Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science, 2018

VOL. 28, NO. 2, 197–207

https://doi.org/10.1080/21639159.2018.1436981

Self-congruity theory in consumer behavior: A little history

M. Joseph Sirgy 
Department of Marketing, Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University, Blacksburg, Virginia

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

I revisit my Journal of Business Research (JBR) article published in 1985 Received 5 May 2017
that has garnered many citations. As such, I discuss the concept of self- Revised 28 June 2017
congruity and the stream of research that the JBR article has spurred Accepted 17 September 2017
over the last 32 + years. KEYWORDS
Actual self-congruity; brand-
消费者行为中自我一致性理论：研究历史简述 image congruence; ideal
self-congruity, ideal social
1985年《Journal of Business Research》上刊登了一篇有关自我一 self-congruity, self-congruity;
致性的文章，我重温了该文章。我依据这篇文章，论述了自我 self-image congruence;
一致性的概念，以及过去32年多的时间里《Journal of Business social self-congruity
Research》刊登文章推动的主流研究。自我一致性是一个心理过
关键词
程与心理活动结果，在这一过程中消费者将两个因素进行对比， 现实自我一致性; 品牌形
一个是他们对于品牌个性的理解，另一个是他们在自我概念下（ 象一致; 理想自我一致性,
真实自我，理想化的自我以及社会上的自我）的品牌用户形象。 理想社会自我一致性, 自
研究显示，自我一致性影响购物行为，购物前行为（如顾客对产 我一致性; 自我形象一致
品的态度，对某一品牌的偏爱，购买某品牌商品的意愿，以及品 性; 社会自我一致性
牌选择），以及购物后行为（如对品牌的满意度，品牌信赖度，
品牌好评度，以及品牌口碑）。
消费者的自我概念涉及至少四个维度，也就是真实自我，理
想化自我，社会自我，以及理想化的社会自我。当消费者评价市
场提供的商品与服务时，就会产生四个消费者的自我概念维度。
在评价品牌用户形象和品牌个性时，消费者的四个自我概念维度
就是比较和参考的标准。自我一致性理论下，真实自我一致性的
生发是由于自我一致性的需要，理想自我一致性则是满足自尊心
的需要，社会自我一致性是为满足社会一致性，理想社会一致性
是为了得到社会认可。
购物动机的真实自我一致性和理想自我一致性之间内在联系的
作用，是《Journal of Business Research》刊载的文章重点。研究问
题是：真实自我一致性和理想自我一致性对于购买动机的影响是
加性效应还是操纵效应？研究数据支持加性效应。当消费者用高
度的真实自我一致性购买具有理想自我一致性的商品时，相比于
其他的真实自我一致性与理想自我一致性情况来说，他们最有可
能购买这种商品。购买动机是建立在一定的期待值的基础上的，
对于考虑购买的商品他们希望能够满足到自我一致性的需要，还
能满足他们的自尊心。
为检验这个假设我们选取了168名女性大学生作为样本，这些
学生是来自美国东部两所大学的心理学和市场营销课堂上的本科
生。回复者被选做消费者研究调查。挑选的消费品为两种杂志（
《花花女郎》和《魅力杂志》）和两种汽车（名爵汽车和大众汽
车）。研究结果更加确定了这个假设，也就是真实自我一致性和
理想自我一致性对于购买动机会产生加性预期效应。

CORRESPONDENCE TO  M. Joseph Sirgy  sirgy@vt.edu

© 2018 Korean Scholars of Marketing Science
198   M. J. SIRGY

《Journal of Business Research》为市场营销和相关学科领域的自我

一致性主流研究奠定了基础。正如前文说到的，致力于主流研究
的人越来越多，这不仅解释了传统购物行为现象（即品牌态度，
品牌偏爱和选择，购物动机，购买意图，购物满意度，顾客忠诚
度，行为转变，口碑传播），还有非传统行为现象，如消费主体
的状况，消费者幸福度，生活满意度，产品对生活满意度影响的
构想，享乐注意等。

Introduction
I was invited by Arch Woodside, Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Global Scholars of
Marketing Science to write a historical narrative of self-congruity research based on my
Journal of Business Research (JBR) article on that topic published in 1985. The exact
title of the article is “Using Self-Congruity and Ideal Congruity to Predict Purchase
Motivation” (Sirgy, 1985b). This article has garnered many citations and helped develop
a strong program of research on self-congruity in consumer and marketing research.
This article reports a study based on my dissertation work on self-concept in consumer
behavior (Sirgy, 1979). I will discuss this article briefly and describe the program of
research that this article helped to develop. However, before discussing the JBR article
the reader can benefit from a description of the underlying theory, namely self-con-
gruity theory and related research.

