Experiential gifts and the construal of meaningful consumption episodes

This study investigates whether recalling the consumption of experiential gifts (vs. material gifts) leads recipients to construe those episodes as more meaningful memories, thereby increasing gratitude and, in turn, social connection with gift givers. Grounded in research on gift exchange, autobiographical memory, and the experiential advantage, the authors propose that experiential gifts are more self-relevant and provide better opportunities for identity expression, leading to their construal as more meaningful consumption episodes. The authors test four core hypotheses across five experiments: H1: Recalling consumption of experiential gifts will be construed as more significant and meaningful memories than recalling consumption of material gifts. H2: Experiential gifts will lead to higher gratitude than material gifts. H3: The advantage of experiential gifts in terms of gratitude will be mediated by the construal of those consumption episodes as more meaningful memories. H4: There will be a positive relationship between gratitude and social connection. H4a: There will be a positive indirect effect of experiential gifts on social connection via increased construal of meaningfulness and increased gratitude. The study aims to clarify affective (gratitude) and relational (social connection) outcomes of gift consumption and the underlying mechanism of meaning construal.

• Social dynamic of gift giving: Gift exchange serves affective and relational goals, with givers aiming to signal relationship value and both parties experiencing emotions (Ward and Chan, 2015; de Hooge, 2014). Meaning arises from symbolic construal rather than the object itself. Recalled consumption is subjective and can vary by gift type. - Consumption and recalled consumption: Consumption is goal-driven and can be conceptualized as an accumulation of meaningful autobiographical memories (Belk, 1988; Ratnayake et al., 2010; Zauberman et al., 2009). From situated cognition and self-based construal, ambiguous consumption episodes are interpreted through self-knowledge; experiential gifts better represent the self and afford identity expression, leading to greater meaning judgments (Schwarz et al., 2021; Sedikides et al., 2021; Baumeister et al., 2013; Gilovich and Gallo, 2019). - Experiential vs. material purchases/gifts: A meta-analysis supports a happiness advantage for experiential purchases (Weingarten and Goodman, 2021). Experiential gifts elicit more intense emotions and stronger social connections (Chan and Mogilner, 2016). Experiences are more central to life narratives (Carter and Gilovich, 2012), serve identity signaling and expression (Gal, 2015; Bronner and de Hoog, 2018; Guevarra and Howell, 2015), are perceived as unique and conversation-worthy (Bastos, 2019; Bastos and Brucks, 2017; Gallo et al., 2019; Duan and Dholakia, 2018), and can enhance eudaimonia (Pchelin and Howell, 2014). - Gratitude and social connection: Gratitude is a social emotion acknowledging benefits from others (Emmons, 2004). If experiential gifts are construed as more meaningful memories, recipients should feel more gratitude and, consequently, stronger social connection; perceived giver investment may also play a role (Joel et al., 2013). Prior work showed experiential gifts foster stronger relationships via emotional intensity (Chan and Mogilner, 2016), but specific emotions (gratitude) had not been isolated. The present research targets gratitude as the key affective pathway and tests meaning construal as the mechanism.

