Consumer Identities, Consumer Selfhood, and the Stability of Consumer Societies

CHAPTER 3

Consumer Identities, Consumer Selfhood, and the Stability of Consumer Societies The first two chapters were intended as an introduction to the various dimensions of globalization, with a focus on the rise of consumerism and the spread of a globalized Western culture—elements that are central to the psychological dynamics of globalization. Now that we have established the pivotal role of consumerism in globalization’s sociocultural effects, we turn our attention to the social and psychological ramifications of this new global cultural syndrome. This is not only because we believe consumerism is a core feature of globalization, but also because consumerism may be the key driver of several global challenges (e.g., Alfredsson, 2004; Carlsson-Kanyama & González, 2009). In this chapter, we begin by considering the impact of marketing as a form of social engineering in greater detail. We then elaborate on the way consumer culture transforms individuals’ psychologies and social realities, as we prepare the ground for our discussion of the social identity framework in Chapter 4.

THE ROLE OF MARKETING IN RESTRUCTURING SOCIETIES FOR CONSUMPTION The market, both as an idea of how society and individuals should be hierarchically ordered, and as the sum of private economic endeavors, depends heavily on its verb form: marketing. If much of the social order is designed around the incentive of financial gain, it is marketing that allows this motivation to be fulfilled. Most directly, marketing creates the consumer needs, which then can be met by the market. In doing so, it simultaneously shapes human psychology and human society, infusing both with what we have called the global consumer culture. The claim that marketing’s primary goal is to inform clients of the consumer possibilities open to them seems naïve, if not disingenuous. The Psychology of Globalization DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-812109-2.00003-3

© 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

41

42

The Psychology of Globalization

While this claim has been used to advocate for marketing’s beneficial social role (see e.g., O’Shaughnessy & Jackson O’Shaughnessy, 2002), it is doubtful that many professionals inside the industry actually believe in it. As early as the 1930s, marketing professionals were explicitly looking for ways to create new consumer needs, thus opening new opportunities for their employers (Ewen, 2008). To achieve this, marketers have to instill the idea that individuals’ lives before consumption are lacking, and that they themselves are somehow incomplete. Indeed, by the early 20th century, this strategy was explicitly discussed in trade journals: “advertising helps to keep the masses dissatisfied with their mode of life, discontented with ugly things around them. Satisfied customers are not as profitable as discontented ones” (Dickinson, 2017; cited in Ewen, 2008, p. 39). In this turn away from the specific product and towards would-be consumers, marketing began to deal with abstracts—the fears and aspirations of the public. As an example, consider the history of an innocuous household brand: Listerine. Originally, this signature blue liquid was marketed as a disinfectant, and offered as a remedy for gonorrhea and dirty floors. In 1925, brand managers decided to expand their product’s market, and came up with the now classic tagline, “always a bridesmaid, but never a bride.” This iconic ad campaign featured a fetching, pensive young woman with a sad expression on her face. The accompanying text explained that this woman was on the verge of getting married, but that this happy prospect was foiled because of bad breath. Utilizing societal fears (of failing to get married, of being socially excluded) this ad campaign was immensely successful in boosting sales (Combs, 1979). Additionally, it has had a resounding and long-lasting social effect: it created a new fear in the minds of the public, the fear of halitosis. Thus, the sizable market of mouthwash was largly invented by this ad campaign, which taught people everywhere that they should be insecure about the ever-lurking possibility of bad breath (Levitt & Dubner, 2014). More generally, much of the great diversity of marketing messages that inundate contemporary consumer cultures is reducible to one short take-home message: “You, and your life, are insufficient; consume this to be complete.” The specifics of that insufficiency vary, as do the products or services offered to remedy it, but the recurring theme is clear. Obviously, none of these commodities actually have the power to permanently transform and complete consumers’ lives and selves. This recurring message nonetheless defines the self as perpetually incomplete, inadequate, or otherwise unsuitable for true happiness, success, intimacy, health, and

Consumer Identities, Consumer Selfhood, and the Stability of Consumer Societies

43

so on. This “empty self” (Cushman, 1990) cannot hold without turning outwards—to consumer culture—to find its momentary fill.

Consumer Selfhood In Chapter 2, we reviewed how cultures foster very different forms of selfhoods to match the social structures and value worldviews indigenous to them. We further pointed out that scholars have made conflicting suggestions regarding the type of selfhood that might be gaining currency as a result of globalizing processes. Relatedly, studies tracking longitudinal, macro changes in societies around the world show a degree of divergence as well, with some reporting mostly uniform increases in individualism (e.g., Santos, Varnum, & Grossmann, 2017), while others yield more mixed patterns (e.g., Tse, Belk, & Zhou, 1989). Across studies, however, societies most consistently show changes congruent with the spread of globalized consumer culture (e.g., the importance of effort; Hamamura, 2012). It thus stands to reason that the emergence of a globalized consumer culture would coincide with the emergence of a new form of selfhood: a consumer selfhood. We define this consumer selfhood as the structuring of who and what a person is, and should ideally be, by the mechanisms of consumer culture. Within this context, proper selfhood and identity are to be established, communicated, and validated through various modalities of consumption. These performances of consumer selfhood utilize symbolic options devised by marketers, which are then presented and interpreted by media outlets targeting individuals’ referent lifestyle groups. Because of the dynamic nature of these symbols, individuals are expected to be aware of consumerist trends relevant to their social position and chosen lifestyle, and utilize them appropriately. Proper consumer selfhood hence hinges on combining brand images and habitual consumptive behaviors to cultivate a socially legible lifestyle that supports individuals’ claims for group affiliation, social status, individual distinction, and personal worth (if you remember the latest personalized ads you received on Facebook or Instagram, you are familiar with this). Those who fail to acquire proper selfhood in this context are marginalized as they are rendered invisible and insignificant “nobodies” (Saatcioglu & Corus, 2014). When imagining the type of consumption that can be used to constitute this selfhood, what comes to mind are the trappings of the wealthy materialist (e.g., Prada, Gucci shoes, Rolex watches). These are undoubtedly

44

The Psychology of Globalization

conspicuous exemplars of consumer selfhood. Nonetheless, consumer selfhood can be established using very different forms of consumption, as consumer selfhood pervades every corner of consumer cultures. More generally, specific consumer choices are both idiosyncratic and contingent on the particularity of the immediate social context (e.g., choosing a Rolex vs the newest Apple Watch), while the process by which selfhood becomes defined by performances of consumption is not. Furthermore, while the more commonly recognized option of signaling status through symbolic consumption of luxury items is paramount within this frame (Shrum et al., 2013), consumer selfhood recognizes the potential symbolic power of any and all forms of consumption. Within this framework, even the most mundane, habitual, and seemingly utilitarian consumptive behaviors serve to construct a lifestyle identity and consumer selfhood (as market research is quick to point out; e.g., consuming cereals as part of a health-conscience lifestyle; Bogue & Yu, 2016). Thus, consumer selfhood applies equally to individuals who subscribe to widely different referent groups, and whose consumptive habits span the incredible range of available lifestyles. It underlies the consumer choices of underprivileged urban youths who display baggy pants and extravagant “bling” as part of their intersectional racial and gendered identities. It also captures the trend-conscious adaptation of this “Hip-Hop lifestyle” by affluent teenagers in Hong Kong who wish to signify their rebellion against traditional Chinese values (Callier, 2016), as well as the very different performances of consumption exhibited by a Fairtrade adhering, organic coffee-shop dwelling Yucci (“young urban creatives”; Florida, 2014). Stated more generally, even though the coupling of selfhood and a specific brand symbol or lifestyle marker is always tentative and context-dependent, within consumerist societies the need for such an association remains constant and largely uncontested (Holt, 2002). Because this process of consumer updating and upgrading is embedded within a (Western) perception of linear time, it is often framed as a process of self-growth and self-actualization. What was once a relatively simple task—of achieving and stabilizing a mature selfhood—is now made into a lifelong quest (Featherstone, 2007). This rarefication of mature selfhood is a product of psychology’s influence on mainstream culture. By defining normal development as deeply traumatic, psychology has rendered the normative self unsatisfactory, thus carving a market-niche for its expertise, services, and products (Illouz, 2008). On a more immediate level, however, this type of selfhood has proven to be most lucrative for

