NFT时尚与数字时尚有何不同?结合社会倾听和消费者调查的混合方法研究的见解

IF 13.1 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Chung-Wha (Chloe) Ki , HyunHwan (Aiden) Lee , Magnum Lam , Eugene Cheng-Xi Aw , Christina W.Y. Wong
{"title":"NFT时尚与数字时尚有何不同?结合社会倾听和消费者调查的混合方法研究的见解","authors":"Chung-Wha (Chloe) Ki ,&nbsp;HyunHwan (Aiden) Lee ,&nbsp;Magnum Lam ,&nbsp;Eugene Cheng-Xi Aw ,&nbsp;Christina W.Y. Wong","doi":"10.1016/j.jretconser.2025.104379","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In the Web 3.0 era, both Digital Fashion (DF) and Non-Fungible Token Fashion (NFT fashion; NF) play pivotal roles in reshaping the fashion industry. Despite sharing a digital foundation, these two entities occupy distinct roles. However, the ongoing conflation of these terms creates ambiguity regarding their specific product attributes, roles, and inherent value. This confusion is further amplified by fragmented research streams between DF and NF. The lack of comparative analysis hinders a clear understanding of each form's unique value and conceptual boundaries. To address this ambiguity, this study adopts a mixed-methods approach comprising three studies to explore how users perceive and interact with NF and DF differently, with a particular focus on NF's distinctive characteristics and its identity within the digital creative economy. Study 1 analyzed extensive Twitter data (124,615 DF-related tweets and 52,751 NF-related tweets) using social listening and Latent Dirichlet Allocation analysis, identifying six key themes for DF and nine for NF. These emergent themes, interpreted through the lens of Means-End Chain Theory, served as the foundation for the development of two survey-based research models tested in Studies 2 (DF) and 3 (NF). Study 2 (<em>n</em> = 201) found that DF is primarily perceived as <em>digital content</em>, driven by its attributes of <em>digital renderability, visual appeal,</em> and <em>customizability</em>. These characteristics encouraged consumer <em>engagemen</em>t and positively influenced <em>purchase intent</em>. In contrast, Study 3 (<em>n</em> = 203) revealed that NF is perceived as a <em>digital asset</em>, underpinned by its <em>collectability, licensability</em>, and <em>ownability</em>. These asset-like attributes similarly fostered <em>engagement</em> and <em>purchase behaviors</em>. Together, these findings offer a more nuanced understanding of DF and NF by revealing that—despite being rooted in the same digital foundation—consumers perceive NF as a distinct variant with unique attributes—collectability, licensability, and ownability—that position it as a digital asset rather than digital content. This perspective advances the literature by clarifying that, although NF is not mutually exclusive of DF, it clearly holds a differentiated role and distinct value within the broader digital creative economy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48399,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services","volume":"87 ","pages":"Article 104379"},"PeriodicalIF":13.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How is NFT fashion distinct from digital fashion? insights from mixed-methods research combining social listening and Consumer surveys\",\"authors\":\"Chung-Wha (Chloe) Ki ,&nbsp;HyunHwan (Aiden) Lee ,&nbsp;Magnum Lam ,&nbsp;Eugene Cheng-Xi Aw ,&nbsp;Christina W.Y. Wong\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jretconser.2025.104379\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>In the Web 3.0 era, both Digital Fashion (DF) and Non-Fungible Token Fashion (NFT fashion; NF) play pivotal roles in reshaping the fashion industry. Despite sharing a digital foundation, these two entities occupy distinct roles. However, the ongoing conflation of these terms creates ambiguity regarding their specific product attributes, roles, and inherent value. This confusion is further amplified by fragmented research streams between DF and NF. The lack of comparative analysis hinders a clear understanding of each form's unique value and conceptual boundaries. To address this ambiguity, this study adopts a mixed-methods approach comprising three studies to explore how users perceive and interact with NF and DF differently, with a particular focus on NF's distinctive characteristics and its identity within the digital creative economy. Study 1 analyzed extensive Twitter data (124,615 DF-related tweets and 52,751 NF-related tweets) using social listening and Latent Dirichlet Allocation analysis, identifying six key themes for DF and nine for NF. These emergent themes, interpreted through the lens of Means-End Chain Theory, served as the foundation for the development of two survey-based research models tested in Studies 2 (DF) and 3 (NF). Study 2 (<em>n</em> = 201) found that DF is primarily perceived as <em>digital content</em>, driven by its attributes of <em>digital renderability, visual appeal,</em> and <em>customizability</em>. These characteristics encouraged consumer <em>engagemen</em>t and positively influenced <em>purchase intent</em>. In contrast, Study 3 (<em>n</em> = 