See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/291184778

Anti-Consumption, Materialism, and Consumer Well-Being

Article in Journal of Consumer Affairs · March 2016

DOI: 10.1111/joca.12089

CITATIONS READS

217 4,869

2 authors:

Michael S W Lee Seo Youn Ahn

University of Auckland University of Auckland
42 PUBLICATIONS 2,336 CITATIONS 1 PUBLICATION 217 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Michael S W Lee on 30 July 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

18 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

MICHAEL S. W. LEE AND CHRISTIE SEO YOUN AHN

Anti-Consumption, Materialism, and Consumer
Well-Being
Substantial research indicates a negative relationship between excessive
consumption, namely materialism, and consumer well-being (CWB).
Since anti-consumption is contradictory to materialism, and material-
ism has a negative relationship with CWB, logically, anti-consumption
should have a positive influence on CWB. To explore this relationship,
we review the literature on anti-consumption, materialism, and CWB,
and ascertain the most prominent values by which anti-consumption
and materialism differ. We then develop a framework based on four
constructs (1. Control over consumption; 2. Scope of concerns; 3. Mate-
rial desire; 4. Source of happiness), conceptually highlighting how
anti-consumption and materialism differ in terms of CWB. Qualitative
data and content analysis of online blogs, forums, and websites pro-
vide preliminary support for our propositions. Finally, we conclude with
some implications for managers and policymakers.

I believe that the very purpose of life is to be happy. From the very core of our being,
we desire contentment. Since we are not solely material creatures, it is a mistake
to place all our hopes for happiness on external development alone. The key is to
develop inner peace. (Dalai Lama XIV 1997)

For most consumers in developed countries, an important goal of

consumption is happiness. Thus, it is interesting to find that materialism, a
belief that acquisition and possession of material objects are the ultimate
source of happiness and life satisfaction (Richins and Dawson 1992), is
in fact related to diminished consumer well-being (CWB) (Burroughs and
Rindfleisch 2002; Kashdan and Breen 2007; Sirgy 1998).
Alternatively, anti-consumption, which focuses on the reasons against
consumption (Chatzidakis and Lee 2013; Iyer and Muncy 2009; Kozinets,
Handelman, and Lee 2010; Lee, Motion, and Conroy 2009) provides a
strong contrast to materialism. If obsession for material goods makes
consumers unhappy, how does “being against consumption” affect
Michael S. W. Lee ([email protected]) is a Senior Lecturer in Marketing and Christie Seo
Youn Ahn ([email protected]) is a Bachelor of Commerce Honors student in Marketing,
both at The University of Auckland Business School, New Zealand.

The Journal of Consumer Affairs, Spring 2016: 18–47

DOI: 10.1111/joca.12089
Copyright 2016 by The American Council on Consumer Interests
SPRING 2016 VOLUME 50, NUMBER 1 19

CWB? Previous anti-consumption literature has focused on its different

motivations, but the consequences of anti-consumption behaviors are less
observable, and thus, the impact of anti-consumption values on CWB
has not been examined. This research explores the relationship between
CWB, materialism, and anti-consumption by: (1) examining the litera-
ture on anti-consumption, materialism, and CWB to ascertain the most
prominent values by which anti-consumption and materialism differ, (2)
developing a conceptual framework showing the antithetical relationship
between materialistic and anti-consumption values, and (3) supporting the
framework by online data collection and analysis.

LITERATURE REVIEW
The Theory of Well-being
Well-being is a general term for the condition of an individual or group in
various contexts, such as their psychological, physical, social, or economic
state, and its importance is increasingly being recognized (Diener 2009;
Lee et al. 2002; Malhotra 2006; Nakano, MacDonald, and Douthitt 1995;
Scott, Martin, and Schouten 2014; Sirgy and Lee 2006). However, the
term “well-being” has a myriad of definitions and measures, with different
disciplines focusing on aspects of well-being relevant only to their area
of interest. This results in terms such as psychological well-being, social
well-being, or CWB. In this paper, the concept of CWB is most relevant.
CWB has been of interest to an increasing number of scholars and man-
agers in various disciplines, such as psychology and marketing (Pancer and
Handelman 2012). Like the general term “well-being,” CWB also lacks a
unified definition (Sirgy, Lee, and Rahtz 2007). However, broadly speak-
ing, CWB refers to the well-being of a consumer or a group of consumers.
Compared to the general concept of well-being, CWB specifically focuses
on the well-being of an individual as a consumer and on the notion that it
is important to consider consumption-related aspects.
Sirgy, Lee, and Rahtz (2007), in a comprehensive review, listed
and explained current conceptualizations and measures of CWB. They
observed that CWB could be divided into two sub-dimensions: objective
and subjective components. The former takes an objective approach (i.e.,
cost of living), while the latter takes a subjective approach (i.e., satisfaction
with possessions). However, all conceptualizations and measures of CWB
listed in the review assume that the level of CWB influences general
quality of life (QOL).
In the early era of CWB studies, objective conceptualizations and
measures were dominant (Ahuvia, Scott, and Bilgin 2010; Pancer and
20 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

Handelman 2012). However, with the rise of subjective well-being and

positive psychology, the importance of satisfaction and happiness were
highlighted (Diener et al. 1999). Researchers then began to develop sub-
jective conceptualizations and measures of CWB (Lee, Sirgy, and Su 1998;
Lee et al. 2002; Rahtz, Sirgy, and Lee 2004), which now dominate the field
over the objective approach. Most subjective models examine consumers’
satisfaction with various aspects of consumption, such as acquisition and
possession of material goods or the experience of retail and services.
Indeed, materialism, a main topic of this research, is listed as one of the
subjective models of CWB. Consequently, our paper focuses on subjective
CWB; specifically we explore how materialism and anti-consumption
may influence subjective CWB.

Materialism

Materialism is a concept often referred to in relation to life satisfaction

and happiness. Individuals scoring high on materialism scales have higher
hopes and expectations of material possessions and, perhaps, due to
unrealistic aspirations, it may be harder for them to feel satisfied with
their possessions compared to non-materialistic individuals (Richins and
Dawson 1992; Sirgy 1998; Sirgy et al. 1998). Materialism is strongly
identified with consumption, more so than any other personality trait,
and the common notion of materialism is the importance one attaches to
worldly possessions, and the belief that acquisition of material possessions
is the ultimate source of happiness and life satisfaction (Ahuvia and Wong
2002; Belk 1985; Richins and Dawson 1992; Richins and Rudmin 1994;
Sirgy 1998).
There have been various attempts to measure materialism by exam-
ining personality traits or attitudes (Belk 1984; Inglehart 1981). Most
well-known is Belk’s (1984, 1985) conceptualization of materialism
as a personality trait, comprising three traits of envy, possessiveness,
and nongenerosity. However, measuring the complex and multidimen-
sional nature of materialism as a personality trait was problematic
owing to low and inconsistent scale reliability (Richins and Dawson
1992).
In an effort to address this problem, Richins and Dawson (1992)
developed a conceptualization and measure of materialism as an individual
consumer value. Their Material Value Scale comprises three main themes
(Acquisition Centrality, Acquisition as the Pursuit of Happiness, and
Possession-defined Success), which together explain the overall construct
of materialism. Their model has been acknowledged to be reliable and has
SPRING 2016 VOLUME 50, NUMBER 1 21

been employed by a number of researchers (Burroughs and Rindfleisch

2002; Kasser and Ryan 1996; Pieters 2013).

Why Are Materialists Unhappy?

Although a myriad of studies examine the negative relationship between
materialism and well-being measures such as life satisfaction and happi-
ness (Ahuvia and Wong 2002; Burroughs and Rindfleisch 2002; Diener
2009; Diener and Biswas-Diener 2002; Kashdan and Breen 2007; Kasser
and Ahuvia 2002; Kasser and Ryan 1993; Sirgy 1998; Tatzel 2002), there
has been some research on the positive impact of materialism. Richins and
Rudmin (1994) suggest that materialism may have some positive impact
on economic and personal well-being by promoting material growth and
personal wealth, particularly in the 18th century, when the ability to meet
basic needs was challenging for most people (Smith 1863). In such cir-
cumstances, desire for material possessions and wealth may have been
prevalent and even encouraged as a means to escape from poverty and
increase well-being.
However, in economically developed nations, the relationship between
economic indicators (i.e., income, material possessions) and well-being is
more complex (Burroughs and Rindfleisch 2011; Pancer and Handelman
2012). Once basic needs are met, other factors moderate the level of
happiness (Kasser and Ryan 1993; Zavestoski 2002), and materialistic
values may begin to have a negative impact on CWB.
One negative component of materialistic values is the lack of control
over consumption. That is, rather than consuming with the sense of auton-
omy or via a careful decision making process, materialistic values result in
a desire for material possession and are more likely to lead to a loss of con-
trol over wise consumption behaviors. This negative feature of materialism
has been implied through terms indicating a lack of control, such as falling
into the trap of materialism (Sivanathan and Pettit 2010) or being caught
in the loop of materialism (Pieters 2013). Rather than being conscious
or reflective about their consumption, materialistic people “allow mate-
rial possessions to play a central role in their lives” (Sirgy, Lee, and Rahtz
2007, 346). Kashdan and Breen (2007) argue that this lack of autonomy has
a strong relationship with materialistic values, which leads to decreased
self-determination and meaning in life. Overall, the literature suggests
materialists view consumption as an escape, and that they lack the sense of
control over consumption which in turn leads to diminished well-being.
Materialism has been associated with self-centred traits such as self-
ishness (Bauer et al. 2012), envy, or nongenerosity (Belk 1985). Having
money-oriented values makes a person focus on one’s own wealth and
22 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