Consumer Identities, Consumer Selfhood, and the Stability of Consumer Societies

45

manufacturers of products and services, and is therefore actively cultivated by their marketing endeavors, as shown earlier. The inherent incompleteness of consumer selfhood is the backdrop against which consumerist pursuits are set. Different products are offered on the market to supply symbolic scaffolding for the self, now needed to shore-up individuals’ sense of coherent selfhood and identity. Given the psychological meaning attached to these acquisitions and their indispensable symbolic functions, they become extensions of the self (Belk, 1988), and come to play a role in many self-functions. For example, experimental studies have demonstrated that individuals consider brand choices as expressive of their personal and social selves (C˘at˘alin & Andreea, 2014). Other studies have shown the importance of brand consumption as a vehicle for the manifestation and reification of self-worth (Shachar, Erdem, Cutright, & Fitzsimons, 2011). Research has also demonstrated that the symbolic link between self and consumer products is such that threats to a cherished brand are experienced as threats to the self, eliciting defensive reactions from those whose self is structurally fragile (Lisjak, Lee, & Gardner, 2012). Conversely, consumption of high status goods mitigates the effects of threats to the self by affirming self-worth or compensating for its loss (Sivanathan & Pettit, 2010). Indeed, researchers have recently argued for the inclusion of brand ownership as an integral part of contemporary self-worth (in a sample of British adolescents; Isaksen & Roper, 2016). Another branch of experimental literature has demonstrated that consumption has metaphysical functions as well. When human beings are confronted by the certainty of their eventual death, they tend to bolster their support of the prevailing cultural worldview and their personal value within it. Within consumer culture, the existential insecurity evoked by thinking of one’s impending death had been shown to drive individuals to believe their future is full of consumerist promises and delights (Arndt, Solomon, Kasser, & Sheldon, 2004). For instance, compared to individuals not reminded of their mortality, those who were reminded expected greater financial success and intended to spend more on pleasurable acquisitions (Ferraro, Shiv, & Bettman, 2005). They also tended to behave in greedier, more selfish ways in a social-dilemma simulation, grabbing as many resources as they could, without considering others’ share, or the sustainability of the system (Ferraro et al., 2005). Other studies have replicated the findings such that under conditions of mortality salience participants intended to buy more (e.g., Das, Duiven,

46

The Psychology of Globalization

Arendsen, & Vermeulen, 2014), exceed their budget by a greater sum (Mandel & Smeesters, 2008), and spend more money on luxury items (Chopik & Edelstein, 2014). These effects were later shown not to extend to participants who follow frugal, anticonsumeristic lifestyles (Nepomuceno & Laroche, 2016). This finding is not surprising from the current perspective, however, as that variant of consumer selfhood builds on consumption of niche products (Fairtrade items, urban farming supplies, etc.) and rejection of mainstream consumptive practices. The study’s operationalization of consumerism as intent to buy into the dreams of mainstream luxury therefore does not capture the motivations of this alternative type of consumer selfhood. There is ample evidence, then, to support our contention that within consumer contexts, consumptive behaviors fulfill many self-functions and needs, such as those relating to the desire for high self-regard, selfexpression, affiliation, embeddedness within a cultural frame, and mitigation of existential or personal insecurities. With the virtually unlimited access offered by globalization, consumer goods can satisfy the needs mentioned above more directly and immediately than ever.

THE PSYCHOLOGICAL ARCHITECTURE OF CONSUMER SELFHOOD AND ITS CONSEQUENCES As demonstrated above, the commercial interests that are served by the globalizing context of consumerism make it their business to perpetuate dissatisfaction in consumers. This is achieved by bombarding individuals with images of variants of the “good life” (Dittmar, 2007; see also Chapter 2), and of those who allegedly achieved it. Regardless of their specific appeal (in terms of lifestyle grouping), these images set the bar unrealistically high, while also instilling the notion that everybody can and should strive to reach it (Richins, 1995). While high self-ideals are instrumental in inspiring individuals to improve themselves (Heine & Lehman, 1999), when set unrealistically high they can be detrimental to psychological, relational, and societal wellbeing (Bushman, Moeller, Konrath, & Crocker, 2012; Crocker & Park, 2004). Likewise, setting happiness as individuals’ ultimate goal actually diminishes subjective wellbeing (Schooler, Ariely, & Loewenstein, 2003). Furthermore, by giving individuals freedom of choice regarding which brand to identify with, and which version of the consumerist good life to

Consumer Identities, Consumer Selfhood, and the Stability of Consumer Societies

47

aspire to (through constructing their consumer lifestyle identities, as we will see below), this culture ensures that no one is left without a (largely unattainable) fantasy to chase. This seemingly autonomous decisionmaking additionally serves to strengthen individuals’ engagement with and commitment to their chosen variant of consumerist pursuits (Moller, Ryan, & Deci, 2006; Thompson & Loveland, 2015). The constant stimulation to elaborate and ruminate on an ideal version of the consumer self, prompts individuals to draw comparisons with their actual, current self and always find it deeply deficient. These self-discrepancies then motivate consumption (Halliwell & Dittmar, 2006), as individuals strive to come closer to their chosen life-styled ideal. These ideals, however, are always changing as commercial interests introduce and market new consumer images. Consumer selfhood itself is anchored in the quicksand of brand images, lifestyle depictions, and other consumer symbols dynamically generated by marketers and market responses. Because these are in constant flux, consumer selfhood is never securely achieved but instead must be constantly reformed to accommodate the fluctuating nature of consumer symbols, as new symbolic meanings crowd out the old. Combined with consumer culture’s emphases on externalities of presentation and appearance (Kasser et al., 2007), this inherent dependency on others to provide ongoing validation for individuals’ self-worth and lifestyle performances renders consumer selfhood structurally unsound. Divergent lines of psychological research have documented the psychological vulnerabilities that result from such an unstable, externally grounded selfhood (see review in Crocker & Park, 2012). Reciprocally, psychology has also shown that these structural attributes of the self increase its susceptibility to marketing endeavors and consumer pressures (e.g., Mittal, 2015). All and all, decades of research have almost invariably demonstrated that this type of psychological need-driven consumption does not lead to sustainable increases in genuine self-esteem or general wellbeing. In fact, those who buy into this prevailing consumer myth that a better self and a better life is just around the corner, are generally worse off for it (Ahuvia, 2008; see discussion below).

