Overview and Directions for the Study of Status Through Consumption

  • Steven D. Silver

Abstract

In this chapter, I review the conceptual framework and empirical results of the preceding chapters and discuss directions for the subsequent study of status through consumption. I begin by reviewing the framework for the study of consumption through nonwork activities in its application to status through consumption.

Keywords

Income Posit Hunt Boulder Editing 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aaker, J., Benet-Martinez, V., and Garolera, J. (2001). “Consumption symbols as carriers of culture: A study of Japanese and Spanish brand personality constructs”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81: 492–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allan, L.G. (1993). “Human contingency judgments: Rule based or associative?”, Psychological Bulletin, 114; 435,448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bagwell, L. and Bernheim, D. (1996) “Veblen effects in a theory of conspicuous consumption”, American Economic Review, 86: 349–373.Google Scholar
  4. Barkow, J., Cosmides, L. and Tooby, J. (1992) The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Batra, R., Homer, P.M., and Kahle, L.R. (2001). “Values, susceptibility to normative influence, and attribute importance weights: A nomological analysis”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, 11: 115–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Becker, G. and Murphy, K. (1988) “A rational theory of addiction”, Journal of Political Economy, 96: 675–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bourdieu, P. (1996 [1989]) The State Nobility: Elite Schools in the Field of Power, Oxford: Polity translated by L. Clough).Google Scholar
  8. Bowles, S. (1998) “Endogeneous preferences: the cultural consequences of markets and other economic institutions”, Journal of Economic Literature, 36: 75–111.Google Scholar
  9. Douglas, J., Wilkens, L., Pantazelou, E., and Moss, F. (1993) “Noise enhancement of information transfer in crayfish mechanoreceptors by stochastic resonance”, Nature, 365:337–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eagly, A. and Chaiken, S. (1993) The Psychology of Attitudes, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
  11. Ellickson, R. (1991) Order Without Law, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Elster, J. (1983) Explaining Technical Change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Engels, F. (1993 [1886]) The Condition of the Working Class in England, D. McLellan (ed). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Fazio, R. (1987) “Self-perception theory: A current perspective”, in Zanna, M., Olson, J. and Herman, C. (eds) Social Influence: The Ontario Symposium, vol. 5. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum,pp. 129–150.Google Scholar
  15. Fiske, S. and Taylor, S. (1991). Social Cognition, New York: McGraw Hill. Folkes, V. (1984) “Consumer reactions to product failure: An attributional approach”, Consumer Research, 10: 398–409.Google Scholar
  16. Heal, G.M. and Ryder, H.E. (1973) “Optimal growth with intertemporally dependent preferences”, Review of Economic Studies, 40 (January): 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Heider, F. (1958) The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations, New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hurt, T. and Rakita, G. (eds) (2001) Style and Function: Conceptual Issues in Evolutionary Archaeology. Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey.Google Scholar
  19. Ireland, N. (1994) “On limiting the market for status signals”, Journal of Public Economics, 53:91–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ireland, N. (1998) “Status-seeking income taxation and efficiency”, Journal of Public Economics, 70:99–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Johnson, J.T., Boyd, K.R., Magnani, P.S. (1994) “Causal reasoning in the attribution of rare and common events”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2: 229–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jones, E.E. and Davis, K.E. (1965) “From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception”, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2: 219–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kelley, H.H. (1983) “Perceived causal structures” in Jaspars, J., Fincham, F.D. and Hewstone, M. (eds.), Attribution Theory and Research: Conceptual, Development and Social Dimensions. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  24. Kelley, H.H. (1987 [1971]) “Attribution in social interaction”, in Jones, E.E., Kanouse, D.E., Kelley, H.H., Nisbett, R.E., Valins, S. and Weiner, B. (eds.) Attribution Perceiving the Causes of Behavior, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 1–26.Google Scholar
  25. Kohn, M. and Slomczynski, K. (1990) Social Structure, Work and Personality, Cambridge, MA: B. Blackwell.Google Scholar
  26. Krippendorff, K. (1980) Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology, Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  27. Lipsey, R.G. and Lancaster, K. (1956) “The general theory of the second-best”, Review of Economic Studies, 24: 11–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Maio, G. and Olsen, M. (1998) “Values as truisms: Evidence and implications”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(2): 294–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McTavish, D.G. and Pirro, E.B. (1990) “Contextual content analysis”, Quality and Quantity, 24:245–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ng, Y-K. (1977) “Towards a theory of third best”, Public Finance, 32: 1–15.Google Scholar
  31. Nisbett, R.E. and Ross, L. (1980) Human Inferences: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment, Englewood Cliff, NJ: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  32. Reed, P. (2001). “Schedules of reinforcement as determinants of human causality judgments and response Rates”, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 27, 187–195.Google Scholar
  33. Samuelson, P.A. (1983) Foundations of Economic Analysis, Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity Press.Google Scholar
  34. Sander, E. and Richard, J-F. (1997) “Analogical transfers guided by an abstraction process: The case of learning-by-doing in text editing“, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 23: 1459–1483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Schoenberg, N. and Ravdal, H. (2000) “Using vignettes in awareness and attitudinal research”, International Journal of Social Research methodology, 3: 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schwartz, S. (1994) “Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of humanvalues?”, Journal of Social Issues, 50(4): 19–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schwartz, S. and Bilky, W. (1990) “Toward a theory of the universal content and structure of values: Extensions and cross-cultural replications”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53: 550–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Silver, S.D. (2000) Consuming Knowledge: Studying Knowledge Use in Leisure and Work Activities, Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Silver, S.D. and Verbrugge, R. (2000) “Home production and non-erogodic growth”, unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  40. Sniderman, R. and Grob, B. (1996) “Innovations in experimental design in attitude surveys”, Annual Review of Sociology, 22: 377–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Stigler, G. and Becker, G. (1977) “De gustibus non est disputandum”, American Economic Review, 67: 76–90.Google Scholar
  42. Sugden, Robert, 1989. “Spontaneous Order”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 3: 85–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Triandis, H. (1995) Individualism and Collectivism, Boulder, Westview Press.Google Scholar
  44. Weiner, B. (1986) An Attributional Theory of Motivation and Emotion, New York: SpingerCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steven D. Silver

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations