Materialism and Economic Psychology

JOURNAL OF

ELSEVIER Journal of Economic Psychology 15 (1994) 217-231

Materialism and economic psychology

Marsha L. Richins *7a, Floyd W. Rudmin b

a School of Business and Public Administration, linit,ersity of Missouri, Middlebush Hall, Columbia, MO 6521 I, USA

h Faculty of law, Queens UniL:ersity, Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3NG

Received July 26, 1993; accepted March 28, 1994

Abstract

This article argues that materialism is a variable relevant to many aspects of economic psychology. The definition and measurement of materialism arc briefly reviewed, followed by a discussion of the potential relationships between materialism and several economic variables, including use of money, work motivation, giving, and material satisfaction. The paper concludes with a discussion of the use of economic goods in social communication and the potential role of materialism in such communication.

1. Introduction

Although materialism has long been a topic of social and philosophical concern, only recently has it become a topic within economic psychology. This is probably because the traditional discourse on materialism has been too broad, too normative, and too philosophical to allow empirical hypothesis testing, particularly at the psychological level. However, economic psychology often involves examining the effects of individual difference variables on economic behavior, and materialism should not be overlooked

* Corresponding author. Tel.: (314) 882-0280, Fax: (314) 882-0365, E-mail: [email protected] souri.edu

0167-4870/94/$07.00 0 1994 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved &SD1 0167-4870(94)00012-Y

218 M.L. Richins. F. W Rudmin /Journal of Erorlomic Psychology 15 (1994) 217-231

as a variable of importance. Materialism, perhaps more than any other variable, describes an individual’s real and desired relationship with economic goods. It is closely tied to the satisfactions one derives from the acquisition and possession of goods and is related to the intensity and the manner by which one pursues economic objectives. In addition, more than other values or personality traits, materialism is uniquely identified with consumption. Thus, it is a phenomenon worthy of investigation for its own sake.

The objective of this article is to increase scholars’ recognition of the relevance of materialism to the study of economic psychology. It reviews the construct of materialism and identifies selected writings concerning the construct. In the course of review, numerous links between materialism and economic psychology are described or hypothesized.

1.1. Defining materialism

The terms ‘materialism’ and ‘materialistic’ are often used without definition. In philosophical usage, materialism originally referred to the notion that nothing exists except matter and its movements (see, for instance, Lange, 1865/1925). In popular usage, materialism more often refers to a ‘devotion to material needs and desires, to the neglect of spiritual matters; a way of life, opinion, or tendency based entirely upon material interests’ (Oxford English Dictionary, 1989, Vol. 9, p. 466). Belk (1985, p. 2651 defines materialism as ‘the importance a consumer attaches to worldly possessions’, while Bredemeier and Toby (1960, p. 77) refer to it as ‘the worship of things’. When large segments of a society avidly desire to consume goods for reasons that economists have traditionally defined as nonutilitarian (e.g., status seeking, novelty), a ‘consumer culture’ is said to exist (Belk, 1988; Fox and Lears, 1983). Although the philosophical usage of the term ‘materialism’ is generally considered to be distinct from the popular usage, materialistic consumers do rely on physical (material) possessions to manifest and perceive otherwise invisible personal characteristics such as happiness, status, and social competence. This reliance on material objects for meaning is reminiscent of the philosophical use of the term.

A review of theoretical and lay conceptions of materialism suggests that materialism involves at least three important elements (Fournier and Richins, 1991; Richins and Dawson, 1992). First, materialists place posses-

M. L. Rich&, F. UC Rudmin /Journal of Economic Psychology 1.5 (IY94,i 217-231 219

sions and their acquisition at the center of their lives. Daun (1983) describes materialism as a way of life in which a high level of material consumption functions as a goal and serves as a set of plans. Csikszentmi- halyi and Rochberg-Halton (1981, p. 231) note the dominance materialism can achieve in one’s life, suggesting that for some materialists, ‘consumption for the sake of consumption becomes a fever that consumes all the potential energy it can get access to’. (Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Hal- ton also describe in detail the positive roles that possessions play in individuals’ lives, such as providing meaning and enabling a fuller unfolding of human life. They refer to such uses of possessions as an instrumental form of materialism. However, since this use of the term ‘materialism’ is not consistent with more common usage both in popular and theoretical writings, it is not employed here.)