Self-congruity theory and related research

Self-congruity is a psychological process and outcome in which consumers compare
their perception of a brand image (more specifically, brand personality or brand-user
image) with their own self-concept (e.g. actual self, ideal self, social self). Differently
put, it is the process and outcome directly related to the consumer’s identification with a
brand. For example, consumers may perceive users of an Apple computer to be “creative”
and they may think of themselves as “creative.” In this case, this comparison between
the brand-user image and consumer’s self-concept is a match (i.e. high self-congruity).
Conversely, if they perceive users of the Apple computer as “creative” but they don’t
think of themselves as “creative” then we have a mismatch (i.e. low self-congruity). As
such, self-congruity is about the extent to which consumers identify with the brand or
more specifically the users of the brand.
Over the last 40 + years, much research has been conducted using self-congruity
theory in consumer behavior and marketing. For literature reviews, see Sirgy (1982,
1985a, 1985b, 1986), Claiborne and Sirgy (1990), Johar and Sirgy (1991), Sirgy, Johar,
Samli, and Claiborne (1991), Sirgy, Grewal, and Mangelburg (2000), and Sirgy and Su
(2000), a meta-analysis by Aguirre-Rodriguez, Bosnjak, and Sirgy (2012), and more
recently Sirgy (2014) and Sirgy, Lee, and Yu (2017). Research has shown that self-
congruity influences consumption behavior – pre-purchase behavior (e.g. consumer
attitude toward the product, preference for a brand, willingness to purchase the brand,
and brand choice) and post-purchase behavior (e.g. satisfaction with the brand, brand
trust and commitment to the brand, and word-of-mouth related to the brand). Allow
me to elaborate.
 JOURNAL OF GLOBAL SCHOLARS OF MARKETING SCIENCE   199

Consumer self-concept
Most consumer researchers recognize the actual self-image reflects what we refer to as the
“consumer self-concept.” But consumer self-concept involves not only one dimension but
at least four, namely actual self-image, ideal self-image, social self-image, and ideal social
self-image (Sirgy, 1982, 1986). The actual self-image is defined as how consumers truly see
themselves. In other words, the actual self refers to a representation of image attributes
that reflects one’s personal identity. The ideal self-image is how consumers would like to see
themselves or what they would like to become. The ideal self reflects a set of image attrib-
utes that the individual wishes or hopes to possess. The social self-image is how consumers
believe they are seen by significant others. Last but not least is the ideal social self-image.
This is how consumers would like to be seen by significant others. The four dimensions
of the consumer self-concept are evoked when consumers make evaluations about goods
and services in the marketplace. These four dimensions of the consumer self-concept serve
as a standard of comparison or referent point in evaluating the relative attractiveness of a
brand-user image or brand personality.

Brand-user image and brand personality

Brand image studies have documented much evidence suggesting that brand personality
is an important factor influencing consumer choice (e.g. Ekinci, 2003; Ekinci, Dawes, &
Massey, 2008; Ekinci & Hosany, 2006; Ekinci & Riley, 2003; Ekinci, Sirakaya-Turk, & Baloglu,
2007; Murphy, Benckendorff, & Moscardo, 2007a, 2007b). What is brand personality? Aaker
and colleagues (e.g. Aaker, 1997; Aaker & Fournier, 1995) proposed that consumers perceive
brands as having personalities in terms of five traits: sincerity, excitement, competence,
sophistication, and ruggedness. Consumers also consider whether the brand personality
matches their self-image when making a purchase decision. As such, consumers evaluate
a brand personality positively when their self-concept matches the brand personality and
negatively when their self-concept does not match.
Brand image studies have also documented the effect of brand-user image on consumer
behavior. Brand-user image focuses on the stereotypic perception of the typical brand user.
For example, when consumers think about the image of the Apple computer, they may
conjure up an image of the typical user as being “creative,” “artistic,” “hip,” and “maverick”
(Sirgy, 1982, 1985a, 1985b). Such an image may relate directly to Aaker’s notion of brand
personality in relation to “excitement” and “competence.” As such, both brand-user image
and brand personality are involved in self-congruity influencing consumer behavior (e.g.
Boksberger, Dolnicar, Laesser, & Randle, 2011; Ekinci & Riley, 2003; Murphy et al., 2007a,
2007b).

Self-congruity effects
Research demonstrates that self-congruity (actual, ideal, social, and ideal social self-
congruity) influences consumer’s pre-purchase behavior (e.g. brand preference and choice)
and post-purchase behavior (e.g. consumer satisfaction, word-of-mouth communication,
and brand loyalty). To reiterate, consumer’s self-congruity reflects the match between con-
sumer’s self-concept and brand personality or brand user image. Specifically, self-congruity
200   M. J. SIRGY

