The price a consumer will pay for a product is often significantly less than the price they will accept to sell it. According to a new study in the Journal of Consumer Research, this occurs because ownership of a product enhances its value by creating an association between the product and consumer identity.

"Our studies support the idea that ownership enhances the attractiveness of a product because ownership creates an association between the item and the self," wrote study authors Sara Loughran Dommer from the Georgia Institute of Technology and Vanitha Swaminathan from the University of Pittsburgh.

In several studies, the authors found a link between possessions and consumer identity. They also discovered that men are more likely to consider a product's association with specific social groups when making a purchase. 

"Men strive to differentiate themselves, and group distinctions are more significant for them," the authors wrote. "In contrast, women are focused on forming connections and less likely to classify themselves as separate from others. They are less likely to purchase products because of an association with a particular social group."

Why is this important, and why should you care? Because businesses can benefit from creating feelings of ownership through promotional strategies such as free trials, samples and coupons. For example, a consumer may be more willing to purchase a couch if they are offered a free trial, clothing stores increase sales by having customers try on items, and sporting goods stores could allow consumers to try out equipment in the store to boost sales.

However, companies wanting women to identify with and purchase their brands need to work harder to emphasize the identity differences across brands. A good example would be Apple's recent Mac versus PC advertising campaign that depicted the distinct identities of the two brands.

"If ownership increases the value consumers place on products, then companies could benefit from any action that creates feelings of ownership before actual purchase," the authors wrote. "Our findings regarding gender differences also suggest that in certain situations companies may benefit from prompting female consumers to make intergroup comparisons."

(Story materials from the University of Chicago Press Journals.)

I’m currently in Baltimore, Maryland, attending the Association Media & Publishing Annual Meeting. In addition to accepting One+’s gold award for magazine general excellence from the organizers, I’m attending many of the event’s professional development sessions.

One of the most interesting sessions was the opening keynote “Why We Buy, Why We Brand” presented by Debbie Millman. It was a fascinating anthropological investigation about, well, branding.

Millman started by taking the audience down the branding history road. A couple of interesting trivia bits included that the word brand comes from “brond,” which is in the epic poem Beowulf from 1010 A.D. Also, the world’s first trademark was for Bass Pale Ale, a beer. Humanity, of course, has its priorities straight.

We were then presented by the various waves of branding. The first wave (1875-1920) of brands guaranteed quality and consistency, with package goods equalling signified premiums and expectations of safety.

Branding’s second wave (1920-1965) brought on anthropomorphization. Metaphor was injected into a brand. This wave was popular, and still is, because people love puzzles, they love figuring out what a logo or image means for a brand. For example, the Morton Salt girl is walking in the rain trailing salt behind her. The slogan is “When It Rains It Pours.” Trying to figure out why Morton says that is part of the fun (Morton figured out a way to cause salt to pour from a container even in humid weather is the answer). Another reason this wave is popular is because people can relate to and project onto characters. The next time you’re in a grocery store check out children’s cereal boxes. All of the characters eyes will be looking down toward the children who are looking up to them.

The third wave (1965-1985) was all about self-expressive statements, that a brand could provide status. If you’re a Mad Men fan, you’ll see this wave in the pitches that Don and Peggy present to clients for Jaguar and Heinz.

Wave four (1985-2000) was the experience era, with experiential marketing a popular tactic.

Now we’re in the fifth wave of branding. Humans are at their happiest when they feel attachment to other people. However, one-in-three current households are comprised of one person (compared to one-in-10 in 1950). Because of this, our brains have found new ways to connect to others. In the current wave we’re in, brands act as connectors.

Your event, your meeting, is a brand. Its sole purpose is connections. This could mean connections to content to new business to new friends. If you’re not thinking of your event in this way, if you’re not even thinking of yourself this way as a meeting professional, then you’re behind the times.

Sure, it’s fine to have a status symbol attached to your event’s brand. Or maybe your brand’s event creates an experience. But without that final piece, the connection, your event will come up sorely lacking. Who wants to attend an event where they don’t bring back any new ideas, business, or friends? No one that I know.