CONSUMER SELFHOOD AND NORMATIVE NARCISSISM In order to ground the psychological characterization of this emerging form of selfhood, we first turn to studies on what is plausibly the most firmly established consumer culture—the United States. In the last half century, as

48

The Psychology of Globalization

consumerism became an endemic cultural syndrome in American society, individuals’ sense of self-esteem has increased. Based on a recent hierarchical linear modeling analysis specifically designed to identify cohort effects, Twenge, Carter, and Campbell (2017) demonstrated that self-esteem rose in later cohorts of their representative national sample. This finding supports similar conclusions from earlier meta-analytical and large-scale studies demonstrating an inflation of self-esteem ratings among Americans (e.g., Twenge, Konrath, Foster, Campbell, & Bushman, 2008). Contrary to common sense, however, these increases in self-worth have not been accompanied by an improvement in individuals’ psychological wellbeing or mental health—in fact, the contrary can be observed. Meta-analyses have documented a concomitant rise in pathological personality tendencies (Twenge, Gentile, DeWall, Ma, Lacefield, & Schurtz, 2010). We interpret this as a decline in adaptive, genuine self-worth which is masked by two interlocking processes: avoidance of the social failure associated with presenting a flawed self-image, and the rise of narcissism with its compensatory defensive dynamics. First, American consumer culture incessantly evokes an image of a better, happier, more worthy self (Hockley & Fadina, 2015). Within this frame, presenting the self in an unqualified positive way is a normative requirement, and the display of anything less than unmitigated self-love is a social failure (Cushman, 1990; Heine, Lehman, Markus, & Kitayama, 1999). Moreover, the properly achieved consumer self is supposed to be maximally fulfilled and self-assured. Hence, admitting self-doubt is a deeply disconcerting personal failure as well. Indicatively, US American’s scores on self-esteem measures typically form highly asymmetrical distributions, with a majority of responses clustered near the highest possible score. Within this frame, an individual could be deemed to possess an abnormal, “low self-esteem” even with scores well above the scale’s midpoint (e.g., Heine et al., 1999). This process could also account for the reporting of overwhelmingly high subjective wellbeing in Western consumer societies, which is paradoxical coupled with unprecedented levels of depression, for instance (Bushman et al., 2012). If happiness and self-worth are the trophies awarded to the “winners” who fully commit to the dream of consumption, then admitting self-doubt is tantamount to admitting defeat. Besides evoking an image of a better, happier, more worthy self, the second process suggested here is the gradual substitution of genuine

Consumer Identities, Consumer Selfhood, and the Stability of Consumer Societies

49

self-worth with artificially inflated self-esteem (Hoyle, Kernis, Leary, & Baldwin, 1999). While the former is the fully internalized, relatively stable, and underlying sense of an individual’s own value, the latter is a less well-integrated and internalized construct, and as such marked by instability, uncertainty, and vulnerability. According to Hoyle et al. (1999) and other researchers, only genuine self-esteem is indicative of and conducive to individuals’ psychological adjustment. In contrast, defensively inflated self-esteem is a defining feature of narcissistic tendencies, and is associated with a wide range of psychological, as well as societal, dysfunctions (e.g., Kernis, 2003). Support for this interpretation comes from the pronounced increase in indices of narcissism in more recent cohorts of US Americans, in which an elevated level of such tendencies, previously considered indicative of psychopathology, had become the new norm (e.g., Twenge et al., 2008). Indeed, contemporary Americans describe their own national character as highly narcissistic, a view shared by others around the world (Miller et al., 2015). Many scholars have suggested that consumer culture promotes narcissistic tendencies. This seems to be the case because consumer cultures instill individuals with an insatiable hunger for validation, which in turn feeds a porous, structurally fragile sense of self-worth. Personal worth within consumer selfhood is hence dependent on constant reinforcing feedback from other individuals. In light of this need from others to bolster the self, an aggrandizing self-image must be projected at all times (Cushman, 1990). These concerns over image and other externalities, now implicated in individuals’ preoccupation with their self-worth, are a core feature shared by consumer selfhood and narcissistic personalities. Within this framework, other people are instrumental only if they can be used as mirrors that reflect back a glorified image of the self. Such an exploitative view of others hollows out interpersonal relationships and diminishes the capacity to empathize with and care for other people (Kasser et al., 2007). Recent meta-analytical studies offer strong support for this contention. For example, American college students’ ability to empathize with others has declined between 1979 and 2009, with the sharpest decreases occurring in the later cohorts (Konrath, O’Brien, & Hsing, 2011). Employing a very different theoretical and operational framework (i.e., attachment theory), Konrath and colleagues (Konrath, Chopik, Hsing, & O’Brien, 2014) have also documented a decrease in psychological adjustment (i.e., secure attachment) in samples of American college students between 1988 and 2011. This decrease in psychological

50

The Psychology of Globalization

adjustment was due to a decline in regard of other people, coupled with an increasingly positive view of the self. In a universe populated only by the self and its mirroring objects, feelings of exaggerated entitlement are only natural. One of the repeated themes in American consumerism is that you, specifically, are a unique, special, and extraordinary human being (Hockley & Fadina, 2015). In light of this extraordinary uniqueness, the self deserves every consideration, any special treatment, and instant gratification of all needs, even when those are not accorded to less “special” people. The theme of exaggerated entitlement, propagated by consumer culture and manifested in narcissistic individuals, is so central to the characterization of the contemporary American psyche that it appears in the title of Twenge and Campbell’s (2009) influential book “The narcissism epidemic: Living in the age of entitlement.” Continuing with the pandemic metaphor, the contagion of narcissism has spread beyond the borders of American society, carried by the vectors of globalized consumer culture. Thus, other Western societies have seen an increase of narcissistic tendencies over cohorts (Brown, 2012), a trend that now appears even in collectivist societies that were previously mostly immune to this psycho-social pathology. Within the rapidly globalizing context of Chinese society, individuals from more globalized sections of this society (those who are wealthier, more urbanite, and endorse individualistic values) exhibited greater narcissistic tendencies when compared with their more traditional counterparts (Cai, Wu, Shi, Gu, & Sedikides, 2016). Relatedly, samples of Indian and Chinese students (who represent the globalizing vanguard of their respective societies) exhibited higher levels of vanity even when compared to their Western counterparts. The Asian students were relatively more concerned about their appearance and achievements, and while all samples felt like they fell short of their ideals in those areas, this tendency was more pronounced in the Asian student samples (Durvasula & Lysonski, 2008). Other studies reported progressive increases in favorably-biased perceptions of the self in such collectivistic settings. Recent research demonstrated that Chinese individuals are more likely to actively bolster their self-image the more they identify with contemporary (i.e., globalizedconsumerist vs traditional) Chinese culture. This bolstering of the self also increased when such identification was experimentally primed, as opposed to simply measured (Zhang, Noels, Guan, & Weng, 2017). Lastly, the use of such self-enhancing mechanisms to bolster the self seems to increase in

Consumer Identities, Consumer Selfhood, and the Stability of Consumer Societies

51

later generations, as recent evidence showed their pronounced manifestation amongst Chinese secondary school students (Hu, Zhang, & Ran, 2016). The use of these mechanisms stands in stark contrast to the abundance of findings which indicate their relative absence in traditional collectivistic cultures (see review in Rosenmann & Kurman, 2019). These favorably-biased perceptions of the self, however, can either represent normative and adaptive facets of selfhood within increasingly individualistic contexts, or a more defensive self-aggrandizing dynamic (Rosenmann & Kurman, 2019). It is therefore unclear if these findings, in and of themselves, indicate a rise in narcissistic tendencies, or an adoption of more benign Westernized forms of selfhood. Nonetheless, an individualist account of selfhood would have been supported if the increased usage of these self-enhancing strategies in collectivistic settings had coincided with higher levels of self-esteem, compared with earlier generations. However, research has documented the opposite trend, with self-esteem scores decreasing across cohorts both in China (e.g., Liu & Xin, 2015) and Japan (e.g., Ogihara, Uchida, & Kusumi, 2016). This pattern suggests the fracturing of genuine self-esteem as consumerism takes hold in these cultures, in which the presentation of a blatantly self-promoting and self-loving image (typical of American culture) was highly nonnormative until recently (Rosenmann & Kurman, 2019). The current perspective could also contribute to the hotly debated relationship between selfishness and individualism (e.g., Welzel, 2010). According to our perspective, individualism per se may not necessarily lead to selfish, nonprosocial behavior. In fact, the precepts of individualism grant value to every human life, and accord it with inalienable worth. This shared claim to human dignity underlies the discourse of universal human rights, and many humanitarian efforts (see Chapter 2). It is consumer selfhood with its fragile, uncertain, and externally contingent sense of worth that prepares the ground for narcissistic tendencies to develop, as it eventually leads to more selfish behaviors. Taking this to heart, researchers have recently started to look for ways to elicit prosocial behaviors from these normative narcissists, instead of fighting the rising tide of narcissism within consumer cultures (Konrath, Ho, & Zarins, 2016; Naderi & Strutton, 2014). In summary, we have argued that the global cultural syndrome of consumerism generates a new form of selfhood. While this consumer selfhood had originally developed within individualist contexts, it departs from the independent form of selfhood classically associated with such contexts and

52

The Psychology of Globalization

has increasing influence in collectivistic contexts as well. Within consumer selfhood, peoples’ sense of self-worth and identity depends on socially appropriate utilization of consumptive symbols. This selfhood is therefore externally grounded, and structurally unstable, plausibly linking it with the raise of normative narcissism seen around the world.