Second, possessions and acquisition are viewed by materialists as essen- tial to their satisfaction and well-being in life. Belk (1985, p. 265) notes that for materialistic individuals ‘possessions . . . are believed to provide the greatest sources of satisfaction and dissatisfaction’ in life. According to Looft (19711, materialists believe that expanded levels of consumption lead to increases in the amount of pleasure obtained. While most individuals care deeply about their own happiness, it is the single-minded pursuit of happiness through acquisition or possession rather than through other means that distinguishes materialism,

The third element of materialism involves the tendency of materialists to judge their own and others’ success by the number and quality of possessions accumulated. The value of possessions stems partly from their ability to confer status (Mason, 1981; Veblen, 1899/1953) and also from their ability to project a desired self-image and identify one as a participant in an imagined perfect life (Campbell, 1987). Materialists view themselves and others as successful to the extent they can possess products that project these desired images. The use of possessions in forming impressions of others and projecting images of the self is addressed later in this article.

1.2. Measuring materialism

Empirical research on materialism was rare and sporadic until the mid 1980’s. In part this reflected a lack, until recently, of appropriate measures of the construct. For purposes of economics-oriented research, it is useful to think of materialism measurement from two perspectives, depending on the goal and context of the research.

220 M.L. Richins, F. W. Rudmin /Journal of Economic Psychology 15 (1994) 217-231

Individual level analysis Many studies have attempted to examine materialism as an individual

difference variable. One might, for instance, examine the relationship between individuals’ level of materialism and their spending habits, work motivation, and the like. Several different measures have been used in individual analysis (see Richins and Dawson, 1992, for a review), but only two are based on psychometric principles. Belk (19851 developed measures of envy, possessiveness, and nongenerosity - three traits associated with materialism. Several researchers have used the summation of these three scales as a measure of materialism (e.g., Belk, 1985; Hunt et al., 1990; Rudmin, 19881. Richins and Dawson (1990, 19921 use a different approach. Rather than using personality traits to infer level of materialism, they assess materialism more directly by measuring the three characteristics of materialism described above: acquisition centrality, acquisition as the pursuit of happiness, and possession-defined success.

Cultural analysis A second research perspective attempts to assess the level of materialism

within a culture for purposes of comparing different cultures or tracing materialism levels over time. Two separate approaches have been used. In a very extensive series of studies, Inglehart (e.g., 1977, 1990) has attempted to identify post-materialistic societies, in which individuals emphasize such values as belonging and self-expression instead of material possessions. In his surveys, administered primarily in Europe, he lists 12 goals and classi- fies respondents as possessing materialist or post-materialist values by the social goals they choose as most important. The second approach to measuring materialism at a cultural level is content analysis. For example, Belk and Pollay (198.5) used content analysis to examine materialistic themes in print advertising in the U.S. between 1900 and 1980. Tse et al. (19891 used content analysis to compare consumption values in advertise- ments in Hong Kong, the People’s Republic of China, and Taiwan.

1.3. The effects of materialism

Materialism has had both positive and negative impacts on cultures, economies, and individuals. The industrial revolution and the success of capitalistic modes of production is said to be due in part to the Protestant work ethic and the purposeful pursuit of wealth with which it eventually came to be associated (Weber, 1904-05/1958). Although some have sug-

ML.. Rich&s, F. W Rudmin /Journal of Economic Psychology 15 (1994) 21 T-231 221

gested that the traditional work ethic has eroded in recent decades among some segments of the population (Albee, 1977; Howard and Wilson, 1982; see, however, Furnham, 1990, Ch. 71, materialism can still be said to have a positive impact on economies. The desire for goods on the part of (materialistic) workers may cause them to work harder or longer, enhanc- ing their incomes and standard of living (Cherrington, 1980; Schor, 1991). High levels of consumption by (materialistic) consumers can increase the wealth of business institutions, increasing their ability to make capital improvements and invest in research and development, which in turn leads to greater productivity, technological breakthroughs, and again, higher living standards.