203) revealed that NF is perceived as a <em>digital asset</em>, underpinned by its <em>collectability, licensability</em>, and <em>ownability</em>. These asset-like attributes similarly fostered <em>engagement</em> and <em>purchase behaviors</em>. Together, these findings offer a more nuanced understanding of DF and NF by revealing that—despite being rooted in the same digital foundation—consumers perceive NF as a distinct variant with unique attributes—collectability, licensability, and ownability—that position it as a digital asset rather than digital content. This perspective advances the literature by clarifying that, although NF is not mutually exclusive of DF, it clearly holds a differentiated role and distinct value within the broader digital creative economy.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48399,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services\",\"volume\":\"87 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104379\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969698925001584\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969698925001584","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在Web 3.0时代,无论是数字时尚(DF)还是不可替代代币时尚(NFT);NF)在重塑时尚产业方面发挥着关键作用。尽管共享一个数字基础,但这两个实体扮演着不同的角色。然而,这些术语的持续合并在它们的特定产品属性、角色和内在价值方面造成了歧义。DF和NF之间支离破碎的研究流进一步放大了这种混淆。缺乏比较分析阻碍了对每种形式的独特价值和概念边界的清晰理解。为了解决这种模糊性,本研究采用混合方法,包括三项研究,探索用户如何以不同的方式感知NF和DF并与之互动,特别关注NF的独特特征及其在数字创意经济中的身份。研究1使用社交聆听和潜在狄利克雷分配分析分析了广泛的Twitter数据(124,615条与DF相关的tweet和52,751条与NF相关的tweet),确定了DF的6个关键主题和NF的9个关键主题。这些新兴的主题,通过手段-目的链理论的视角来解释,成为研究2 (DF)和研究3 (NF)中测试的两个基于调查的研究模型发展的基础。研究2 (n = 201)发现,DF主要被视为数字内容,受其数字可渲染性、视觉吸引力和可定制性等属性的驱动。这些特征鼓励消费者参与,并对购买意图产生积极影响。相比之下,研究3 (n = 203)显示,NF被视为一种数字资产,其可收集性、可许可性和所有权是其基础。这些类似资产的属性同样促进了用户粘性和购买行为。总之,这些发现通过揭示——尽管植根于相同的数字基础——消费者将NF视为具有独特属性(可收集性、许可性和所有权)的不同变体,从而对DF和NF提供了更细致入微的理解,这些属性将其定位为数字资产而不是数字内容。这一观点通过澄清这一观点推动了文献的发展,即尽管NF与DF并不相互排斥,但它在更广泛的数字创意经济中显然具有不同的作用和独特的价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How is NFT fashion distinct from digital fashion? insights from mixed-methods research combining social listening and Consumer surveys
In the Web 3.0 era, both Digital Fashion (DF) and Non-Fungible Token Fashion (NFT fashion; NF) play pivotal roles in reshaping the fashion industry. Despite sharing a digital foundation, these two entities occupy distinct roles. However, the ongoing conflation of these terms creates ambiguity regarding their specific product attributes, roles, and inherent value. This confusion is further amplified by fragmented research streams between DF and NF. The lack of comparative analysis hinders a clear understanding of each form's unique value and conceptual boundaries. To address this ambiguity, this study adopts a mixed-methods approach comprising three studies to explore how users perceive and interact with NF and DF differently, with a particular focus on NF's distinctive characteristics and its identity within the digital creative economy. Study 1 analyzed extensive Twitter data (124,615 DF-related tweets and 52,751 NF-related tweets) using social listening and Latent Dirichlet Allocation analysis, identifying six key themes for DF and nine for NF. These emergent themes, interpreted through the lens of Means-End Chain Theory, served as the foundation for the development of two survey-based research models tested in Studies 2 (DF) and 3 (NF). Study 2 (n = 201) found that DF is primarily perceived as digital content, driven by its attributes of digital renderability, visual appeal, and customizability. These characteristics encouraged consumer engagement and positively influenced purchase intent. In contrast, Study 3 (n = 203) revealed that NF is perceived as a digital asset, underpinned by its collectability, licensability, and ownability. These asset-like attributes similarly fostered engagement and purchase behaviors. Together, these findings offer a more nuanced understanding of DF and NF by revealing that—despite being rooted in the same digital foundation—consumers perceive NF as a distinct variant with unique attributes—collectability, licensability, and ownability—that position it as a digital asset rather than digital content. This perspective advances the literature by clarifying that, although NF is not mutually exclusive of DF, it clearly holds a differentiated role and distinct value within the broader digital creative economy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
20.40
自引率
14.40%
发文量
340
审稿时长
20 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services is a prominent publication that serves as a platform for international and interdisciplinary research and discussions in the constantly evolving fields of retailing and services studies. With a specific emphasis on consumer behavior and policy and managerial decisions, the journal aims to foster contributions from academics encompassing diverse disciplines. The primary areas covered by the journal are: Retailing and the sale of goods The provision of consumer services, including transportation, tourism, and leisure.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信