MATERIALISM AS THE MOST CONSPICUOUS FORM OF CONSUMER SELFHOOD This conceptualization of consumer selfhood is novel, and relies most directly on scholarly work done outside of empirical psychology. As demonstrated, however, psychological science provides ample support for this conceptualization, as well as the means to explore its manifestations in individuals’ lives and, in an aggregated form, in social life. Terms such as “materialism,” “consumerism,” or “capitalism” rarely appeared in quantitative psychological discourse before the 1990s, but today they are widely used within the field. Most prolific is the amassed literature on materialism as an individual-level variable. Integrating the various definitions, Dittmar, Bond, Hurst, and Kasser (2014) suggested it is the “individual differences in people’s long term endorsement of values, goals, and associated beliefs that center on the importance of acquiring money and possessions that convey status” (p. 880). From the current perspective, the materialist individual is the conspicuous exemplar of consumer selfhood, one that ascribes to consumer culture’s most conventional representations. Paralleling the scales devised to measure forms of selfhood related to individualism or collectivism as an individual-difference variable (e.g., Singelis, 1994), measures of materialism can be considered as proxies of conventional consumer selfhood. Indeed, individuals scoring high on materialism tend to be highly susceptible to normative influences (Chang & Arkin, 2002) as they also score high on indices of conformism, conventionalism, and desire for cognitive simplicity (Elphinstone & Critchley, 2016; Kasser et al., 2007; see also Kasser, 2016). They also tend to exhibit higher levels of internalization of and investment in consumeristic conventions, such as those which define body ideals (Guðnadóttir & Garðarsdóttir, 2014; Vansteenkiste, Soenens, & Duriez, 2008). At least within established consumer contexts, these individuals also exhibit high levels of political conservatism (Duriez, Vansteenkiste, Soenens, & De Witte, 2007), and tend to endorse socially prevalent forms of stereotyping and prejudice (Roets, Van Hiel, & Cornelis, 2006).

Consumer Identities, Consumer Selfhood, and the Stability of Consumer Societies

53

Not surprisingly then, highly materialistic individuals watch more TV and do so more attentively (Shrum, Burroughs, & Rindfleisch, 2005). They also show greater interest in explicitly materialistic media genres and commercials, as they perceive those to be valid sources of self-relevant information (Gurel-Atay, Kahle, & Ring, 2011; Lewallen, Miller, & Behm-Morawitz, 2016). Lastly, the consumer decisions of highly materialist individuals seem to be more vulnerable to even the bluntest marketing ploys. In one study, participants had to make a hypothetical choice between an expensive “plus” and a cheaper “basic” cable package. The preference of participants scoring high on materialism for the “plus” alternative held regardless of whether its utility was superior to the “basic” option, seems to stem simply from its premium label (Goodman & Irmak, 2013). In short, highly materialist individuals seem to buy into consumer culture’s promises hook, line, and sinker (Sirgy, 1998), as they continually attempt to secure a better self through consumption (Dittmar, Long, & Bond, 2007; Richins, 2011). As such, research has shown that the materialist form of consumer selfhood strongly manifests the psychological correlates of consumer culture we have proposed here. In a recent theoretical paper, Donnelly, Ksendzova, Howell, Vohs, and Baumeister (2016) reviewed evidence demonstrating that highly materialist individuals tend to espouse selfenhancement and hedonistic values, and prioritize self-interest over concern for other people, the collective good, or moral considerations. They are highly willing to make substantial sacrifices to temporarily elevate their standard of living and level of hedonic enjoyment, which they feel are chronically lacking. Concomitantly, these individuals tend to be highly conscious of what others may think of them, as they are hypervigilant about the risk of social exclusion. Despite this strong desire to be accepted, they tend to feel lonelier, and have strained relationships with others. Highly materialistic individuals tend also to engage in extensive upward social comparisons, contrasting themselves, their accomplishments, and their standard of living to more successful others as well as to media ideals (which they tend to see as relatively credible). They are envious of others for their apparent success and prosperity, and tend to feel like they deserve more than they have. These feelings of anger over not getting their share are tempered by their belief in meritocracy and social mobility. They thus place the blame for falling short of these unrealistic ideals on their own shortcomings. This leads to the finding that those scoring high

54

The Psychology of Globalization

in materialism experience an acute discrepancy between who they are and who they are supposed to be. These individuals additionally tend to worry more about their financial situation and future security, but have a harder time delaying gratification. They tend to engage in impulsive buying and other forms of impetuous consumption, which prioritize immediate rewards over avoidance of future costs. This is plausibly because they tend to believe further purchases would make them happy and finally complete. When these dreams are deferred, highly materialistic individuals feel disappointed, guilty and are prone to self-blame. The desire to escape these negative emotions and aversive self-ruminations then drives them to consume more. In this escapist “consumption mode” they tend to focus on the concrete and tangible, exhibiting highly simplified, rigid thought patterns while tuning out more abstract mental processes. This frame of mind disinhibits their behavior, leading to questionable decision-making which in turn feeds the next cycle of self-blame and aversive self-awareness, to be quelled again by consumption (Donnelly et al., 2016). Indeed, Dittmar et al.’s (2014) meta-analysis of hundreds of samples from around the world demonstrated that a higher level of materialism is robustly associated with lower overall wellbeing and poorer psychological adjustment. The maladjustment related to materialism is both significant and highly generalized, as it incorporates life-outcomes which are not directly related to consumption (e.g., greater propensity to engage in health-risk behaviors and suffer from lower overall health). This metaanalysis also demonstrated that levels of materialism are associated with deficiencies in self-worth. While this connection was evident with regard to overall self-esteem (r 5 .19), it was even more substantial when negative self-evaluations (e.g., persistent self-doubts, high discrepancy between the ideal and actual selves) were tested (r 5 .27). An illustration of this association between materialism and lower genuine self-worth comes from Chaplin and John’s (2007) influential study of children and adolescents, where materialism was the outcome, and not the predictor. In their experimental study, levels of materialism dropped when participants received a boost to their self-esteem from their peers. Importantly from our perspective, this boost did not only make participants feel good about themselves, but also decidedly better than others (Chaplin & John, 2007). In line with our proposed conceptualization here, the positive feedback given in this study seems to have bolstered participants’ narcissistic, self-aggrandizing tendencies and not just their

