Consumption today is too easily dismissed as vanity, or reduced to cliché. But behind every curated object lies a coded message. And behind that message: identity, memory, and longing.

This work began not with data, but with a curiosity born at the intersection of personal observation, academic research, and strategic practice.

This essay is not about branding tactics.

It is an invitation to think differently, to see conspicuous consumption as a bio-cultural phenomenon: shaped by affect, filtered through culture, and encoded in the neural architecture of desire.

Neuroeconomics and neuromarketing offered the bridge I was seeking.

Where behavioral theory stopped at preference, neuroscience revealed pleasure.

Where culture explained codes, biology revealed circuits.

And in between… I found meaning.

Welcome. The work begins here.

T.

Conspicuous consumption is not just excess. It is expression.

Across societies, people signal identity, aspiration, and social position through what they own, what they share, and what they display – physically and digitally. In this light, consumption becomes more than behavior. It becomes language.

The drive to display is not superficial. It speaks to deeper psychological needs: for belonging, differentiation, and symbolic recognition. And because these needs are shaped by culture, the meaning of a luxury signal is never universal.

In collectivist cultures, the display may signal loyalty to a group or respect for shared norms. In individualist cultures, it may reflect self-affirmation, autonomy, or even defiance. As Kastanakis & Balabanis (2014) point out, luxury is not always about the object — but about the narrative it supports.

This is where the lens of neuroeconomics becomes powerful. It adds a new dimension to what has traditionally been explained through sociology or cultural theory. If symbolic goods activate reward centers in the brain, we can begin to ask not only what people value, but how they are wired to feel that value.

And the implications go far beyond theory. In branding and marketing communication, understanding the cultural and neurocognitive underpinnings of conspicuous consumption can inform positioning strategies tailored to local markets.

In financial education, it can contribute to the development of programs that address not only economic rationality, but also the social and emotional pressures that distort consumer decisions.

And in public policy, recognizing the affective and symbolic nature of conspicuous consumption may lead to more nuanced interventions, sensitive to individuals’ socio-cultural contexts.

The study of conspicuous consumption, then, is not marginal.

It sits at the intersection of economy, identity, and symbolic power.

While conspicuous consumption has been explored through economic theory, sociology, and marketing, its neurocognitive and cultural underpinnings remain surprisingly underdeveloped. This essay takes an integrative approach – drawing from decision neuroscience, cultural psychology, and consumer behavior – to explore a simple but powerful question:

What happens in the brain when we signal status? And how does culture shape that signal?

Rather than framing consumption as a rational transaction, we investigate it as a cognitive and symbolic act, embedded in a social field and modulated by internalized values.
From here, several lines of inquiry emerge:

• How do our brains evaluate status, rewards, and symbolic markers?
• How do cultural codes (such as individualism or collectivism) alter what feels rewarding, what feels risky, and what feels right to display?
• And can we build a model that connects these neurocognitive mechanisms with real-world consumer behavior?

While this is not an empirical study, it is oriented toward theory that invites future research. Specifically, we suggest that:

• In collectivist cultures, status display is neurally linked to regions involved in social conformity and group-based reward.
• In individualist cultures, it is more closely tied to autonomy, personal identity, and individual gain.
• And across cultures, status symbols are processed not in isolation, but through culturally internalized filters — shaping both meaning and motivation.

The goal is not to reduce status to biology. It is to understand how biology, culture, and identity interact in the act of being seen.

What is conspicuous consumption

The concept of conspicuous consumption dates back to Thorstein Veblen’s The Theory of the Leisure Class (1899), where he described how members of the upper class used visible consumption for status.

To consume was to communicate. And the message was social distinction.

For Veblen, visibility was the point. Luxury items were designed to be seen.

A Swiss watch, a designer handbag, or a limited-edition car are not merely tools. They are symbols, social medals worn in public space.

Contemporary theory builds on this foundation.