There are negative consequences of materialism as well. For centuries, religious leaders have warned of the spiritual hazards of materialism (see Belk, 1983; Rudmin and Kilbourne, in press), and others have described the harm to interpersonal relationships it may cause (e.g., Fromm, 1976). More recently, materialism has been criticized for its negative impact on the earth’s resources. Unbridled materialism uses natural resources at an unnecessarily high rate and contributes to pollution and the destruction of habitat and species (Durning, 1991; Hirsch, 1978; Meadows et al., 1972; Worster, 1993).

Concerns have also been raised about the interaction between materialism and social systems. In the U.S. and Western Europe, there is growing recognition that economic resources are more strained than previously thought. Lower rates of job growth have combined with increasing demands on those resources due to political reorganization, demographic changes, rising health costs, and increased social welfare demands. The result is that many societies are no longer economically capable of sustain- ing a materialistic ideal. Standards of living are not likely to rise as they have in the past; for many, they have declined. It has been suggested that the inability of individuals to achieve their materialistic ideal contributes (in part) to disturbances in social systems. These disturbances may include excessive personal debt and increasing personal bankruptcy rates, dissatisfaction and resentment among ordinary citizens, increases in property crimes, and intolerance of immigrants and other out-group members.

Materialism and consumer culture are not limited to the developed economies of Western Europe and North America but have been docu- mented in a variety of Third World countries (Blair, 3965; Lewis, 1973; Yellen, 1985). Belk (1988) describes some of the negative consequences of the increasing materialism and desire for Western goods in these cultures.


These consequences include the devaluation of locally produced goods (upon whose production local economies may depend) and a reduction in the consumption of necessities so that luxuries and status goods may be obtained.

2. Materialism and economic variables

As the preceding discussion indicates, there are important links between materialism and economic behavior. The following discussion examines in more detail the specific economic variables that may be related to materialism. Relevant research is cited, and suggestions are made concerning how materialism may be incorporated in future research on the topics described below.

2.1. Money

Although materialists are believed to value possessions for a variety of reasons, money is the currency which enables one to acquire. Thus, one can expect materialistic people to have a different relationship with money from those who are low in materialism. One way they are expected to differ is in the amount of money they need or desire. Wachtel and Blatt (19901, studying college students, found only weak relationships between desired income and traits associated with materialism. Richins and Dawson (19921, however, measured material values in a broader cross-section of the population and found a strong relationship between materialism and desired income: the income deemed necessary to satisfy needs was about 50 percent higher for consumers high in materialism than for those low in materialism.

Low and high materialists are also likely to differ in the meaning money holds for them and in money-related attitudes. While the relationship between materialism and these variables has apparently not been investi- gated, the logical relationship between materialism and money attitudes, and the existence of a variety of appropriate measures (e.g., Furnham, 1984; Wernimont and Fitzpatrick, 1972; Yamauchi and Templer, 19821, suggest this would to be a fruitful area of inquiry.

Spending Because acquisition is important to materialists, and materialists more

than others view their possessions as indicators of their own success in life,

ML. Richins, F. W Rudrnin /.Journal of Ecunomic Psychology I5 (19943 217-231 223

they are likely to spend their money in different ways than those low in materialism. Two studies have examined materialism and expenditures, although the expenditures have been hypothetical. Belk (1985) found that high materialism respondents are more likely than low materialism respondents to report they would buy luxuries if they were unexpectedly given $100. Richins and Dawson (1992) allowed their respondents a hypothetical windfall of $lO,~OO and examined planned expenditures in six categories. High and low materialism respondents differed in four of the six types of expenditures, with high materialism respondents spending as much as three times more than low materialism respondents in some cases. Studies of actual expenditure patterns (e.g., Lunt and Livingstone, 1992) would more clearly show the influence of materialistic values on spending practices.

A related research topic concerns compulsive shopping. O’Guinn and Faber (1989) found relationships between compulsive, opt-of-control shopping and personality traits such as envy (which has been linked to materialism), while Hanley and Wilhelm (1992) studied compulsive buying and money attitudes. This is a promising area for inquiry. While critics have blamed ‘rampant materialism’ for excessive debt and bankruptcy, empirical studies testing this thesis have not yet been conducted.

