Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The reconciliation of humanism and positivism in the practice of consumer research: A view from the trenches

  • Published:
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Consumer researchers commonly assert that humanism differs from positivism (what is referred to here as naturalism) on a number of dimensions. However, it is shown here that once terminological differences and methodological similarities are recognized, the remaining differences between humanism and naturalism within consumer research are few. While arguments persist at the philosophical extremes, it appears that practicing researchers have achieved considerable reconciliation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen, Chris T. and Thomas J. Madden. 1985. “A Closer Look at Classical Conditioning.”Journal of Consumer Research 12 (December): 301–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, Paul F. 1986. “On Method in Consumer Research: A Critical Relativist Perspective.”Journal of Consumer Research 13 (September): 155–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayus, Barry L. 1985. “World of Mouth: The Indirect Effects of Marketing Efforts.”Journal of Advertising Research 25 (June/July): 31–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belk, Russell W., Melanie Wallendorf, and John F. Sherry. 1989. “The Sacred and Profane in Consumer Behavior: Theodicy on the Odyssey.”Journal of Consumer Research 16 (June): 1–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhaskar, Roy. 1979.The Possibility of Naturalism. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinberg, David and Joseph E. McGrath. 1985.Validity and the Research Process. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calder, Bobby J. and Alice M. Tybout. 1989. “Interpretive, Qualitative, and Traditional Scientific Empirical Consumer Behavior Research.” InInterpretive Consumer Research. Ed. Elizabeth Hirschman. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 199–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlsmith, J. Merrill, Phoebe C. Ellsworth, and Elliot Aronson. 1976.Methods of Research in Social Psychology. New York: Newbury Award Records.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Jacob. 1990. “Things I Have Learned (So Far).”American Psychologist 45 (December): 1304–1312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Joel B. 1989. “An Over-Extended Self?”Journal of Consumer Research 16 (June): 125–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crapanzano, Vincent. 1986. “Hermes Dilemma: The Masking of Subversion in Ethnographic Description.” InWriting Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Eds. James Clifford and George E. Marcus. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 51–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deshpande, Rohit. 1983. “Paradigms Lost’: On Theory and Method in Research in Marketing.”Journal of Marketing 47 (Fall): 101–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, Norman K. 1978.The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellen, Roy F. 1984.Ethnographic Research: A Guide to General Conduct. London, U.K.: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferster, Charles B. and B. F. Skinner. 1957.Schedules of Reinforcement. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feyerabend, Paul. 1987. “Putnam on Incommensurability.”British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 38 (March): 75–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, David. 1970.Historian’s Fallacies. New York: Academic Press, 209–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, Baruch. 1982. “For those Condemned to Study the Past: Heuristics and Biases in Hindsight.” InJudgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Eds. Daniel Kahneman, Paul Slovic, and Amos Tversky. London, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 335–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, Allan. 1990.Experiment, Right or Wrong. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedlander, Frank. 1964. “Comment, Type I and Type II Bias.”American Psychologist 19 (March): 198–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaeth, Gary J. and Timothy B. Heath. 1987. “The Cognitive Processing of Misleading Advertising in Young and Old Adults: Assessment and Training.”Journal of Consumer Research 14 (June): 43–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geertz, Clifford. 1973.The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwald, Anthony G., Anthony R. Pratkanis, Michael R. Leippe, and Michael H. Baumgardner. 1986. “Under What Conditions Does Theory Obstruct Research Progress.”Psychological Review 93 (April): 216–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, Kenneth R., Gary H. McClelland, and Jeryl Mumpower. 1980.Human Judgment and Decision Making: Theories, Methods, and Procedures. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herr, Paul M. 1989. “Priming Price: Prior Knowledge and Context Effects.”Journal of Consumer Research 16 (June): 67–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschman, Elizabeth C. 1986. “Humanistic Inquiry in Marketing Research: Philosophy, Method, and Criteria.”Journal of Marketing Research 23 (August): 237–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoch, Stephen J. and Young-Won Ha. 1986. “Consumer Learning: Advertising and the Ambiguity of Product Experience.”Journal of Consumer Research 13 (September): 221–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holbrook, Morris B. and John O’Shaughnessy. 1988. “On the Scientific Status of Consumer Research and the Need for an Interpretive Approach to Studying Consumption Behavior.”Journal of Consumer Research 15 (December): 398–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, Laurel Anderson and Julie L. Ozanne. 