with brand-user image refers to perceived similarity a potential buyer sees between the
typical user of a brand and himself or herself. Research has demonstrated that self-congruity
with brand-user image (and brand personality too) is a strong predictor of brand attitude
and brand loyalty in relation to various products (e.g. Bosnjak, Sirgy, Hellriegel, & Maurer,
2011; Ericksen & Sirgy, 1992; Krishen & Sirgy, 2016; Liu, Li, Mizerski, & Soh, 2012; Sirgy,
Lee, Johar, & Tidwell, 2008; Sirgy & Samli, 1985; Sirgy et al., 1991, 1997).
Self-congruity has also a significant influence on consumer’s value perception and
pre-purchase behavior such as brand evaluation and brand choice (e.g. Beerli, Meneses, &
Gil, 2007; Boksberger et al., 2011; Chon, 1990, 1992; Chon & Olsen, 1991; Hosany, 2012;
Hosany & Martin, 2012; Hung & Petrick, 2011; Kastenholz, 2004; Litvin & Goh, 2002; Litvin
& Kar, 2003; Üner & Armutlu, 2012). Consumers prefer brands that match well with their
self-concept. Incongruity with their self-concept tend to cause dissonance and psychological
discomfort that threatens the person’s belief about the self (Sirgy, 1986).
Moreover, consumer’s self-congruity impacts consumer’s post-purchase behavior such
as customer satisfaction, trust, and commitment to the brand, and word-of-mouth com-
munication (e.g. Aguirre-Rodriguez, Bóveda-Lambie, & Miniard, 2014; Chebat, El-Hedhli,
& Sirgy, 2009; Chebat, Sirgy, & Grzeskowiak, 2010; Ericksen & Sirgy, 1992; Kressmann,
Sirgy, Herrmann, Huber, & Lee, 2006; Krishen & Sirgy, 2016; Yim, Chan, & Hung, 2007).
In other words, the greater the match between the brand-user image/personality and con-
sumers’ self-concept the greater the chance that consumers will satisfied with the brand,
will feel trust for the company behind the brand, will feel committed to repurchase the same
brand, and will promote the brand to others. In addition, self-congruity directly increases
product involvement (Kressmann et al., 2006) and mitigates the effect of attractiveness of
alternatives (Yim et al., 2007).

Dimensions of self-congruity and self-concept motives

Research suggests that actual self-congruity is motivated by the need for self-consistency,
ideal self-congruity is motivated by the need for self-esteem, social self-congruity by the need
for social consistency, and ideal social self-congruity by the need for social approval. Sirgy
(1982) identified four self-concept motives (self-consistency, self-esteem, social consist-
ency, and social approval) corresponding to the four self-concept dimensions (actual, ideal,
social, and ideal social self-image), resulting in four types of self-congruity: actual-, ideal-,
social-, and ideal social-self-congruity. Specifically, self-congruity has a significant influence
on perception of value and pre-consumption and post-consumption behaviors because
self-congruity leads to the satisfaction of self-concept needs: the need for self-consistency,
the need for self-esteem, the need for social consistency, and the need for social approval.
Let us start by discussing actual self-congruity and the self-consistency motive. Actual
self-image is defined as how consumers see themselves. Actual self-congruity is thus the
match between the brand-user image (or brand personality) and the consumer’s actual
self-image. For example, a consumer perceives that users of the Apple computer are “creative
and cool.” If they think of themselves as “creative and cool,” then we coin this psychological
process and outcome as actual self-congruity. Consumers are motivated to evaluate goods
and services favorably when the brand-user image (or brand personality) of the product in
question is high in self-congruity (i.e. the brand-user image/personality matching the con-
sumer’s actual self-image). Conversely, consumers evaluate goods and services unfavorably
 JOURNAL OF GLOBAL SCHOLARS OF MARKETING SCIENCE   201

