551

2004 by JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH, Inc. ● Vol. 31 ● December 2004
All rights reserved. 0093-5301/2004/3103-0006$10.00
Playing It Safe: Susceptibility to Normative
Influence and Protective Self-Presentation
DAVID B. WOOTEN
AMERICUS REED II*
Two studies support the usefulness of susceptibility to normative influence (SNI)
as a predictor of protective self-presentation—efforts to avoid undesirable or as-
sailable self-presentations that may lead to disapproval. Study 1 finds that high
SNI consumers are especially concerned about avoiding negative impressions in
public settings. They respond more favorably to protective messages than do their
low SNI counterparts, but only when the messages pertain to conspicuous benefits.
Study 2 suggests that SNI is inversely related to individuals’ tendencies to ex-
aggerate similarities to their “ought” selves and their willingness to portray them-
selves more favorably than others. Overall, these findings suggest that high SNI
consumers are averse to calling attention to themselves, especially when doing
so may lead to disapproval.
Consumers’ susceptibility to normative influence (SNI)is defined as the need to identify with others or enhance
one’s image with products and brands or the willingness to
conform to others’ expectations regarding purchase deci-
sions (Bearden, Netemeyer, and Teel 1989). Research has
found SNI to predict concerns about public appearances and
efforts to gain social acceptance. For instance, high SNI
consumers value conspicuous benefits more than do their
low SNI counterparts (Batra, Homer, and Kahle 2001). Com-
pared with low SNI consumers, high SNI consumers are
also more easily persuaded to join their peers who support
a boycott (Sen, Gurhan-Canli, and Morwitz 2001).
Bearden et al. (1989) developed a 12-item measure of sus-
ceptibility to social influence based on McGuire’s (1968) re-
search on influenceability and Deutsch and Gerard’s (1955)
distinction between normative and informational influence.
Our research focuses on the normative dimension as measured
by the eight-item SNI subscale. Bearden et al. (1989) found
SNI to predict concerns about others’ opinions, compliance
with others’ expectations, and tendencies to emulate others.
Batra et al. (2001) used a similar measure and found the
importance of conspicuous attributes to increase with SNI.
These findings suggest that SNI reflects a desire to fit in—a
*David B. Wooten is assistant professor of marketing, University of
Michigan Business School, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1234 (dbwooten@
umich.edu). Americus Reed II is assistant professor of marketing at the
Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6340
(amreed@wharton.upenn.edu). The authors acknowledge the helpful com-
ments and suggestions of the editor, associate editor, and three reviewers.
The authors also thank Leila Hekmati, Jennifer Lee, Michelle Leung, Kiwan
Park, Alan Tsang, and Mary Wagner for their assistance with data
collection.
concern often associated with protective self-presentation
(Wolfe, Lennox, and Cutler 1986). However, despite evidence
of its predictive validity, the SNI construct has received sur-
prisingly little attention in consumer research (Batra et al.
2001). Moreover, SNI has yet to be assessed in terms of its
relationship to particular self-protective styles of self-
presentation.
Arkin, Lake, and Baumgardner (1986) describe acquisi-
tive and protective self-presentation as distinct but inde-
pendent self-presentation styles. The acquisitive style in-
volves actors’ efforts to gain approval or ingratiate
themselves with others by presenting themselves in the most
favorable light. By contrast, the protective style reflects de-
sires to avoid losing approval or garnering disapproval. This
approach involves avoiding impressions that are likely to
be negatively evaluated by target audiences or making im-
pressions that are unlikely to be challenged, disapproved,
or even noticed (Arkin 1981). In this article, we examine
SNI as a predictor of the protective style by presenting two
studies relating SNI to different protective tactics.
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN
PROTECTIVE SELF-PRESENTATION
Social disapproval can occur when individuals fail to con-
vey desired impressions or when they successfully convey
impressions that are undesired by their target audiences.