Sauing and debt Consumer saving and consumer debt are variables of considerable inter-

est in economic theory, and psychological variables are an important (although under-researched) element in determining them (Katona, 1975; Lea et al., 1993; Lunt and Livingstone, 1991; Wsrneryd, 1989). Since materialism represents the centrality of possession and acquisition in consumers’ lives, and since acquisition most often involves spending (which is in direct opposition to saving), research and theoretical models concerning savings and debt might profitably include materialism as a variable.

2.2. Work motivation and behavior

The desire to obtain (more> goods is widely credited as an important motivation for work. Materialists have a stronger desire than others for goods, and thus can be expected to work more or strive for higher paying jobs. Schor (1991) has analyzed work and leisure hours in the United States, a country often described as particularly materialistic. She found that in the last two decades the work time of Americans of all gender and income groups has substantially increased, despite productivity gains that


have allowed the United States to achieve one of the highest material standards of living in the world. This increase in work stands in sharp contrast to European economies in which work hours have declined. In Schor’s analysis, an important cause of increasing work and declining leisure among Americans is their materialistic values.

Given the presumed role of materialism in work motivation, research documenting and elaborating this relationships is warranted. For instance, there appears to be some tension in the relationship between materialism and work. The traditional (Protestant) work ethic values work for its own sake and for its social contributions (see Furnham, 1990, for a comprehen- sive review), while the materialist is more instrumental in his/her approach to work, valuing work primarily for the buying power it provides. It is possible that this instrumental orientation involves a denigration of work itself. Some evidence of this is provided in a study by Belk (1989). He asked college students to report their liking of comic book characters with which they were familiar. Using content analysis procedures, some of the characters were classified as consumption heroes (hard working, intelligent, and unselfish) and some as consumption villains (greedy spendthrifts who obtain wealth through luck, crime, or magic instead of hard work). Materi- alistic students tended to like the consumption villains (and dislike the more traditional consumption heroes), while the opposite was true for students low in materialism. This finding suggests that materialism is linked with work attitudes; it may be a useful variable in modeling the relationship between work attitudes and various work behaviors.

2.3. Giving

The humane operation of societies and economies requires sharing or other methods to redistribute wealth. Two forms of this behavior relevant to economists are tax contributions and charitable contributions. While the research on the topic can be described as preliminary at best, it appears that those high in materialism are less willing than their counterparts to give to others. Studies suggest that materialists are less willing than non-materialists to make organ donations (Belk and Austin, 19861, less likely to share a cash windfall with others (Belk, 1985; Richins and Dawson, 19921, and less likely to make charitable contributions (Richins and Daw- son, 1992).

Although tax contributions are generally considered non-voluntary, there

M.L. Richins, F. W. Rudmin /Journal of Economic Psychology 15 (1994) 217-231 225

are at least two respects in which individuals have some degree of choice concerning the taxes they pay. In some economies, tax evasion and tax avoidance are practiced by significant segments of society, and personal values such as materialism and greed are likely to play some role in this behavior. Second, in many political units, citizens have the opportunity to vote on specific taxes directly affecting the social welfare of the locality. These taxes may be used to improve a variety of public services such as roads, schools, and sewage treatment facilities or to provide aid to disad- vantaged members of the community. Research could assess whether the self-interest of materialistic individuals makes them likely to favor only those tax levies of direct personal benefit.

2.4. Material satisfaction and quality of life

The important goals of spending and consumption, from an economic perspective, are utility, satisfaction, and improved quality of life. Through- out the world, economic advancement is valued for its ability to improve the quality of life. Some evidence suggests, however, that increased economic well-being does not do a great deal to improve the happiness or life satisfaction of a society at large (Diener, 1984; Easterlin, 1974; Inglehart and Rabier, 1986; see, however, Lane, 1991, for a contrary view).