when the brand-user image/personality does not match the consumer’s actual self-image.
The underlying motive that guides this process and outcome is the need for self-consist-
ency. The need for self-consistency is the motivational drive to make decisions and act in
ways consistent with one’s personal identity (Epstein, 1973; Sirgy, 1986). This psychological
dynamic is particularly important when consumers have strong beliefs about their own
identity (Burke & Stets, 2009; Gregg, Sedikides, & Gebauer, 2012; Sedikides & Strube, 1995).
Consumers purchase and consume goods and services in ways that serve to consolidate and
validate their personal identity. Behaviors and outcomes perceived inconsistent with one’s
actual self-image generate cognitive dissonance, a state of mind characterized by mental
strain (Sirgy, 1982, 1985a, 1985b). Self-verification theory has long asserted that people
are motivated to verify or confirm currently held self-views (Burke & Stets, 2009; Cast &
Burke, 2002; Swann, Stein-Seroussi, & Giesler, 1992). Verification of self-concept increases
self-confidence, facilitates social interactions, and generates positive attitude towards the
object of evaluation. In contrast, lack of verification of self-concept results in negative feel-
ings such as distress and anxiety.
Consumer research on the predictiveness of actual self-congruity (and the underlying
self-consistency motive) shows that this construct is a strong predictor of brand choice (e.g.
Ascher, 1985; Beerli et al., 2007; Ericksen & Sirgy, 1992; Hsieh & O’Leary, 1994; Hung &
Petrick, 2011; Jackson, 1973; Klenosky, Charles, & Michael, 1993; Krishen & Sirgy, 2016;
Pizam & Calantone, 1987; Sheldon & Mark, 1987; Sirgy et al., 2008; Witt & Martin, 1987).
That is, much evidence indicates that consumers choose brands whose image matches their
actual self-image. For example, in travel and tourism, research indicates that tourists are
motivated to visit destination sites that reinforce their conceptions of who they are, and
so doing satisfies the need for self-consistency (e.g. Prentice, Guerin, & McGugan, 1998).
With respect to ideal self-congruity, the assertion is that people in general do things
to enhance their sense of self (i.e. boost their self-esteem) and avoid self-deflation (Cast
& Burke, 2002; Epstein, 1973; Sedikides & Strube, 1995; Sirgy, 1986). This dynamic is
particularly strong for individuals with high levels of self-monitoring and independent
self-construals (Brown & Gallagher, 1992; Gregg et al., 2012; Sedikides, 1993; Sedikides &
Strube, 1995). This motivational tendency manifests itself in the marketplace through ideal
self-congruity. That is, consumers evaluate goods and services favorably when they perceive
these goods and services to be associated with brand users (or having a brand personality)
consistent with their ideal self-image. They do so to satisfy their need for self-esteem. To
reiterate, consumers purchase and consume goods and services to help them realize their
ideal self – the person they desire to become, and doing so serves to boost their self-esteem.
Research in consumer behavior supports the ideal self-congruity effect (see literature
reviews previously cited). For example, research has found that consumers want to enhance
their image by being associated with the firms having a desirable image (e.g. Bhattacharya &
Sen, 2003). Consumers wear clothes having a clothing image consistent with their ideal self
(e.g. Ericksen & Sirgy, 1992). Consumers donate money to social causes that are congruent
with their ideal self (e.g. Shang, Reed, & Croson, 2008). Tourists travel to destinations that
serve to boost their self-esteem (e.g. Amin, 1979; Ascher, 1985; Beerli et al., 2007). They
patronize hospitality services motivated by self-esteem by consuming services that helps
them realize their ideal self (e.g. Ekinci et al., 2008). They also travel and go on cruises
influenced by the same motive (e.g. Hung & Petrick, 2011). Consumers express greater
202   M. J. SIRGY

preference for brands in product placement associated with celebrity figures matching their
ideal self-image (e.g. Krishen & Sirgy, 2016).
With respect to social self-congruity, this construct refers to the fit between how consum-
ers believe they are seen by others in relation to the brand-user image (or brand personality).
Consumers’ social self-image influences consumer behavior through the social consistency
motive in that they are motivated to maintain the image of how they are viewed by others
(Sirgy, 1982; Sirgy & Samli, 1985). In other words, behavior is influenced by the expectations
of significant others. If one believes that others view him or her in certain ways; hence, they
expect him or her to behave in those ways. By behaving differently, the individual may feel
dissonant with others’ expectations of him or her, which drives up the motivation to restore
social consistency – to act in ways consistent with other’s expectations of him or her. The
need for social consistency is an offshoot from the need for self-consistency – trying to
maintain a consistent view of oneself by behaving in ways that reinforces and consolidates
one’s actual self-image. In the case of social consistency, the individual is motivated to
maintain one’s social identity by behaving in ways that reinforces and consolidates one’s
social self-image (cf. Burke & Stets, 2009; Large & Marcussen, 2000).
Let us consider the research related to the social self and the need for social consist-
ency. Consumers have a social identity based on their identification with groups or social
network (e.g. Reed, 2004; Reed, Forehand, Puntoni, & Warlop, 2012). Consumer’s social
identity becomes salient when their social network becomes accessible and important.
Reinforcement of social identity through the purchase of a product increases consumer’s
sense of identification with specific groups. In contrast, lack of reinforcement of social
identity produces anxiety and other negative feelings about the self. For example, consum-
ers feel uncomfortable taking actions inconsistent with how they believe others see them.
Suggestive evidence of this phenomenon comes from tourism studies linking travelers’
reference group influence with destination choice (e.g. Kim & Hyun, 2013; Mansfeld, 1992;
Pearce, 1989; Robinson, 1979). Travelers also rely on norms of their reference groups in
making plans to go on a vacation cruise (Hung & Petrick, 2011). Shoppers patronize stores
that have store-patron image consistent with their social self-image (Sirgy & Samli, 1985).
Ideal social self-congruity refers to the fit between how consumers would like to be seen by
others in relation to the brand-user image or brand personality. The ideal social self-image
influences consumer decision-making through the social approval motive. That is, consumers
are motivated to do things that would cause others to think highly of them. They believe
that acting in ways that realize their ideal social self-image is likely to earn approval from
others. Actions inconsistent with the ideal social self-image may lead to social disapproval
(e.g. Riley, 1995; Sirgy & Samli, 1985).

