The overall objective of this thesis was to gain a deeper understanding of the antecedents, processes, and manifestations of uniqueness-driven consumer behavior. To achieve this goal, five studies have been conducted in Germany and Switzerland with a total of 1048 participants across different demographic and socio-economic backgrounds. Two concepts were employed in all studies: Consumer need for uniqueness (CNFU) and general uniqueness perception (GUP). CNFU (Tian, Bearden, & Hunter, 2001), a mainly US"based consumer research concept, measures the individual need, and thus the motivation to acquire, use, and dispose consumer goods in order to develop a unique image. GUP, adapted from the two-component theory of individuality (Kampmeier, 2001), represents a global and direct measure of self-ascribed uniqueness. Study #1 looked at the interrelation of the uniqueness-driven concepts. Therefore, GUP and CNFU were employed in the study as potential psychological factors that influence and predict uniqueness-driven consumer behavior. Different behavioral measures were used: The newly developed possession of individualized products (POIP), the newly developed products for uniqueness display (PFUD), and the already established uniqueness-enhancing behaviors (UEB). Analyses showed that CNFU mediates the relationship between GUP and the behavioral measures in a German speaking setting. Thus, GUP (representing self-perception) was identified as the driver behind CNFU (representing motivation) and the actual consumer behavior. Study #2 examined further manifestations of uniqueness-driven consumer behavior. For this purpose, an extreme form of uniqueness-increasing behavior was researched: Tattooing. The influence of GUP and CNFU on tattooing behavior was investigated using a sample derived from a tattoo exhibition. To do so, a newly developed measure to determine the percentage of the body covered by tattoos was employed. It was revealed that individuals with higher GUP and CNFU levels indeed have a higher tattooing degree. Study #3 further explored the predictive possibilities and limitations of the GUP and CNFU concepts. On the one hand, study #3 specifically looked at the consumption of customized apparel products as mass customization is said to become the standard of the century (Piller & Müller, 2004). It was shown that individuals with higher CNFU levels not only purchased more customized apparel products in the last six months, but also spend more money on them. On the other hand, uniqueness-enhancing activities (UEA), such as travel to exotic places or extreme sports, were investigated by using a newly developed 30-item scale. It was revealed that CNFU partly mediates the GUP and UEA relationship, proving that CNFU indeed predicts a broad range of consumer behaviors and that GUP is the driver behind the need and the behavior. Study #4, entered a new terrain. In contrast to the previous three studies, it explored the so termed "passive" side of uniqueness-seeking in the consumer context. Individuals might feel unique because business companies treat them in a special way. Such a unique customer treatment (UCT) involves activities like customer service or customer relationship management. Study #4 investigated if individuals differ in their need for such a treatment. Hence, with the need for unique customer treatment (NFUCT) a new uniqueness-driven consumer need was introduced and its impact on customer loyalty examined. Analyses, for example, revealed that individuals with high NFUCT levels receiving a high unique customer treatment (UCT) showed the highest customer loyalty, whereas the lowest customer loyalty was found among those individuals with high NFUCT levels receiving a low unique customer treatment (UCT). Study #5 mainly examined the processes behind uniqueness-driven consumer behavior. Here, not only the psychological influences, but also situational influences were examined. This study investigated the impact of a non-personal "indirect" uniqueness manipulation on the consumption of customized apparel products by simultaneously controlling for the influence of GUP and CNFU. Therefore, two equal experimental groups were created. Afterwards, these groups either received an e-mail with a "pro-individualism" campaign or a "pro-collectivism" campaign especially developed for study #5. The conducted experiment revealed that, individuals receiving a "pro-individualism" poster campaign telling the participants that uniqueness is socially appropriate and desired were willing to spend more money on customization options compared to individuals receiving a "pro-collectivism" poster campaign. Hence, not only psychological antecedents such as GUP and CNFU influence uniqueness-driven consumer behavior, but also situational factors.