Researchers now distinguish between:

Conspicuous consumption: the visible display of goods to signal status,

Status consumption: a broader orientation toward self-affirmation through acquisition,

Snob consumption: the deliberate rejection of mass-market goods in favor of exclusivity (Kastanakis & Balabanis, 2014).

As Pino et al. (2017) show, even among younger, supposedly minimalistic consumers, symbolic visibility remains a key driver of luxury behavior. In fact, the very subtlety of modern branding, the quiet logo, the unspoken aesthetic, has become its own form of display.

In cultures where overt status is discouraged, the signal doesn’t disappear.

It becomes encrypted.

This variation is not accidental. It is cultural.

In collectivist societies, conspicuous consumption is often more overt (and socially accepted) as it reflects family prestige, intergenerational success, and loyalty to group norms.

In contrast, individualist cultures lean toward coded signals, visible only to the “initiated” – as Han, Nunes & Drèze (2010) describe through their “brand prominence model”.

What we consume is not just a reflection of wealth. It is a reflection of which group we belong to, and which signals we wish to project or withhold.

This is why conspicuous consumption must be read as a symbolic act situated at the intersection of psychology, culture, and identity. And this is precisely where neuroeconomics becomes valuable: it explains not only what is displayed, but how it is processed, felt, and rewarded at the neural level.

Luxury brands and social status

Luxury brands sell meaning and often, that meaning is status.

From Veblen’s theory of conspicuous consumption to contemporary models of symbolic branding, luxury has functioned as a grammar of differentiation.

To wear, carry, or be seen with a luxury product is rarely a neutral act. It is a statement: of aspiration, of affiliation, or of aesthetic allegiance.

Kapferer and Bastien (2015) argue that luxury operates as a modern ritual of recognition, replacing aristocratic insignia with curated logos, materials, and design codes. Luxury is not only about owning — it’s about being seen owning. Or in some cases, being seen by those who know.

The brand becomes a carrier of unspoken signals of taste, hierarchy, or heritage.

Yet not all luxury is conspicuous.

Ricca and Robins (2012), in their concept of Meta-Luxury, distinguish between luxury as display and luxury as dedication. The former seeks attention; the latter seeks alignment with craftsmanship, excellence, and a legacy of cultural depth.

This “silent luxury” is especially resonant in individualistic cultures, where overt display is discouraged, and symbolic value is encrypted in minimalism, restraint, and refinement.

Luxury, then, becomes bifocal:

• Outward, it performs status and social recognition.
• Inward, it fulfills identity, alignment, and coherence.

This symbolic ambivalence it’s the architecture of modern prestige.

And it is deeply shaped by culture: collectivist societies may favor visibility and shared recognition, while individualist contexts often reward discretion and encoded hierarchy.

In both cases, however, luxury brands trigger more than preference.

They activate emotion, memory, and meaning through both cultural codes and neurocognitive cues.

That’s what makes them essential to the study of conspicuous consumption: They are neural and cultural signals, operating at the intersection of perception, power, and self-expression.

Most theories of conspicuous consumption frame the behavior as social, cultural, or symbolic. But what if the impulse to display status – to own, show, and signal – also comes from how the brain calculates meaning and reward?

Neuroeconomics provides a deeper lens.

Where classical economics assumes rationality and equilibrium, neuroeconomics asks: how do people actually feel and decide under pressure, uncertainty, or social exposure?

It studies decision-making as a mechanism grounded in the neural circuits of emotion, valuation, and control.

Instead of asking “What do people choose?”, it asks “How do they arrive at that choice and why does it feel rewarding?”

The findings are striking.

Reward anticipation activates areas like the ventral striatum and vmPFC – regions sensitive to emotional salience, personal significance, and expected pleasure. Deliberation, on the other hand, relies on the dlPFC – the brain’s executive center, responsible for long-term thinking, regulation, and social norm evaluation.

This dual dynamic explains why individuals sometimes reject economically beneficial offers in the Ultimatum Game because fairness feels more important than gain.