well-being rather than on other people’s well-being. Thus, having mate-

rialistic values negatively impacts on the ability to consider macro level
concerns such as environmental or community issues (Burroughs and
Rindfleisch 2002; Kilbourne and Pickett 2008). This micro level focus
may lead to a further problem of incongruity between one’s desired self
and one’s real, materialistic self. Since people do not want to regard them-
selves as selfish, inconsiderate, and environmentally damaging consumers
(Kilbourne and Pickett 2008), such incongruity may also lead to the sense
of dissatisfaction and unhappiness.
A strong desire for material possessions is central to materialistic values
(Richins and Dawson 1992), and may be associated with diminished life
satisfaction and well-being. First, psychological dissatisfaction will be
greater for materialistic individuals when they cannot afford what they
desire (Ryan and Deci 2001). Such cases occur because even individuals
with low income may score highly on measures of materialism (Karabati
and Cemalcilar 2010). Second, even for those with high income, money,
and wealth does not always guarantee perceived well-being (Diener and
Seligman 2004). Due to their insatiable desire and unrealistic expectations,
materialistic individuals find it more difficult to be satisfied with their QOL
compared to unmaterialistic others (Shaw 2002). Therefore, even with
increased consumption, one may feel unhappy because one’s aspirations
are heightened as well. This effect is known as hedonic adaptation or the
hedonic treadmill (Brickman and Campbell 1971; Lyubomirsky 2011).
Lastly, people scoring high on materialism are more prone to compare
themselves to wealthier others, this may lead to envy and a sense of
inequity and anger, which also leads to diminished life satisfaction and
happiness (Sirgy 1998).
Studies also find that materialism inherently shifts a person’s focus
onto extrinsic rather than intrinsic goals (Kasser and Ryan 1996; Tatzel
2002). Materialistic individuals rely on factors outside of the individ-
ual, such as financial success and acquisition of possessions, to achieve
satisfaction and happiness. Such preoccupation with material possession
may lead to neglect in other life domains, such as social and interper-
sonal relationships (Kasser and Ahuvia 2002; Kasser and Ryan 1993).
Maslow (1954) proposes that self-actualisation is at the top of his “hier-
archy of needs” but unlike lower-order needs, self-actualisation cannot
be obtained solely by material possessions and wealth (Kasser and
Ahuvia 2002; Maslow 1954; Zavestoski 2002). These findings suggest
that the pursuit of material ambition alone cannot deliver sustainable
well-being (Diener 2009; Diener and Biswas-Diener 2002). Therefore,
excessive consumption, as encapsulated by materialistic values, may have
SPRING 2016 VOLUME 50, NUMBER 1 23

a negative impact on the well-being of consumers regardless of income

level.
So far we have discussed how materialism may be negatively linked
to happiness and well-being. Continuing along this train of reasoning, if
materialistic values make people unhappy, and materialism is contradictory
to anti-consumption, then anti-consumption values may improve CWB.
This premise is an interesting, and previously unexamined, avenue that
enables us to explore the possible consequences of anti-consumption.
However, before we discuss the literature on anti-consumption,
we feel it is necessary to delineate between non/anti-materialism and
anti-consumption, which we believe are related but different constructs.
Non/anti-materialism is opposite to materialism with both concepts
occupying opposite ends of a continuum. Materialism is focused on
the acquisition of the material possessions in the pursuit of happiness
(Holt 1995; Richins and Dawson 1992; Scott, Martin, and Schouten
2014); therefore, non/anti-materialism focuses on the rejection of material
possessions. In contrast, anti-consumption revolves around the reasons
against consumption, and is predominately concerned with the plethora
of reasons and processes that lead to a person being against consumption
(Chatzidakis and Lee 2013; Lee, Fernandez, and Hyman 2009).
So, while all acts of non/anti-materialism involve anti-consumption, not
all acts of anti-consumption involve non/anti-materialism. Basically, if a
person is against the acquisition of material then they are automatically
against consumption; however, a person who is driven by reasons against
consumption of goods or services, may not necessarily be a non/anti-
materialist. To illustrate, consider a person practicing anti-consumption
against IKEA or other mass-produced furniture. The reasons motivating
their anti-consumption may involve perceptions of quality, avoidance of
multinationalism, prior negative experiences, or rumors about corporate
irresponsibility. Their avoidance of IKEA may also motivate them to
consume products from local furniture manufacturers, or make their own
furniture, as in the case of voluntary simplifiers, etc. So we see an
acceptance of materiality in this case of anti-consumption. On the other
hand, materialism is focused on the role that material possessions play
in happiness; therefore a non/anti-materialist would reject the idea of
furniture being necessary to have a happy life, whether that furniture is
IKEA-bought or locally made.
We posit that “non/anti-materialism” is a redundant term since it is
nearly impossible to be truly non/anti-material, and thus we propose that,
within the realm of consumer affairs, anti-consumption is actually a more
appropriate contrast for materialism. Indeed, it would be very difficult for
24 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

most modern-day consumers to attain any level of CWB while practicing

non/anti-materialism, whereas the practice of anti-consumption is often
compatible with the CWB. Even non/anti-materialists espousing the value
of consumption experiences such as river rafting or dematerialized e-books
still rely on material components to make their experience a reality. In
contrast, anti-consumption does not deny the role of the physical, since
all acts of anti-consumption involve a simultaneous push away from one
source and pull toward another, which invariably results in some manner
of material consumption.
Overall, anti-consumption and materialism are not exact opposites
on the same continuum; however, they are antagonistic concepts and
therefore it makes sense to compare them against one another and, more
importantly, alongside CWB. Non/anti-materialism is the true opposite
of materialism, but non/anti-materialism is virtually impossible and not
applicable for the majority of people. Therefore, this paper removes
non/anti-materialism from the “CWB equation,” opting only to compare
materialism with anti-consumption, since these two contrasting concepts
have a more practical relationship to CWB than non/anti-materialism.

Anti-consumption

Anti-consumption is a burgeoning field of research that studies the

phenomena and reasons against consumption (Black and Cherrier 2010;
Chatzidakis and Lee 2013; Cherrier 2009; Dalli, Romani, and Gistri 2006;
Hogg, Banister, and Stephenson 2009; Iyer and Muncy 2009; Kozinets
and Handelman 2004; Lee et al. 2011; Lee, Motion, and Conroy 2009;
Odou and de Pechpeyrou 2011; Sandikci and Ekici 2009; Thompson,
Rindfleisch, and Arsel 2006; Zavestoski 2002). It is the voluntary and
intentional avoidance of consumption, and occurs either in a general or in
selective fashion (Iyer and Muncy 2009). Anti-consumers choose to reject,
reduce, or reclaim certain goods, services, or brands (Lee et al. 2011) due
to a number of reasons such as negative experiences in relation to a product
or brand, symbolic incongruence (Lee, Motion, and Conroy 2009), and/or
political animosity (Sandikci and Ekici 2009). Other anti-consumers resist
the consumerist mainstream and strive to make their own consumption
decisions (Kozinets and Handelman 2004; Lee, Motion, and Conroy 2009;
Zavestoski 2002). Overall, anti-consumption is a conscious and deliberate
choice based on decisions that are consistent with one’s values (Kozinets,
Handelman, and Lee 2010).
Anti-consumption behaviors may also be driven by macro level envi-
ronmental and societal concerns. As consumption increasingly plays a
SPRING 2016 VOLUME 50, NUMBER 1 25

central role in modern society, there has been growing concerns about
the negative impact of excessive consumption (Alcott 2008; Cherrier and
Murray 2002; Dobscha 1998; Evans 2011), consumerism (Gabriel and
Lang 2006), and materialism (Belk 1988; Pepper, Jackson, and Uzzell
2009) on the environment and society. The field of green consumption
focuses on the consumption behaviors motivated by environmental and
sustainability concerns (Banarjee and McKeage 1994; Black 2010; Black
and Cherrier 2010; Evans 2011; Gilg, Barr, and Ford 2005). Typically,
individuals with macro level concerns may use their consumer power to
reject the brands or products which they believe are damaging society
(Chatzidakis and Lee 2013; Littler 2005).
Another motivation for anti-consumption is the pursuit of a simpler
lifestyle. This is best represented in the practice of voluntary simplicity,
which represents a purposeful rejection and/or reduction of overall con-
sumption in order to achieve a simpler lifestyle (Black and Cherrier 2010;
Brown and Kasser 2005; Craig-Lees and Hill 2002; Elgin and Mitchell
1977; Etzioni 2004; Huneke 2005; Leonard-Barton 1981; McDonald et al.
2006; Shaw and Newholm 2002; Zavestoski 2002). Voluntary simplifiers
believe over-consumption and excessive desire for material possessions
have a negative impact on the environment and personal well-being. There-
fore, they engage in anti-consumption behaviors in order to pursue a sim-
pler and stress-free lifestyle (Iyer and Muncy 2009; Zavestoski 2002), but
as mentioned earlier, voluntary simplification does not necessarily mean
less emphasis on materiality. For example, setting up a vegetable garden
involves a high level of materiality, and therefore could not really be clas-
sified as non/anti-materialism. However, the reasons for wanting to grow
one’s own vegetables are likely to be partially driven by anti-consumption
motivations such as the rejection of highly processed foods, genetically
modified organisms, monoculture, pesticides, or chemical fertilizers.
While stress and fatigue of the consumerist lifestyle is a central motiva-
tion for voluntary simplicity, it is not the only motivation for the trend. By
reducing unnecessary consumption, anti-consumers pursue a more mean-
ingful life by shifting their concerns and spending more time and effort on
intrinsically satisfying focal activities (Borgmann 2000; Zavestoski 2002).
In the hierarchy of needs, Maslow (1954) proposes self-actualisation as
the highest order of needs, which can be achieved by intrinsic growth.
Relatedly, self-actualisation is a common motivation for anti-consumption
behaviors, which are associated with fulfilling intrinsic goals (Zavestoski
2002). The pursuit of intrinsic goals implies that anti-consumers seek hap-
piness from internal factors, such as personal growth, rather than from
external factors such as financial success or social status. This is supported
26 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