For individuals within a society, the expectation that owning more possessions or achieving an increased standard of living will make one happier appears to be unfounded. Several authors have noted that while acquisitions or an increased income do enhance individuals’ satisfaction temporarily, the pleasure from these improvements quickly wanes and one’s satisfaction (or dissatisfaction) reverts to its previous level (Brickman and Campbell, 1971; Inglehart and Rabier, 1986; Scitovsky, 1976; see also Lane, 1991, Ch. 26). Materialistic individuals, who place possessions near the center of their lives and who believe their happiness to depend on possession and acquisition, tend to have lower levels of satisfaction with their lives overall and especially with their standard of living (Belk, 1985; Dawson and Bamossy, 1990; Richins, 1987; Richins and Dawson, 1992); they also tend to have poorer social adjustment and mental health (Kasser and Ryan, 1993). These considerations need to be brought to bear in research assessing economic development in Third World countries or when studying the effects of changing economic structures in Eastern Europe and elsewhere.


3. Social communication and economic goods

Economic analysis often examines consumption from utilitarian, rational, and functional points of view. One contribution of psychology and the other social sciences is the recognition that consumption serves other purposes as well. Douglas and Isherwood (1979) have persuasively argued for recognition of the broader goals and meanings of consumption, including the roles of possessions in defining one’s identity and in social communication. It is primarily the socially constructed meanings of these possessions, rather than their ‘objective’ characteristics, that allow goods to function in these ways. Although the two roles of identity formation and social communication are intertwined (Cooley, 1902; Mead, 19341, for clarity they are discussed separately below.

3.1. Identity

It is well recognized that one’s sense of self stems in part from the possessions one owns (Braun and Wicklund, 1989; James, 1890; Mc- Cracken, 1986; Simmel, 1900/1978). Although not tested empirically, it has been suggested that materialists are more likely than others to define their selves through possessions (Wright et al., 1992).

Several studies have examined the symbolic meanings of possessions as they relate to identity (e.g., Dittmar, 1992; Furby, 1978; Richins, 1994b; Wallendorf and Arnould, 1988). An emerging body of evidence suggests that possessions have different meanings for those low and high in materialism and that these individuals use possessions in different ways. Richins (1994a), for instance, found that materialists are more likely to value possessions for their status, appearance-related, and utilitarian meanings while those low in materialism are more likely to derive value from a possession’s symbolic ties with other individuals (e.g., gifts) or its potential for hedonic satisfaction.

Collections are organized groups of possessions. Among other functions, collections may be used by individuals to create or improve self-identity (Beaglehole, 1932; Moulin, 1987; Rigby and Rigby, 1944). Collections have been viewed by some scholars as a means of legitimizing acquisitiveness (e.g., Clifford, 1985); thus, materialism may be associated both with the intensity of the collecting motive and with the types (and meanings) of objects collected.

ML. Richins, F. W. Rudmin /Journal of Economic Psychology IS (1994) 217-231 227

3.2. Social co~~u~~catio~

An obvious example of the use of economic goods for social communication purposes is the exchange of gifts (Caplow, 1982; Cheal, 1988; Davis, 1972; Sherry, 1983). Gifts have a number of functions, including the expression of feelings for the recipient and the strengthening of social ties. Another use of gifts, in some cases, is to communicate aspects of the self (both real and ideal) to others (Neisser, 19731. Materialistic individuals place possessions at the center of their lives, and they use possessions to judge their own success. To the extent they desire to communicate their (actual or desired) status or success to others, materialists would be motivated to give gifts whose meanings are consistent with this status. In many cases the desired status communication might require the giving of costly items, leading to the hypothesis that materialistic individuals would give more expensive gifts, as an expression of their materialistic values, than would those low in materialism. However, as noted earlier, materiaI- ists seem unwilling to share their economic resources with others, leading to the contrary conclusion that the gifts of materialistic individuals would be more niggardly than the gifts given by others. Although gift-giving has been linked empirically to some consumer values (Beatty et al., 19911, the relationship between materialism and gift-giving has not yet been systemat- ically examined.

The use of goods to communicate aspects of the self to others is not limited to gift giving. People actively use a wide variety of socially-visible economic goods to signal characteristics of their selves to others (Goffman, 1959; Grubb and Grathwohl, 1967; Mason, 1981). Clothing and cars are two obvious examples of goods that are used in this way. Simultaneously, observers decode the information contained in these objects to make inferences, or social judgments, about the owner’s personal characteristics (Dittmar, 1992; Holman, 1981). There is tentative evidence that the materialism level of both owners and observers are implicated in these processes. For instance, Richins (1994a) demonstrated that observers sometimes can infer the materialism level of an individual from the kinds of possessions that individual values. In addition, Dittmar and Pepper (1994) found that observers’ level of materialism has at least some bearing on the outcomes of this evaluation process, The effects of materialism on social judgments is a potentially fruitful area of inquiry.

