Chronological Summary of the Positive Psychology Meetings:
“Finding Alternatives to Materialism”
The Quality of Life Research Center
Peter F. Drucker School of Management
Claremont, California 2000
by
Jeremy P. Hunter
Executive Summary
The meetings of the Positive Psychology Center at Claremont took place on February
25-26; April 14-15; April 28-29 and June 9-10, 2000. It had been decided that the theme for
the Spring 2000 meetings was going to be the question: “What can the social sciences do
to help provide alternatives to excessive dependence on materialism?” The reason for
choosing this topic was the realization that while the U.S. has achieved a position of
global leadership in terms of economic productivity and democratic institutions, this
achievement had not been matched by a vision of a good life to which all could aspire
without exhausting the resources of the planet along the way. Is there a way to slow
down the increasingly frantic cycles of production and consumption, while at the same
time improving the quality of life?
To answer this question, fifteen individuals, five at a time, were invited each for a
weekend in February, April, and June 2000. The idea was to keep meetings small to
optimize diversity while allowing constant face-to-face participation. The schedule was
as follows: informal get-together Thursday evening; full discussions Friday and Saturday
interspersed with outdoors walks, and departure Sunday morning. In advance of the
meetings, each participant was assigned a question on which he or she was expected to
lead a 2-hour discussion. For instance the Director of Education of the Getty Museum
was asked to speak to the issue: “What can aesthetic education contribute to setting
limits to materialism?” One relevant publication for each participant was also circulated
among the whole group in advance of the meeting.
Meeting 1: February 25-27, 2000
Meeting 1: February 25-26, 2000
Participants:
Diane Brigham, Director of Education, Getty Museum, L.A.
Robert Emmons, Psychology, UC Davis
Alexandra Freund, Max Planck Institute, Berlin
David Mick, Univ. of Wisconsin Business School, Madison, WI.
Ken Sheldon, Psychology, Univ. of Missouri
Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, CGU
Jeanne Nakamura, CGU
Jeremy Hunter, CGU
The meetings were intense and extremely stimulating. The conversation across
disciplinary boundaries was to the point and free of jargon or professional pretense. An
enormous number of ideas emerged, and some of the highlights are reported below.
Basically, the group agreed that: a) there is increasing evidence in the social sciences to
the effect that the correlation of material well-being and subjective well-being is very
weak; b) this fact is not believed by society at large. Taken together, these two facts pose
a danger for the future, when all the nations of the world will try to outdo each other in
efforts to increase subjective well-being by consuming more and more material resources.
What can psychology and the other social sciences do to avert the worst consequences of
runaway materialism? The consensus of the group focused on two strategies:
1. Continue research on the relationship between wealth, consumption, and
happiness. At the same time, find ways of letting people know how low the
correlation is between material and subjective well-being. In this effort, it is
important to popularize findings in a dramatic way, enlisting as spokespersons
opinion leaders and media stars like Oprah Winfrey.
2. Increase research on conditions that support traits leading to subjective
well-being without necessarily depending on material resources, such as
autonomy, spirituality, and intrinsic motivation. The group concluded that it
was important to enlist organizations that would benefit from such knowledge,
including the World Council of Churches, the YMCA, the 4H, the Boy Scouts.
Also, practices that provide alternatives to exclusive addiction to material
consumption ought to be of interest to enlightened businessmen concerned
with maintaining a vibrant civil society in a sustainable environment.
Friday AM Notes:
Meeting 1: February 25-27, 2000
David Mick started the morning discussions asking “Does Consumer Research Offer
Hopeful News about Limiting Materialism?” David provided and overview of the history
of the role of materialism in consumer research:
1970s—Environmental Research
1980s—Definitions, Scales, Correlates of Materialism.
(Russell Belk)
1990s—New Perspectives and Research on Materialism.
1. Sacred and Profane, Belk, et al.
2. Historical, Cross-cultural, self-identity (Belk)
3. Meaning, Measure and Morality of Materialism (Rudmin, Richins)
4. Materialism as Dependence (Mick, Fournier)
5. Consumer Boycotts and Resistance (Dobscha, Mick)
6. Voluntary Simplicity (Rudmin, Kilbourne)
7. Homelessness and Poverty (Hill, Holt)
8. Critical Theory
He then proposed the following alternative questions:
1. “Can Consumer Researchers Help to Limit Materialism?”
2. “Why Should Consumer Researchers Help to Limit Materialism?”
3. “How Should Consumer Researchers Help to Limit Materialism?
4. “Will Consumer Researchers Help to Limit Materialism?”
David also went on to say that the real problem was addiction to materialism noting
that human beings, being sophisticated tool users, depend on material objects for
survival. So the human dependence on objects has existed nearly as long as humanity
itself, and certainly longer than civilized humanity. However, dependence can be taken
to an extreme case where the object plays no larger role in the person’s life outside of the
temporary psychic gratification gained through acquisition/possession. It is this
phenomenon, which seems especially pernicious in consumer cultures. Mick notes a
distinction raised by Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton of Instrumental versus
Terminal Materialism. Terminal materialism typifies the case where an object is
consumed for no other purpose than to consume it. Carried out on a mass scale, this type
of behavior causes mass waste with little overall psychic gain. Conversely, instrumental
materialism is a case where an object leads to other ends, for example, the case of a car
that offers transportation to work, mobility, etc.
David pointed out the connection between terminal materialism and the Buddhist
concept of mindlessness. Mindlessness can be described as a state where a person does
not pay full attention to his/her surroundings, internal feelings/motivations/cognitions,
etc. Mick suggested that terminal materialistic behavior is an expression of automatic
behavior encouraged by constant commercial messages. One remedy to this state of
affairs is a cultivation of greater sensitivity to one’s purchasing motives and the role that
things play in life. Furthermore, the idea was raised that people may not be materialistic
enough and only gain a shallow appreciation for the things they buy and quickly tire of.