by findings from qualitative research examining the motivations for down-

shifting (Craig-Lees and Hill 2002; Huneke 2005).
In the present review, the different motivations for anti-consumption
behaviors were discussed. It is important to note that these motivations
are not mutually exclusive and some anti-consumption behavior may be
explained by multiple motivations. For instance, an anti-consumer may
avoid a company’s brand because of its poor environmental record and
because of a personal negative experience.

Gap in the Literature: Consequences of Anti-consumption

The preceding sections position anti-consumption as the most appropri-
ate anti-thesis to materialism. However, compared to materialism, which
has been examined in relation to CWB, there are no studies explicitly link-
ing anti-consumption values with CWB. Part of this may be due to the fact
that unlike materialism, anti-consumption values are yet to be developed.
Without a clear idea of anti-consumption values, it is difficult to examine
anti-consumption in relation to other topics such as CWB.
Therefore, this research fills the gap in literature by developing a set
of anti-consumption values, comparing these values with materialistic
values to highlight the contrasting relationship, and, finally, linking both
values to their influence on CWB. If anti-consumption values contain
contrary attributes to materialistic values, which are strongly associated
with diminished CWB, it seems logical to propose that anti-consumption
values may be related to increased CWB.

CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT

The literature review above compared various characteristics of mate-

rialism with well-being and anti-consumption. This process has identified
four anti-consumption values which are contradictory to materialism: (1)
control over consumption; (2) scope of concerns; (3) material desire; and
(4) source of happiness.
Table 1 highlights the first construct, sense of control over consumption.
The literature reveals a lack of control and autonomy in the consumption of
materialistic individuals. On the other hand, people with anti-consumption
values show a highly controlled approach to consumption. In general,
anti-consumption behaviors include voluntary rejection or reduction of
consumption that is not driven by factors, such as financial difficulties
or lack of resources. This suggests that anti-consumption behaviors are
inherently autonomous, unlike materialistic behaviors.
SPRING 2016 VOLUME 50, NUMBER 1 27

TABLE 1
Control over Consumption

Materialistic Values Anti-consumption Values

Control over LOW sense of control HIGH sense of control

Consumption • Materialism related to dimin- • Anti-consumption behav-
ished self-determination and iors are inherently voluntary
autonomy (Kashdan and and autonomous (Kozinets,
Breen 2007). Handelman, and Lee 2010).
• Materialists tend to be swayed • Anti-consumers are conscious
by advertising messages, rein- about their decision making and
forcing their materialistic val- take into account their values
ues (Sirgy et al. 1998). and thoughts in consumption
• Materialistic behaviors are (Fernandez, Brittain, and Bennett
often described as something 2011; Lee, Motion, and Conroy
which people fall into or get 2009).
trapped within. These behav- • Anti-consumers choose to reject
iors are seen as an escape consumption in order to seek
from unpleasant emotions other sources of satisfaction
(Pieters 2013; Sivanathan and (Zavestoski 2002).
Pettit 2010).

Consumption plays a central role in the modern society, in which

consumers are bombarded with marketing messages encouraging material
consumption. Nonetheless, anti-consumers have their own reasons for
going against consumer culture, which shows a high degree of control
over consumption. Materialistic values seem to indicate less control owing
to an obsession and aspiration for material possessions (Kashdan and
Breen 2007), while anti-consumption values signal a more conscious and
reflective decision making style. Indeed, an interviewee from a qualitative
study on voluntary simplifiers said: “It’s exciting to take control of your life,
to take control over consumption choices and your lifestyle” (Zavestoski
2002, 160), which clearly demonstrates a sense of control and consequent
positive emotion.
In some cases, anti-consumers achieve a sense of control by resisting
marketing messages (Lee, Motion, and Conroy 2009; Rumbo 2002), again
showing that individuals with anti-consumption values more consciously,
and critically, evaluate their consumption patterns. On the other hand,
television viewership research conducted by Sirgy et al. (1998) suggests
that materialistic individuals are influenced by advertising messages, which
enhance their desire for material possession. Such literatures demonstrate
the contrast between anti-consumption and materialistic values in terms of
control over consumption.
28 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

TABLE 2
Scope of Concerns

Materialistic Values Anti-consumption Values

Scope of MICRO LEVEL concerns MACRO LEVEL concerns

Concerns
• Materialistic consumption is • Motivated by both societal and
mainly about personal concerns personal concerns (Iyer and
(Burroughs and Rindfleisch Muncy 2009).
2002). • Anti-consumption behaviors
• Materialism associated with driven by environmental con-
self-centered attributes: selfish- cerns (Black 2010; Dobscha
ness (Bauer et al. 2012); envy 1998).
and nongenerosity (Belk 1984). • Anti-consumption behavior can
• Negative impact on environmen- be driven by societal/ethical con-
tal beliefs – leading to incongru- cerns (Chatzidakis and Lee 2013;
ence between desired and true self Fernandez, Brittain, and Ben-
(Kilbourne and Pickett 2008). nett 2011; Hoffmann and Müller
2009).

Having control and autonomy over their decision making enhances an

individual’s sense of self-determination and self-actualisation, which leads
to increased CWB (Maslow 1954; Ryan and Deci 2001). Therefore, it
can be presumed that the autonomous quality of anti-consumption values
positively impacts one’s perception of life satisfaction and happiness.
Table 2 describes the second construct: scope of concerns. For materi-
alistic individuals, the literature suggests that their consumption is mainly
driven by micro-level concerns, such as fulfilling their own material desire
or self-enhancement (Burroughs and Rindfleisch 2002). This devotion to
personal goals restrains them from having a broader scope of concerns,
such as sustainability or ethical issues (Kilbourne and Pickett 2008). In
contrast, macro-level concerns often motivate anti-consumption behavior
(Shaw and Newholm 2002), such as boycotting, voluntary simplicity, or
consumer resistance. The extant literature shows that anti-consumption
behaviors are often driven by the concerns for sustainability or as
a form of resistance toward unethical practices in marketing (Black
and Cherrier 2010; Dobscha 1998; Evans 2011). For instance, research
on dumpster diving shows that resisting the mainstream market helps
some individuals establish a heroic self-image (Fernandez, Brittain, and
Bennett 2011), while others protest against the loss of jobs by boy-
cotting companies who relocate their factories offshore (Hoffmann and
Müller 2009).
In general, anti-consumers display a broader scope of concerns for their
consumption compared to materialists, with such altruistic beliefs leading
SPRING 2016 VOLUME 50, NUMBER 1 29

TABLE 3
Material Desire

Materialistic Values Anti-consumption Values

Material HIGH desire for material LOW desire for material

Desire acquisition/possession acquisition/possession
• Excessive and obsessive material • Lower level of material desire for
desire (Belk 1985; Richins 1994; voluntary simplifiers (Craig-Lees
Sirgy 1998). and Hill 2002; Etzioni 2004).
• Unreasonably high aspiration of • Desire to reduce stress caused
material acquisition/possessions by consumption-focused lifestyle
(Shaw and Newholm 2002). (Zavestoski 2002).
• Cycle of desire or the hedo- • Preference for experiential spend-
nic treadmill (Belk, Ger, and ing (Carter and Gilovich 2010;
Askegaard 2003, Brickman and 2012; Tatzel 2002).
Campbell 1971; Lyubomirsky
2011).

to increased CWB. The belief that they are doing a good deed for the
environment and society establishes the congruence between their ideal
self and the true self. This is supported by a number of studies, which
confirm that pro-social behaviors such as helping others (Weinstein and
Ryan 2010) or donating to charity (Harbaugh 1998) impact positively on
the well-being of the actor.
Table 3 compares materialism and anti-consumption in regards to
material desire. Prior materialism literature suggests a negative relation-
ship between strong material desire and diminished life satisfaction and
well-being (Shaw 2002; Sirgy 1998). Materialists pursue high quantity
and quality of material goods; however, due to hedonic adaptation the-
ory (Brickman and Campbell 1971; Lyubomirsky 2011) they are likely
to remain dissatisfied and fall into the cycle of desire (Belk, Ger, and
Askegaard 2003). On the other hand, individuals with anti-consumption
values are likely to exhibit a lower level of material desire, due to its
inherent nature against consumption (Lee, Fernandez, and Hyman 2009).
Instead, anti-consumers seek to simplify their lives (i.e., voluntary sim-
plicity) and reduce the desire of material acquisition and possession
(i.e., downshift). Zavestoski (2002, 150) describes the practice of vol-
untary simplicity as “reducing clutter in one’s life, eliminating burden-
some time commitments, and creating peaceful personal space to enjoy
life.” Similarly, the anti-consumption literature supports the notion that
simplifiers reduce feelings of fatigue and stress by purposefully with-
drawing from the fast-paced consumerist society (Etzioni 2004; Iyer and
Muncy 2009).
30 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

Findings from happiness research suggest that often, the most impor-
tant sources of life satisfaction are nonmaterial in nature (Myers and
Diener 1995). Therefore, individuals with anti-consumption values may
achieve greater life satisfaction and CWB by being less materially driven,
perhaps emphasizing experiences over possessions. A study supported
this notion by examining the differences between the consumption pat-
terns of materialistic and non-materialistic individuals, and found that
non-materialistic individuals spent more money on experiential consump-
tion (i.e., travel), which provided a greater and more sustained sense of
satisfaction (Carter and Gilovich 2010, 2012; Tatzel 2002). Overall, with-
out being as extreme as non/anti-materialists, anti-consumption values are
associated with reduced desire for material possession, which leads to
enhanced CWB.
Table 4 illustrates how materialistic values and anti-consumption values
contrast in terms of the final construct: source of happiness. The material-
ism literature suggests that materialistic individuals rely on the extrinsic
goals (i.e., financial success, reputation) to achieve life satisfaction and
happiness (Kasser and Ryan 1996). However, extrinsic rewards do not
guarantee a sustained sense of happiness, so values placed on pursuing
such goals may contribute to the negative relationship between material-
ism and well-being (Tatzel 2002). Research shows that pursuing intrinsic
goals are a more direct and effective way of achieving sustained satisfac-
tion and happiness (Diener and Biswas-Diener 2002; Maslow 1954; Tatzel
2002), and this supports the argument that anti-consumers are, in general,
happier than materialists.
For instance, an individual with materialistic values may strive to
achieve extrinsic goals by working more, earning more, and spend-
ing more, which they believe will bring happiness. However, research
shows that following these goals does not lead to self-actualisation even
when consumption is successful (Kasser and Ryan 1993; Maslow 1954;
Zavestoski 2002). On the other hand, self-actualisation is itself a common
goal for anti-consumers who downshift (Zavestoski 2002); they work
less, earn less, and consume less, but instead spend more time following
intrinsic goals, such as establishing meaningful relationships or practicing
personal growth and self-mastery (Craig-Lees and Hill 2002; Elgin 1998;
Huneke 2005).
Some readers may perceive the terms “micro level” and “intrinsic” to
be similar, in the notion that both terms refer to concepts that are personal
and individual to a human being. However, “micro level” concerns in
materialistic individuals refers to the self centered and self-serving nature
of their consumption, whereas the “intrinsic” goal of anti-consumers refers
SPRING 2016 VOLUME 50, NUMBER 1 31

TABLE 4
Source of Happiness

Materialistic Values Anti-consumption Values

Source of EXTRINSIC goals in pursuit of INTRINSIC goals in pursuit of

Happiness happiness happiness
• Materialistic individuals focus • Individuals with anti-
more on extrinsic goals such as consumption values tend to
financial success, and approval pursue intrinsic goals, (i.e.,
from others (Kasser and Ryan personal growth) which origi-
1996). nate from one’s internal values
• Preoccupation with material (Craig-Lees and Hill 2002;
desire and possession leads Huneke 2005).
to neglecting other important • Pursuit of intrinsically satisfying
domains (i.e., interpersonal) activities such as having qual-
(Kasser and Ahuvia 2002; Kasser ity time with friends and family
and Ryan 1993). (Brown and Kasser 2005; Huneke
• Extrinsic consumption patterns 2005).
of materialism leads to lowered • Downshifting involves a con-
well-being (Tatzel 2002). scious shift away from material
• Extrinsic goals cannot lead goals and toward intrinsically sat-
to achieving self-actualisation isfying pursuits (Elgin 1998).
(Kasser and Ryan 1993; Maslow • Self-actualisation is a common
1954; Zavestoski 2002). motivation for voluntary simpli-
fiers (Zavestoski 2002).

to the pursuit of self-actualisation through personal growth and reflection.

Therefore, these terms are distinct.

Conceptual Framework

Figure 1 illustrates the relationship between CWB, materialistic val-

ues, and anti-consumption values. As explained in previous sections, this
research focuses on the subjective component of CWB. The conceptual
framework suggests three propositions, which will clarify the relationship
between the three topics of interest and address the research objectives pre-
sented at the beginning of this paper.
The review on the materialism literature supports a negative relationship
between materialistic values and CWB. Thus:
P1: Materialistic values have a negative relationship with CWB.

In the conceptual development process, the contrasting attributes of

materialistic values and anti-consumption values were identified and cate-
gorized into four groups. Therefore:
32 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

FIGURE 1
Relationship Between Materialistic Values, Anti-Consumption Values, and CWB

P2: Materialistic values and anti-consumption values contrast on four key constructs:
a. Control over consumption; b. Scope of concerns; c. Material desire; d. Source of
happiness.

Figure 1 contrasts each construct on a continuum, indicating the degree

of difference between anti-consumption and materialistic values.
P1 proposed a negative relationship between materialism values and
CWB. Therefore, synthesizing P1 with P2 (the contrasting nature of
anti-consumption values and materialistic values) leads to:
P3: Anti-consumption values have a positive relationship with CWB.

METHODOLOGY

Our data collection is based on theoretical sampling (Glaser and Strauss

1967), which involves the use of “information to shed light on an emerg-
ing theory” (Charmaz 2000, 519). Therefore, to explore the plausibility
of our propositions and emerging ideas (rather than prove causality in a
positivistic sense) we conducted online data collection and analysis by
SPRING 2016 VOLUME 50, NUMBER 1 33

gathering publicly available information in online forums, such as blogs,

websites, and online discussion. Since a materialistic mind-set and associ-
ated behaviors are often socially criticized, people may be hesitant to reveal
what they really think and do, thus online research is a valid tool enabling
preliminary access to honest opinions about sensitive topics.

First Approach

Initially we searched for blogs strongly associated with the topics of

materialism and anti-consumption. The reason we prioritized blogs was
that it is the most suitable place for people to express their personal
thoughts and feelings.
We started by Googling keywords such as “materialism” or
“anti-consumption” to find blogs where these terms were mentioned.
As a result, we found blogs which were closely related to the topic of
materialism or anti-consumption, such as “The Everyday Minimalist.”
This blog records and shares the various ways to live a “minimalistic”
life; most blogs contained rich information due to their high involvement.
Following this initial exploration, we expanded our search to include
“neutral” blogs which are not specialized in the area of materialism or
anti-consumption. These blogs may be personal blogs, with diary-like
posts talking about everyday life, or focused on specific topics of interest
(i.e., photography, mobile phones).
However, these search strategies still provided limited data, since peo-
ple may not necessarily use conceptual words such as “materialism” or
“anti-consumption” even when they talked about relevant things.

Second Approach

We used the data gained from the initial group of blogs to find new
keywords to search. After reading posts from these blogs, we identified
some words that were often mentioned, such as “shopping” or “simple
living.” We also tried using whole phrases such as “I hate shopping,” “I love
shopping,” “Is being materialistic bad?,” “Consume less,” and so on. These
keywords related to our topics, and were practical since they were used
in everyday language. Furthermore, in this second approach, we did not
restrict our search to blogs, but expanded to other forms of online opinion.
To write a full post in a blog, a person may think that they need to
be a topic expert. Moreover, the length of posts, which are typically at
least one page long, may discourage people from writing a post about a
topic. We wanted to find other sources in which people feel less pressured
34 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

to express their opinion. Therefore, we included “comments” as part of

the data. These comments included remarks left in the bottom of other
sources of media, such as blogs, articles, videos, or as a part of discussion
boards. The benefit of collecting comments is that there are a higher
number of comments that are relevant to our research compared to the
number of blog posts. Moreover, in most cases, comments are written as
feedback or replies, therefore the people who leave comments often express
their opinions on the issues being discussed. Thus it was straightforward
to ascertain if they agree (or disagree) with the main statement/opinion.
Furthermore, comments in discussion boards tended to be polarized. Since
we needed data to support our framework, which depicts the contrasting
relationship between materialism and anti-consumption, it was beneficial
to find comments that confront each other.
Including comments as part of the data gave us another unexpected out-
come. Occasionally, we would find some comments left from other blog-
gers, who promoted their own blogs. They often had similar interests with
the blogs we initially found, and wanted the blog owner (and other visitors)
to visit their own blog and share ideas. Therefore, these subsequent blog
discoveries were often relevant for our research. Sometimes the blog own-
ers themselves would mention other “neighbor” blogs and recommend that
visitors refer to them for other interesting posts. This “spider-web search”
of finding connections between blogs was an efficient way to find a number
of blogs with similar themes. Changing the keywords to a more casual
language and widening the scope of the research also resulted in more data.
Overall, we collected a total of 59 relevant text units, which provides
preliminary support for our framework. For this paper, only the most salient
quotes are used as examples. See Table 5 for a representation of the sources
and the amount of data collected.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

