MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W8365777

A Model of the Materialistic Self

2014· article· en· W8365777 sur OpenAlexaff
David Watson

Notice bibliographique

RevueNorth American journal of psychology · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueSocial and Cultural Dynamics
Établissements canadiensMacEwan University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMaterialismPsychologySocial psychologyHappinessPersonalityTraitPhilosophyEpistemology
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Materialism has been defined as the devotion to acquisition and possession ... (Tatzel, 2002, p.110). Theoretically, materialism has been viewed either as a set of values consisting of success, centrality, and happiness (Richins & Dawson, 1992) or as a trait consisting of possessiveness, non-generosity and envy (Belk, 1984, 1985). Subjective well-being has been found to be lower in highly materialistic individuals compared to those that are materialistic (e.g., Belk, 1985; Burroughs & Rindfleisch, 2002; Kashdan & Breen, 2007; Kasser & Ahuvia, 2002; Kasser & Ryan, 1993). One possible reason for lower subjective well-being is that there are social drawbacks to the pursuit of materialistic goals. This is likely to have consequences for the self, since materialistic individuals are stigmatized as being less likable, and they have desirable personality qualities, such as being self-centered, selfish, manipulative, and externally oriented (Van Boven, Campbell & Gilovich, 2010, p. 551). While the relationship between materialism and low subjective well-being has been established, there are only a few studies examining the relationship between materialism and the self (e.g., Belk, 1988; Chang & Arkin, 2002; Gao, Wheeler & Shiv, 2009; Kashdan & Breen, 2007; Tian & Belk, 2005). These studies have found that the materialistic self is external and fragile; however, why materialism can impact the self in this manner requires further investigation. Self-concept clarity, self-efficacy, locus of control and self-monitoring are four important self-related concepts that are likely to be related to both externality and fragility of the self in materialism. The present study investigated the question of why the materialistic self is external and fragile. Defining the self While there are a variety of definitions of the self, one possible definition of the self provided by Campbell et al. (1996) may have particular relevance to materialism: .the self-concept is defined as a cognitive schema--an organized knowledge structure that contains traits, values, episodic and semantic memories about the self and controls the processing of self-relevant information (p. 141). This conception of the self is consistent with the notion that experiential purchases (e.g. travel, restaurant meals, theater tickets) become part of an individual's memories and hence part of one's self-concept compared to the purchase of physical objects which are inherently external (Carter & Gilovich, 2102). Therefore, it is possible that the highly materialistic individual is likely to develop a strong sense of self as the emphasis is upon acquiring status- enhancing objects rather than experiences that will form the fabric of a strong internalized sense of self. Materialism and an Extrinsic Self The extrinsic nature of materialistic goals is a possible reason for the lack of happiness found with highly materialistic individuals (Kasser, 2002, Sheldon & Kasser, 2008). Extrinsic goals are satisfying in terms of how they create admiration in others rather than satisfying inherent psychological needs (Kasser & Ryan, 2001). In a study involving 15 cultures, Grouzet et al., (2005) found that a goal of financial success was related to an extrinsic orientation, which brings the focus onto the physical self rather than a more spiritual, self-transcendent self. Kashdan and Breen (2007) have related materialism to self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000), which also makes the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic goals. Intrinsic goals are directed towards pursuits such as personal development or enhancing personal relationships. Extrinsic goals are focused on the attainment of popularity, money or physical attractiveness. Kashdan and Breen (2007) describe the materialistic 'self' as an externalized self, whereby a positive view of the self is contingent on possessions, money, power, and image (p. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,345
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,222

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,022
Tête enseignante GPT0,324
Écart entre enseignants0,301 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations6
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueNorth American journal of psychologyMême sujetSocial and Cultural DynamicsTravaux en français237 207