When unfair offers are rejected, fMRI scans show heightened activity in the anterior insula – a region tied to emotional discomfort and norm violation.

When accepted, activity shifts to the dlPFC, suggesting a conscious override of emotional reaction for the sake of outcome. In other words: the brain negotiates between emotional protest and cognitive compromise.

In the context of luxury and symbolic consumption, this tension becomes even more charged.

Luxury brands activate brain regions tied to status processing, including the amygdala and vmPFC. The response is stronger in individuals who place higher importance on material status or symbolic belonging. These neural reactions suggest that buying luxury is not just a lifestyle choice — it’s a neurocognitive event. A form of symbolic arousal.

A flash of internal significance, externally displayed.

Impulse or Intent? The β–δ systems divide

One of the most useful models in neuroeconomics distinguishes between two systems of decision-making:

The β (beta)-system, linked to immediate rewards, includes the ventral striatum and medial PFC. It governs fast, affective, status-affirming decisions — the kind often behind impulse consumption.

The δ (delta)-system, associated with delayed gratification, activates the dorsolateral PFC and parietal regions. It supports reflection, long-term thinking, and symbolic coherence.

This tension, between immediacy and intention, is visible in the neural traces of conspicuous consumption.

When consumers make decisions under social pressure, especially in highly visible, status-loaded contexts, β-system activation dominates. That’s why luxury can feel irresistible, even when logically unjustified.

Yet in consumers with stronger identity clarity or aesthetic discipline, the δ-system plays a larger role. They may still signal status, but through coherence, not excess.

Neuroeconomics doesn’t reduce consumers to neurons. But it reveals something powerful: that the way we assign value is not only shaped by culture, it is felt in the body, calculated in the brain, and expressed in behavior.

Understanding conspicuous consumption, then, requires not just sociological insight, but neuro-symbolic fluency. It means learning to read what people value both culturally and cognitively and how those values are displayed, defended, or denied.

Neuroeconomic mechanisms in conspicuous consumption

If luxury brands carry symbolic meaning, the question is not only what they say, but how they feel.

Neuroeconomics provides a powerful answer. By observing how the brain reacts to status cues, social rewards, and symbolic design, it offers a physiological window into what we often mistake for taste or choice.

Beneath the aesthetic, there is arousal.

Beneath the brand, a biological signal.

Studies show that luxury brands activate the ventral striatum, the amygdala, and the vmPFC — regions linked to reward anticipation, emotional salience, and subjective value.

Exposure to these signals doesn’t just inform preference, it generates it. Even when there is no functional difference in the product, adding a luxury label can light up reward circuits in the brain (Audrin et al., 2017).

This response is stronger in individuals who score high in materialism or status orientation. But it’s not merely personal, it’s cultural.

In collectivist cultures, where social norms reward belonging and hierarchy, luxury logos act as tools of recognition. Here, the dlPFC (responsible for norm processing and social alignment) is heavily engaged.

In individualist cultures, where self-expression and autonomy dominate, the same products activate the vmPFC, reinforcing personal value rather than social adherence.

Cultural meaning it’s wired.

The brain reacts not only to design, but to what that design means within a symbolic system.

The message is not printed on the product. It’s printed in the mind.

Symbolic value is not an abstraction. It is embodied, felt in the nervous system, interpreted through cultural memory, and expressed through visible choice.

What we call “taste” is often a rehearsal of deeper scripts: of belonging, aspiration, and distinction.

Conspicuous consumption, then, it is what the body confirms and culture rewards.

Value, in this sense, it is cognitive, cultural, and cellular.

The human brain responds to status. But how it responds and why is deeply shaped by the cultural lens through which value is perceived.

While core structures such as the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) and the ventral striatum are consistently involved in symbolic decision-making, the way these circuits are activated depends on the cultural meaning attached to the signal.

In collectivist cultures, conspicuous consumption is often a function of alignment.

It is less about standing apart and more about standing correctly — in harmony with family, tradition, or societal expectations.