Revisiting the JBR 1985 article

As previously mentioned, the study reported in the JBR 1985 article is based on my disser-
tation that was completed in 1979 at the University of Massachusetts and chaired by mentor
Seymour Epstein, a well-renowned personality psychologist (Sirgy, 1979). The literature
review part of the dissertation was also published in the Journal of Consumer Research (Sirgy,
1982). This article too has garnered much publicity and numerous citations over the years.
The JBR 1985 article focused on part of my dissertation that examined the interrelation-
ship between actual self-congruity and ideal self-congruity on purchase motivation. The
 JOURNAL OF GLOBAL SCHOLARS OF MARKETING SCIENCE   203

interrelationship between actual and ideal self-congruity is best captured in Table 1. The
research question was: Are the effects of actual self-congruity and ideal self-congruity on
purchase motivation additive or multiplicative? The data provided support for the additive
model.
As Table 1 shows, when consumers experience high levels of actual self-congruity (high
ACS) with a product accompanied with high levels of ideal self-congruity (high ICS) they
become motivated to purchase the product the most, compared other conditions of actual
self-congruity and ideal self-congruity. Their purchase motivation is based on the expec-
tation that purchasing the product in question is likely to satisfy both needs, namely the
needs for self-consistency and self-esteem. For example, a consumer who perceives herself
as “sexy” and she believes that striving to be “sexy” is an ideal image to have, she is likely
to be highly motivated to purchase products that reflect the image of “sexy” (e.g. alcoholic
beverages that are associated with “sexy”). Of course, if the consumer does not see herself
as being “sexy” and does not believe that such an image is ideal for herself, then she would
experience low actual self-congruity and low ideal self-congruity with alcoholic beverages
reflecting a “sexy” image. And as such, she is likely to avoid “sexy” alcoholic beverages
altogether.
What happens when consumers experience high levels of actual self-congruity but low
levels of ideal self-congruity (high ACS and low ISC) or, conversely, low levels of actual
self-congruity and high levels of ideal self-congruity (low ACS and high ISC)? They are
likely to experience motivational conflict, conflict between the needs for self-consistency
and self-esteem. Consider the following example of high ACS and low ISC: a women con-
sumer who sees herself as “sexy.” She believes that she is indeed very attractive (high actual
self-image) but hates herself for being “sexy” (low ideal self-image). She may not have an
ideal self-image of “sexy” because most women envy her and most men treat her as a sex
object. As such she is likely to experience high actual self-congruity with alcoholic beverages
associated with a “sexy” image but low ideal self-congruity. She is likely to be motivated to
purchase and consume a brand of alcoholic beverage portraying “sexiness” because doing
so is consistent with who she is; therefore, such purchase and consumption of the product
would satisfy her need for self-consistency. But then the same purchase and consumption
of the alcoholic beverage is likely to frustrate her need for self-esteem. She knows that the
image of herself as an “sexy” is far from ideal, and her purchase and consumption of the
alcoholic beverage is likely to deflate her self-esteem. Hence, she would experience approach
motivation based on the need for self-consistency and avoidance motivation based on the
need for self-esteem. The resultant purchase motivate is likely to moderate, reflecting the
conflict between these two self-concept motives.
Now consider another example reflecting low actual self-congruity and high ideal
self-congruity (low ACS and high ICS). Let us revisit the image of “sexy” related to alcoholic

Table 1. The effects of the interrelationship between actual self-congruity and ideal self-congruity on
purchase motivation.
Self-congruity condition Self-consistency motivation Self-esteem motivation Purchase motivation
High ACS & low ISC Approach Approach High
Low ACS & high ISC Avoidance Approach Moderate
High ACS & low ISC Approach Avoidance Moderate
Low ACS & low ISC Avoidance Avoidance Low
Notes:ACS = actual self-congruity; ICS = ideal self-congruity.
204   M. J. SIRGY

beverages. She likes to project an image of herself as “sexy” (ideal self-image) but she does
not see herself as “sexy.” In other words, she is not “sexy” but would like to become “sexy.”
This consumer is likely to experience approach motivation towards the purchase and con-
sumption of “sexy” alcoholic beverages because doing so is likely to help her realize an ideal
image of herself as “sexy.” In other words, purchasing and consuming an alcoholic beverage
that is “sexy” is likely to give her a self-esteem boost. But at the same time, purchasing and
consuming the same product is likely to frustrate the need for self-consistency. That is, such
purchase and consumption is not consistent with who she is. She does not see herself as
“sexy” – she sees herself as “unattractive.” In this situation, she would experience conflict
between the needs for self-esteem and self-consistency – approach motivation from the need
for self-esteem and avoidance motivation from the need for self-consistency. The resultant
purchase motivation is likely to be moderate too.
I tested the hypothesis reflected in these predictions (as reiterated in Table 1) using a
sample of 168 female college students enrolled in undergraduate psychology and market-
ing courses at two eastern universities in the United States. Respondents were recruited as
subjects in a consumer research study. The selected consumer products were two magazines
(Playgirl and Glamour) and two automobiles (MGB and VW Rabbit). The results of this
study provided support to the hypothesis confirming that actual self-congruity and ideal
self-congruity have an additive predictive effect on purchase motivation.