Meeting 1: February 25-27, 2000
Bob Emmons raised the issue of gratitude and materialism suggesting that by
appreciating things more fully, more value can be extracted from them and the need to
quickly accumulated something else decreases. This could perhaps be called “Deep
Materialism” or “Positive Materialism.” Skillful consumption could be incorporated into a
education program for youth through schools, churches, etc. Bob Emmons went on to
discuss: “To What Extent Can Spirituality Provide Limits to Materialism”
Relationship between Spirituality and Materialism:
Emmons reports that there are 4 distinct forms of relating spiritualism and materialism.
1.
Mutual Exclusivity: as exemplified by an anti-materialist message in Bible
(cf. Ecclesiastes), in De Tocqueville, etc.
2.
Affluence Fueling Spirituality: This generally results from dissatisfaction
with high material attainment and provokes search for deeper truths,
3.
Isomorphism: “Salvation through Stuff”; shopping as religious activity
(Leach’s Land of Desire history of department store development and role
of religion in dep’t store design) and
4.
Spirituality Leading to Materialism where God helps “chosen ones” both
spiritually and financially (a.k.a. “Prosperity Gospel” or “Consumer
Evangelism”).
“Consumption is an issue suited for faith communities. Among the institutions of our
society, only the church and the synagogue and the mosque can still posit some reason
for human existence other than the constant accumulation of stuff” (McKibben, 1996).
Emmons also discussed the role of conditionality and happiness, citing the research of
Bill McIntosh. He examined the behavior of “linkers” and “non-linkers.” Linkers are
people who believe that their happiness is contingent on the attainment of important
goals, whereas non-linkers are less attached to the outcomes of particular goals.
Spiritual Alternatives to “Affluenza”
Emmons named at least three alternatives to a materialistic way of life.
1.
2.
3.
Consecrated consumption/stewardliness: “Nurturing Nature” where
humans take on the role of guardians of nature and realize human
responsibility for its impact on nature and duty to protect it.
Voluntary Simplicity: “Less is More” A nascent social movement of
“downshifting” where people consciously choose remove themselves from
the “Accumulation Game” and emphasize other values like social
relationships, volunteerism, etc.
Cultivating Virtue, which provides alternatives goals from a materialistic
way of life, for example the fostering of gratitude (“Wanting what you
have”)…Bob suggests developing research on inducing gratitude in everyday
life. Coins “Possession Obsession” Ad campaign: “Got Gratitude?”
Meeting 1: February 25-27, 2000
What are the obstacles to positive motivation?
Ken Sheldon started the discussion by reviewing the future role of positive psychology
and the legacy of humanistic psychology. One of the failures of humanistic psychology
was its failure to build results on an empirical base, an error which positive psychology
seeks not to repeat. To this end, Ken discusses the importance of self-organizing systems,
flow, enjoyment, and other generative concepts.
Through the lens of Deci and Ryan’s Self Determination theory, he proposed that
extrinsically motivated individuals lose out not only in terms of quality of experience, but
ironically, may also lose out in terms of material success, because of the “tragedy of the
commons.” He reviewed results of recent social dilemma research and noted their
relevance to the emerging “group selection" paradigm in evolutionary psychology. Ken’s
results suggest that when extrinsic rewards are the dominant motivation, people not
only fail to enjoy what they are doing, but also fail to secure as many resources as they
intend, because their behavior tends to undermine group-level performance. Whereas
intrinsically motivated people both enjoy their tasks and thrive economically, even
though this is not their primary intention.
Ken then noted a paradox: if most people say they most favor intrinsic values, and if
people who strongly favor material values tend to be unhappier than those who don’t,
and if they also tend to do no better, economically, then why does materialism persist?
What maintains it? One possibility is that consumer culture and media tend to program
extrinsic rewards as the goals for which everyone should strive. John Bargh’s important
work on the automatic priming of goals by the environment is relevant.
It was observed that we have no systematic programs for inoculating the youth against
consumer culture. This led into a conversation regarding the role of initiation rites in
modern life and how the absence of the transformative effects of initiations plays out in
stunted psyches on a larger scale. The notion of revitalizing traditional youth
development organizations offers a means of teaching skills, enhancing abilities and
channeling interests to structure adolescence to positive, pro-social ends. They would
also provide meaningful alternatives to consumption, substance abuse, etc.
Why material goals are so attractive?
Alexandra Freund discussed next what light action theory can shed on limiting
materialism. Action theory suggests that humans are intentional and goal driven. These
goals play a central role in human behavior by organizing attention/action and providing
purpose. Material goals have clear, short-term and concrete goals, with immediate
feedback, which in part is why they’re so seductive. Conversely, other types of goals, like
personal development, require long periods of time, have spotty feedback and are often
difficult and painful to pursue. The challenge becomes making more worthwhile
activities more/as enjoyable as the easy-gratification material ones. How, therefore to
Meeting 1: February 25-27, 2000
make nonmaterial goals also clear, concrete and short-term? How can these relate to
long-term goals? Can they be dissected into smaller short-term goals with same eventual
outcome?
Process vs. Outcome orientation
There are also differences in quality of experience depending upon one’s goal
orientation. If one is process oriented, one enjoys the progress towards the goal and
offers a greater number of “enjoyments” along the way. Outcome orientation focuses on
lack of attainment and has a short-lived enjoyment once goal is attained. The implication
for the quality of life is enormous. If a life is lived with an incessant goal orientation, then
large swaths of life will be merely endured, not enjoyed, until a goal is, if ever, reached.
The temporary lift received from goal attainment recedes as another goal is selected and
embarked upon.
How do we slow down?
In our conversations, the role of mindfulness again arose. Mick points out the dilemma
of “cognitive misers” who don’t want to think/use attention any more than they have to.
This often results in stereotyped behavior where mindlessness runs rampant.
Mike mentions the Jesuit tradition of instituting daily goals and feedback loops to assess
one’s state of being and measure progress, as an example of a method that fosters
appreciation.
