. (2013), “Look at me! Look at me! Conspicuous brand usage,
self-brand connection, and dilution”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 50 No. 4, pp. 477-488.
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.
Goldsmith, R.E. and Clark, R.A. (2012), “Materialism, status consumption, and consumer
independence”, The Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 152 No. 1, pp. 43-60.
Grace, D., Ross, M. and King, C. (2018), “Brand fidelity: a relationship maintenance perspective”,
Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 25 No. 6, pp. 577-590.
Gregoire, Y., Tripp, T.M. and Legoux, R. (2009), “When customer love turns into lasting hate: the
effects of relationship strength and time on customer revenge and avoidance”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 73 No. 6, pp. 18-32.
Gumparthi, V.P. and Patra, S. (2019), “The phenomenon of brand love: a systematic literature review”,
Journal of Relationship Marketing, pp. 1-40.
Hair, J.F., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L. and Kuppelwieser, V.G. (2014), “Partial least squares structural
equation modeling (PLS-SEM)”, European Business Review.
Hegner, S.M., Fetscherin, M. and van Delzen, M. (2017), “Determinants and outcomes of brand hate”,
The Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 13-25.
Ioana-Daniela, S., Lee, K.-H., Kim, I., Kang, S. and Hyun, S.S. (2018), “Attitude toward luxury cruise,
fantasy, and willingness to pay a price premium”, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research,
Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 325-343.
Iriscommunications (2016), Pakistani Fashion Market.
Islam, J.U. and Rahman, Z. (2016a), “Examining the effects of brand love and brand image on
customer engagement: an empirical study of fashion apparel brands”, Journal of Global Fashion
Marketing, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 45-59.
Islam, J.U. and Rahman, Z. (2016b), “The transpiring journey of customer engagement research in
marketing: a systematic review of the past decade”, Management Decision, Vol. 54 No. 8,
pp. 2008-2034.
Jain, S. (2019), “Exploring relationship between value perception and luxury purchase intention”,
Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: International Journal.
Jebarajakirthy, C., Yadav, R. and Shankar, A. (2020), “Insights for luxury retailers to reach customers
globally”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning.
Jin, S.V. and Ryu, E. (2019), “Celebrity fashion brand endorsement in Facebook viral marketing and
social commerce”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: International Journal.
JFMM Johnson, Z.S., Mao, H., Lefebvre, S. and Ganesh, J. (2019), “Good guys can finish first: how brand
reputation affects extension evaluations”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 29 No. 4,
25,4 pp. 565-583.
Jung Choo, H., Moon, H., Kim, H. and Yoon, N. (2012), “Luxury customer value”, Journal of Fashion
Marketing and Management: International Journal, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 81-101.
Kang, Y.-J. and Park, S.-Y. (2016), “The perfection of the narcissistic self: a qualitative study on luxury
consumption and customer equity”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 9, pp. 3813-3819.
642
Kashif, M., Awang, Z., Walsh, J. and Altaf, U. (2015), “I’m loving it but hating US”, British Food
Journal.
Kauppinen-R€ais€anen, H., Bj€ork, P., L€onnstr€om, A. and Jauffret, M.-N. (2018), “How consumers’ need for
uniqueness, self-monitoring, and social identity affect their choices when luxury brands
visually shout versus whisper”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 84, pp. 72-81.
Kemer, G., Bulgan, G. and Yıldız, E.Ç. (2016), “Gender differences, infidelity, dyadic trust, and jealousy
among married Turkish individuals”, Current Psychology, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 335-343.
Khandeparkar, K. and Motiani, M. (2018), “Fake-love: brand love for counterfeits”, Marketing
Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 36 No. 6, pp. 661-677.
Ki, C., Lee, K. and Kim, Y.-K. (2017), “Pleasure and guilt: how do they interplay in luxury
consumption?”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 722-747.
Kim, G. and Jin, B.E. (2019), “Older female consumers’ environmentally sustainable apparel
consumption”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: International Journal.
Kim, K.J., Feeney, B.C. and Jakubiak, B.K. (2018), “Touch reduces romantic jealousy in the anxiously
attached”, Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, Vol. 35 No. 7, pp. 1019-1041.
Ko, E., Costello, J.P. and Taylor, C.R. (2019), “What is a luxury brand? A new definition and review of
the literature”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 99, pp. 405-413.
Laroche, M., Mourali, M. and Pons, F. (2005), “Individualistic orientation and consumer susceptibility
to interpersonal influence”, Journal of Services Marketing.