Concluding thoughts
The JBR article helped provide a foundation for a stream of research in self-congruity in
marketing and related disciplines. As discussed in the preceding paragraphs, this stream of
research has blossomed to explain not only traditional consumer behavior phenomena (i.e.
brand attitude, preference/choice, purchase motivation, intention, consumer satisfaction,
loyalty, switching behavior, and word-of-mouth communication) but also nontraditional
behavioral phenomena such as subjective well-being, consumer happiness, life satisfaction,
perceived product impact on life satisfaction, hedonic well-being, among others. This occurs
through a self-congruity mechanism, coined as self-expressiveness (e.g. Bosnjak, Brown,
Lee, Yu, & Sirgy, 2016; El-Hedhli, Chebat, & Sirgy, 2013; Grzeskowiak, Sirgy, Foscht, &
Swoboda, 2016; Lee, Sirgy, Yu, & Chalamon, 2015; Sirgy et al., 2016). That is, in situations
in which consumers become highly involved with purchase and consumption of a good or
service self-congruity is likely to play a central role influencing behavioral phenomena that
go beyond the marketplace – important personal and social outcomes. As such, I believe
that the concept of self-congruity is a key construct in the behavioral, social, and adminis-
trative/policy sciences. My hope is that scholars from a variety of disciplines will continue
to work with this construct to achieve greater explanatory heights.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

ORCID
M. Joseph Sirgy   http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6379-0199
 JOURNAL OF GLOBAL SCHOLARS OF MARKETING SCIENCE   205

References
Aaker, J. (1997). Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing Research, 34, 347–356.
Aaker, J., & Fournier, S. (1995). A brand as a character, a partner and a person: Three perspectives
on the question of brand personality. Advances in Consumer Research, 22, 391–395.
Aguirre-Rodriguez, A., Bóveda-Lambie, A. M., & Miniard, P. W. (2014). The impact of consumer
avatars in internet retailing on self-congruity with brands. Marketing Letters, online first publication,
1–11.
Aguirre-Rodriguez, A., Bosnjak, M., & Sirgy, M. J. (2012). Moderators of the self-congruity effect on
consumer decision-making: A meta-analysis. Journal of Business Research, 65, 1179–1188.
Amin, S. (1979). Classe Et Nation [Social class and nation]. Paris: Editions de Minuit.
Ascher, F. (1985). Tourism: Transnational corporations and cultural identities. Oxfordshire: cabdirect.
Beerli, A., Meneses, G. D., & Gil, S. M. (2007). Self-congruity and destination choice. Annals of
Tourism Research, 34, 571–587.
Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2003). Consumer-company identification: A framework for
understanding consumers’ relationships with companies. Journal of Marketing, 67, 76–88.
Boksberger, P., Dolnicar, S., Laesser, C., & Randle, M. (2011). Self-congruity theory: To what extent
does it hold in tourism? Journal of Travel Research, 50, 454–464.
Bosnjak, M., Brown, C. A., Lee, D.-J., Yu, G. B., & Sirgy, M. J. (2016). Self-expressiveness in sport
tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 55, 125–134.
Bosnjak, M., Sirgy, M. J., Hellriegel, S., & Maurer, O. (2011). Postvisit destination loyalty judgments.
Journal of Travel Research, 50, 496–508.
Brown, J. D., & Gallagher, F. M. (1992). Coming to terms with failure: Private self-enhancement and
public self-effacement. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 3–22.
Burke, P. J., & Stets, J. E. (2009). Identity theory. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Cast, A. D., & Burke, P. J. (2002). A theory of self-esteem. Social Forces, 80, 1041–1068.
Chebat, J.-C., Sirgy, M. J., & Grzeskowiak, S. (2010). How can shopping mall management best capture
mall image? Journal of Business Research, 63, 735–740.
Chebat, J.-C., El-Hedhli, K., & Sirgy, M. J. (2009). How does shopper-based mall equity generate
mall loyalty? A conceptual model and empirical evidence. Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, 16, 50–60.
Chon, K. (1990). The role of destination image in tourism: A review and discussion. The Tourist
Review, 45, 2–9.
Chon, K. (1992). Self-image/destination-image congruity. Annals of Tourism Research, 19, 360–363.
Chon, K., & Olsen, M. D. (1991). Functional and symbolic congruity approaches to consumer
satisfaction/dissatisfaction in tourism. Journal of the International Academy of Hospitality Research,
3, 2–22.
Claiborne, C. B., & Sirgy, M. J. (1990). Self-congruity as a model of attitude formation and change:
Conceptual review and guide for future research. In B. J. Dunlap (Ed.), Developments in marketing
science (Vol. 13, pp. 1–17). Cullowhee, NC: Academy of Marketing Science.
Ekinci, Y. (2003). From destination image to destination branding: An emerging area of research.
e-Review of Tourism Research, 1, 21–24.
Ekinci, Y., Dawes, P. L., & Massey, G. R. (2008). An extended model of the antecedents and
consequences of consumer satisfaction for hospitality services. European Journal of Marketing,
42, 35–68.
Ekinci, Y., & Hosany, S. (2006). Destination personality: An application of brand personality to
tourism destinations. Journal of Travel Research, 45, 127–139.
Ekinci, Y., & Riley, M. (2003). An investigation of self-concept: Actual and ideal self-congruence
compared in the context of service evaluation. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 10,
201–214.
Ekinci, Y., Sirakaya-Turk, E., & Baloglu, E. (2007). Host image and destination personality. Tourism
Analysis, 12, 433–446.
El-Hedhli, K., Chebat, J.-C., & Sirgy, M. J. (2013). Shopping well-being at the mall: Construct,
antecedents, and consequences. Journal of Business Research, 66, 856–863.
206   M. J. SIRGY