Design: Five experiments examining the effects of gift type (experiential vs. material) and meaning construal (special vs. ordinary) on gratitude and social connection, using between-subjects random assignment and mediation/sequential mediation analyses (Hayes PROCESS). Power: Based on meta-analytic effect size (Weingarten and Goodman, 2021) adjusted to d≈0.26 and power=0.95 using G*Power. Participants and procedures: - Study 1 (N=199; 65% women; ages 18–39, M=26.37, SD=5.19; college students in Mexico): Randomly assigned to experiential vs. material gift recall conditions. Instructions asked participants to recall and describe consumption of an experiential or material gift (~1000 MXN; ~$50), focusing on consumption rather than exchange. Measures: Gratitude (grateful, thankful, appreciative; α=0.71) and social connection (closeness/connection/strong relationship with giver; α=0.93), each rated 1–10 (“not at all” to “completely”). Analysis: Mediation (PROCESS Model 4) testing gift type → gratitude → social connection. - Study 2 (N=225; 70% women; 93% aged 18–25; college students in Mexico): Same two conditions (experiential vs. material gift recall). Measures: Gratitude (α=0.75) and construal of meaningful memories (special, unique, special memories, valuable memories; α=0.91), all 1–10. Analysis: Mediation (Model 4) testing gift type → meaningfulness → gratitude. - Study 3 (N=201; 68% women; 91% aged 18–25; college students in Mexico): Manipulated proposed mediator: special vs. ordinary gift (price >1000 MXN), with instructions to recall a gift that created a unique/significant moment vs. a common moment; focus on consumption. Measures: Meaningful memories (α=0.94) and gratitude (α=0.82). Analysis: Mediation (Model 4) testing special vs. ordinary → meaningfulness → gratitude. - Study 4 (N=200; 70% women; 65% aged 18–25; college students in Mexico): Same special vs. ordinary manipulation. Measures: Meaningful memories (α=0.95), gratitude (α=0.61), social connection (α=0.91). Analysis: Sequential mediation (Model 6) testing special vs. ordinary → meaningfulness → gratitude → social connection. Additional check: Coded recalled gift types (0=material, 1=experiential, 2=ambiguous) to ensure special/ordinary did not confound with experiential/material. - Study 5 (N=362; 65% women; mean age=25.17; adults recruited via social media): 2×2 between-subjects: gift type (experiential vs. material) × meaningfulness (special vs. ordinary). Measures: Meaningful memories (α=0.94) and gratitude (α=0.88). Analysis: Moderated mediation (PROCESS Model 59) testing whether the indirect effect of experiential (vs. material) on gratitude via meaningfulness is moderated by special vs. ordinary; follow-up simple effects comparisons and mediation within experiential conditions. Measurement scales: All items rated on 1–10 scales, anchored from “I do not feel like that at all” (1) to “I completely feel like that” (10). Statistical approach: Hayes bootstrap mediation/conditional process analyses with reporting of unstandardized coefficients, p-values, and bootstrap confidence intervals.

• Study 1 (experiential vs. material; N=199): Gift type positively affected gratitude (b=0.73, p=0.003). Gratitude predicted social connection (b=0.68, p<0.001). Direct effect of gift type on social connection was not significant (b=0.12, p=0.63). Indirect effect of gift type on social connection via gratitude was significant (IE=0.49, 95% CI [0.16, 0.88]). Descriptive means: Gratitude Mexp=8.85 (SD=1.34) vs. Mmat=8.13 (SD=1.97); Social connection Mexp=9.02 (SD=1.80) vs. Mmat=8.40 (SD=2.24). - Study 2 (experiential vs. material; N=225): Experiential gifts increased construal of meaningful memories (b=0.82, p=0.001). Meaningfulness predicted gratitude (b=0.46, p<0.001). Direct effect of gift type on gratitude not significant (b=0.12, p=0.42). Indirect effect significant (IE=0.38, 95% CI [0.16, 0.61]). Means: Gratitude Mexp=9.19 (SD=1.25) vs. Mmat=8.70 (SD=1.45); Meaningfulness Mexp=9.12 (SD=1.67) vs. Mmat=8.29 (SD=2.03). - Study 3 (special vs. ordinary; N=201): Special gifts increased meaning construal (b=0.59, p=0.025). Meaningfulness predicted gratitude (b=0.63, p<0.001). Direct effect of condition on gratitude not significant (b=0.27, p=0.11). Indirect effect significant (IE=0.38, 95% CI [0.05, 0.72]). Means: Gratitude Mspecial=9.12 (SD=1.36) vs. Mordinary=8.48 (SD=1.93); Meaningfulness Mspecial=8.95 (SD=1.56) vs. Mordinary=8.35 (SD=2.13). - Study 4 (special vs. ordinary; N=200; sequential model): Condition increased meaningfulness (b=0.94, p=0.004). Meaningfulness predicted gratitude (b=0.33, p<0.001); direct effect of condition on gratitude not significant (b=0.04, p=0.83). Gratitude predicted social connection (b=0.70, p<0.001). Sequential indirect effect special→meaningfulness→gratitude→social connection significant (IE=0.22, 95% CI [0.07, 0.40]). Coding check: No differences in recalled gift type across conditions; special: 72% material, 17% experiential, 11% ambiguous; ordinary: 77% material, 13% experiential, 10% ambiguous. - Study 5 (2×2 moderated mediation; N=362): No evidence of moderation by special vs. ordinary on the indirect pathway. Interactions non-significant: gift type×special/ordinary on meaningfulness (b=0.50, p=0.10) and on gratitude (b=−0.03, p=0.84); mediator×special/ordinary on gratitude (b=0.08, p=0.15). Simple effects: Within experiential gifts, special > ordinary on meaningfulness, F(1,184)=6.05, p=0.015, Mspecial=9.36 (SD=1.09) vs. Mordinary=8.81 (SD=1.91); within material gifts, special vs. ordinary not different, F(1,176)<1, Mspecial=9.06 (SD=1.51) vs. Mordinary=9.02 (SD=1.31). Mediation within experiential gifts: condition→meaningfulness (b=0.55, p=0.015); meaningfulness→gratitude (b=0.81, p<0.001); direct effect not significant (b=−0.10, p=0.32); indirect effect significant (IE=0.44, 95% CI [0.09, 0.84]). Overall: Across studies, experiential gifts are construed as more meaningful, which increases gratitude; gratitude in turn is associated with stronger social connection. The mechanism (meaningfulness) mediates effects, and the sequential path to social connection is supported. Moderation by special vs. ordinary does not alter the core mediation, though special experiential gifts particularly enhance meaningfulness and gratitude.