Leventhal, R.C., Sarkar, A. and Sreejesh, S. (2014), “Examination of the roles played by brand love and
jealousy in shaping customer engagement”, The Journal of Product and Brand Management.
Lin, J.S. and Sung, Y. (2014), “Nothing can tear us apart: the effect of brand identity fusion in
consumer–brand relationships”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 54-69.
Mino, K. (2008), “Growth and bubbles with consumption externalities”, The Japanese Economic
Review, Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 33-53.
Mullen, P.E. (1990), “A phenomenology of jealousy”, Australian and New Zealand Journal of
Psychiatry, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 17-28.
Ngo, L.V., Northey, G., Duffy, S. and Thao, H.T.P. (2016), “Perceptions of others, mindfulness, and
brand experience in retail service setting”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 33,
pp. 43-52.
Podsakoff, P.M. and Organ, D.W. (1986), “Self-reports in organizational research: problems and
prospects”, Journal of Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 531-544.
Prentice, C., Han, X.Y., Hua, L.-L. and Hu, L. (2019), “The influence of identity-driven customer
engagement on purchase intention”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 47,
pp. 339-347.
Rageh Ismail, A. and Spinelli, G. (2012), “Effects of brand love, personality and image on word of
mouth: the case of fashion brands among young consumers”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and
Management: International Journal, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 386-398.
Rodrigues, C. and Rodrigues, P. (2019), “Brand love matters to Millennials: the relevance of mystery,
sensuality and intimacy to neo-luxury brands”, The Journal of Product and Brand
Management.
Saenger, C., Thomas, V.L. and Bock, D.E. (2020), “Compensatory word of mouth as symbolic self- Love is not
completion”, European Journal of Marketing.
blind
Samala, N. and Singh, S. (2019), “Millennial’s engagement with fashion brands: a moderated-mediation
model of brand engagement with self-concept, involvement and knowledge”, Journal of Fashion
Marketing and Management: International Journal, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 2-16.
Sarkar, A., Krishna, G.R. and Rao, K. (2014), “Brand desire and brand jealousy: routes to persuasion”,
The Marketing Review, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 265-278.
643
Sarkar, A., Sarkar, J.G., Sreejesh, S., Anusree, M. and Rishi, B. (2020), “You are so embarrassing, still,
I hate you less! Investigating consumers’ brand embarrassment and brand hate”, Journal of
Brand Management, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 93-107.
Schade, M., Hegner, S., Horstmann, F. and Brinkmann, N. (2016), “The impact of attitude functions on
luxury brand consumption: an age-based group comparison”, Journal of Business Research,
Vol. 69 No. 1, pp. 314-322.
SCMP (2019).
Shaikh, S., Malik, A., Akram, M. and Chakrabarti, R. (2017), “Do luxury brands successfully entice
consumers? The role of bandwagon effect”, International Marketing Review.
Su, N. and Reynolds, D. (2017), “Effects of brand personality dimensions on consumers’ perceived self-
image congruity and functional congruity with hotel brands”, International Journal of
Hospitality Management, Vol. 66, pp. 1-12.
Vigolo, V. and Ugolini, M.M. (2016), “Does this fit my style? The role of self-congruity in young
women’s repurchase intention for intimate apparel”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and
Management: International Journal.
Wade Clarke, D., Perry, P. and Denson, H. (2012), “The sensory retail environment of small fashion
boutiques”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: International Journal, Vol. 16 No. 4,
pp. 492-510.
Wu, J., Qin, Y. and Jia, F. (2018), “Why do consumers hate brands? A conceptual paper of the
determinants of brand hate”, Journal of Business Economics, Management and Marketing 2018,
p. 232.
Yu, M., Liu, F. and Lee, J.A. (2019), “Consumers’ responses to negative publicity: the influence of
culture on information search and negative word-of-mouth”, Journal of Brand Management,
Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 141-156.
Zarantonello, L., Romani, S., Grappi, S. and Bagozzi, R.P. (2016), “Brand hate”, The Journal of Product
and Brand Management, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 11-25.
Zarantonello, L., Romani, S., Grappi, S. and Fetscherin, M. (2018), “Trajectories of brand hate”, Journal
of Brand Management, Vol. 25 No. 6, pp. 549-560.
Zhang, L. and Cude, B.J. (2018), “Chinese consumers’ purchase intentions for luxury clothing: a
comparison between luxury consumers and non-luxury consumers”, Journal of International
Consumer Marketing, Vol. 30 No. 5, pp. 336-349.

Corresponding author
Muhammad Kashif can be contacted at: kashif@gift.edu.pk

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

View publication stats