Program Possibilities:
Ad campaign with Covey to encourage mindfulness
Mindfulness tapes for commuters
Oprah, Oprah, Oprah
Rise of small-group movement (fostering mindful conversation)
Saturday AM Notes:
The Aesthetic Alternative
Sunday morning Diane Brigham offered an art-based exercise for self-exploration and
clearly showed one possible and powerful means for developing alternatives to
Materialism. She displayed a number of posters from the museum’s collection, and then
asked to rest of the participants to look at the artworks with a number of questions in
mind, e.g. “Which one of these works represents most some elements of your self” What
was most revealing about the exercise, was the realization of how deep and emotional
experience on is able to obtain if one confronts an object with full attention and personal
engagement. We then discussed the role of creation/appreciation of aesthetics as a
possible skill that could be fostered that would enhance the richness of everyday life. We
also discussed enhancing the role of museums as social/psychological/spiritual educators.
Meeting 1: February 25-27, 2000
Sheldon suggested that we focus on needs, which enhance the three dimensions of
Autonomy, Competence, and Relatedness.
Program Possibilities:
Gallery of Mindfulness
Museum Skills: “How to Use Museum” pamphlet
Understanding the role of museum/culture centers in economic development
Saturday PM Discussion:
After an intense discussion, we focused on developing framing questions that would
guide future endeavors. The primary question addressed the cognitive dissonance most
people express when they tout the importance of non-material things like family, friends,
religions over material gain, yet behave in ways that undermine the former and enhance
the latter.
IF MATERIAL VALUES AREN’T THE MOST IMPORTANT ONES TO PEOPLE, WHY
DO THEY ACT AS IF THEY ARE?
Possible answers:
1.
b/c they are mistaken, and really do value the material more
2.
b/c material goals are the only “game in town”—in that alternatives are not
available
3.
b/c other goals aren’t accessible. Skills and/or awareness low (poor people
don’t believe a museum is a place for them)
4.
b/c trade-offs for embracing non-M. are too great not enough time:
a. goals conflict
b. delaying gratification
David Mick mentioned the Maguire persuasion model and its relevance to developing
alternatives to materialism, and enhancing awareness of its limits. According to this
model, the process of persuasion starts with Awareness, then builds up Motivation,
requires Skills, and then results in Behavior.
From this it was decided that research should continue to focus on:
1.
The psychic costs of materialism,
2.
Developing a picture of life in which there are socially legitimate
alternatives to materialistic goals that can be widely pursued by most
people.
Program Possibilities:
Meeting 1: February 25-27, 2000
Mindfulness enhancing techniques
Field experiments
School intervention—consumers, mindlessness; dependent variables?
Alternatives
 Book clubs
 “Salon” /Library
 Museums
 Malls…
 Revitalize youth organizations
 Service orgs (and other civil society networks)
 ILMS (Library-Museum Studies)
 Meditation Groups
The meeting adjourned with the understanding that at least tow more weekends with a
different cast of characters would confront these issues, and that if good ideas continued
to emerge, those participants who are motivated to do so would convene for a larger
meeting later this year. At this meeting, concrete steps towards publication, diffusion
and implementation would be taken.
Meeting 2: April 14-15, 2000
Meeting 2, April 14-15, 2000
Participants:
Attilah Olah, Eotovos Lorand University, Budapest, Hungary
Larry Gianinno, William T. Grant Foundation, New York
Kevin, Rathunde, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City
Regula Pfister, Psychological Institute, University of Zurich, Switzerland
Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, CGU
Jeanne Nakamura, CGU
Jeremy Hunter, CGU
Executive Summary
The theme of the meeting that arose revolved around the notion of “Attention,
Consumption, and the Self.” The presentations built on both the work of the previous
meeting and on each other. All the presentations focused on the role of attention in
consumption and on how a person can bolster one’s defenses against mindless
materialism.
Larry Gianinno brought to bear his considerable knowledge of advertising and media
practices, as well as his own research in economic practices of youth to examine the
various reasons one consumes goods.
Kevin Rathunde explored the notion of abiding interest, a relationship between world and
self, and its promise for a deeper satisfaction than a terminal materialism.
Attilah Olah reported on his model of a psychological immune system, a set of measurable
traits that protect against stress, illness, as well various addictions, like materialism
Regula Pfister shared with us her research findings that speak to the notion explored in
the Center’s first meeting: if materialistic goals are not as satisfying as non-material ones,
why do people keep pursuing them?
Friday AM Notes:
The Economy of the Self
Larry Gianinno began the session by exploring the nature of what might be called “the
economy of the self” and proposed an alternative definition of thinking about economic
behavior, contrary to the traditional idea of people as rational actors in a monetary
economy. Gianinno offered instead the concept that the economy is a system in which
people related to each other in regards satisfying wants and needs. Expanding the
notion of “allocation of scarce resources” to cultural contexts, this diversified view of
Meeting 2: April 14-15, 2000
economic practices can be applied to other, non-financial, resources like attention and
by extension social relationships, values, affect, and so on.
While economists rarely consider this, economic practices are a shared, social
phenomenon. Economic practices are not experienced by all members of a society, so
that some are “adults only” (like those found at work), while others may exist only
between children (e.g. trading baseball cards) and yet others may be shared between
many groups. These practices are often guided by social scripts (e.g. “how to behave at a
restaurant”) which are learned at an early age and govern/guide behavior in certain
contexts.
Social rules that govern exchanges are often influenced by social distance (the closeness
of a person’s social ties to another person) and as social distance decreases, relationships
become more efficient as trust increases and defenses can be dispensed with. This also
ties into the notion that affect guides much of economic decision-making. Research
suggests that as persons age, non-economic factors become increasingly important.
Taking the concept of laddering from advertising practices, meaning is construed by
three points of attentional focus:
Attributes (physical, symbolic properties)
Benefits (functional, social, psychological properties)
Values (moral, or ethical properties) (e.g. “Green goods”)
These three categories serve to distinguish perceptions of products from each other. And
represent the images that advertisers manipulate to encourage an economic connection.
However economists tend to ignore these factors and provide no shared lexicon of
consumption practices. Religions once provided reference points for economic
behavior, but these influences have weakened in the face of growing secularization. Now
material success has become the only reference point of “positive development.” Without
a linguistic referent, Giannino suggests that people revert to intuitive schemes and
explanations for their behavior.
