In philosophy, materialism refers to a theoretical system where matter is seen as the only reality in the world, as opposed to spiritualism and idealism (Popkin & Stroll, 1993). Materialism, in the sense used here, is more precise, but has some connection to this viewpoint. It is a preoccupation with, desire for, and emphasis on, material goods and money to the neglect of other matters. Definitions of materialism often refer to the satisfaction or happi- ness people expect to gain from material goods. For instance, materialism has been defined as “an orientation emphasizing possessions and money for personal happiness and social progress” (Ward & Wackman, as cited in Fournier & Richins, 1991, p. 404). There is research on postmaterialist values, such as valuing free speech or involvement in politics, but the emphasis of this work is on political culture (Inglehart, 2006). Within psychology, the three most widely used approaches to defining and measuring materialism are outlined briefly below.
The materialistic personality
The earliest attempt to measure materialism within psychology was the development of the Belk Materialism Scale (BMS; Belk, 1984), which con- ceptualises materialism as a triad of personality traits, or stable internal properties that characterise an individual. Materialism is seen as a manifest- ation of three personality traits—possessiveness, non-generosity, and envy— which are so strongly associated with materialism that materialism itself can be operationalised and measured via these three traits. According to this approach, the more possessive, envious, and non-generous a person is, the more materialistic s/he is believed to be. Possessiveness is defined as “the inclination and tendency to retain control or ownership of one’s possessions” (1984, p. 291). A possessive person should be worried about the possible loss
of possessions, prefer to own rather than rent or borrow material objects, and be more inclined to save and retain possessions. The non-generous person is unwilling to share or give possessions to others. Envy is seen as a destructive trait, characterised by an attitude of displeasure and ill-will towards people who are seen as superior in “happiness, success, reputation or the possession of anything desirable” (Belk, 1984, p. 292), motivating negative, even criminal, behaviour.
This approach has been influential but it implies that materialistic person- ality traits are stable dispositions, whereas materialism might fluctuate during a person’s life, such that they are more materialistic during some phases than others, or even choose a non-materialistic lifestyle, such as “voluntary simplicity” (Etzioni, 1998; Huneke, 2005). Furthermore, although it may well be the case that materialistic people are possessive, non-generous, and envious, this personality approach of defining materialism in terms of stable individual traits neglects some core elements of materialism that are held to be important in both scientific and common-sense understanding. These are: the use of material objects for status display, judgement of one’s own and other people’s success by wealth and possessions, and beliefs about the psy- chological benefits that material goods will bring, such as happiness or life satisfaction (Fournier & Richins, 1991). These elements are explicitly taken into account by an alternative approach, concerned with a materialistic value orientation.
Materialism as an individual value orientation
This approach defines materialism as a “set of centrally held beliefs about the importance of possessions in one’s life” (Richins & Dawson, 1992, p. 308). Richins and Dawson, who developed the materialistic values approach, conceptualise materialism in terms of three key components, and validated a questionnaire, the Materialistic Values Scale (MVS), which is now the most widely used materialism instrument in consumer research (Wong, Rindfleisch, & Burroughs, 2003). The first component, acquisition
centrality, is the belief that material possessions and money are a highly
important life goal, indicated by agreement with statements such as “I would like a lot of luxury in my life”. The second component, success, refers to the extent to which people see possessions and money as a good yardstick for evaluating their own achievements, as well as those of others. Example items are “The things I own say a lot about how well I’m doing in life” or “Some of the most important achievements in life include acquiring material posses- sions”. Finally, the happiness component captures the conviction that goods and money are the major path to personal happiness, a better life, and a more positive identity, such as “I’d be happier if I could afford to buy more things” or “My life would be better if I owned certain things that I don’t have”. Thus, people with strong materialistic values not only focus on acquiring material goods and money but they also believe that consumer goods can provide
important psychological benefits. Taken together, these components suggest that a materialistic value orientation indicates a conviction that material pos- sessions can become sources of identity, to such an extent that they come to define who one is (Dittmar, 2005a). The MVS measures the intensity, or absolute strength, of individuals’ materialistic values: the more they value material goods as a life goal, yardsticks of success, and means to happiness and identity, the more materialistic they are.
According to this approach, materialism is a socially constructed phen- omenon, in the sense that its meanings are communicated within con- sumer culture and shared among a large number of individuals. In this way, materialistic values represent a committed relationship with material goods expressed by both individuals and society. The advantages of this theoretical approach are that it fully takes into account the influence of consumer culture and the shared meanings of materialism, and that it captures differ- ences in the extent to which individuals endorse materialistic values. Thus, it measures the absolute importance of materialism in a person’s life. However, its most obvious neglect is that it does not consider the relative importance of materialistic values with respect to other values a person may hold. Therefore, it does not distinguish between a person whose strong materialistic values reflect their only life goal, and a person with equally strong materialistic values, but who has satisfying personal relationships and community involve- ment as equally powerful life goals. Thus, it may be important to consider the relative importance individuals place on financial goals as compared to their other life goals.
The relative importance of financial goals
The most influential perspective on materialism within psychology was devel- oped by Kasser and Ryan (1993, 1996), drawing on Self-determination Theory (e.g. Ryan & Deci, 2000). As outlined in Chapter 1, they draw a distinction between life goals or aspirations as either intrinsic or extrinsic based on their content and, to measure them, they designed the Aspirations Index (AI). The AI measures the importance a person places on intrinsic life goals (such as self-acceptance, affiliation, and community involvement) as well as extrinsic goals (financial success, fame, and image). The more a person rates the importance of financial goals as high compared to other (intrinsic) goals, the more materialistic s/he is. Self-determination Theory proposes that attaching high importance to an extrinsic life goal, such as financial success, is negatively associated with indicators of well-being, because extrinsically motivated goals are guided by external influences, such as coercion or approval from others, whereas intrinsically motivated goals are of interest in their own right, bringing pleasure and true fulfilment. “[E]xcessive concentra- tion on external rewards can distract people from intrinsic endeavours and interfere with personal integration and actualisation” (Kasser & Ryan, 1993, p. 410). In short, seeking material rewards takes time and energy away from
fulfilling basic psychological, intrinsically motivated needs, and therefore leads to lower well-being.
This relative-life-goals perspective captures an essential aspect of material- ism but, given that it focuses predominantly on the desire for financial success, it neglects dimensions of materialism identified in the values approach, such as the beliefs about the psychological benefits expected from material goods, including enhancing happiness and satisfaction in life. Kasser’s later publica- tions, however, define a materialistic value orientation as involving both the relative financial goal perspective outlined here, as well as materialistic beliefs about status and a positive identity through material goods (2002; Kasser & Kanner, 2004).