赤松 直樹

Purpose This paper examines when virtual luxury access with lower acquisition difficulty is perceived as comparable with physical ownership and is associated with lower immediate offline perceived brand luxury. Design/methodology/approach Seven online scenario experiments draw on construal level and equity theories. They vary or measure perceived realism, the contrast between two images, the scenario emphasis on possession and rarity comparisons, imagined prior ownership, and virtual acquisition difficulty. Findings Virtual democratization was not uniformly associated with lower perceived brand luxury. When comparison cues were weak, the negative indirect association through perceived unfairness weakened or became positive; an auxiliary study suggested a possible playfulness pathway. Higher reported perceived realism was associated with a stronger negative indirect association through perceived unfairness. The unfairness pattern varied with prior ownership, whereas the perceived reduction in scarcity was broader. The contrast between the two images yielded a pattern consistent with psychological proximity and perceived fit between the virtual and physical products but did not isolate visual realism. The scenario emphasis on possession and rarity comparisons was more directly associated with perceived unfairness. In Study 5, which held the image and scenario constant, average and low-cost access were associated with larger declines in perceived brand luxury than premium access. Practical implications Luxury brands should assess comparability before matching virtual products to physical icons or widening access. More realistic representations may be associated with stronger comparison, but the contrast between the two images does not establish visual realism as causal. Distinct virtual lines, more demanding access, and benefits for physical product owners warrant testing. Originality/value This paper treats metaverse luxury democratization as a question of how access is designed. It examines how programmable scarcity, acquisition difficulty, perceived realism, and other comparison cues relate to immediate offline brand judgments involving perceived unfairness.

Purpose This study aims to investigate how choice sets influence consumers' sequential health product choices. We examined how their composition (homogeneous vs mixed) affected consumers' perception of hedonic value in a prior health product and their subsequent health choices, considering consumption timing and consumers' age differences. Design/methodology/approach We used a scenario-based experimental design with two studies. Study 1 (n = 196) examined whether choice set type (mixed vs homogeneous) affected perceived hedonic value and subsequent choices. Study 2 (n = 431) replicated Study 1 and added consumption timing (same vs different) as a factor, using a 2 × 2 between-subjects design with mediation analysis. Findings Health products chosen from a mixed choice set were perceived as lower hedonic than those from a homogeneous set, decreasing preference for health products in subsequent choice situations when consumption timing was the same. However, with different consumption timing, mixed choice sets better promote sequential health choices. These effects were stronger among younger consumers (aged 20–43 years). Originality/value The originality lies in identifying choice sets as marketing interventions that influence sequential health choices. Previous research focused on one-shot decisions; this study uniquely reveals how choice set composition in prior health choice situations affects perceived hedonic value and subsequent health choices, bridging marketing with sequential choice psychology.