Of the many ways in which materialism may influence economic behavior, only a few have been addressed here. However, it is hoped that this


article successfully demonstrates some of the ways in which materialism is important to economic psychology and that researchers in the future will be more apt to consider its influence on the variables they study.

References

Albee, G.W., 1977. The Protestant ethic, sex, and psychotherapy. American Psychologist 32, 150-161. Beaglehole, E., 1932. Property: A Study in Social Psychology. New York: Macmillan.

Beatty, S.E., L.R. Kahle and P. Homer, 1991. Personal values and gift-giving behaviors: A study across cultures. Journal of Business Research 22, 149-157.

Belk, R.W., 1983. Worldly possessions: Issues and criticisms. Advances in Consumer Research 10,

514-519.

Belk, R.W., 1985. Materialism: Trait aspects of living in the material world. Journal of Consumer

Research 12, 265-280.

Belk, R.W., 1988. Third world consumer culture. Research in Marketing, Supplement 4, 103-127.

Belk, R.W., 1989. Effects of identification with comic book heroes and villains of consumption on

materialism among former comic book readers. Advances in Consumer Research 16, 414-419.

Belk, R.W. and M.C. Austin, 1986. ‘Organ donation willingness as a function of extended self and materialism’. In: M. Venkatesan and W. Lancaster (Eds.), Advances in Health Care Research (pp.

84-88). Toledo, OH: American Association for Advances in Health Care Research.

Belk, R.W. and R.W. Pollay, 1985. Images of ourselves: The good life in twentieth century advertising.

Journal of Consumer Research 11, 887-897.

Blair, T.L.V., 1965. Africa: A Market Profile. New York: Praeger.

Braun, O.L. and R.A. Wicklund, 1989. Psychological antecedents of conspicuous consumption. Journal

of Economic Psychology 10, 161-187.

Bredemeier, H.C. and J. Toby, 1960. Social Problems in America: Costs and Casualties in an

Acquisitive Society. New York: Wiley.

Brickman, P. and D.T. Campbell, 1971. ‘Hedonic relativism and planning the good society’. In: M.H. Appley (Ed.), Adaptation-Level Theory (pp. 287-302). New York: Academic Press.

Campbell, C., 1987. The Romantic Ethic and the Spirit of Modern Consumerism. New York: Basil

Blackwell. Caplow, T., 1982. Christmas gifts and kin networks. American Sociological Review 47, 383-392.

Cheal, D., 1988. The Gift Economy. New York: Routledge.

Cherrington, D., 1980. The Work Ethic: Working Values and Values that Work. New York: AMA-

COM.

Clifford, J., 1985. ‘Objects and selves - An afterword’. In: George W. Stocking, Jr. (Ed.), Objects and

Others: Essays on Museums and Material Culture (pp. 236-246). Madison, WI: University of

Wisconsin Press. Cooley, C.H., 1902. Human Nature and the Social Order. New York: Charles Scribners.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. and E. Rochberg-Halton, 1981. The Meaning of Things: Domestic Symbols and the Self. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Daun, A., 1983. ‘The materialistic life-style: Some socio-psychological aspects’. In: L. Uusitalo (Ed.), Consumer Behavior and Environmental Quality (pp. 6-16). New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Davis, J., 1972. Gifts and the U.K. economy. Man 7, 408-429.

Dawson, S. and G. Bamossy, 1990. Isolating the effect of non-economic factors on the development of a consumer culture: A comparison of materialism in the Netherlands and the United States. Advances

in Consumer Research 17, 182-185.


Diener, E., 1984. Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin 95, 542-575.

Dittmar. H., 1992. The Social Psychology of Material Possessions: To Have Is To Be. New York: St.

Martin’s Press.

Dittmar, H. and L. Pepper, 1994. To have is to be: Materialism and person perception in working-class

and middle-class British adolescents. Journal of Economic Psychology 15, 233-251.

