Elliot (1995) also suggests that symbolic meaning of products have two directions, outward in constructing the social world (social-symbolism) and inward towards constructing our self-identity (self-symbolism). This draws attention to the fact that consumption of the symbolic meaning of products is a social process experienced by the consumer that helps to visibly maintain the basic categories of a rapidly changing culture. According to Douglas and Isherwood (1978) the consumer’s choice becomes a vital source of the culture of the moment and that the meanings of consumer goods are grounded in their social context and the demand for goods derives more from their role in cultural practices rather than from the satisfaction of simple human needs.
Elliot puts forward that consumption is seen as a cultural practice and one way of participating in social life and may be an important element in undermining social relationships while the whole system of consumption is an unconscious expression of the existing social structure through a seductive process which pushes the purchasing impulse until it reaches the limits of economic potential (Baudrillard, 1988). It is within this social context that the individual uses consumer goods and the consumption process as the materials with which to construct and maintain an identity, form relationships and frame psychological events (Lunt and Livingstone, 1992). With the advent of postmodernism and the self-symbolic role of material goods we can become our "possible selves" (Markus and Nurius, 1986). The symbolic focus of much promotional activity in postmodernity is desire "Desire does not desire satisfaction. To the contrary desire desires desire. The reason images are so desirable is that they never satisfy" (Taylor and Saarinen, 1994). Mort (1988) believes that postmodern consumption is in fact linked with aspects of sexuality, both conscious and unconscious as it promises the satisfaction of previously taboo desires through imagery and representations, similar views are shared by others, similarly according to Kellner (1992) and Bocock (1993) there are symbolic linkages between consumption and the human body.
In recent years there has been emphasis on the development in social cognition of the theory of motivated choice, which underpins the theory of emotions in decision processes (Forgas, 1992; Kunda, 1990) This constitutes the theory that motivated choice is where judgement is driven by an emotional desire to arrive at a particular conclusion, where biased information search and reasoning processes are used "to arrive at those conclusions they want to arrive at" (Kunda, 1990). Freedom and control in the consumption domain is typified by the influence of advertising. Leiss et al., (1990) advocates that consumers find it hard to resist the influence of advertising or become susceptible to advertising, by the Marxist analysis of its central role in the maintenance of capitalism. Marxists have also portrayed advertising as a "magic system" (Williams, 1980) of magical inducements and satisfactions which validates consumption, if only in fantasy, by association with social and personal meanings and thus transforms goods which had rational use-value into irrational symbols. This focus on the power of the symbolic which is further developed by Williamson (1986) who argues that advertisements function at an unconscious level at which the consumer is unable to resist dormant meaning transfer.
Willis (1990) argues active exercise of freedom through consumption and believes that consumption choices of the young as the behaviour of practical existentialists, Willis believe that the young are seen as exercising choice through consumption-related symbolic creativity I believe you can see this in everyday life in the form of bright colours, bold text, cartoons and logos. This develops a process that builds higher-level symbolic meaning structures from the ordinary experiences of everyday life this develops a more creative younger consumer that interacts in the social world and Elliot believes the social world can be controllable by them to some extent. According to Elliot, advertisements can be seen as cultural products in their own right, and young people consume them independently of the products and have a creative symbolic relationship with them. Although Willis (1990) sees advertising as manipulative to some extent, he sees the need for individual choice and creativity in meaning and identity construction, as individual consumers use advertising images as personal and social resources. These are invested with specific meanings anchored in everyday life, via the process of grounded aesthetics, which are then used to construct or maintain personal and social identities. According to Bauman (1990) members of society can develop styles of identity this in tern will develop so called tribes within society. Buying and displaying tribe specific products can form these tribes sometimes called “neo-tribes”; this is very common amongst the younger consumer. According to Elliot the exercise of choice through consumption now flows across national boundaries in a global cultural economy through the operation of advertising which are image-centred strips of reality which offer the consumer a series of elements "out of which scripts can be formed of imagined lives, their own as well as those of others living in other places" (Appaduri, 1990).