Control Over Consumption
Our data supports the first part of our framework: individuals high in
materialistic values tend to have lower control over their consumption,
whereas people high in anti-consumption values tend to have higher control
over their consumption. The following quote conveys the loss of control
driven by materialistic behavior.
“In the beginning stage, the goal is mostly monetary wealth, and I see no problem
with that. Money is a big and exciting part of our culture. And most of us start out
with our arms and legs tangled up in the stuff to the point that it is a source of stress,
status, and a loss of autonomy. The need for money is forcing us to set alarm clocks
SPRING 2016 VOLUME 50, NUMBER 1 35

TABLE 5
Main Sources of Data and Amount of Data Collected

Source Type Number Examples

Blog 25 Blogs with specific purposes, i.e.,
http://www.bornrich.com
http://www.everydayminimalist.com
Personal blogs, i.e.,
http://mandibelle16.wordpress.com
http://ourwalrusroom.blogspot.co.nz
Comments under discussion board 18 Discussion board in online community, i.e.,
http://boards.straightdope.com
http://community.babycenter.com
Comments under online news article 12 Comments left under online articles, i.e.,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk
Online news article 2 Online news articles from
http://www.dailymail.co.uk
http://www.psychologytoday.com
Video 2 Youtube videos

and drive to other cities every morning, give up on the chance of raising our own
kids, and sign up for terms of voluntary slavery that can extend 45 years or longer.”
(http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/09/18/is-it-convenient-would-i-enjoy-it-
wrong-question/)

This text was written by a blogger called “Mr Money Mustache,”

who writes about how to “enjoy” money wisely while getting out of the
lifestyle he explains as a “debt-powered treadmill.” His quote suggests
that people are “forced” to spend more time working because of the
need for money, which signifies a loss of autonomy. He criticizes the
“earn-more-spend-more” lifestyle, describing it as “voluntary slavery.”
Essentially, he argues that following a materialistic lifestyle leads to loss
of control and autonomy.
Another quote supports the relationship between materialistic values
and a loss of control, but specifically within a consumption context:
“I too am a shopaholic, sales especially … what a bargain … no it isn’t. They sit in
the wardrobe, and it gets fuller and fuller, I end up wearing the same half dozen
pieces, because I can’t find other things amongst the overloaded hangers, etc. When
I decide to find something else, I come across things I’d forgotten I bought. The guilt
is horrendous, but I continue to do it. Is there something that can be done to that
part of the brain to stop it??!!!!! Clearly I understand drug addicts, because clothes
shopping is a drug for me! H E L P!!!”
(http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2546427/How-adding-cost-clothes-
curing-shopping-addiction.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=
1490)

A journalist for the Daily Mail wrote an article describing her obsession
with clothes and how she was trying to reduce her wardrobe and change
36 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

her consumption habits. Her article generated 194 responses where people
shared their thoughts on materialistic lifestyles. This quote was one such
comment and shows how a person might fall into the trap of materialistic
consumption, feeling like they are addicted to shopping. The writer clearly
expresses his or her inability to change her habits. The difference between
the first and second quote is perhaps that the writer of the second quote is
aware of her loss of control, whereas the people described by “Mr Money
Mustache” in the first quote may not be aware of a loss of autonomy
associated with materialistic values.
In contrast, the next two quotes address the higher sense of control
associated with anti-consumption values. The following quote depicts how
managing one’s spending on clothing is related to self-control.
“But what is really in the balance here besides financial stability is self-control; and
one must always have self-control to some extent. In this case, it is okay for me to
buy an outfit once a month, it is not okay for me to do this every week.”
(http://mandibelle16.wordpress.com/2012/12/11/im-so-sick-of-shopping-and-
fashion/)

This was written as a comment to a blog discussing the fatigue caused

by frequent shopping. This person points out the importance of having
control for her urge to spend beyond her financial ability. This shows
that she is aware of her financial status and is thinking sensibly to avoid
falling into the trap of materialism. Her quote also highlights our earlier
distinction between anti-consumption and non/anti-materialism. Here we
see that she is against over-consumption rather than strictly practicing
non/anti-materialism.
The next quote highlights the power of marketing and advertising,
arguing that ads are made to “attract the eye of the consumer.”
“Now I will give advertisers their due. They have studied and researched their targeted
audience. They have come to understand with precision how to attract the eye of
the consumer, but when we understand their goal, their bias, we can then make the
decision of whether or not to ignore, turn off or turn away from their pleadings so
that we put ourselves back in control. Ultimately choosing to consume less, puts us
in the driver’s seat, rather than the world that is swirling around us. It is the primary
premise of living a simply luxurious life that we be selective about what we bring
into our lives so as not to be drowning in unnecessary excess that reduces our ability
to enjoy the life we want to live.”
(http://www.thesimplyluxuriouslife.com/why-not-consume-less/)

This quote is from the blog “Simply Luxurious Life,” which revolves
around the pursuit of a simple yet luxurious life. From the blogger’s
perspective, a consumer’s loss of control is partly due to marketing and
advertising, therefore a consumer has more control if they make their own
SPRING 2016 VOLUME 50, NUMBER 1 37

decisions rather than being swayed by advertising messages. These quotes

are in line with the findings from the literature review and therefore provide
support to our framework.

Scope of Concerns

In our framework, materialistic values are associated with a micro

scope of concerns, such as self-centeredness. The following quote, which
is another comment from the Daily Mail article, poignantly criticizes
a woman for her materialistic lifestyle: that she is a “self-absorbed
narcissist.”
“Her house is a mess, her garden’s a bigger mess and she hasn’t worked for years.
But she STILL continues to spend thousands of pounds on clothes, shoes, bags,
tanning products, hairdressers, eyebrow shaping, colonic irrigation, Gym sessions,
specialised food supplements, anything at all that she thinks will make her a better
person. Unfortunately, she’s seen as a deluded, self-absorbed narcissist whose only
interest in life is herself. She could have saved the money and put it to good use
instead of squandering it away. These people need all the ‘Stuff’ as without it they
have to take responsibility for their own lives and grow up.”
(http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2546427/How-adding-cost-clothes-curing-
shopping-addiction.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1493)

In this quote, the woman in the description is blamed for living a life
that is only for herself. It is interesting to see that she is also criticized for
not spending her money toward “good use,” perhaps referring to charity or
donation. It was quite common to find people suggesting that materialistic
individuals should spend more for others, rather than for themselves.
However, others oppose this idea, arguing that people have right to spend
their own money the way they want. As the next quote, extracted from a
discussion board “Is buying expensive clothing wrong?” suggests:
“Life’s too short though, you’ve got to be a bit selfish, let’s be honest. Enjoy yourself,
might as well.
And if you think about, some people should enjoy themselves a bit.
And in reality, a bit of charity isn’t going to help poverty, it’s more of a developmental
issue.”
(http://www.bungie.net/en/Forum/Post?id=2772888)

While this quote agrees that “enjoying themselves” may be selfish, it

still validates the idea that it is acceptable for people to enjoy their life
as they want. This quote also supports the framework by acknowledging
self-centeredness as a materialistic value. However, it provides a different
perspective; that it is okay for people to spend their own money the way
they want.
38 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

In contrary, anti-consumption values were typically associated with hav-

ing a macro scope of concerns, meaning that a person’s anti-consumption
behavior may be related to their concern for the environment or commu-
nity. These views are reflected in the next two quotes. By rejecting what is
not needed and reducing their ecological footprint, these people are trying
to reclaim a more sustainable lifestyle.
“I believe that it is not only up to residents, but also businesses to show care for the
environment and lead by example. And as you already know, I strongly believe that
one must ‘Refuse the things that we do not need or do not want to support in order
to be sustainable.’”
(http://zerowastehome.blogspot.co.nz/search/label/Refuse)

The phrase “refuse the things that we do not need or do not want to sup-
port” precisely shows that anti-consumption may derive from the concerns
for sustainability. Compared to the previous quotes about materialistic indi-
viduals, anti-consumers seem to consider more than their own well-being.
The next quote shows a mother’s concern for her daughter and the world
she is going to live in 50 years later.
“We often buy highly packaged food from our local supermarket chain just to save
time. We drive our cars almost everywhere (again to save time). But this is going to
change. I plan to blog our family’s journey towards living a more sustainable life and
decreasing our ecological footprint, particularly that of Little Eco. She (her daughter)
is my main motivation for making these changes. It saddens me to think about what
sort of earth we are leaving her. What will she think of us in 50 years’ time when
she looks back at the way we lived our lives? At this stage of her life we have total
control of how big her ecological footprint is. Is it fair to leave her with an ecological
debt that may take her years of sustainable living and good deeds to pay off?”
(http://www.littleecofootprints.com/2008/12/my-eco-blogging-journey-begins.html)

Both quotes were from blogs related to sustainability and voluntary

simplicity. For this reason, there were many postings about reducing
waste and over consumption. The existence of these blogs supports our
assumption that some anti-consumption values are driven by a wider scope
of affairs, such as concern for the others and the environment.