Epstein, S. (1973). The self-concept revisited: Or a theory of a theory. American Psychologist, 28,
404–416.
Ericksen, M. K., & Sirgy, M. J. (1992). Employed females’ clothing preference, self-image congruence,
and career Anchorage. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 408–422.
Gregg, A. P., Sedikides, C., & Gebauer, J. E. (2012). Dynamics of identity: Between self-enhancement
and self-assessment. In S. Schwartz, K. Luyckx, & V. Vignoles (Eds.). Handbook of identity theory
and research (Vol. 1, pp. 305–327). New York, NY: Springer.
Grzeskowiak, S., Sirgy, M. J., Foscht, T., & Swoboda, B. (2016). Linking retailing experiences with life
satisfaction. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 44, 124–138.
Hosany, S. (2012). Appraisal determinants of tourist emotional responses. Journal of Travel Research,
51, 303–314.
Hosany, S., & Martin, D. (2012). Self-image congruence in consumer behavior. Journal of Business
Research, 65, 685–691.
Hsieh, S., & O’Leary, J. T. (1994). A travel decision model for Japanese pleasure travel. In L. E. Hudman,
& J. A. David (Eds.), Tourism: The economy’s silver lining (pp. 94–104). Whitehall, MI: Travel and
Tourism Research Association.
Hung, K., & Petrick, J. F. (2011). The role of self- and functional congruity in cruising intentions.
Journal of Travel Research, 50, 100–112.
Jackson, G. (1973). A preliminary bicultural study of value orientations and leisure attitudes. Journal
of Leisure Research, 5, 10–20.
Johar, J. S., & Sirgy, M. J. (1991). Value-expressive versus utilitarian advertising appeals: When and
why to use which appeal. Journal of Advertising, 20, 23–33.
Kastenholz, E. (2004). Assessment and role of destination-self-congruity. Annals of Tourism Research,
31, 719–723.
Kim, J., & Hyun, Y. (2013). The importance of social and ideal social dimensions in self congruity
research. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 16, 39–49.
Klenosky, D. B., Charles, E. G., & Michael, M. (1993). Understanding the factors influencing ski
destination choice: A means-end analytic approach. Journal of Leisure Research, 24, 362–379.
Kressmann, F., Sirgy, M. J., Herrmann, A., Huber, F., & Lee, D. J. (2006). Direct and indirect effects
of self-image congruence on brand loyalty. Journal of Business Research, 59, 955–964.
Krishen, A., & Sirgy, M. J. (2016). Identifying with the brand placed in music videos makes me like
the brand. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 37, 1–14.
Large, M. D., & Marcussen, K. (2000). Extending identity theory to predict differential forms and
degrees of psychological distress. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63, 49–59.
Lee, D.-J., Sirgy, M. J., Yu, G. B., & Chalamon, I. (2015). The well-being effects of self-expressiveness
and hedonic enjoyment associated with physical exercise. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 10,
141–159.
Litvin, S. W., & Goh, H. (2002). Self-image congruity: A valid tourism theory? Tourism Management,
23, 81–83.
Litvin, S. W., & Kar, G. H. (2003). Individualism/collectivism as a moderating factor to the self-image
congruity concept. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 10, 23–32.
Liu, F., Li, J., Mizerski, D., & Soh, H. (2012). Self‐congruity, brand attitude, and brand loyalty: A study
on luxury brands. European Journal of Marketing, 46, 922–937.
Mansfeld, Y. (1992). Tourism: Toward a behavioral approach. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Murphy, L., Benckendorff, P., & Moscardo, G. (2007a). Destination brand personality: Visitor
perceptions of a regional tourism destination. Tourism Analysis, 12, 419–432.
Murphy, L., Benckendorff, P., & Moscardo, G. (2007b). Linking travel motivation, tourist self-image
and destination brand personality. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 22, 45–59.
Pearce, G. D. (1989). Tourist development. Harlow: Longman, Burnt Mill.
Pizam, A., & Calantone, R. (1987). Beyond psychographics – Values as determinants of tourist
behavior. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 6, 177–181.
Prentice, R. C., Guerin, S., & McGugan, S. (1998). Visitor learning at a heritage attraction: A case
study of Discovery as a media product. Tourism Management, 19, 5–23.
Reed, A., II (2004). Activating the self-importance of consumer selves: Exploring identity salience
effects on judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 286–295.
 JOURNAL OF GLOBAL SCHOLARS OF MARKETING SCIENCE   207