A shared formal language of consumption would provide symbolic tools that would
foster:
Awareness of Economic Agents
Awareness of Types of Economic Exchanges
Awareness of Motives which Guide Economic Behavior
Program Possibilities:
Develop formal language of consumption to make people aware of “non-rational
component” of consumption practices.
Meeting 2: April 14-15, 2000
Develop media products that teach children economic thinking as well as critical
consumption practices.
Define Positive notion of fully functioning personhood to aim for.
Focus on fostering Generativity (Biological, Parental, Work, Cultural legacies), as research
shows that children need more than material goods to have a good life.
Abiding Interest & Materialism
Kevin Rathunde discussed the role of families in cultivating children's abiding interest.
The literal meaning of the word "interest" -- to be between -- suggests a
person-environment relationship. Abiding interest, therefore, can be thought of as a
sustained and evolving relationship between the self and the world. Kevin proposed that
focusing attention through an abiding interest is likely to make children less susceptible
to mindless materialism, and the family environment is an important context for the
cultivation of children's ability to focus attention.
There are many concepts in the social sciences that could be used to shed light on
dynamics of abiding interest. Kevin chose terminology from G. Labouvie-Vief & H.
Werner to discuss two, interrelated modes -- or ways of using attention -- that
presumably must work in close synchrony in order to sustain interest.
The first mode uses immediate perceptual processes and creates a close, undifferentiated
identification between the self and the object of attention. Labouvie-Vief referred to this
mode as "mythos" and Werner called it "physiognomic perception." The second mode
uses logical/rational processes to separate the self from the object of attention, think
more objectivity, set goals, and so on. Labouvie-Vief called this mode "logos" and
Werner named it "technical perception." Abiding interest presumably depends upon the
synchrony of these two modes such that there is a flexible movement between them, and
each can inform the other. Similarly, Labouvie-Vief suggested that "wisdom" required
the synchrony between mythos and logos, and Werner thought that creativity depended
upon the flexible interrelation between physiognomic and technical perception.
KR hypothesized three types of materialistic behavior that may relate to the separation
or coordination of these two modes. In other words, the over-emphasis of immediate
processes or rational processes may result in different (negative) patterns of
consumption, while the coordination of the two modes may be linked with a healthier,
meaning-making pattern.
Blind Materialism (analogous to a "weak instrumental" form of Materialism, see "The
Meaning of Things" by Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg-Halton. and Dewey’s concept of
Meeting 2: April 14-15, 2000
"fooling") focuses on immediate pleasure and comfort and, therefore, consumption is not
meaningfully related to future experience or goals.
Empty Materialism (=Terminal Materialism) focuses on attaining goals that are not
intrinsically related to the self; such goals are more likely to arise from an external source
(e.g., media, social comparison).
Relational Materialism ("Strong Instrumental") can be seen as a pattern of consumption
that furthers a self-other relationship (i.e., an abiding interest). For instance, a person
might purchase a piece of furniture for their home based on an interest in a particular
era or style.
The question becomes "How can families help set limits to materialism by cultivating the
abiding interests of their children?"
Kevin's research on the family has found that the combination of familial support and
challenge (analogous but not identical to Baumrind's notion of responsive and
demanding parenting) is associated with adolescents' abiding interest, or the synchrony
of positive immediate moods while focusing on meaningful long-term goals. In contrast,
high support and low challenge in the family is associated with positive immediate
experience that is unconnected to goals, and low support and high challenge in the
family is associated with a pattern of goal-striving that is disconnected to positive
immediate experience. Kevin hypothesized that adolescents from these three types of
families might have different patterns of consumption that mirror the relational, blind,
and empty materialism patterns, respectively.
Kevin also discussed several ways that the optimal, support/challenge pattern might be
enhanced in families: fostering secure attachments by avoiding the over- or
under-stimulation of infants; providing children with opportunities to enjoy working
hard on meaningful goals (i.e., bringing together the two components of abiding
interest); and having parents model a pattern of abiding interest in their own lives.
Finally, an emphasis was placed on communication in the family and the possibility of
helping families to learn how to extend and elaborate conversations. Conversation in
the family, and the ability to build a shared reality through progressive discourse
exchange, may be one of the most important contexts for socializing children to have
more flexible control over their attention. Good communication requires a blending of
"subjective" immediacy with "objective" reflection on the stream of conversation.
Program Possibilities:
 Interactive PBS show on "The Healthy Family"
 Mediascope (Hubert Jessup) encodes research into primetime programs
 20/20 segment on parenting?
Meeting 2: April 14-15, 2000



Examples of families with Abiding Interest in magazines like Child, Parents,
Parade.
Campaign to synchronize message.
Benton foundation website which disseminates academic findings to general
audience.
Friday PM Notes:
A Psychological Immune System
Attila Olah next reported on his development of a model of healthy human functioning,
called the Psychological Immune System. He followed the theme of preventative
efforts to create healthy individuals who would be less likely to fall prey to the
pernicious aspects of materialism.
The model of the immune systems comes in three parts and synthesizes various
psychological concepts that have been offered as part of the “good person” like
self-esteem, optimism, or ego-resilience. In this case, a healthy person is one who
solves adaptive tasks with subjective well-being and life satisfaction and is able
to create a good fit between behavior and context. The model has been
operationalized in the PIS inventory, which has good psychometric characteristics and
convergent validity. The inventory measures the following aspects of the psychic
immune system:
The Approach-Belief Subsystem (ABS) measures the extent to which a person
trusts the environment and his or her ability to make a difference in it. It is
composed of the following dimensions:
 Positive Thinking
 Sense of Control
 Sense of Coherence
 Sense of Self-Growth
The Monitoring-Creating-Executing Subsystem (MCES) refers to the ability to
operate effectively in the environment. It consists of:
 Change and Challenge Orientation
 Social Monitoring Capacity
 Creative Self-Concept
 Social Mobilizing Capacity
 Self-Efficacy
 Goal Orientation
 Problem Solving Capacity
 Social Creating Capacity
Meeting 2: April 14-15, 2000
The Self-Regulating Subsystem (SRS) refers to the ability to change adaptively as
required.