Consumer Identities, Consumer Selfhood, and the Stability of Consumer Societies

55

self-esteem. Thus, when others already recognize the uniquely valuable nature of an individual, materialistic pursuits become redundant. Finally, these findings are complimented by the results of an ambitious research project linking higher levels of materialism in early adulthood to decreases in individuals’ wellbeing over time (Kasser et al., 2014). This project also included an experimental component, in which a subgroup of participants was educated about consumer culture’s psychologically most damaging influences. Those who discussed these injurious effects of consumerism showed decreases in levels of materialism and increased psychological wellbeing, months after the intervention. This study supports the claim made here and elsewhere, that consumer selfhood, and especially materialism as its most extreme manifestation, has a deleterious effect on wellbeing and psychological health. In sum, the psychological literature describes highly materialist individuals as captured in a series of vicious feedback loops (Sirgy, 1998). They desire to be included and accepted, yet their absorbed self-focus leaves them lonely and detached. They believe they can and must “make it big” by ascending the socioeconomic ladder, but their consumptive behaviors are wasteful and irresponsible. They believe in the fantasies propagated by consumer culture, and when those do not come true, blame themselves but continue to endorse the consumerist system. Finally, these pursuits of unrealistic ideals set these individuals up for repeated failures. They turn to conspicuous consumption to bolster their insecure sense of self-worth, but remain fraught with self-doubts. They put great emphasis on having a highly enjoyable, happy life, but end up less satisfied with the lives they lead, and suffer from poorer wellbeing, relative to less materialist individuals. In line with the current perspective, maladaptive materialism is increasing in prevalence, and spreading around the world, as globalized consumer culture takes hold. Thus, researchers have documented the increase in levels of materialism in more recent cohorts of US Americans (e.g., Kasser et al., 2007). In fact, more dramatic inter-generational effects have been observed elsewhere, where globalized consumer culture was only relatively recently introduced into the local cultural environment (e.g., Gupta, 2011). While these increasing materialistic tendencies strongly exhibit all the psychological correlates postulated here to accompany consumer selfhood, it is important to note again that the two are not synonymous. Materialistic identities are perhaps the most conventional and pernicious variant of this form of selfhood, and as such received the lion’s share of

56

The Psychology of Globalization

scholarly attention (Shrum et al., 2013). Nevertheless, even individuals scoring low on materialism may be captured by the broader conceptualization of consumer selfhood. Without a doubt, the pursuit of material possessions and luxury items to signal status and success is an important part of consumer selfhood. The latter, however, includes also the consumption of nonmaterial goods, and nonluxury items, and their use not only to signal social status, but instead to communicate and reify every facet of selfhood and identity. Thus, lifestyle choices are not limited to material possessions. For example, the kind of vacation people decide to purchase, and the kind of gym they choose to join, are all parts of their respective consumerist lifestyles. While psychological research has demonstrated that such experiential consumption is more conducive to subjective wellbeing than acquisition of material possessions (Gilovich, Kumar, & Jampol, 2015), it is nonetheless integral to the lifestyle (at least of those who can afford it) and thus consumer selfhood of individuals. Moreover, unlike the focus on pricy, highend luxury items in the classic conceptualization of materialism, consumer selfhood is not constrained to a specific class of goods, as any product at every price range can be used in a symbolic capacity and thus be part of the construction of a lifestyle and matching consumer selfhood.

Evidence From Experimental Primes of Consumerism Above, we demonstrated that individuals’ score on measures of materialism can be regarded as proxies for their adoption of conventional consumer selfhood, much like scales of self-construal measure adoption of individualistic and collectivistic forms of selfhood. Beyond devising an individual-difference approach to forms of selfhood, cross-cultural psychology has also demonstrated that different forms of selfhood may coexist within a single individual, and become activated by situational cues (Oyserman, 2017). A large body of research has shown that simple primes, such as attending to a text which uses first-person singular pronouns (e.g., I, mine, my) versus first-person plural pronouns (e.g., we, us, our), creates individualistic versus collectivistic experimental effects (Oyserman, 2017). Borrowing again from this approach, we next review some experimental findings, which we interpret as primes of consumer selfhood, and show that situational cues that momentarily put individuals in a consumerist frame of mind produce effects congruent with our conceptualization of consumer selfhood.

Consumer Identities, Consumer Selfhood, and the Stability of Consumer Societies

57

For example, Bauer, Wilkie, Kim, and Bodenhausen (2012) demonstrated in four experiments that consumerist primes lead individuals to automatically associate the self with self-enhancement values and concomitantly experience higher negative affect. Primed participants also tended to view other individuals not as potential cooperative partners, but as competitors who must be bested. The researchers concluded that “in general, it is clear that the consumer identity did not unite—it divided” (p. 522), to the momentary detriment of those primed. Importantly, the experimental primes used in this study closely resembled stimuli ubiquitous in everyday life within consumer cultures, such as exposure to advertisements, or the simple framing of self and others as “consumers” instead of “individuals.” Another recent project demonstrated that after consumerist primes individuals tend not only to see others as competitors, but also to feel that they themselves are not getting what they deserve in comparison. In these studies, Chinese participants who were unobtrusively cued with reminders of conspicuous consumption (e.g., by responding in front of a palatial Prada store) were more likely to feel like they deserve more than they have, relative to others (Zhang & Zhang, 2016). Consumerist cues additionally affect how individuals relate to their own body, as they come to view it as an aesthetic object submitted to the judgment of others. For example, Chinese and American women’s level of such self-objectification increased after viewing ads for luxury items, even though these ads did not include any portrayal of or reference to the human form (Teng, Poon, Zhang, Chen, Yang, & Wang, 2016). This and other studies (Rosenmann, Kaplan, Gaunt, Pinho, & Guy, 2017) empirically support the contention that consumerism leads to the objectification of the human body (and especially women’s bodies), as was postulated by the feminist scholars who first formulated this important psychological concept (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997). Another type of stimuli that bombards individuals in consumer cultures is the promise of quick cash, easy money, and windfall earnings. Research shows that being given a lottery ticket, or merely imagining the act of buying one, is enough to make individuals think of specific luxury consumer goods and induce a more concrete cognitive style (i.e., lower-level construal; after all, there is nothing abstract about a luxuriating afternoon spent on the yacht purchased with the winnings). Construing the world in this way, these individuals found it harder to delay gratification and exercise self-control in making consumer decisions (Kim, 2013).

58

The Psychology of Globalization

The effects of priming mundane aspects of consumer culture led Donnelly et al. (2016) to assert that these “momentary bursts. . . corresponded to greedy selfishness reflective of loosened moral standards” (p. 307), a conclusion which is also upheld by a growing body of research on the effects of money primes. In more than 165 priming experiments, conducted in many different parts of the world, subtle reminders of money (such as having a stack of Monopoly money placed within participants’ visual periphery; Vohs, Mead, & Goode, 2006) had discernable effects on individuals’ frame of mind, motivational priorities, social judgment, and even perception of physical temperature. Both literally and figuratively, these studies show that money primes make people cold. Primed individuals come to value self-sufficiency and independence over social contact or interpersonal care. They are less willing to help others, or indeed, tolerate the expression of emotions, as they adopt a utilitarian, business-minded approach. This self-focused utilitarianism in turn increases individuals’ task perseverance and performance, and bolsters their support of the “free market” and other hierarchical, unequitable social systems (reviewed in Vohs, 2015). More generally, many studies in psychology have shown the power of such a business-minded approach, epitomized by the adage “nothing personal, it’s just business” to dampen individuals’ feelings of social responsibility and care for the wellbeing of others (e.g., Molinsky, Grant, & Margolis, 2012). When put in such a frame of mind, individuals are also more likely to behave in unethical ways, as the desire to win and acquire resources takes precedence over moral considerations (e.g., Aquino, Freeman, Reed, Lim, & Felps, 2009). Tellingly, bankers induced to think of their professional identity were more likely to behave in dishonest ways than their non-primed colleagues (Cohn, Fehr, & Maréchal, 2014). Taken together, this considerable body of experimental work lends support to many of the contentions raised above about the effects of consumer culture and its accompanying socioeconomic systems. While the specific effects of these primes differ, they have themes of independence, self-focus, and competitiveness in common. Cues most relevant to the workplace, such as thinking of money or even just being in a business setting (Kay, Wheeler, Bargh, & Ross, 2004), seem to foster a narrowing of self to the confines of utilitarian professionalism and bottom-line thinking, which trumps moral or interpersonal considerations. Conversely, primes more prevalent in consumerist settings, like images of luxury items, opulent stores, or evocations of a sudden financial windfall, trigger lapses in