Desire develops from physical need through a growing awareness of the established choice between a desire to have and a desire to be. “The gap between the fantasy world of imaginary consumption of perfect pleasure and the disappointments of reality is the basic motivation for Campbell's (1987) "autonomous imaginative hedonism" which results in limitless wants and a permanent state of frustration. The limited resources of the individual consumer must therefore require choices to be made, choices of which desire to feed and which to deny, which meanings to consume and which to reject or avoid. This vital act of consumer choice may not be to choose that which is most pleasing, but to reject that which is most distasteful” (Elliot 1997).
Bourdieu (1984) suggests that tastes "when they have to be justified, they are asserted purely negatively, by the refusal of other tastes". The consumer may define himself or herself by what they dislike and not by what they like, Elliot believes that strong negative emotional reactions to the consumption practices of others may structure social categories. “The emotions experienced by the consumer are driven by unconscious desires constrained by the market economy yet obtaining limited freedom through existential consumption and symbolic creativity” (Elliot 1997).
Marketers believe that the real or imagined presence of others can have a significant influence on an individual’s behaviour (Abrams, 1994, Bearden et al., 1989). In their well-known work, Bearden et al., (1989) discuss the importance of the opinions of others to an individual’s consumption behaviour. They identify that consumer’s susceptibility to interpersonal influence is a general personality trait that varies across individuals and situations. Some individuals have a need to identify with or enhance one’s image with significant others through the acquisition and use of products and brands, (logos) the willingness to conform to expectations of others regarding purchase decisions and the tendency to learn about products and services by observing others or seeking information from others.
Kellman (1961) describes three processes that explain how social influence affects opinion change (1) compliance (2) identification and (3) internalisation. Kellman then goes on to describe compliance occurring when an individual accepts influence from another person or a group because he/she wants to obtain favourable judgements or actions or wants to avoid unfavourable actions or judgements this could be true of the mass public today in the United Kingdom even though Kellman’s theory is dated. Kellman also describes identification when an individual adopts group attitudes or behaviours that form a part of a person’s self image and is concerned with meeting the others’ expectations to validate his/hers own role performance this can be applied to the younger generation of consumers who feel that it is imperative to be part of a group. Kellman then goes on to say internalisation occurs when an individual changes his/hers attitude or behaviour because change is congruent with his/hers value system.
Bearden et al., (1989) determines two types of influences that affect consumer susceptibility these are normative influences and informative influences. Normative influences can further be broken down into value expressive and practical influences. Each of these influences relates to Kellmans’s processes. “Value expressiveness is motivated by the individual’s desire to enhance or support his/hers self-concept through referent identification” (Bearden et al., 1989 pp 474). The practical aspect of the normative influence relates to an individual’s hope of achieving rewards or punishment through compliance, this could be said of the younger generation of consumers. Informational influences focus on the use of information from others to increase the knowledge. “Informational influence operates through the process of internalisation, which occurs if information from others increases the individual’s knowledge about some aspect of the environment” (Bearden et al., 1989 pp 474). This could be said of myself as an everyday consumer.
Some research has found a linkage between values and consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence. People who are highly susceptible to consumer influence rate the values of a sense of belonging, warm relationships with others and being well respected more highly than do those who are less susceptible to consumer influence (Kropp et al., 1999). In addition to this susceptibility to social influence tends to decline with age, so adolescents or the young adults are more likely to be susceptible interpersonal influence than are older adults (Kahle 1995).
Methodology: The results of this study are based upon previously written academic work. Most of the work in this review would have been experienced by you and me as ordinary human beings; this means that we have actually experienced this in our very own consumer day-to-day experiences. I believe that substantial research should be carried out on the direct and indirect affects of advertising on the consumers as a whole, I firmly believe that results will differ dramatically due to age gaps, socio-cultural factors, language and location. This type of research should be carried out by implementing questionnaires, individual and group interviews and mass media coverage. The time scale for such research would prove to be a bridge to far, and the research will be flawed due to ever changing consumer and advertising industry, results will be hard to collate, justify, interpret and results will become out dated and obsolete very quickly. The question of how advertising works has exercised marketing thinkers for over 100 years: AIDA (Attention-Interest-Desire -Action), the first of the so-called hierarchy of effects models, dates back to 1898 (see Ambler, 1998). This and similar models of advertising continue to dominate much thinking about what advertising does, although they are clearly a gross, misleading and mistaken over-simplification. This is a problem, because how we believe our advertising should work influences how we set out to measure the effects, either in pre-testing or in campaign evaluation.