The findings support the proposition that experiential gifts, when recalled with a focus on consumption, are construed as more meaningful life memories than material gifts. This meaning-making process leads recipients to feel more gratitude toward the giver, which then strengthens perceived social connection. The results clarify the affective mechanism behind the experiential gift advantage by isolating gratitude (rather than undifferentiated emotional intensity) as the key emotion linking gift consumption to relational outcomes. By demonstrating that meaning construal mediates the effects of gift type on gratitude (and, sequentially, on social connection), the research addresses calls to examine memory dynamics in experiential vs. material consumption. While framing gifts as special vs. ordinary did not moderate the overall mediation of gift type, special experiential gifts did enhance meaning construal relative to ordinary experiential gifts, indicating that elevating the perceived specialness of experiential gifts can further boost gratitude via meaning. These findings underscore the social-relational benefits of experiential gifting and suggest that recipients’ self-relevance and identity expression opportunities drive meaningfulness and downstream affective and relational outcomes.

This research shows that experiential gifts foster greater gratitude and social connection than material gifts by being construed as more meaningful consumption memories. Across five experiments, the authors provide convergent evidence that meaning construal mediates the effect of gift type on gratitude, and gratitude predicts social connection, yielding a sequential pathway from experiential gift recall to relationship strengthening. The work contributes by identifying gratitude as a specific affective mechanism and by integrating memory-based meaning-making into the experiential advantage literature. Practically, givers and marketers can prioritize experiential gifts and enhance their perceived specialness to amplify meaningfulness, gratitude, and relational benefits. Future research could examine how to design experiences that maximize meaning consolidation, explore giver perspectives and awareness of meaning opportunities, and test these processes longitudinally and across more diverse populations.

• Sample composition: Most participants in four studies were college students from two private universities in Mexico, limiting generalizability; only Study 5 broadened recruitment via social media. - Design: Cross-sectional recall-based designs limit causal inference about long-term dynamics and how connections evolve over time. - Perspective: Focused exclusively on recipients; did not assess givers’ awareness, intentions, or behaviors regarding creating meaningful moments. - Additional note: Differences between special vs. ordinary material gifts in meaning construal were not observed, suggesting boundary conditions that warrant further study.