Uniqueness pp 105-127 | Cite as

Commodities As Uniqueness Attributes

  • C. R. Snyder
  • Howard L. Fromkin
Part of the Perspectives in Social Psychology book series (PSPS)


As noted in the second chapter, there are many mechanisms that may account for the high degree of attitudinal and behavioral consistency we see frequently in groups (see Kiesler & Kiesler, 1969). “Normal” behavior becomes formalized in society, and people are rewarded for compliance and punished for deviations (Goffman, 1963). The reader may easily imagine unusual behaviors that may quickly bring strong social disapproval and mistreatment (see Becker, 1963; Clinard, 1968; Freedman & Doob, 1968; Goffman, 1963; Lofland, 1969; Matza, 1969; Palmer, 1970; Schur, 1965, 1969). In this regard, it is at times striking to see society’s quick and strong response to a person who has deviated from the norm (Schachter, 1951). Equally striking, however, is the lack of response that a society will typically give to someone who is behaving “normally.” Given this situation, we may be expected to develop a cautiousness in showing ourselves to be unique. Fortunately, however, society provides some socially acceptable attributes whereby people may manifest their differentness; these characteristics are called uniqueness attributes.


Research Participant Exchange Theory York News Uniqueness Scale Pluralistic Ignorance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Allen, W. How to set a world record. In M. S. Yee (Ed.), The great escape. New York: Bantam, 1974, pp. 224–225.Google Scholar
  2. Becker, H. S. Outsiders. New York: Free Press, 1963.Google Scholar
  3. Brock, T. C. Implications of commodity theory for value change. In A. G. Greenwald, T. C. Brock, & T. M. Ostrom (Eds.), Psychological foundations of attitudes. New York: Academic, 1968, pp. 243–275.Google Scholar
  4. Clinard, M. B. Sociology of deviant behavior 3rd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1968.Google Scholar
  5. Cook, W. J. The art of Jonathan Livingston Hang Glider. In M. S. Yee (Ed.), The great escape. New York: Bantam, 1974, pp. 98–100.Google Scholar
  6. Freedman, J. L., & Doob, A. N. Deviancy: The psychology of being different. New York: Academic, 1968.Google Scholar
  7. Fromkin, H. L. Affective and valuational consequences of self-perceived uniqueness deprivation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, 1968.Google Scholar
  8. Fromkin, H. L. The effects of experimentally aroused feelings of indistinctiveness upon valuation of scarce and novel experiences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1970, 16, 521–529.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fromkin, H. L. A social psychological analysis of diffusion and adoption of new products from a uniqueness motivation perspective. Paper presented at the Association for Consumer Research, University of Maryland, College Park, September 1971.Google Scholar
  10. Fromkin, H. L. The “irrationality” of “economic man”: A psychological view of scarcity. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association, Honolulu, September 1972.Google Scholar
  11. Fromkin, H. L. The psychology of uniqueness: Avoidance of similarity and seeking of differentness. Institute for Research in the Behavioral, Economic, and Management Sciences. Paper No. 438, Purdue University, 1973.Google Scholar
  12. Fromkin, H. L., & Brock, T. C. A commodity theory analysis of persuasion. Representative Research in Social Psychology, 1971, 2, 47–57.Google Scholar
  13. Fromkin, H. L., Olson, J. C., Dipboye, R. L., & Barnaby, D. A commodity theory analysis of consumer preferences for scarce products. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association Convention, Washington, September 1971.Google Scholar
  14. Fromkin, H. L., & Snyder, C. R. The search for uniqueness and valuation of scarcity: A neglected dimension of value in exchange theory. In K. Gergen, M. S. Greenberg, & R. H. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research. New York: Plenum, 1980.Google Scholar
  15. Fromkin, H. L., Williams, J. J., & Dipboye, R. L. Birth order, responses to need for uniqueness scale items, and valuation of scarce commodities. Unpublished manuscript, Purdue University, 1974.Google Scholar
  16. Goffman, I. Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1963.Google Scholar
  17. Hall, C. S., & Lindzey, G. Theories of personality. New York: Wiley, 1957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Homans, G. C. Social behavior. Its elementary forms. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World, 1961.Google Scholar
  19. James, W. The principles of psychology, vol. 1. New York: H. Holt & Company, 1890.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kiesler, C. A., & Kiesler, S. B. Conformity. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1969.Google Scholar
  21. Kuralt, C. Tubing on the Apple. In M. S. Yee (Ed.), The great escape. New York: Bantam, 1974, p. 63.Google Scholar
  22. Lofland, J. Deviance and identity. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1969.Google Scholar
  23. Matza, D. Becoming deviant. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1969.Google Scholar
  24. Nord, W. R. Social exchange theory: An integrative approach to social conformity. Psychological Bulletin, 1969, 71, 174–208.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Palmer, S. Deviance and conformity: Roles, situations, and reciprocity. New Haven, Conn.: College and University Press, 1970.Google Scholar
  26. Saint-Exupéry, A. de The little prince. New York: Harcourt Brace & Jovanovich, 1971.Google Scholar
  27. Schachter, S. Deviation, rejection, and communication. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1951, 46, 190–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Schur, E. M. Crimes without victims; deviant behavior and public policy: Abortion, homosexuality, drug addiction. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1965.Google Scholar
  29. Schur, E. M. Reactions to deviance: A critical assessment. American Journal of Sociology, 1969, 75, 309–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Simmel, G. Fashion. American Journal of Sociology, 1957, 62, 541–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Snyder, C. R., & Atlas, M. Need for uniqueness and perceived product scarcity. Unpublished manuscript, University of Kansas, 1978.Google Scholar
  32. Snyder, C. R., & Fromkin, H. L. Abnormality as a positive characteristic: The development and validation of a scale measuring need for uniqueness. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1977, 86, 518–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Stone, G. P. Appearance and the self. In A. M. Rose (Ed.), Human behavior and social processes. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1962, pp. 86–118.Google Scholar
  34. Szybillo, G. J. The effects of price and scarcity on the valuation of fashions by fashion opinion leaders and nonopinion leaders. Doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, 1973.Google Scholar
  35. Veblen, T. The theory of the leisure class: An economic study of institutions. New York: The Modern Library, 1934.Google Scholar
  36. Walster, E., Piliavin, J., & Walster, G. W. The hard-to-get woman. Psychology Today, 1973, 7, 80–83.Google Scholar
  37. Walster, E., Walster, G. W., Piliavin, J., & Schmidt, L. “Playing hard to get”: Understanding an elusive phenomenon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1973, 26, 113–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yee, M. S. (Ed.) The great escape. New York: Bantam, 1974.Google Scholar
  39. Zellinger, D. A., Fromkin, H. L., Speller, D. E., & Kohn, C. A. A commodity theory analysis of the effects of age restrictions upon pornographic materials. Institute for Research in the Behavioral, Economic, and Management Sciences. Paper No. 440, Purdue University, 1974.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. R. Snyder
    • 1
  • Howard L. Fromkin
    • 2
  1. 1.The University of KansasLawrenceUSA
  2. 2.York UniversityDownsviewCanada

Personalised recommendations