With the internet boom on-line polls could be carried out to get immediate responses but this alienates people who do not have access to the internet, I believe there are many alternatives but collating such a varied and culturally diverse set of advertising information may prove to be impossible. Another subject area to study in depth is the direct affect of symbolism on consumer behaviour. This will eradicate conflicting views of academics (Derrida v Sperber), consumers can be surveyed making everyday purchases and semiotic testing could be implemented, this would highlight any biased purchases either towards products with or without symbols. Stimulus/response testing could take place which has it’s origin firmly rooted in behaviourist psychology, problems arising from this type of testing is that it originates from experiments with animals and is only useful for understanding low involvement behaviour. To try and ascertain how a consumer reacts with other consumers will prove to be difficult, how will two different consuming entities with different class, race and location react with each other? From a cognitive perspective this will be hard to achieve, studies of information processing strategies would take place this assumes that the consumer is a complex rational decision-maker. From a postmoderm perspective analysing such a subject area will prove to be difficult as it replaces the search for truth with multiple answers, rejection of a pre-given subject (cognitive and behaviourist). There may also be a deconstruction of a main method due to integration of texts, literature, films, advertising and behaviour theories this would add confusion. There also may be exposes contradictions and unrecognised assumptions. I also believe that a subject area to be researched is consumer behaviour on the Internet, does ‘E-Shopping’ discard the conventional methods of consuming and does the social aspect of consuming disappear? There must be an impact.
Procedures for analysis: Every consumer from every walk of life should be analysed equally this way no bias will be developed. I would carry out undercover surveillance of shopping patterns in small to large shopping outlets, this way you can highlight any patterns of consumption where symbols, influence, consumer susceptibility are involved this should be carried out on a global sample scale. Schoolchildren should be mass interviewed to see if there is a changing pattern within the younger and more susceptible consumer, trends might be set. I would carry out questionnaires on a small sample basis in a handful of locations to see if there are differences or trends developing with consumption within different socio-cultural boundaries. If so what are the differences and how do they affect consumption? Advertising groups such as Verve researchers and Logistix Kid should show simultaneous advertisements to a mass audience to see if reactions differ and to determine if advertising influences a consumer. For an analysis of internet consumption I would conduct online polls and interview internet consumers of all ages, races and background to see if a significant trend is developing that might in turn change consumer behaviour as we know it.
Outputs: This study has confirmed that determining how a consumer reacts to internal (basic instinct) and external (environment) factors such as desire, influence, imagery and susceptibility are difficult to determine. Academics and consumers alike know that we all operate in a consistently changing world that brings about changes daily and this review highlights that many academics conflict on theories such as consumer behaviour, desire, symbolism and consumer creativity. This review may bring to light subject areas that need reviewing for example consistent views and opinions on consumer symbolic interpretation, linkages between consumption and the human body and the affect of advertising on consumption. I believe that Internet shopping experience should be researched, this may change the outlook of consumer behaviour completely the social aspects and topics covered in this literature review may disappear. I would like to cover the topic of Internet consumer behaviour in detail in the near future.
Bibliography
Abrams, D (1994), “Social self-regulation”, Personal and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp.473-83.
Ambler, T. (1998) `Advertising and profit growth', Admap, May.
Appadurai, A. (1990), "Disjuncture and difference in the global cultural economy", Public Culture, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 1-24
Bearden, W.O., Netemeyer, R.E. and Teale J.E. (1989), “Measurement of consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15, pp. 473-81.