Consumer Identities, Consumer Selfhood, and the Stability of Consumer Societies

59

self-control, judgments based on externalities (even of the self), and feelings of frustrated entitlement, as people compare the realities of their lives with those promised to them by consumer culture. The spread of consumerism through globalization is thus an important phenomenon, with repercussions that affect the health and wellbeing of individuals, societies, and the natural world. We have drawn from various lines of psychological science to begin describing this new form of selfhood associated with the emerging cultural syndrome of global consumerism. It seems as if every generation in living memory comes to perceive the younger generation as being outlandishly different. This is perhaps truer than ever, as younger cohorts around the world may indeed depart from their predecessors in the very way their selves are constructed and organized. Based on the extant literature, we have sketched a rather alarming depiction of this transition. Perhaps we are simply showing our age. Nonetheless, toward the end of this chapter we will try to explain why this form of selfhood, which seems to frustrate so many of our most basic human needs, is expanding across different cultures. Furthermore, and as we will discuss in detail in Chapter 7, the type of socioeconomic systems associated with this global rise of consumerism is directly responsible for the depletion of our physical environments. In order to constantly produce, consume, and discard, this shark of a system (if you recall Kasser et al.’s (2007) metaphor from Chapter 2) needs to devour ever-increasing amounts of resources, and excrete ever-growing piles of garbage. In the following section, however, we expand on the changes to the social structure accompanying these consumerist transitions. As we will see, these societal shifts are responsible for the changing landscape of politics and collective action in this age of globalization (elaborated in Chapters 5 and 6, respectively). They are also part and parcel of the increasing social tolerance in more globalized societies we have noted in Chapter 2.

The Segmentation of Consumer Societies Going hand-in-hand with these effects of consumerism on forms of selfhood are its effects on individuals’ identities. Within consumer cultures, the increased marketing utility of consumer characteristics and their aggregation into market-segment profoundly impacts the basic process of social categorization and group formation. In Chapter 2 we described the

60

The Psychology of Globalization

nascent consumer culture as requiring the incorporation of multiple social classes and categories within the ranks of the mass-consuming public. Stated bluntly, there is profit to be extracted from every consuming individual, regardless of their membership in different social categories (such as those of race, gender, or social standing). This vested economic interest in ensuring the freedom to consume has joined other globalizing processes to destabilize hierarchies based on ascribed social categories: within consumer cultures these social categories are being increasingly redefined as more or less acceptable lifestyle options, which, in order to be realized, require consumption. With more nuanced knowledge accumulating in the social sciences, the consuming public started to be segmented along demographic lines, allowing advertisers to more precisely target their audiences. In this process, social categories became demographic characteristics of individuals, which then could be regrouped into defined market-segments of the consumer public. With time, these groups became increasingly specific, and included not only basic demographic categories, but groupings based on behavioral tendencies as well. This process is coming to full fruition online, as social science, marketing, and technology synergized to make advertising increasingly personalized. Extrapolating from the personal information many people freely report, the content most of us eagerly post online, our online search histories, and the sum of our recorded online behavior, advertisers now rely on psychographics to guide their marketing efforts. Psychographics supplement demographic market segmentation by taking into account consumers’ psycho-social profiles, constructed from indices of their personality, attitudes, interests, opinions, values, and general worldviews (Vyncke, 2002). This psychographic information can then be used to strategically mobilize the most effective source of social influence (which varies between segments; Krishnan & Murugan, 2006), and project a brand image which would be optimally congruent with the segment’s worldview, values, and desires (e.g., Vyncke, 2002). Gathering psychographic data to deliver scientifically guided marketing messages to users, or sell to third-party companies, is how social network sites (and many other online platforms) generate profits (Enders, Hungenberg, Denker, & Mauch, 2008). This business model therefore shaped much of the online world to accommodate the marketing and the commercial interests that underlie it.

Consumer Identities, Consumer Selfhood, and the Stability of Consumer Societies

61

Consumer Lifestyle Identities This dynamic process of using demographic and psychographic characteristics to define market segments has changed the nature of the social identities that were once based on these characteristics. Through targeting consumers by their lifestyle, marketers endeavor to reciprocally create these lifestyles as identity options open to individuals through consumption. Before offering a formal definition for these consumer lifestyle identities, and exploring their significance in understanding selfhood, collective identity, and collective action in consumer cultures, we will illustrate our use of the term. The first illustration comes from the recent history of sexual identities. Sex has ascended within modern and then consumer cultures to an unprecedented status as a core, at times definitive, feature of selfhood. Within the past century and a half, many non-mainstream sexualities were transformed from being abominations in God’s eyes, to crimes against nature, and then to mental disorders (Foucault, 1990). Within consumer cultures, this transformation takes another step, as sexual proclivities become redefined as clusters of consumer habits, that is, consumer lifestyles. A prime example of this collective transformation is the contemporary recoding of homosexuality into a discernable lifestyle: the “gay lifestyle.” While some scholars point to the Stonewall Riots of 1969 as the birthplace of gay collective identities (e.g., Kissack, 1995), others argue that these identities only became widely available later, and for different reasons. While post-Stonewall, a nascent gay identity was embraced by a small subset of socially and politically active individuals, it was only after same-sex attracted men were collectively targeted as a market-segment by commercial forces that it became widely applicable. Starting in the early 1970s, marketers became interested in same-sex attracted men, because of a (largely debunked) image of them within marketing circles as loyal consumers with a great deal of discretionary money to spend (i.e., DINKs— “Double Income, No Kids”). However, effectively marketing to this market-segment proved challenging, as targeted ads could not be run on mainstream media without alienating large segments of the heteronormative society. This lead to the financing of niche media outlets—the first mass-circulated gay journals—developed to cater only to this specific audience and thus allow marketers to safely deliver their targeted messages. These journals could then foster a sense of shared belonging to an

62

The Psychology of Globalization

ephemeral gay community, validate individuals’ incipient gay identities, and further galvanize them through calls for collective political action. According to this account of gay history, its emergence as a viable identity and communal option for same-sex attracted men is largely due to efforts of marketers to effectively target this market-segment (Campbell, 2015). With the consolidation of this social-category/market-segment, and the installment of effective marketing avenues, commercial interests could offer increasingly specialized commodities and services to those who partake in this gay lifestyle: gay resorts, gay nightlife, gay TV shows (and niche channels), gay gyms, and a host of material and cultural products and services designed to cater to “gay sensibilities.” Reflecting these marketing myths and interests, the idealized gay lifestyle is also highly stylized and aestheticized, as gay individuals are casted as connoisseurs of refined tastes and high-end design (Clarkson, 2005). Nowhere is this aesthetic rigor more evident than in relation to the male form, which has become thoroughly objectified, just as the female form has been for ages (Rosenmann & Kaplan, 2014). All these features of this idealized lifestyle now become a part of many individuals’ sense of what it means to be gay, as the consumption of these targeted products and services reifies individuals’ gay identities (Tsai, 2011). Notably, the process of codifying an identity into the rubrics of consumption is always reciprocal, and dependent on consumers’ willingness to engage marketers in cogenerating a lifestyle option. Within the current context, the redefinition of (sexual) minority status as a lifestyle is indeed appealing to many, as it promises greater social inclusion and minority empowerment. As described earlier, the development of this lucrative lifestyle had been crucial to the galvanization of gay identities, communities, and collective actions (d’Emilio, 1983). Furthermore, being integrated into the marketplace as valuable consumers normalizes being gay, and makes its status equal to those of other forms of acceptable human diversity, such as being Jewish or being of Irish ancestry in this American context (Tsai, 2011). This lifestyle formulation of gay identities does not accommodate the diversity of same-sex attracted men as it excludes those who are unable or unwilling to consume it. As the gay lifestyle became established as a mainstreamed identity, adopted mainly by affluent Whites (who were the desired market-segment from the beginning), spin-off lifestyle identities emerged. The “bear lifestyle” option, for example, targets predominantly working class men as well as those who do not conform to the hairless,