Douglas, M. and B. Isherwood, 1979. The World of Goods. New York: Basic Books.

Durning, A., 1991. Limiting consumption: Toward a sustainable culture. The Futurist 25, 10-15.

Easterlin, R.A., 1974. ‘Does economic growth improve the human lot?: Some empirical evidence’. In:

P.A. David and M.W. Reder (Eds.), Nations and Households in Economic Growth (pp. 89-125).

New York: Academic Press.

Fournier, S. and M.L. Richins, 1991. Some theoretical and popular notions concerning materialism.

Journal of Social Behavior and Personality 6, 403-414.

Fox, R.W. and T.J.J. Lears (Eds.), 1983. The Culture of Consumption: Critical Essays in American

History, 1880-1980. New York: Pantheon.

Fromm, E., 1976. To Have or To Be? New York: Harper and Row.

Furby, L., 1978. Possession in humans: An exploratory study of its meaning and motivation. Social

Behavior and Personality 6, 49-65.

Furnham, A., 1984. Many sides of the coin: The psychology of money usage. Personality and Individual

Differences 5, 501-509.

Furnham, A., 1990. The Protestant Work Ethic: The Psychology of Work-related Beliefs and Behaviors.

London: Routledge.

Goffman, E., 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.

Grubb, E.L. and H.L. Grathwohl, 1967. Consumer self-concept, symbolism and market behavior: A

theoretical approach. Journal of Marketing 31, 22-27.

Hartley, A. and M.S. Wilhelm, 1992. Compulsive buying: An exploration into self-esteem and money

attitudes. Journal of Economic Psychology 13, 5-18.

Hirsch, F., 1978. Social Limits to Growth. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Holman, R.H., 1981. ‘Product use as communication: A fresh appraisal of a venerable topic’. In: B.M.

Enis and K.J. Roering (Eds.), Review of Marketing 1981 (pp. 106-119). Chicago, IL: American

Marketing Association.

Howard, A. and J. Wilson, 1982. Leadership in a declining work ethic. California Management Review

24, 33-46.

Hunt, J.M., R.A. Florsheim, A. Chatterjee and J.B. Kernan, 1990. Credit cards as spending facilitating

stimuli: A test and extension of Feinberg’s conditioning hypothesis. Psychological Reports 67,

323-330.

Inglehart, R., 1977. The Silent Revolution: Changing Values and Political Styles among Western

Publics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Inglehart, R., 1990. Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University

Press.

Inglehart, R. and J.-R. Rabier, 1986. ‘Aspirations adapt to situations - But why are the Belgians so

much happier than the French? A cross-cultural analysis of the subjective quality of life’. In: F.M.

Andrews (Ed.), Research on the Quality of Life (pp. l-561. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.

James, W., 1890. The Principles of Psychology, Vol. 1. New York: Holt.

Kasser, T. and R.M. Ryan, 1993. A dark side of the American dream: Correlates of financial success as a central life aspiration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65, 410-422.

Katona, G., 197.5. Psychological Economics. New York: Elsevier Science Inc.

Lane, R.E., 1991. The Market Experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lange, F.A., 1925. The History of Materialism. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. (Orginally

published 1865.1

Lea, S.E.G.. P. Webley and R.M. Levine, 1993. The economic psychology of consumer debt. Journal of Economic Psychology 14, 85-l 19.

Lewis, O., 1973. ‘The material culture of the poor: A case study of a Mexico City vecindad’. In: D.W.

Lathrop and J. Douglas (Eds.), Variation in Anthropology: Essays in Honor of John C. Gregor (pp.

253-277). Urbana, IL: Illinois Archaeological Survey.

Looft, W.R., 1971. The psychology of more. American Psychologist 26, 561-565.

Lunt, PK. and S.M. Livingstone, 1991. Psychological, social and economic d~t~rminants of savings:

Comparing recurrent and total savings. Journal of Economic Psychology 12, h21-641.

Lunt, P.K. and S.M. Livingstone, 1992. Mass Consumption and Personal Identity. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Mason. R.S.. 19X1. Ct~nspi~uous Consumption: A Study of Exceptional Consumer Behavior. Westmead: Gower.