Baudrillard, J. (1981), For a Critique of the Political Economy of the Sign, Telos Press, St Louis, MI.
Bauman, Z. (1990), Thinking Sociologically, Blackwell, Oxford.
Bocock, R. (1993), Consumption, Routledge, London.
Bourdieu, P. (1984), Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, (trans. Nice, R.), Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.
Campbell, C. (1987), The Romantic Ethic and the Spirit of Modern Consumerism, Blackwell, Oxford.
Debord, G. (1977), Society of the Spectacle, Black and Red, Detroit, MI.
Derrida, J. (1977), Of Grammatology, (trans., Spivak, G.), Johns Hopkins Press,
Baltimore, MD.
Douglas, M. and Isherwood, B. (1978), The World of Goods: Towards Anthropology of Consumption, Allen Lane, London.
Elliot R, (1997), Existential consumption and irrational desire. (Postmodern Marketing) European Journal of Marketing, March-April 1997 v31 i3-4 p285(1)
Elliott, R. (1995), "Consuming symbolic meaning: methodological implications", European Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 2.
Firat, A.F. (1993), "The consumer in postmodernity", Advances in Consumer Research, No. 18, pp. 70-6.
Firat, A.E and Venkatesh, A. (1993), "Postmodernity: the age of marketing", International Journal of Research in Marketing, No. 10, pp. 227-49.
Forgas, J.P. (1992), "Affect in social judgements and decisions: a multiprocess model", Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, No. 25, pp. 227-78.
Foster, H. (1985), Recodings: Art, Spectacle, Cultural Politics, Bay Press, Seattle, WA
Jencks, C. (1987), The Language of Post-modern Architecture, Rizzoli, New York, NY.
Kaplan, E.A. (1987), Rocking around the Clock: Music Television, Postmodernism, and Consumer Culture, Methuen, New York, NY
Kahle, L. R., (1995) “Role-relaxed consumers: a trend of the 1990’s”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 66-71.
Kellman, H. C. (1961), “processes of opinion change”, Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 25, pp. 570- 58.
Kellner, D. (1992), "Popular culture and the construction of Postmodern identities", in Lash, S. and Friedman, J. (Eds), Modernity and Identity, Blackwell, Oxford.
Kunda, Z. (1990), "The case for motivated reasoning", Psychological Bulletin, No. 108, pp. 480-98
Kropp, F., Jones, M., Rose G., Shoham, A. (1999). “Group identities: a cross-cultural comparison of values and group identities”, Journal of International Consumer Marketing
LeVine, R. (1984), "Properties of culture: an ethnographic view", in Schweder, R. and
LeVine, R. (Eds), Culture Theory: Essays on Mind, Self and Emotion, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Lunt, P and Livingstone, S. (1992), Mass Consumption and Personal Identity: Everyday Economic Experience, Open University Press, Buckingham.
Markus, H. and Nurius, P. (1986), "Possible selves", American Psychologist, No. 41, pp. 954-69.
Mort, F. (1988), "Boy's own? Masculinity, style and popular culture", in Chapman, R. and Rutherford, J. (Eds), Male Order, Lawrence and Wishart, London.
Sperber, D. (1975), Rethinking Symbolism, (trans. Morton, A.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Stephanson, A. (1988), "Regarding postmodernism - a conversation with Fredric Jameson", in Ross, A. (Ed.), Universal Abandon? University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN, pp. 3-30.
Storr, A. (1973), Jung, Fontana, London.
Taylor, M. and Saarinen, E. (1994), Imagologies: Media Philosophy, Routledge,
London.
Van Raaij, W.F. (1993), "Postmodern consumption", Journal of Economic Psychology, No. 14, pp. 541-63.
Williams, R. (1980), Problems in Materialism and Culture, Verso, London.
Williamson, J. (1986), Consuming Passions: The Dynamics of Popular Culture, Marion Boyars, London.
Willis, P. (1990), Common Culture: Symbolic Work at Play in the Everyday Cultures of the Young, Open University Press, Milton Keynes.