Consumer Identities, Consumer Selfhood, and the Stability of Consumer Societies

63

taut, and sanitized body ideals of mainstream gay culture. While these subsidiary identities can be seen as stemming from a rejection of the consumerist gay lifestyle, they nevertheless become hubs for marketing endeavors themselves (e.g., Wright, 2016). For our second set of examples we return to the very different social categories based on religion, which were introduced in Chapter 2. There, we discussed how Christianity has become embroiled with consumer habits in contemporary North America. Minority religions have undergone the same process by which they became increasingly codified into a discernable consumer lifestyle variant. Beyond the cliché of American Jews going out to have a Chinese dinner on Christmas Eve, American Jews were quick to adopt consumer lifestyles (Howe, 2017), including for instance the adaptation of Hanukah to Yuletide consumption (e.g., giftgiving, the “Hanukah Bush”; Hirschman & LaBarbera, 1989) or buying Israeli products (Izberk-Bilgin, 2015). These adaptations were perhaps instrumental in rising within the ranks of American society. Comparably, Hindi traditions manifest in using statues of selected deities as elements of home décor, fashion preferences, and only buying “authentic” ritualistic items imported directly from India (Mitra, 2016). Furthermore, in both cases, various artifacts originating from these religious traditions have found new markets outside of the minority community. Both the Om symbol and Kabballah bracelets were reintroduced as components of consumer lifestyles that bear little resemblance to those of the religious minorities and retain little of their original religious meanings. Because these signifiers originate in nonmajority culture, they carry an air of exotic authenticity, which can be combined with other elements to create, for instance, a spiritually-awakened or New Age consumer lifestyle. As these examples illustrate, consumer lifestyles become an increasingly important source of collective identities for people around the world. We thus define consumer lifestyle identities as an assemblage of everyday consumer practices and performances, which denotes voluntary affiliation with a specific group of consumers (i.e., a market-segment; after Featherstone, 2007). This clustering of consumer practices is subjectively coherent, and provides guidance not only about what products or services are acquired, but also where and how they are consumed. A lifestyle thus delineates the range of appropriate consumer tastes, their specific aesthetics, as well as the rules of their display. These are parts of the form and fashion in which a specific consumer lifestyle (as the name suggests) is

64

The Psychology of Globalization

stylized. Often, these extend also to the bodily dispositions of the consumer: its shape, appearance, and utilization. As the gay versus bear lifestyles demonstrate, this connection to the body, and other less malleable aspects of personhood, may limit an individual’s ability to choose a consumer lifestyle identity for him- or herself. Indeed, biological sex is plausibly the most influential of these aspects of personhood, but by no means the only one. Age, ethnicity, race, and body shape are more or less ascribed factors which limit an individual’s ability to achieve a specific consumer lifestyle identity. Nonetheless, each opens a range of lifestyle possibilities catering to members of that social category. Stated more generally, consumer lifestyle identities are never ascribed. For every ascribed social category, consumer culture affords many different lifestyle variants. It is up to individuals to voluntarily commit to their chosen lifestyle, and obtain its legitimate consumptive enactment. This process redefines many ascribed statuses into achieved consumer statuses, whose successful enactment depends on the individual’s financial and cultural capabilities. This element of volition manifests two precepts of consumer culture: its emphasis on individuals’ freedom of choice, and the ostensibly meritocratic nature of its hierarchies. This consumerist framework thus promotes a form of egalitarianism, as an extension of the social tolerance granted by liberalism. In North America, gays, Jews, Hindus, and the dazzling array of “others” previously excluded because of their ascribed membership in stigmatized minorities, can now find a place in the consumerist mainstream. Moreover, within consumer culture, they can celebrate their previously stigmatized status as it is transformed to give an authentic and exotic flavoring of diversity to their consumer identity. Nonetheless, this equality is always contingent on their ability to mainstream their identities and secure the resources needed to properly enact these lifestyles. This directs our attention to three core aspects of consumer lifestyle identities: their (perhaps limited) ability, as collective identities, to satisfy individuals’ psychological needs, the way they are hierarchically ordered, and how they interact to affect collective action and the stability of the social system itself. These issues require that we expand on the psychological bases of collective identification—an issue we explore further in Chapter 4. Indeed, issues surrounding the psychology of collective identification are essential to this discussion of globalization even beyond their role in shaping consumer cultures’ structures (e.g., Arnett, 2002).

Consumer Identities, Consumer Selfhood, and the Stability of Consumer Societies

65

CONSUMER SELFHOOD AND THE STABILITY OF GLOBALIZED CONSUMER CULTURE Given the pervasive dissatisfaction and frustration which seem inherent to human experience within this cultural framework, we must ask why these systems of social and psychological structuring not only persist, but expand. Beyond the obvious appeal of a system so capable of fostering innovation and technological advances, the answer to this question lies in basic psychological processes, as well as in their interaction with the macro structures of consumerism. On the most basic level, people are surprisingly poor judges of what does and could make them happy and satisfied (Ahuvia, 2008). Because we tend to recall events in ways that are congruent with our lifenarratives, we often fail to learn our lessons, when those run contrary to the teachings of our culture and the way it had shaped our selfhood. Thus, when anticipating the results of a culturally elaborate event (e.g., finally being able to buy the classic car we have always wanted), we tend to rely on that cultural knowledge, and not our prior experiences, when imagining how life-altering this event would be. Given that this promise of completeness (achievable through consumption) is ubiquitous in consumer cultures, all of us come to expect great things from what amounts at the end to just things. More generally, any prevailing cultural system defines and confines what is socially legible, what to expect, and how to make sense of the world. This cultural way of viewing the world and relating to it becomes so engrained in individuals’ psychology (i.e., consumer culture into consumer selfhood) that breaking away from this cultural default is difficult. And yet, the general mechanism by which cultures and forms of selfhood reconstitute one another seems especially efficient within consumer culture. This is firstly because consumer culture is uniquely adept at coopting oppositional ideas and re-presenting them as part of the myriad options it affords. The unconventionality and authenticity of such oppositional ideas often inspire a process of market translation, whereby they become reformed as unconventional consumptive trends with an authentic flare (Featherstone, 2007). These can then be safely reintegrated into the system as new elements and incorporated into a select set of consumer lifestyle identities. These new elements, and the lifestyles they suit, may certainly retain their oppositional stance vis-à-vis other consumptive