McCracken, Cr., 1986. Culture and consumption: A theoretical account of the structure and movement

of the cultural meaning of consumer goods. Journal of Consumer Research 13, 71-84.

Mead, G.H., 1934. Mind, Self, and Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press,

Meadows, D.H. et al.. 1972. The Limits to Growth. Washington, DC: Potomac Associates.

Mouiin, R., 1987. The French Art Market: A Sociological View. Tr~lnslation by A. Goldhammer. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Neisser, M., 1973. The sense of self expressed through giving and receiving, Social Casework 54, 294-301.

O’Guinn, T.C. and R.J. Faber, 1989. Compulsive buying: A phenom~nolo~i~al exploration. Journal of Consumer Research 16, 147-157.

Richins, M.L., 1987. Media, materialism, and human happiness, Advances in Consumer Research 14. 352-356.

Richins. M.L., iY94a. Special possessions and the expression of material values. Journal of Consumer

Research 21. in press.

Richins, M.L., 1994b. Valuing things: Materialism and the private and public meanings of possessions.

Journal of Consumer Research 21, in press.

Richins, M.L. and S. Dawson, 1990. Measuring material values: A preliminary report of scale

development. Advances in Consumer Research 17. 169-175.

Richins, M.L. and S. Dawson, 1992. A consumer values orientation for materialism and its measure-

ment: Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research 19, 303-316.

Rigby, D. and E. Rigby, 1944. Lock. Stock and Barrel: The Story of Collecting. Philadelphia, PA: J.W.

Lippincott. Rudmin, F.W., 1988. ‘Personality traits and the meaning of ownership’. In: L.F. Alwitt (Ed.). Proceed-

ings of the Division of Consumer Psychology, Division 23 (pp. 39-45). Eugene, OR: University of

Oregon.

Rudmin F.W. and W. Kilbourne. in press. ‘The meaning and morality of voluntary simplicity: History

and hypotheses on deliberately denied materialism‘. In: N. Dholakia and R. Belk (Eds.), Consump-

tion and Marketing: Macro Dimensions. Northridge. CA: PWS-Kent Publishing.

Schor, J.B., 1991. The Overworked American: The Unexpected Decline of Leisure. New York: Basic

Books. Scitovsky, T., 1976. The Joyless Economy. New York: Oxford University Press.

Sherry, J.F., Jr., 1983, Gift giving in anthropological perspective. Journal of Consumer Research 10, 157-168.

Simmel. G., 1978. The Philosophy of Money. Translation by T. Bottomore and D. Frisby. London:

Routledge and Kegan Paul. (Originally published 1900.1 Tse, D.K., R.W. Belk and N. Zhou, 1989, Becoming a consumer society: A longitudinal and cross-cult-

urai content analysis of print ads from Hong Kong. the People’s Republic of China, and Taivvan.

Journal of Consumer Research 15, 457-472.


Veblen, T., 1953. The Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study in the Evolution of Institutions.

New York: The American Library. (Originally published 1899.)

Wachtel, P.L. and S.J. Blatt, 1990. Perceptions of economic needs and of anticipated future income.

Journal of Economic Psychology 11, 403-415.

Wallendorf, M. and E.J. Arnould, 1988. ‘My favorite things’: A cross-cultural inquiry into object

attachment, possessiveness and social linkage. Journal of Consumer Research 14, 531-547.

Wirneryd, K.-E., 1989. On the psychology of saving: An essay on economic behavior. Journal of

Economic Psychology 10, 515-541.

Weber, M., 1958. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Translation by T. Parsons, New

York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. (Originally published 1904-05.)

Wernimont, P.F. and S. Fitzpatrick, 1972. The meaning of money. Journal of Applied Psychology 56,

218-226.

Worster, D., 1993. The Wealth of Nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wright, N.D., C.B. Claiborne and M.J. Sirgy, 1992. The effects of product symbolism on consumer

self-concept. Advances in Consumer Research 19, 311-318.

Yamauchi, K.T. and D.I. Templer, 1982. The development of a money attitude scale. Journal of

Personality Assessment 46, 522-528.

Yellen, J., 1985. Bushmen. Science 85, 41-48.

Materialism and Economic Psychology

Documents

Transcript of Materialism and Economic Psychology