 Synchronicity (the ability to keep step with environmental changes, to pulse in
sync with the present events in an open and flexible manner.)
 Impulse Control
 Emotional Control
 Irritability Control
The three interacting systems optimize a person’s action in the world.
Saturday AM Discussion:
Why do Material Goals Persist II?
Regula Pfister reported research results from a study using the Experience Sampling
method (ESM) with Swiss workers. She offered an explanation of why materialism
persists even though non-material goals may be favored by people. While people were in
flow while working, they reported being in a paradoxical state: stressed, anxious and
angry, yet powerful and alert as well. However, when they experienced flow in leisure,
they felt powerful as well as relaxed (but they experienced flow in leisure much more
rarely than at work). While working, Challenges were found to be positively correlated
to both positive and negative activation. Flow at work was unrelated to momentary
happiness and satisfaction, but it correlated positively with long-term happiness and
satisfaction.
The implication of these findings is that when engaged in materialistic consumption
challenges are low, which leads to positive but short-lived reward. These findings
corroborate Ken Sheldon’s notions from the first meeting.
Saturday PM Discussion:
The meeting concluded that Materialistic behavior is not necessarily bad, that positive
outcomes may be associated with it like self-expression, cementing social relations, etc.
However, the pernicious effects of materialism obtain when consumption practices are
grounded in mindless behavior, believing that consumption itself will make you happy.
All agreed that a lexicon should be constructed to highlight and concretize the processes
involved in our relations with objects, as well as explore the difference between
worth/meaning/price and value; between hoarding and connoisseurship.
All agreed that a salutatory strategy would be do define positive
alternatives to mindless materialism instead of merely being
Meeting 2: April 14-15, 2000
“materialism bashers.” These might include terms like creative
materialism, mindful materialism or critical consumption.
Meeting 3: April 28-29, 2000
Meeting 3: April 28-29, 2000
Participants:
Russell Belk, Eccles School of Business, University of Utah, his research primarily involves
the meanings of possessions, materialism, collecting, non-first world consumer culture
and gift-giving.
Michael Benedikt, Department of Architecture, University of Texas, Austin, involve in 16
research grants since 1977. Author
Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, CGU
Antonella Delle Fave, Department of Psychology, Medical School of the University of
Milan
Carrissa Griffing, University of Pennsylvania
Jeremy Hunter, CGU
Tim Kasser, Department of Psychology, Knox College
Jeanne Nakamura, CGU
Regula Pfister, Psychological Institute, University of Zurich, Switzerland
Rick Robinson, Chief Experience Officer, Sapient
Sheldon Solomon, Department of Psychology, Skidmore College
Executive Summary
The theme of the meeting that arose revolved around the notion of “Attention,
Consumption, and the Self.” The presentations built on both the work of the previous
meeting and on each other. All the presentations focused on the role of attention in
consumption and on how a person can bolster one’s defenses against mindless
materialism.
Friday AM Notes:
An Overview of Materialism
Russell Belk provided an excellent overview of the state of research in consumption and
the role it plays in life around the world. On the basis of extensive cross-cultural
research, RB concludes that materialism is not limited to affluent societies. In our society,
consumers claim to disdain materialism whereas they keep indulging in it. Why? Starting
with the premise that humans need hope he examined the implications of consumer
desire as being a chief supplier of “hope fulfillment.”
Lacking other goals, consumption provides objects of desire that keep us wanting to go
on – being without desire altogether is a sad and unacceptable alternative.
Consumer behavior is largely motivated by dissatisfaction with the present and a longing
for transformation: “I don’t want realism, I want magic”
Transformations of luxuries into necessities through habituation.
Meeting 3: April 28-29, 2000
Transformations of consumption act through ritualization.
Transformation of interpersonal security through financial security.
Transformation of self through acquisition of goods, marking inclusive and
exclusive territories of identity.
In the subsequent discussion, which raged on for quite some time, the following points
were raised (among others):
• The ruinous impact of materialism on the environment
• That materialism is basically unfair
• That materialism does not satisfy spiritual needs.
• The substitution of connoisseurship for hoarding/fetishism
• What alternative sources of “magic” can we appeal to?
Objects and Identities
Rick Robinson, who as a corporate executive introduced himself as an “agent of
materialism,” discussed the role of consumption in the psychic life of the consumer – how
objects are built into our identities. Although a “pure sales” view of the market has been
weakened because of increasing consumer sophistication, market saturation, etc., we are
not likely “to get rid of the stuff.” Hence instead of thinking how to limit materialism, RR
asks how we can use materialism to improve the quality of life.
He also talked about the need to produce systems that are more sympathetic to real
needs as opposed to those assumed by marketing experts. The current situation cannot
have business as “the other” as has been in the past, but needs the help of social science
to understand real behavior.
For instance, in order to implement an “experience economy,” we need different
representations of our relation with artifacts; a new lexicon and syntax of consumption.
He described how a brand of cold medications has been marketed on an
“experience-based model of cold” rather than on the obscure chemical properties of the
drug. This in turn was based on extensive research that yielded self-defined stages of the
flu based on shared cultural categories. This is one way that consumer products can be
made more responsive to the real needs of the public.
RR also believes that the spread of the internet is going to subvert information ownership;
for example, patients can share their symptoms, cures, and experiences bypassing the
medical establishment in ways that reduce the monopoly of medical personnel on healthrelated information.
Friday PM Notes:
The Psychic Costs of Materialism
Meeting 3: April 28-29, 2000
Tim Kasser discussed the psychic costs of a high materialistic value orientation (relative
to alternative values like belongingness). His and others’ research suggest that the costs
of materialism are a lowered quality of life:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Those who value materialistic goals above all other things tend to be less
happy, less fulfilled, have lower self esteem. Their self-esteem is contingent
on possessions and is often unrealistic and delusional.
They have weaker, fewer, and less lasting relationships. Friendships are
instrumental, less empathetic and helpful —“commodity friendships.”