Actors who value approval but lack confidence in their abil-
ities to discern or enact desired impressions often protect
themselves from losses of approval by avoiding undesired,
contestable, or even noticeable impressions. Personality in-
ventories that assess need for approval, especially those re-

552 JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH
TABLE 1
PRETEST 1: TEST TO IDENTIFY CONSPICUOUS PRODUCT BENEFITS
Product category
Benefit conspicuousness Score
(SD)High Low
Mouthwash* Prevents bad breath Prevents gingivitis 1.42 (.12)
Soap* Prevents blemishes Prevents dryness .98 (.18)
Detergent* Brightens colors Softens fabrics .93 (.14)
Disinfectant* Eliminates odors Kills germs .49 (.21)
Toothpaste Prevents cavities Controls tartar .36 (.19)
Medicine* Relieves runny noses Relieves nasal congestion .33 (.16)
NOTE.— Scores close to zero reflect no difference in conspicuousness whereas scores close to two indicate large differences.Np 45.
*Denotes categories with significant differences between benefits ( ).p ! .05
flecting negative outcome expectancies, should predict one’s
propensity to exhibit these protective tendencies (Arkin
1981).
For several reasons, SNI appears to represent a class of
measures associated with the protective style of self-
presentation. First, the need to identify with others is a
defining characteristic of SNI and an antecedent of protec-
tive self-presentation. People with high acceptance needs
but low outcome expectancies often exhibit protective ten-
dencies (Arkin 1981). Second, the willingness to conform
to others’ expectations is a defining characteristic of SNI
and a protective response to potential social losses. People
individuate themselves to achieve gains and conform to
avoid losses (Santee and Maslach 1982). Third, specific
items on the SNI scale reflect efforts to conform to expec-
tations (e.g., “If other people can see me using a product,
I often purchase the brand they expect me to buy”) and
avoid disapproval (e.g., “I rarely purchase the latest fashion
styles until I am sure my friends approve of them”), thereby
capturing protective tendencies. Fourth, SNI is negatively
correlated with self-esteem and positively correlated with
attention to social comparison information (Bearden et al.
1989). Low self-esteem (Brown, Collins, and Schmidt 1988)
and attention to social comparison information (Wolfe et al.
1986) both predict protective self-presentation.
Prior theorizing on conditions conducive to normative
influence suggests that SNI should predict protective ten-
dencies only when consumption outcomes are conspicuous.
According to Bourne (1957, p. 218), “the conspicuousness
of a product is perhaps the most general attribute bearing
on its susceptibility to reference group influence.” Norma-
tive influence requires the presence of others to maintain
surveillance, mediate valued rewards, or impose sanctions
(Burnkrant and Cousineau 1975). This logic suggests that
consumption outcomes that are not visible to others should
be accompanied by minimal self-presentational concerns or
social pressures. In other words, SNI should not predict self-
protection when there is no audience from which there is a
need to be protected. We conducted an advertising claims
experiment to test this argument and the following hypoth-
eses:
H1a: High SNI participants should evaluate protective
messages about conspicuous benefits more fa-
vorably than should their low SNI counterparts.
H1b: The effect of SNI on evaluations of protective
messages about conspicuous benefits should be
greater than its effects on protective messages
about inconspicuous benefits or acquisitive mes-
sages about either conspicuous or inconspicuous
benefits.
STUDY 1
We conducted an advertising claims experiment with a 2
(SNI: high vs. low) # 2 (benefit conspicuousness: high vs.
low) # 2 (message framing: protective vs. acquisitive) #
2 (product category: mouthwash vs. soap) design. We mea-
sured SNI by using Bearden et al.’s (1989) eight-item scale
and dichotomized SNI by a median split. Benefit conspic-
uousness and message framing were between-subjects fac-
tors manipulated with stimuli developed and tested on re-
spondents who were not included in the actual experiment.
Product category was a within-subjects replicate factor also
determined through pretesting.
Stimulus Development and Testing
In order to identify product-benefit combinations for the
experiment, we asked 45 undergraduate students to use a
five-point scale to rate the relative visibility of benefits for
six product categories. Based on the pretest results reported
in table 1, we selected high and low conspicuousness ben-
efits for the mouthwash and soap product categories.
We developed protective (negatively framed) and ac-
quisitive (positively framed) claims for the chosen product-
benefit combinations and conducted a second pretest to as-
sess their equivalence at each level of conspicuousness.
Ninety pretest participants rated the noticeability of four
pairs of benefits on a seven-point scale. The means reported
in table 2 show that (1) the conspicuous mouthwash benefits
were equally noticeable and more noticeable than the in-
conspicuous benefits ( ), (2) the acquisitive framingp ! .01
yielded a more noticeable benefit than did the protective