Neurocognitive research suggests that this orientation strengthens the engagement of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC), which governs norm compliance, and the anterior insula, which processes social risk and emotional salience.

When a product carries group-recognized prestige – a luxury car, a heritage watch – these structures respond not just to the product itself, but to what it means within the collective imagination.

By contrast, individualist cultures associate luxury more closely with self-expression and symbolic autonomy. Here, the vmPFC becomes a site of internal resonance, not public signaling.

Discrete luxury, what Ricca and Robins (2012) call meta-luxury, becomes neurologically rewarding precisely because it affirms personal coherence, not external validation.

Same product. Same brand. Different brain response.

Because culture doesn’t just shape behavior, it shapes perception itself.

Empirical research confirms these distinctions.

Hennigs et al. (2012) demonstrate that U.S., European, and East Asian consumers differ in how they prioritize value dimensions — from hedonic expression to social recognition to functional pragmatism. These priorities are not just stated; they are reflected in the neural salience of symbolic stimuli.

Even at the level of nonconscious response, cultural priming alters perception.

EEG and fMRI studies (e.g., Hubert & Kenning, 2008) show that the same luxury stimulus can elicit different patterns of activation depending on whether individuals are primed with collectivist or individualist values.

This means conspicuous consumption is not simply a global strategy repeated with local flavor. It is a biocultural phenomenon – shaped by how identity is constructed, how status is rewarded, and how meaning is encoded in the brain.

Culture is not the context of consumption. It is part of its cognitive architecture.

This essay has explored a deceptively simple question:

Why do we display? And what happens – culturally and neurologically – when we do?

From Veblen’s early reflections on leisure-class behavior to the latest neuroimaging studies, conspicuous consumption emerges as more than a social reflex. It is a neuro-symbolic performance where brain circuits, cultural scripts, and personal identity coalesce around objects designed to be seen.

Luxury brands, in this context, are not just products. They are triggers for meaning, memory, and status. They activate not only attention, but affiliation. Not only preference, but neural pleasure.

Neuroeconomics has given us a vocabulary for what once seemed ineffable. It shows that symbolic value it is also somatic. That the desire to own, to display, to differentiate is not simply learned; it is also felt, processed through the ventral striatum, the vmPFC, the anterior insula.

But culture determines the code.

In collectivist societies, status flows through recognition and alignment. In individualist cultures, it moves through distinction and encoded subtlety. The same product – a handbag, a car, a logo – doesn’t mean the same thing, nor activate the same brain, in every context.

The brain does not consume alone. It consumes with culture.

What this work offers is a conceptual framework; one that invites researchers, brand strategists, and behavioral economists to think beyond the surface of choice. It asks us to see consumption as a mirror – not only of markets, but of minds.

In a time where attention is scarce and signals proliferate, understanding the biology of desire and the culture of meaning is not optional. It is essential.

This is not the end of the question, but perhaps a more intelligent way to begin asking it.

We live in a culture saturated with signs, logos, likes, affiliations.

And yet, many of those signs pass unnoticed, unexamined, unchallenged.

This work proposes that what we consume is not trivial. It reveals how we see ourselves and how we hope to be seen. It maps where biology meets belonging, and where visibility becomes identity.

In a global economy of attention and symbolic power, understanding how meaning is constructed – neurally, culturally, commercially – is no longer the domain of theorists.

It is the responsibility of every strategist, brand builder, and social thinker.

Luxury is not the point. Meaning is.

And meaning, like status, is always performed, but never neutral.

The next step is not to abandon display, but to decode it.

To ask:

Whose values are embedded here?

What reward is this product really promising?

And in what context does that promise make sense?

In the emerging field of neuro-symbolic economics, this paper is just a beginning: a map, not a doctrine.

But perhaps it points toward a future where we build brands, policies, and cultures with more awareness of what we’re really selling: not things, but significance.

T.

Crafted in clarity. Shared with intention. | aristocrat.marketing | 2025