Material Desire

The positive relationship between materialistic values and material

desire is almost self-explanatory; materialistic people have a higher
material desire. The following person from the Babycenter community
colloquially explains that even though her family is “tight for money,” she
would still “almost die to have” some expensive fashion items.
SPRING 2016 VOLUME 50, NUMBER 1 39

“I think it’s a matter of the lifestyle you’re accustomed to. My family is tight for
money but that doesn’t stop me from drooling over the 200 dollar purse or the 300
dollar boots I would almost die to have. It’s a matter of you and what you want.
There’s nothing wrong with materialism. I don’t agree with people who make that
their self-worth but hey if you work hard for your money and you’ve done what you
got to do to afford those things GO FOR IT. And to hell with anyone who has an
issue with that. :)”
(http://community.babycenter.com/post/a18258915/whats_so_wrong_about_being_
materialistic?cpg=12)

She justifies her desire by saying that people should have rights to use
their own money however they want, which is concurrent with quotes
discussed in the previous section. It is interesting to see her defense toward
the material desire, saying “there’s nothing wrong with materialism.” On
the other hand, the next quote criticizes this desire as “greed.”
“I think it comes down to greed. These concerns and wants of materialistic items or
money will only cause greed. It’s like all of the Brawlmart stuff you see on Black
Friday … it’s sickening. ”
(http://soulpancake.com/conversations/view/122433/whats-wrong-with-being-
materialistic.html)

This person refers to the extensive sales in the United States at Walmart
on Black Friday, where people commonly “camp out” near the store,
lining up to enter as early as possible. Rampant fights often occur among
customers who are eager to grab the best priced items, which have earned
Walmart the disgraceful name of “Brawlmart.”
We also found contrasting data for anti-consumption, suggesting
that anti-consumers have less material desire, which, again, appears
self-explanatory:
“However, my experiences with ‘shiny new things’ is that it never seems to be
enough. There’s always some newer, shinier object out there waiting to replace what
you just bought.
In my own life, I have been doing my best to get things back to a more simple level.
I used to love to go shopping for gadgets and fun stuff all the time. Don’t get me
wrong, it is fun to go shopping, but I found that the fun wore off quickly and was
back to shopping for more.
Now it seems, I buy less and actually want less. *sigh* I must be getting old”
(http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=199301)

This is another comment from the discussion “what is so wrong about

materialism,” an issue discussed on many boards in various websites. This
person seems to be tired of the endless material desire that cannot be
satisfied. This is coherent with the insatiable nature of materialistic values,
which was discussed in the materialism literature. The last sentence,
40 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

“*sigh* I must be getting old” was particularly interesting because it

reveals the writer’s emotion about this “change” in his or her values. Here,
“getting old” may refer to the maturity and discretion one obtains with age
and wisdom in spending.
The following quote speaks to how anti-consumers achieve satisfaction
despite having low material desire.
“I’ve realised that having everything I want is within my reach. I don’t need more
money; I just need to want less.
Simple living, sustainable living, voluntary simplicity, minimalism, or whatever you
want to call it, isn’t about deprivation. Living with less is about deciding what you
really want and foregoing the rest. In the wise words of Henry David Thoreau, ‘I
make myself rich by making my wants few.’
I’ve been questioning my wants: a new camera, tablet computer, slow cooker and
so on. When I consider these wants against my greater life goals – get out of debt,
have minimal impact on the environment, live in a clutter-free home – these wants
become secondary. My greater life goals seem more important and all of a sudden I
no longer want these things. They may move back onto my list of wants one day, but
for now I like the idea of feeling like I want for little.”
(http://www.littleecofootprints.com/2014/01/how-to-want-less.html)

This quote supports the current definition of anti-consumption: that it

is a conscious choice against specific consumption situations, not neces-
sitated by limited resources. The text suggests that anti-consumption isn’t
about deprivation, or non/anti-materialism, but may sometimes be against
over-consumption and reduced material desire, “wanting for little” rather
than not wanting at all.

Source of Happiness

The last construct in the framework is source of happiness, where we

suggest that people high in materialistic values tend to seek happiness from
extrinsic sources, while those with anti-consumption values tend to pursue
an intrinsic source of happiness.
“I think I am going to just answer the question in your title: What’s so wrong with
materialism? I find materialism wrong because it places things above people. It
shows that your priorities are on transient items that can be bought and sold and
not on people and relationships. Money and therefore things cannot buy happiness.
If you are happy before you have money, you are going to be happy after you have
money. If you are miserable broke, than you are going to be miserable rich. Money
doesn’t change that. If you think it makes you happy, why is that? Oh sure money
can eliminate some worries, it can make life more comfortable, and it may eliminate
stress, but it may make other things more stressful.”
(http://community.babycenter.com/post/a18258915/whats_so_wrong_about_being_
materialistic?cpg=11&csi=2080789937&pd=−1)
SPRING 2016 VOLUME 50, NUMBER 1 41

This person criticizes materialism for promoting extrinsic matters (i.e.,

money) as the source of happiness. She also mentions the common idea
that “money, and therefore things, cannot buy happiness,” arguing that
possessions and money are external to the individual; thus, if a person
is intrinsically unhappy, focusing on external solutions are unlikely to
improve his/her situation. This quote supports the various literature asso-
ciating materialism with reduced CWB.
The next quote says that people expect “shiny new things” (extrinsic
sources) to fill their “void,” but such possessions do not. This quote also
highlights the insatiable nature of materialistic desire.
“I suspect that most are buying shiny new things either with the expectation that it will
somehow fill some void that they perceive exists within them, or to impress others,
which is really just another way to fill the void. Unfortunately, when the novelty of
that shiny, new thing wears off, it becomes simply a dull, old thing. A shiny newer
thing is now required.
None of these actually fill the void, but merely distract the person from its existence.”
(http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=199301)

This quote suggests that when people want and buy materialistic pos-
sessions, they expect that it will fill the “void” and make them hap-
pier. This supports our framework by showing that materialistic individ-
uals try to achieve happiness through extrinsic sources, like materialistic
consumption.
In contrast, the following quote illustrates “A Minimalist’s Train of
Thought,” explaining how caring less about “stuff” makes you happier and
freer.
“If you care less about stuff, it means you’ll care less about image
If you care less about image, you will care more about experiences and memories
If you care more about experiences and memories, you will be happier with less
If you are happier with less, you’ll never want or need for more
The less you want or need for more, the more you will feel free.”
(http://www.everydayminimalist.com/?p=3121)

This quote is from a blog called “Everyday Minimalist.” As the name

suggests, this blog is about living a minimalistic life, which shares many
similarities with anti-consumption values. This quote is part of “A Mini-
malist’s Train of Thought,” which explains how a thought leads to another
thought which ultimately demonstrates the mechanism of the minimalis-
tic thinking. The quote says if you care less about extrinsic things such
as “stuff” or “image,” you will care more about intrinsic things such as
“experiences and memories” that will ultimately make you happy, which
supports our framework.
42 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

Overall, the theoretically sampled sources have provided preliminary

support for our propositions. The extant literature and our data support
P1, that materialistic values have a negative relationship with CWB. The
text units gathered also provide evidence for P2, that materialistic and
anti-consumption values are divergent on four key constructs (Control over
Consumption; Scope of Concerns; Material Desire, and Source of Happi-
ness). Finally, given P1 and P2 are supported, P3, that anti-consumption
values have a positive relationship with CWB, also seems indicatively plau-
sible given the qualitative data presented.

CONTRIBUTION AND IMPLICATIONS

The current anti-consumption literature lacks research on the con-

sequences of anti-consumption, in particular about the impact of
anti-consumption on individual consumers. This research contributes
to the literature by exploring how anti-consumption values may be specif-
ically related to CWB. This adds insights to the relatively new field of
research, and enhances an overall understanding of anti-consumption.
Moreover, we contribute to the CWB literature by suggesting a positive
relationship between anti-consumption and CWB.
In terms of practical implications, as public and governmental
attention turns toward subjective measures of CWB, more people
may be interested in behavior that improves their well-being. Such
goals may result in increasing numbers of people turning away
from traditional material-driven consumption patterns toward more
anti-consumption-based lifestyles, which we propose are highly compat-
ible with CWB. For instance, spending money on experience (i.e., travel
overseas), rather than material possessions (Carter and Gilovich 2010,
2012; Tatzel 2002). These people are likely to agree with anti-consumption
values more so than materialistic values. Previously, anti-consumption
phenomena were perceived as a challenge for marketers and managers
due to their emphasis on rejecting consumption. However, the notion of
experiential spending may have implications for marketing managers in
terms of targeting individuals with anti-consumption values, especially if
such a shift in society develops.
In terms of public policy, the positive relationship between
anti-consumption values and CWB may be utilized to encourage
pro-environmental behavior. Unlike the prevalent belief that there exists
a conflict between sustainable consumption and personal satisfaction,
our research argues that environmentally responsible and macro-oriented
anti-consumption behaviors can also be positively associated with
SPRING 2016 VOLUME 50, NUMBER 1 43

happiness. Therefore, rather than focusing on negative reasons, such

as promoting sustainability through fear of climate change, public pol-
icymakers could encourage environmentally friendly consumption by
highlighting the positive effects of anti-consumption values on CWB,
effects such as increased autonomy and intrinsic happiness.

