An investigation into the interplay of attachment avoidance and interpersonal closeness on consumers' sharing intentions

• Main Author: Graul, Antje Ricarda Helena
• Other Authors: Theotokis, Aristeidis ; Saridakis, Charalampos ; Leonidou, Constantinos
• Published: University of Leeds 2017
• Subjects: 658
• Online Access: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.739800

Sharing is predicted to be the novel way to consume: The Time Magazine (Walsh 2011) stated sharing as one of ten ideas that were predicted to change the world in the future and experts forecast the sharing economy to be worth $335 billion by 2025 (PwC 2015). However, little is known about the reason for which some consumers are more willing to provide their personal belongings for sharing than others. The present research aims to fill this gap by investigating consumers’ interpersonal sharing behaviour as a function of the individual’s level of attachment avoidance - the degree to which individuals avoid closeness and dependency on others. Previous research demonstrates that personal possessions can be perceived as an extension of self, wherefore sharing them with others can be seen as a process of interpersonal interaction. The author provides the first demonstration of this consequence by relating the constructs of sharing and attachment avoidance. Four studies provide evidence for the assumption that the consumers’ level of attachment avoidance predicts the extent to which they were prone to provide their personal possessions for sharing. Specifically, consumers high in attachment avoidance were reluctant to share with close others (study 1), while this effect was reversed if the sharing partner was interpersonally distant (study 2-4) and explained by perceived fear to commit to another person as a mediator (study 4). Together, these results offer new insights into the role of attachment avoidance in influencing interpersonal behaviour and have important theoretical contributions and managerial implications for marketing managers of sharing schemes. Limitations of this study and avenues for future research are discussed.