They are more at risk for alcoholism and other addictions
Poorer people and poorer nations are more materialistic
Children from troubled families are more materialistic.
Material goals undermine intrinsic motivations; those for whom they are
paramount have less autonomous reasons for action.
Demystifying Money’s Power
Sheldon Solomon explored the idea that money is the root of a problem in which it acts
as a symbolic conflation of legitimate needs with useless desires.
SS, harking back to ideas of Kierkegaard and Ernest Becker, identifies our “evolutionary
conundrum” as having become smart enough as a species to recognize our own mortality,
thereby triggering dread and anxiety about our futures.
Cultures provide shields against the chaos of mortality, often based on absurd
supernatural scenarios. With the deflation of the credibility of religious explanations, we
are left with money as the sole barometer of success. Many people entertain the crazy
hope that they can purchase life everlasting.
This situation requires a need to demystify the psychic power of money without
demystifying the process of living. In the ensuing discussion, two particularly important
points were raised:
•
“Acceptance of death” interventions should decrease materialism
•
Rituals of gift-giving may reduce the selfishness inherent in consumerism.
Saturday AM Notes:
The Theory of Value
Michael Benedikt discussed his evolutionary theory of value based on the premise that
individual value-driven decisions are like holographic chips re-enacting on a small scale
the entire evolutionary process.
The central concept of this theory is that of “Omega”, or complexity-and-organization.
MB unveiled an elegant mathematical model showing the relationship between these two
variables, and the areas between them where Omega reaches its optimal expression. With
Meeting 3: April 28-29, 2000
the premise that “Business is a projection of our soul” MB reviewed a proposed F
hierarchy of exchange patterns and commented on their relative complexity.
Finally, drawing on his experience with architecture, MB described efforts to build spaces
where people could fully experience their individuality, starting with High School
buildings that do not look like penitentiaries.
Complexity and Optimal Development
Antonella Delle Fave finished the individual discussions reporting on cross-cultural
research in Indonesia, Nepal, and other cultures. Through the use of ESM, the Flow, and
Life Themes Questionnaires, she presented results that suggest 90% of people around the
world recognize and cherish flow experiences, while only 2% (in a sample of 4000
respondents) associate consumption with flow.
ADF’s paradigm assumes that optimal experience is a mechanism for selecting and
transmitting cultural information. Instead of dissipating activities like shopping, it would
behoove us to encourage people to build goals and a life through increasingly complex,
culturally constructive tasks. Enhancing individual complexity develops emergent
properties, which act as improbable “strange attractors” eventually leading to cultural
evolution.
Saturday PM Notes:
Among the ideas that arose in the later discussions are the following:
•
Identify “tweakable institutions” that could become allies in our quest;
•
Identify parallel initiatives
•
Construct a map of conceptual possibilities, creating a matrix of potential
outcomes (e.g. flow, enhanced community life) by potential mechanisms to
reach them (e.g. built environment, agencies, etc.)
•
Create a website
•
Develop a “Quality of Life” seal of approval for products and services.
•
Explore token economies that use alternatives to money
•
Activities that amplify community engagement
•
Workplace Quality of Life initiatives
•
A ceremony for trading in useless things (á la Bonfire of the Vanities)
•
Build a board (e.g. Bill Bradley, Tipper Gore, Mark Hartfield . . .)
As usual, the meeting adjourned with lively discussion and ideas for re-convening in the
Winter of this year at a plenary meeting focused on clear agenda items that have emerged
from this series of encounters.
Meeting 4: June 9-10, 2000
Meeting 4: June 9-10, 2000
Participants:
David Myers, Department of Psychology, Hope College
Jane Zeender, Director of Marketing, The Center for a New American Dream
Barbara Fredrickson, Department of Psychology, University of Michigan
Paolo Inghilleri, Department of Psychology and Cultural Anthropologie, University
of Verona
Wade Pickren, Official Historian of the American Psychological Association
Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, CGU
Jeanne Nakamura, CGU
Jeremy Hunter, CGU
Executive Summary
The theme of the meeting that arose revolved around the notion of “Wealth, Well-Being
and Positive Experience.” The presentations built on both the work of the previous
meeting and on each other. All the presentations focused on the role of attention in
consumption and on how a person can bolster one’s defenses against mindless
materialism.
Friday AM Notes:
Wealth and Well-being
David Myers reviewed his work on the relationship between wealth and well-being
summarized in his new book on The American Paradox. Reviewing American social
history of the last half century, DM concludes that the material advances of the last 40
years not only have not been accompanied by advances in human well-being, but led
instead to a “Social recession”. To document these claims, DM presented an impressive
array of survey data showing positive trends in material well being paralleled by negative
trends in social and psychological well-being.
Having concluded that excessive materialism flattens the richness of life and deprives
individuals of psychic resources for confronting adversity, DM discussed various
alternatives ranging from instituting courses in the psychology of consumption, to public
policy suggestions such as progressive consumption taxes and the taxation of inherited
wealth.
The ensuing discussion considered such possibilities as the role of the media in
disseminating the kind of data presented by DM, and policy options like the ones recently
implemented in major Italian cities, where cars are banned from driving in the city one
Sunday each month. Such policies, in turn, force the city administration to provide
alternative transportation plus civic events that encourage social participation.
Meeting 4: June 9-10, 2000
Friday PM Notes:
The Center for a New American Dream
Jane Zeender started by reporting four questions that her Foundation was hoping to get
answers for by our group. These were:
1.
Have there been historical precedents for a successful limitation of
materialism and self-regulation of consumption?
2.
How can empathy for the plight of those affected by excessive materialism
be best awakened?
3.
How can communities be mobilized to provide alternatives to
consumption?
4.
If fear of death is at the basis of excessive consumption, what alternatives to
it can be found?
Next, JZ described some of the global trends that motivate the Center for a New American
Dream to seek alternatives to excessive consumption. In the reckless depletion of natural
resources, the U.S. is playing a leading role, and we cannot expect the rest of the world to
mend its ways while we continue splurging; e.g. that Americans constituting 5% of the
population of the planet can continue to use up 40% of its petroleum products.