LIMITATIONS, FUTURE RESEARCH, AND CONCLUSION

While this paper makes a novel contribution by proposing, for the

first time, the relationship between materialism, anti-consumption, and
CWB, we only assumed one direction of influence: from materialism
and anti-consumption toward CWB. However, similar to most work on
materialism, one question is whether lower (higher) CWB influences
people to develop materialistic (anti-consumption) values in the first place,
rather than their level of CWB being driven by these values. To remain
within the scope of this paper, we did not address this issue of causality,
which future research could consider.
The exploratory nature of the present research is another limitation. We
collected online data that were publicly available; however, we did not con-
duct empirical research. In addition to testing our proposed relationships
(perhaps with survey data or an experiment), future empirical research may
also attempt to interview the bloggers and comment posters directly.
To conclude, we began by discussing why materialism is negatively
associated with CWB. We then expanded this discussion to include
the concept of anti-consumption. Anti-consumption, or the phenomena
against consumption, provides a stark contrast to materialism. Thus,
we proposed that if materialism has a negative relationship with CWB,
then anti-consumption may have a positive relationship with CWB. A
propositional framework was developed, and, using qualitative data col-
lected from online blogs, forums, and websites, we provided preliminary
support for our ideas, suggesting that future research would be worth-
while. Our brief discussion of the difference between anti-consumption
and non/anti-materialism further contributes to the area by: (1) posi-
tioning anti-consumption as a more appropriate contrast to materialism,
one that is positively associated with CWB and (2), highlighting that
non/anti-materialism, which is the concrete opposite of materialism
is not only impossible, but negatively associated with CWB. Overall,
despite being exploratory, this research contributes to the special issue
and domain by elucidating the relationship among anti-consumption,
materialism, and CWB.
44 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

REFERENCES
Ahuvia, Aaron C. and Nancy Y. Wong. 2002. Personality and Values Based Materialism: Their
Relationship and Origins. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12 (4): 389–402.
Ahuvia, Aaron, Crystal Scott, and Elif Izberk Bilgin. 2010. Consumer Well-Being. In Wiley Interna-
tional Encyclopedia of Marketing. Part 3: 1–2. DOI: 10.1002/9781444316568.wiem03035.
Alcott, Blake. 2008. The Sufficiency Strategy: Would Rich-world Frugality Lower Environmental
Impact? Ecological Economics, 64 (4): 770–786.
Banarjee, Bobby and Kim McKeage. 1994. How Green Is My Value: Exploring the Relationship
Between Environmentalism and Materialism. Advances in Consumer Research, 21: 147–147.
Bauer, Monika A., James E.B. Wilkie, Jung K. Kim, and Galen V. Bodenhausen. 2012. Cuing Con-
sumerism: Situational Materialism Undermines Personal and Social Well-Being. Psychological
Science, 23 (5): 517–523. DOI: 10.2307/41489733.
Belk, Russell W. 1984. Three Scales to Measure Constructs Related to Materialism: Reliability,
Validity, and Relationships to Measures of Happiness. Advances in Consumer Research, 11 (1):
291–297.
———. 1985. Materialism: Trait Aspects of Living in the Material World. Journal of Consumer
Research, 12 (3): 265–280.
———. 1988. Possessions and the Extended Self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (2): 139–168.
DOI: 10.2307/2489522.
Belk, Russell W., Güliz Ger, and Søren Askegaard. 2003. The Fire of Desire: A Multisited Inquiry into
Consumer Passion. Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (3): 326–351.
Black, Iain. 2010. Sustainability Through Anti-consumption. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 9 (6):
403–411.
Black, Iain R. and Helene Cherrier. 2010. Anti-Consumption as Part of Living a Sustainable Lifestyle:
Daily Practices, Contextual Motivations and Subjective Values. Journal of Consumer Behaviour,
9 (6): 437–453.
Borgmann, Albert. 2000. The Moral Complexion of Consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 26
(4): 418–422.
Brickman, Philip and Donald T. Campbell. 1971. Hedonic Relativism and Planning the Good Society.
In Adaptation Level Theory: A Symposium, edited by Mortimer H. Appley (287–302). New York:
Academic Press.
Brown, Kirk Warren and Tim Kasser. 2005. Are Psychological and Ecological Well-Being Compatible?
The Role of Values, Mindfulness, and Lifestyle. Social Indicators Research, 74 (2): 349–368.
Burroughs, James E. and Aric Rindfleisch. 2002. Materialism and Well-Being: A Conflicting Values
Perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (3): 348–370. DOI: 10.1086/344429.
———. 2011. What Welfare? On the Definition and Domain of Consumer Research and the Foun-
dational Role of Materialism. In Transformative Consumer Research for Personal and Collective
Well-being, edited by Simone Pettigrew, Connie Pechmann, and Julie L. Ozzanne (245–262). New
York: Taylor & Francis.
Carter, Travis J. and Thomas Gilovich. 2010. The Relative Relativity of Material and Experiential
Purchases. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98 (1): 146–159.
———. 2012. I Am what I Do, not what I Have: The Differential Centrality of Experiential and
Material Purchases to the Self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102 (6): 1304–1317.
DOI: 10.1037/a0027407.
Charmaz, Kathy. 2000. Grounded Theory: Objectivist and Constructivist Methods. In Handbook of
Qualitative Research, edited by Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Chatzidakis, Andreas and Michael S.W. Lee. 2013. Anti-consumption as the Study of Reasons Against.
Journal of Macromarketing, 33 (3): 190–203.
Cherrier, Hélène. 2009. Anti-Consumption Discourses and Consumer-Resistant Identities. Journal of
Business Research, 62 (2): 181–190.
SPRING 2016 VOLUME 50, NUMBER 1 45

Cherrier, Hélène and Jeff Murray. 2002. Drifting Away from Excessive Consumption: A New Social
Movement Based on Identity Construction. Advances in Consumer Research, 29: 245–247.
Craig-Lees, Margaret and Constance Hill. 2002. Understanding Voluntary Simplifiers. Psychology &
Marketing, 19 (2): 187–210.
Dalai Lama XIV. September 1997. The Purpose of Life. From the Speech of His Holiness the Dalai
Lama at the Forum 2000 Conference, Prague, Czech Republic.
Dalli, Daniele, Simona Romani, and Giacomo Gistri. 2006. Brand Dislike: Representing the Negative
Side of Consumer Preferences. Advances in Consumer Research, 33: 87–95.
Diener, Ed. 2009. Subjective Well-being. In The Science of Well-being, edited by Ed Diener (11–58).
Dordrecht, Heidelberg, London, New York: Springer.
Diener, Ed and Robert Biswas-Diener. 2002. Will Money Increase Subjective Well-Being? Social
Indicators Research, 57 (2): 119–169.
Diener, Ed and Martin E.P. Seligman. 2004. Beyond Money Toward an Economy of Well-Being.
Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5 (1): 1–31.
Diener, Ed, Eunkook M. Suh, Richard E. Lucas, and Heidi L. Smith. 1999. Subjective Well-being:
Three Decades of Progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125 (2): 276.
Dobscha, Susan. 1998. The Lived Experience of Consumer Rebellion Against Marketing. Advances in
Consumer Research, 25: 91–97.
Elgin, Duane. 1998. Voluntary Simplicity. Toward a Way of Life That Is Outwardly Simple, Inwardly
Rich. Revised edition. New York: William Morrow & Co.
Elgin, Duane and Arnold Mitchell. 1977. Voluntary Simplicity. Strategy & Leadership, 5 (6): 13–15.
Etzioni, Amitai. 2004. Voluntary Simplicity: Characterization, Select Psychological Implications, and
Societal Consequences. In The Invisible Hand and the Common Good, edited by Bernard Hodgson
(377–405). Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer.
Evans, David. 2011. Thrifty, Green or Frugal: Reflections on Sustainable Consumption in a Changing
Economic Climate. Geoforum, 42 (5): 550–557.
Fernandez, Karen V., Amanda J. Brittain, and Sandra D. Bennett. 2011. Doing the Duck: Negotiating
the Resistant-Consumer Identity. European Journal of Marketing, 45 (11/12): 1779–1788.
Gabriel, Yiannis and Tim Lang. 2006. The Unmanageable Consumer. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gilg, Andrew, Stewart Barr, and Nicholas Ford. 2005. Green Consumption or Sustainable Lifestyles?
Identifying the Sustainable Consumer. Futures, 37 (6): 481–504.
Glaser, Barney G. and Anselm L. Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for
Qualitative Research. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Harbaugh, William T. 1998. What Do Donations Buy?: A Model of Philanthropy Based on
Prestige and Warm Glow. Journal of Public Economics, 67 (2): 269–284. DOI: 10.1016/
S0047-2727(97)00062-5.
Hoffmann, Stefan and Stefan Müller. 2009. Consumer Boycotts Due to Factory Relocation. Journal of
Business Research, 62 (2): 239–247.
Hogg, Margaret K., Emma N. Banister, and Christopher A. Stephenson. 2009. Mapping Symbolic
(Anti-) Consumption. Journal of Business Research, 62 (2): 148–159.
Holt, Douglas B. 1995. How Consumers Consume: A Typology of Consumption Practices. Journal of
Consumer Research, 22 (1): 1–16.
Huneke, Mary E. 2005. The Face of the Un-Consumer: An Empirical Examination of the Practice of
Voluntary Simplicity in the United States. Psychology & Marketing, 22 (7): 527–550.
Inglehart, Ronald. 1981. Post-Materialism in an Environment of Insecurity. American Political Science
Review, 75 (4): 880–900.
Iyer, Rajesh and James A. Muncy. 2009. Purpose and Object of Anti-consumption. Journal of Business
Research, 62 (2): 160–168.
Karabati, Serdar and Zeynep Cemalcilar. 2010. Values, Materialism, and Well-Being: A Study
with Turkish University Students. Journal of Economic Psychology, 31 (4): 624–633. DOI:
10.1016/j.joep. 2010.04.007.
46 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