66

The Psychology of Globalization

practices; in this form, however, they no longer challenge the system. If any form of anticonsumer ideology can be transformed over time into a consumer lifestyle, then macro challenges to these systems are short-lived, as they are quickly reabsorbed to become a new set of micro identity options for individuals to choose from (Kasser et al., 2007). As reviewed above, this act of autonomous choice is vital to individuals’ continued engagement with and maintenance of their preferred consumer lifestyle identities. What may have started as a challenge to the consumerist system ends up being another facet of its palliative allure. Second, defining globalized consumer culture as the unavoidable result of the “way the world works”—and thus simply the way things are and will continue to be—greatly impoverishes the potential for imagining alternatives to it (Kasser et al., 2007). As we elaborate in the next chapters, this possibility of envisioning a cognitive alternative to the system is a prerequisite for any form of collective action aimed at fundamentally challenging the status quo. It furthermore mobilizes powerful psychological processes to the aid of this cultural system. This is because individuals’ motivation to perceive the social world as just, predictable, and hence controllable become dependent on perceiving the system as legitimate and stable (Jost & Major, 2001). This individual-level desire to justify the system is served by consumer culture’s prevailing myths and internal logic. Within this cultural system, constant consumption wards off existential insecurities and replaces them with an assurance of a better tomorrow lying within everyone’s reach, supplementing religion as the “opium of the people” (Shachar et al., 2011). Complementing these personal beliefs are the social ideologies extoling the importance of effort, which combined with meritocracy, make those promises seem plausible (Ledgerwood, Mandisodza, Jost, & Pohl, 2011). Indeed, ample research has shown that both belief in meritocracy and the evenhanded fairness of the free market serve to boost the system’s legitimacy, and quell perceived threats to the system’s stability (Day & Fiske, 2017). This (arguably illusory) sense of personal control and mastery over future life outcomes is most appealing to those who find their current social standing ungratifying. Indeed, for members of disadvantaged groups, belief in color-blind meritocracy predicts increased physical and mental wellbeing, an effect mediated by a greater sense of personal mastery (McCoy, Wellman, Cosley, Saslow, & Epel, 2013). Simultaneously, however, it dampens individuals’ resolve to oppose this social order, even as it

Consumer Identities, Consumer Selfhood, and the Stability of Consumer Societies

67

positions them at a collective disadvantage (Wiley, Deaux, & Hagelskamp, 2012). These meritocratic ideologies embedded within the globalizing consumer culture thus have a strong palliative function for those who are individually or collectively disadvantaged by the social order (McCoy & Major, 2007). Finally, this cultural framework also promotes a specific understanding of social reality that further stabilizes the social order it enshrines (CostaLopes, Dovidio, Pereira, & Jost, 2013; Kasser et al., 2007). Studies have thus demonstrated that the perception of a meritocratic reality (i.e., meritocracy as a descriptive norm) drives the palliative, system-legitimizing functions described above (Son Hing, Bobocel, Zanna, Garcia, Gee, & Orazietti, 2011). Nonetheless, the seemingly factual perception of meritocracy as a social reality is itself subject to cultural and motivational biases. Thus, Americans tend to grossly overestimate the potential for upward social mobility in the United States, which studies show is abysmally low (World Economic Forum, 2016a, 2016b). This pronounced bias is motivationally driven—it goes above and beyond similarly framed estimation biases, and increases further in magnitude when participants are probed about the upward social mobility potential of people who “are similar to you in terms of goals, abilities, talents, and motivations” (Kraus & Tan, 2015). It lastly increased as a function of participants’ perception of their own socioeconomic class (regardless of whether it was only measured, or experimentally manipulated). This suggests again that these beliefs serve to justify the system and the adoration of those who are positioned highly within it (Kraus & Tan, 2015), by both dominants and subordinates. Another recent study has demonstrated this link between descriptive beliefs in social mobility and prescriptive acceptance of income inequality both cross-culturally and experimentally (Shariff, Wiwad, & Aknin, 2016). These palliative functions combine to create highly a adaptive social system, able to reabsorb dissent, and prevent it from becoming a collective challenge to the status quo. As we will see in Chapter 4, group-level challenges to a social order require: (1) that social mobility of individuals is perceived to be unattainable (i.e., individuals cannot realistically hope to exit their inferior position and enter into the dominant one); and (2) that lower-status group members can envision an alternative to an illegitimate social order (Reicher & Hopkins, 2001; Simon & Klandermans, 2001; Tajfel & Turner, 1979). Contemporary consumer culture frustrates both prerequisites, as it ostensibly provides opportunities for the social mobility

68

The Psychology of Globalization

of meritorious individuals, and defines the status quo as an inevitable (and thus stable and legitimate) state of affairs. The optimal efficiency of this type of social system is not surprising, given the fact that it represents market logic writ large. As such, it is the outcome of the pursuit of self-interest by competing actors, who use state-of-the-art empirical knowledge in the social, political, and economic sciences to guide their efforts. A dazzling array of talents (e.g., in science, technology, creative problem solving) is recruited by these efforts, which in turn loop back into consumer culture and its shaping of human societies and individuals. Consumer culture hence represents the culmination of the precepts of individualistic societies. Nonetheless, the societies and psychologies fostered under its auspices are no longer individualistic, in the strict sense of the term. As reviewed above, individualism is rooted in an ethics of dignity as an internal and inalienable source of basic human worth. Only individuals themselves are capable of jeopardizing their own dignity by failing to live up to their internal standards, or, as Eleanor Roosevelt is purported to have said, “no one can make you feel inferior without your consent.” Within consumer culture, these self-standards become nearly impossible to achieve. Instead, internal dignity as a source of self-worth is substituted by the externalities of an individual’s competitive standing vis-à-vis relevant others, and the self’s reflection in their evaluating gaze. The resultant narcissistic tendencies thus run contrary to individualism in at least two ways: they deny the self its unconditional, internal source of worth, while also denying others that same measure of dignity. Those tendencies, however, are fully compatible with consumer selfhood. Because of these departures from strict individualism, consumer culture can more seamlessly be integrated into non-individualistic social settings. It is perfectly adept at manifesting culturally appropriate content (e.g., tailoring commercials to collectivistic audiences; Han & Shavitt, 1994), as those are absorbed into its formats and mediums. To reiterate, global consumer culture does not eliminate local cultures to make room for some literally homogenized global content. Instead, the accommodations it requires of different cultures and societies are largely made on an infrastructural level, and those seldom attract opposition. These, nonetheless, have profound effects on both the macro level of social systems and the micro level of individuals’ psychology and forms of selfhood. Around the world, then, individuals are becoming acculturated into global consumer culture, and develop their consumer selfhood as a result.

Consumer Identities, Consumer Selfhood, and the Stability of Consumer Societies

69

Similarly to macro cultural influences, acculturative transformations introduced by this new cultural framework do not overwrite preexisting frameworks, but supplement them, enabling individuals to fit into their changed cultural surroundings. A study of cultural patterning of behaviors on SNS media illustrates this (Qiu, Lin, & Leung, 2012). This study utilized a kind of natural cultural prime, documenting the differential use of Facebook and Renren (the Chinese-language SNS) by the same individuals. The Chinese-speaking participants of the study seemed to flexibly switch between platforms and corresponding modes of selfhood. When interacting on Renren, participants behaved in typical collectivistic, othercentered ways, such as sharing information that may be useful for their friends (e.g., travel tips). In contrast, those same individuals’ posts on Facebook were self-focused and somewhat narcissistic, as activities were aimed at self-disclosure or self-promotion. This study thus demonstrated the ability of individuals to go back and forth between behavior patterns expressing elements of the selfhoods which were most congruence with the salient cultural context (as represented by the two SNS platforms). More generally, this study adds to the research reviewed above, showing that when elements of consumer culture become situationally salient, they cue corresponding elements of individuals’ consumer selfhood to produce culturally appropriate forms of emotion, cognition, and action.

SUMMARY As various societies around the world turn increasingly consumeristic, the prevalence of these situational cues is bound to increase as well, leading individuals to elaborate and refine their consumer selfhood. With consumer selfhood gaining significance as a structuring principle of people’s daily lives and their forms of engagement with their surrounding social environment, more self-functions and needs become channeled into the furrows allotted by consumer culture. This in turn further entrenches consumer selfhood in the lives of individuals, and the framework of consumer culture in the macro social systems in which they live.