In an effort to curb excessive consumption the NAD foundation has found:
1.
It is important to avoid being judgmental or critical, because people resent
being made to feel guilty. Humor works better.
2.
It is better to ask questions of people rather than trying to influence
answers.
3.
Doable, measurable, small-scale change is best – such as changing light
bulbs with CFHs, or reducing Christmas gifts.
The important thing to convey is that supplanting more with better one can live a richer
life experientially and spiritually.
The discussion that followed identified two interesting possibilities for positive
psychology researchers:
How can the environmental impact (or “ecological footprint”) of individual
behavior be measured?
What alternatives can be devised to reduce one’s environmental impact?
Could one develop a mirror image to the Holmes-Rahe stress index which would
assess the positive contribution of various life events?
Meeting 4: June 9-10, 2000
Saturday AM Notes:
Understanding the Role of Objects
Paolo Inghilleri started his talk with the question, What makes an object attractive? He
made a distinction between two forms of materialism – the instrumental, purposive,
mindful form; and the terminal, mindless, negative form of materialism. Next he
introduced the ritual, community-building forms of consumption, and ended up
discussing how the quality of subjective experience in the interaction with artifacts leads
to the psychological selection which shapes culture.
Building on Jacques Monod’s distinction, he discussed the dual status of artifacts: On the
one hand they are inorganic objects subject to the second law of thermodynamics; on the
other hand, they embody the negentropic strivings of human complexity. Some of the
points of his talk touched upon
•
Objects as fetishes, rich in information about the past, thereby constraining
behavior; and through their instrumental form, giving instructions for future
behavior
•
Objects that enhance well-being and positive experience
•
Objects that promote group interests and values
•
Objects that promote memory and tradition, as well as innovation and change.
Cites Monod in that objects have 2 sides: constructed of inorganic materials which 1) are
destined for physical entropy, 2) but b/c of human attention (psychic energy) lends
artifacts a place in psychic life and complexity. Memory and behavior is mediated
through objects. Inherent potential: 1) linked to past, 2) possibility of leading to
innovation.
Objects contain information and give instructions for behavior and constraints to
behavior. Interaction b/w biological development and cultural objects. Meaning of
objects is interlinked to 2 interests: the individual (through personal meaning) and the
group (eg. social value/status)
The discussion focused on developing a typology of the attractiveness of objects,
based on two orthogonal axes: One measuring the personal/social continuum, the
other the past/future continnum.
Emotions and Materialism
Barbara Fredrickson focused on the subjective experience of materialism, and specifically
on the “social trap” that follows when short-term benefits are recognized while long-term
costs are ignored.
Meeting 4: June 9-10, 2000
She suggested that the solution is to develop “mindful connoisseurs” who can derive
short-term benefits from consumption while avoiding long-term costs.
Next, Barbara Fredrickson reviewed the difference between the evolutionary function of
negative and positive emotions. While negative emotions evoke specific action tendencies
(such as flight, or defense), positive emotions are less specific, but no less important, in
that they expand the repertoire of actions. Interest leads to exploration, love to approach.
Negative emotions are adaptive in the moment, positive ones are adaptive in the long
run, leading to growth and transformation.
Negative emotions tend to lead to a narrowing possibility of action, which in the short
term may prove adaptive. However, in the long term deleterious for optimal
development. Positive emotions are adaptive in the long-term and can include
exploration and playfulness. An emotion like contentment allows for an integration of
experience.
Thus the possibility arises of cultivating positive emotions to reduce consumption, and
implementing activities that produce positive emotions such as elevation, joy, awe,
appreciation, pride, and contentment.
Saturday PM Discussion:
During the discussion, David Myers produced a model which indicated how attitudes
and behaviors towards materialism could be influenced through a) disseminating
information about environmental crisis, such as global warming; b) disseminating
information about the limits of material well-being; c) providing alternatives that liberate
us from exclusively material solutions, such as opportunities for flow, for spirituality, for
stewardship, and through relationships.
The discussion touched on practical solutions such as including sections on alternatives
to materialism in textbooks, course outlines, and influencing TV series like Dateline and
20/20.
Meeting 4: June 9-10, 2000
Finally, a matrix to guide further research and action was developed, as follows:
RESEARCH
Develop Analysis
Measures
EDUCATION ALLIANCES &
IMPLEMENTATION
MATERIALISM
COSTS OF
Personal
Social
Environmental
BENEFITS OF
Personal
Social
Environmental
ALTERNATIVES TO
Activities
Experiences
The decision was made that participants in the four small meetings will be invited
in the Autumn of 2000 to fill up the matrix with specific recommendations, and perhaps
with ideas for how to implement them in practice.
List of Participants
List of Participants
Russell Belk, N. Eldon Tanner Professor at the David Eccles School of Business,
University of Utah. . His research and writing focus on qualitative, cross-cultural
perspectives of consumption systems and how they interact with one another. His has
conducted research that involves the cultural meanings of possessions, materialism, and
collecting as well as non-first world consumer cultures and gift-giving.
Michael Benedikt, holds the Hal Box Chair in Urbanism Department of Architecture and
is the Director of the Center for American Architecture and Design, at the University of
Texas, Austin. He has been involved in 16 research grants since 1977 and has 30 years of
experience in major architectural projects. He also authors more than 50 publications,
including the upcoming A General Theory of Value.
Diane Brigham, Director of Education, Getty Museum, Los Angeles, develops and
implements interpretive programs and educational services based on the museum’s
collections. She began her career as an elementary school art teacher, was named
National Museum Educator of the Year in 1995, presented papers and workshops on
teaching strategies, audience development and the educator’s role in the museum at
numerous conferences.
Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Professor of Psychology at Claremont Graduate University
and Director of the Quality of Life Research Center. He has written over 189 journal
articles and 16 books including Flow and Finding Flow which have been translated into 15
languages, have had major TV stories on NOVA, the BBC, and RAI, etc., and major print
stories in publications such as American Psychologist, Newsweek, The New York Times,
The Wall Street Journal, and Psychology Today.