Kashdan, Todd B. and William E. Breen. 2007. Materialism and Diminished Well-Being: Experiential
Avoidance as a Mediating Mechanism. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 26 (5): 521–539.
DOI: 10.1521/jscp. 2007.26.5.521.
Kasser, Tim and Aaron Ahuvia. 2002. Materialistic Values and Well-Being in Business Students.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 32 (1): 137–146.
Kasser, Tim and Richard 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 (2): 410.
———. 1996. Further Examining the American Dream: Differential Correlates of Intrinsic and
Extrinsic Goals. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 22 (280): 280–287.
Kilbourne, William and Gregory Pickett. 2008. How Materialism Affects Environmental Beliefs,
Concern, and Environmentally Responsible Behavior. Journal of Business Research, 61 (9):
885–893. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.09.016.
Kozinets, Robert V. and Jay M. Handelman. 2004. Adversaries of Consumption: Consumer Move-
ments, Activism, and Ideology. Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (3): 691–704.
Kozinets, Robert V., Jay M. Handelman, and Michael S.W. Lee. 2010. Don’t Read This; or, Who Cares
What the Hell Anti-Consumption Is, Anyways? Consumption Markets & Culture, 13 (3): 225–233.
DOI: 10.1080/10253861003786918.
Lee, Dong-Jin, M. Joseph Sirgy, and Chenting Su. 1998. International Quality-of-Life Orientation:
The Construct, Its Antecedents, and Consequences. Research in Marketing, 14: 151–184.
Lee, Dong-Jin, M. Joseph Sirgy, Val Larsen, and Newell D. Wright. 2002. Developing a Subjective
Measure of Consumer Well-Being. Journal of Macromarketing, 22 (2): 158–169.
Lee, Michael S.W., Karen V. Fernandez, and Michael R. Hyman. 2009a. Anti-consumption:
An Overview and Research Agenda. Journal of Business Research, 62 (2): 145–147. DOI:
10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.01.021.
Lee, Michael S.W., Judith Motion, and Denise Conroy. 2009b. Anti-consumption and Brand Avoid-
ance. Journal of Business Research, 62 (2): 169–180. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.01.024.
Lee, Michael S.W., Hélène Cherrier, Dominique Roux, and Bernard Cova. 2011. Anti-consumption
and Consumer Resistance: Concepts, Concerns, Conflicts, and Convergence. European Journal of
Marketing, 45 (11/12): 1680–1687.
Leonard-Barton, Dorothy. 1981. Voluntary Simplicity Lifestyles and Energy Conservation. Journal of
Consumer Research, 8 (3): 243–252.
Littler, Jo. 2005. Beyond the Boycott: Anti-Consumerism, Cultural Change and the Limits of Reflex-
ivity. Cultural Studies, 19 (2): 227–252.
Lyubomirsky, Sonja. 2011. Hedonic Adaptation to Positive and Negative Experiences. In Oxford
Handbook of Stress, Health, and Coping edited by Susan Folkman (200–224). New York: Oxford.
Malhotra, Naresh K. 2006. Consumer Well-Being and Quality of Life: An Assessment and Directions
for Future Research. Journal of Macromarketing, 26 (1): 77–80.
Maslow, Abraham. 1954. Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper.
McDonald, Seonaidh, Caroline J. Oates, C. William Young, and Kumju Hwang. 2006. Toward
Sustainable Consumption: Researching Voluntary Simplifiers. Psychology & Marketing, 23 (6):
515–534.
Myers, David G. and Ed Diener. 1995. Who Is Happy? Psychological Science, 6 (1): 10–19.
Nakano, Noriyuki, Maurice MacDonald, and Robin Douthitt. 1995. Toward Consumer
Well-Being: Consumer Socialization Effects of Work Experience. In New Dimensions of
Marketing/Quality-of-Life Research edited by M. Joseph Sirgy and A. Coskun Samli (151–175).
Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
Odou, Philippe and Pauline de Pechpeyrou. 2011. Consumer Cynicism: From Resistance to
Anti-consumption in a Disenchanted World? European Journal of Marketing, 45 (11/12):
1799–1808.
Pancer, Ethan and Jay Handelman. 2012. The Evolution of Consumer Well-Being. Journal of Historical
Research in Marketing, 4 (1): 177–189.
 SPRING 2016 VOLUME 50, NUMBER 1 47

Pepper, Miriam, Tim Jackson, and David Uzzell. 2009. An Examination of the Values That Motivate
Socially Conscious and Frugal Consumer Behaviours. International Journal of Consumer Studies,
33 (2): 126–136. DOI: 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2009.00753.x.
Pieters, Rik. 2013. Bidirectional Dynamics of Materialism and Loneliness: Not Just a Vicious Cycle.
Journal of Consumer Research, 40 (4): 615–631. DOI: 10.1086/671564.
Rahtz, Don R., M. Joseph Sirgy, and Dong-Jin Lee. 2004. Further Validation and Extension of the
Quality-of-Life/Community-Healthcare Model and Measures. Social Indicators Research, 69 (2):
167–198.
Richins, Marsha L. 1994. Special Possessions and the Expression of Material Values. Journal of
Consumer Research, 21 (3): 522–533. DOI: 10.2307/2489690.
Richins, Marsha L. and Scott Dawson. 1992. A Consumer Values Orientation for Materialism and
Its Measurement: Scale Development and Validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 19 (3):
303–316. DOI: 10.2307/2489391.
Richins, Marsha L. and Floyd W. Rudmin. 1994. Materialism and Economic Psychology. Journal of
Economic Psychology, 15 (2): 217–231. DOI: 10.1016/0167-4870(94)90001-9.
Rumbo, Joseph D. 2002. Consumer Resistance in a World of Advertising Clutter: The Case of
Adbusters. Psychology & Marketing, 19 (2): 127–148.
Ryan, Richard M. and Edward L. Deci. 2001. On Happiness and Human Potential: A Review of
Research on Hedonic and Eudaimonic Well-Being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52 (1): 141–166.
DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141.
Sandikci, Ozlem and Ahmet Ekici. 2009. Politically Motivated Brand Rejection. Journal of Business
Research, 62 (2): 208–217.
Scott, Kristin, Diane M. Martin, and John W. Schouten. 2014. Marketing and the New Materialism.
Journal of Macromarketing, 34 (3): 282–290.
Shaw, James W. 2002. Materialism, Psychological Well-Being, and Overall Quality of Life. Quality
of Life Research, 11 (7): 661. DOI: 10.2307/4037782.
Shaw, Deirdre and Terry Newholm. 2002. Voluntary Simplicity and the Ethics of Consumption.
Psychology & Marketing, 19 (2): 167–185.
Sirgy, M. Joseph. 1998. Materialism and Quality of Life. Social Indicators Research, 43 (3): 227–260.
Sirgy, M. Joseph and Dong-Jin Lee. 2006. Macro Measures of Consumer Well-Being (CWB): A
Critical Analysis and a Research Agenda. Journal of Macromarketing, 26 (1): 27–44.
Sirgy, M. Joseph, Dong-Jin Lee, Kosenko Rustan, H. Lee Meadow, Don Rahtz, Muris Cicic, Guang Xi
Jin, Duygun Yarsuvat, David L. Blenkhorn, and Newell Wright. 1998a. Does Television Viewership
Play a Role in the Perception of Quality of Life? Journal of Advertising, 27 (1): 125–142.
Sirgy, M. Joseph, Dong-Jin Lee, Val Larsen, and Newell Wright. 1998b. Satisfaction with Material
Possessions and General Well-Being: The Role of Materialism. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction
Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 11: 103–118.
Sirgy, M. Joseph, Dong-Jin Lee, and Don Rahtz. 2007. Research on Consumer Well-Being (CWB):
Overview of the Field and Introduction to the Special Issue. Journal of Macromarketing, 27 (4):
341–349.
Sivanathan, Niro and Nathan C. Pettit. 2010. Protecting the Self Through Consumption: Status Goods
as Affirmational Commodities. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46 (3): 564–570.
Smith, Adam. 1863. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Edinburgh:
A. and C. Black.
Tatzel, Miriam. 2002. Money Worlds and Well-Being: An Integration of Money Dispositions, Materi-
alism and Price-Related Behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 23 (1): 103–126.
Thompson, Craig J., Aric Rindfleisch, and Zeynep Arsel. 2006. Emotional Branding and the Strategic
Value of the Doppelgänger Brand Image. Journal of Marketing, 70 (1): 50–64.
Weinstein, Netta and Richard M. Ryan. 2010. When Helping Helps: Autonomous Motivation for
Prosocial Behavior and Its Influence on Well-Being for the Helper and Recipient. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 98 (2): 222–244. DOI: 10.1037/a0016984.
Zavestoski, Stephen. 2002. The Social–Psychological Bases of Anticonsumption Attitudes. Psychol-
ogy & Marketing, 19 (2): 149–165.

View publication stats