Reed, A., II, Forehand, M. R., Puntoni, S., & Warlop, L. (2012). Identity-based consumer behavior.
International Journal of Research in Marketing, 29, 310–321.
Riley, R. W. (1995). Prestige-worthy tourism behavior. Annals of Tourism Research, 22, 630–649.
Robinson, H. (1979). A geography of tourism. Plymouth: Macdonald and Evans.
Sedikides, C. (1993). Assessment, enhancement, and verification determinants of the self-evaluation
process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 317–338.
Sedikides, C., & Strube, M. J. (1995). The multiply motivated self. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 21, 1330–1335.
Shang, J., Reed, A., & Croson, R. (2008). Identity congruency effects on donations. Journal of Marketing
Research, 45, 351–361.
Sheldon, P. J., & Mark, J. (1987). The demand for package tours: A mode choice model. Journal of
Travel Research, 24, 16–23.
Sirgy, M. J. (1979). Self-concept in consumer behavior (Unpublished Ph.D. disseartation). Department
of Psychology, University of Massachusetts.
Sirgy, M. J. (1982). Self-concept in consumer behavior: A critical review. Journal of Consumer Research,
9, 287–300.
Sirgy, M. J. (1985a). Self-image/product-image congruity and consumer decision making. International
Journal of Management, 2, 49–63.
Sirgy, M. J. (1985b). Using self-congruity and ideal congruity to predict purchase motivation. Journal
of Business Research, 13, 195–206.
Sirgy, M. J. (1986). Self-congruity: Toward a theory of personality and cybernetics. New York, NY:
Praeger.
Sirgy, M. J. (2014). Revisiting self-congruity theory in travel and tourism: Reviewing the latest evidence
and refining the model. In N. Prebensen, M. Uysal, & J. Chen (Eds.), Creating experience value in
tourism (pp. 63–78). Oxfordshire: CABI.
Sirgy, M. J., Lee, D.-J., Johar, J. S., & Tidwell, J. (2008). Effect of self-congruity with sponsorship on
brand loyalty. Journal of Business Research, 61, 1091–1097.
Sirgy, M. J., Lee, D.-J., Yu, G. B., Gurel-Atay, E., Tidwell, J., & Ekici, A. (2016). Self-expressiveness in
shopping. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 30, 292–299.
Sirgy, M. J., Lee, D.-J., & Yu, G. B. (2017). Revisiting self-congruity theory in consumer behavior:
Making sense of the research so far. In C. Jansson-Boyd & M. Zawisza (Eds.), Routledge international
handbook of consumer psychology (pp. 185–201). London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis.
Sirgy, M. J., Grewal, D., & Mangelburg, T. (2000). Retail environment, self-congruity, and retail
patronage: An integrative model and a research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 49, 27–138.
Sirgy, M. J., Grewal, D., Mangleburg, T. F., Park, J. O., Chon, K. S., Claiborne, C. B., … Berkman, H.
(1997). Assessing the predictive validity of two methods of measuring self-image congruence.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25, 229–241.
Sirgy, M. J., Johar, J. S., Samli, A. C., & Claiborne, C. B. (1991). Self-congruity versus functional
congruity: Predictors of consumer behavior. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 19,
363–375.
Sirgy, M. J., & Samli, A. C. (1985). A path analytic model of store loyalty involving selfconcept, store
image, socioeconomic status, and geographic loyalty. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
13, 265291.
Sirgy, M. J., & Su, C. (2000). Destination image, self-congruity, and travel behavior: Toward an
integrative model. Journal of Travel Research, 38, 340–352.
Swann, W. B., Stein-Seroussi, A., & Giesler, R. B. (1992). Why people self-verify. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 62, 392–401.
Üner, M. M., & Armutlu, C. (2012). Understanding the antecedents of destination identification:
Linkage between perceived quality-of-life, self-congruity, and destination identification. In M.
Uysal, R. Perdue, & M. J. Sirgy (Eds.), Handbook of tourism and quality-of-life research (pp. 251–
261). New York, NY: Springer.
Witt, S. F., & Martin, C. A. (1987). Econometric models for forecasting international tourism demand.
Journal of Travel Research, 25, 23–30.
Yim, K. C., Chan, K. W., & Hung, K. (2007). Multiple reference effects in service evaluations: Roles
of alternative attractiveness and self-image congruity. Journal of Retailing, 83, 147–157.
Copyright of Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science is the property of Taylor &
Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a
listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.