1988. “Alternative Ways of Seeking Knowledge in Consumer Research.”Journal of Consumer Research 14 (March): 508–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, Shelby D. 1983.Marketing Theory: The Philosophy of Marketing Science. Homewood, IL: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1989. “Naturalistic, Humanistic, and Interpretive Inquiry: Challenges and Ultimate Potential.” InInterpretive Consumer Research. Ed. Elizabeth C. Hirschman. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 185–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1991. “Positivism and Paradigm Dominance in Consumer Research: Toward a Critical Pluralism and Rapproachment.”Journal of Consumer Research 18 (June): 32–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, Robert and David A. Aaker. 1985. “Is Market Share All It’s Cracked Up to Be?”Journal of Marketing 49 (Fall): 11–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, Michael D. 1984. “Consumer Choice Strategies for Comparing Noncomparable Alternatives.”Journal of Consumer Research 11 (December): 741–753.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1986. “Modeling Choice Strategies for Noncomparable Altermatives.”Marketing Science 5 (Winter): 37–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1988. “Comparability and Hierarchical Processing in Multiattribute Choice.”Journal of Consumer Research 15 (December): 303–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, Thomas S. 1962.The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lana, Robert E. and Ardie Lubin. 1962. “Comment, Chi Square Revisited.”American Psychologist 17 (November): 793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Yvonna S. and Egon Guba. 1985.Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loftus, Elizabeth F. and Guido Zanni. 1975. “Eyewitness Testimony: The Influence of the Wording of a Question.”Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 5 (January): 86–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lutz, Richard J. 1989. “Positivism, Naturalism and Pluralism in Consumer Research: Paradigms in Paradise.” InAdvances in Consumer Research, Volume 16. Ed. Thomas K. Srull. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie, Scott B., Richard J. Lutz, and George E. Belch. 1986. “The Role of Attitude Toward the Ad as a Mediator of Advertising Effectiveness: A Test of Competing Explanations.”Journal of Marketing Research 23 (May): 130–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCloskey, Donald N. 1983. “The Rhetoric of Economics.”Journal of Economic Literature 21 (June): 481–517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mick, David Glenn and Michelle DeMoss. 1990. “Self-Gifts: Phenomenological Insights from Four Contexts.”Journal of Consumer Research 17 (December): 322–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Norman and Donald T. Campbell. 1959. “Recency and Primacy in Persuasion as a Function of the Timing of Speeches and Measurements.”Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 59: 121–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nachman, Steven R. 1984. “Lies My Informants Told Me.”Journal of Anthropological Research 40 (Winter): 536–555.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Guinn, Thomas C. and Ronald J. Faber. 1989. “Compulsive Buying: A Phenomenological Exploration.”Journal of Consumer Research 16 (September): 147–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ozanne, Julie L. and Laurel A. Hudson. 1989. “Exploring Diversity in Consumer Research.” InInterpretive Consumer Research. Ed. Elizabeth Hirschman. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rist, Ray. 1977. “On the Relations Among Education Research Paradigms: From Disdain to Detente.”Anthropology and Education Quarterly 8 (Summer): 42–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, Alexander. 1988.Philosophy of Social Science. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, Milton J. 1969. “The Conditions and Consequences of Evaluation Apprehension.” InArtifact in Behavioral Research. Eds. Robert Rosenthal and Ralph L. Rosnow, New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo, J. Edward. 1974. “More Information is Better: A Reevaluation of Jacoby, Speller, and Kohn.”Journal of Consumer Research 1 (December): 68–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherry, John F., Jr. 1990. “A Sociocultural Analysis of a Midwestern American Flea Market.”Journal of Consumer Research 17 (June): 13–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, John K. and Louis Heshusius. 1986. “Closing Down the Conversation: The End of the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate.”Educational Researcher 15 (January): 4–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternthal, Brian, Alice M. Tybout, and Bobby J. Calder. 1987. “Confirmatory versus Comparative Approaches to Judging Theory Tests.”Journal of Consumer Research 14 (June): 114–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallendorf, Melanie and Russell W. Belk. 1989. “Assessing Trustworthiness in Naturalistic Consumer Research.” InInterpretive Consumer Research. Ed. Elizabeth Hirschman. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 69–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, Peter. 1980. “Message-Evoked Thoughts: Persuasion Research Using Thought Verbalizations.”Journal of Consumer Research 7 (September): 151–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zukav, Gary. 1979.The Dancing Wu Li Masters. New York: Morrow.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, USA

    Timothy B. Heath

Authors
  1. Timothy B. Heath
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Heath, T.B. The reconciliation of humanism and positivism in the practice of consumer research: A view from the trenches. JAMS 20, 107–118 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723451

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723451

Keywords

Search

Navigation