Robert Emmons, Professor of Psychology, UC Davis, author of 60 original publications,
including The Psychology of Ultimate Concerns; his research focuses on personal goals,
spirituality, and subjective well-being.
Antonella Delle Fave, Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, Medical School of
the University of Milan. Her research interest includes: Bio-cultural evolution,
Cross-cultural Psychology, Quality of daily experience, Behavioral development.
Barbara Fredrickson, Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, she is the
recipient of the first Seligman Award for Positive Psychology. She has created a new
theory explaining the beneficial effects of positive emotions called The Broaden-and-Build
Model to help individuals find positive meaning in daily life through spiritual beliefs, or
by re-framing/infusing daily events with positive value.
Alexandra Freund, Research Scientist, Max Planck Institute, Berlin; her research focuses
on the content, and function of the self-definition in old age. Other research interests are
List of Participants
developmental regulation and motivation across the life span. Current project focuses on
the empirical investigation of a model of positive development across the lifespan, the
model of selection, optimization, and compensation.
Larry Gianinno, Vice President of Strategic Communications, William T. Grant
Foundation, New York, his role at the foundation focuses on understanding different
groups of adults and their perceptions of attitudes toward adolescents and young adults.
His research centers on the impact on cultural, social, media, and marketing forces on
youngsters’ decision-making in the everyday economic world.
Jeremy Hunter, Research Director, The Quality of Life Research Center, Claremont
Graduate University, his research focuses on the role of the experience of interest and
boredom in adolescents. He also serves as project manager exploring the “Contemplation
and Everyday Life” which tried to understand the role that contemplative practice has in
determining how a person relates to the world. His article “The Phenomenology of
Body-Mind” will appear in a forthcoming issue of Anthropology of Consciousness.
Paolo Inghilleri, Professor of Social Psychology and Human Development, University of
Verona, Dept. of Psychology and Cultural Anthropology.He is author of From Subjective
Experience to Cultural Change. His area of research include the relationship between
biological, cultural and psychological processes, cultural evolution and self development,
mental health and culture, quality of daily experience in case of migration and cultural
change.
Tim Kasser, Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology, Knox College. He has
authored over two dozen scientific articles and book chapters on materialism, values, and
goals, among other topics, and is currently working on a book about materialism to be
published by MIT Press.
David Mick, Robert Hill Carter Professor of Commerce, McIntire School of Commerce,
University of Virginia; Editor, Journal of Consumer Research. His research centers on the
nature and role of meaning in consumer behavior in advertising, gift giving (particularly
self-gifts), and the consumption of technological products. Four of his articles have
received awards from the Association for Consumer Research and the American
Marketing Association.
David Myers, Professor, Department of Psychology, Hope College, an award-winner
researcher (the Gordon Allport Prize for his studies of group influence), and teacher. His
scientific research, supported by National Science Foundation grants and fellowships, has
appeared in two dozen periodicals, including Science, the American Scientist, the
American Psychologist, and Psychological Science.Author of The Pursuit of Happiness, The
American Paradox and A Quiet World.
List of Participants
Jeanne Nakamura, Research Director, The Quality of Life Research Center. Claremont
Graduate University. Currently heading a set of research projects concerning the pursuit
of good work in the professions, focusing currently on the American college, the business
world, and organized philanthropy. In a related project, she is investigating what is
transmitted across generations by exemplary professionals. In the context of both these
projects and others, her current research interests focus on optimal experience and
development, with emphasis on adulthood and later life; creativity; and the study of
exemplary lives.
Attilah Olah, Head of the Department of Personality and Health Psychology and
vice-director of the Psychological Institute, Eotovos Lorand University, Budapest,
Hungary, his studies center on how members of different cultures cope with everyday
stressful situations. He teaches personality theories, personality assessment and
psychometrics.
Regula Pfister, Psychological Institute, University of Zurich, Switzerland, her
dissertation focuses on the flow experience at work. She also her other central research
interest is to develop the statistical approach of multilevel modeling for the use of ESM
studies.
Wade Pickren, Historian of the American Psychological Association, direct the archives
of the APA program and currently working on a history of psychology and the NIMH.
Personal scholarship focuses on psychology and the public.
Kevin, Rathunde, Associate Professor in the Department of Family and Consumer
Studies at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, research focus on adolescent
development in the family and the role of interest in education and lifelong learning. He
is co-author of the book, Talented Teenagers, which won the Social Policy Book award in
1994.
Rick Robinson, Chief Experience Officer, Sapient, oversees the development of
innovative research approaches for understanding human interaction with products,
environments, communications, services, and technologies. He is a co-author of The Art
of Seeing, and author of numerous articles on research and design.
Ken Sheldon, Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology, University of
Missouri-Columbia. Ken investigates which facets of self-generated personal goals
promote maximal attainment of those goals, best afford experiential need-satisfaction
during the process of attainment, and best promote increases in well-being and new
levels of personality development, if the goals are obtained. A second area of research
concerns cooperation within social dilemmas and examines the ways and conditions in
which "nice guys may finish first," drawing from evolutionary game theory and
group-selection theory, as well as contemporary work on coalition formation and
integrative negotiation.
List of Participants
Sheldon Solomon, Professor, Department of Psychology, Skidmore College and the
Brooklyn College of the City University of New York. His work focuses on exploring the
effects of fear of death on aspects of individual and social behavior. His work has been
reported in The New York Times, Herald Tribune, Boston Globe, Psychology Today, and
Self magazine, and is co-author of the forthcoming book, Self-Esteem and Meaning (2001).
Jane Zeender, Director of Marketing, The Center for a New American Dream, which is
dedicated to helping Americans reduce and shift consumption to improve their quality of
life and protect the natural environment. Before joining the Center, Jane spent 9 years in
corporate America in various sales, marketing, and management positions. She holds an
undergraduate degree in mechanical engineering from Duke University, and a MBA in
marketing from The George Washington University. She began examining the questions
around materialism, quality of life, and personal values after experiencing several
downsizings and has just returned to the East Coast after spending 4 years living and
working in both Portland, Oregon, and Anchorage, Alaska.