Emotion and Reason in Consumer Behavior

Arjun Chaudhuri

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2006
• ISBN:
  9781136406898
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Negocios y empresa
• Subtopic: Negocios en general

Emotion and Reason in Consumer Behavior provides new insights into the effects that emotion and rational thought have on marketing outcomes. It uses sound academic research at a level students and professionals can understand.

1

INTRODUCTION

“When you understand all about the sun and all about the atmosphere and all about the rotation of the Earth, you may still miss the radiance of the sunset.”

(Jane Fonda, quoting Alfred North Whitehead at the graduation ceremony in 1994 of Emma Willard School, Troy, NY)

Consumer behavior is the study of how and why people consume products and services. All behavior can broadly be attributed to three classic influences—the particular characteristics of the individual, the environment that surrounds the individual, and the inherited genetics that constitute the biological makeup of the individual.

The characteristics of the individual consist of, among others, the personality, perceptions, attitudes, needs, and motivations of the individual. The environment of the individual consists of the culture, subculture, family, friends, and institutions that the individual lives in. The genetics of an individual are the biological codes that are unique to each individual, such as DNA, and which are passed on to the progeny of the individual.

The model in Figure 1.1 shows that stimuli (marketing, etc.) result in emotional and rational responses in the individual’s mind, which, in turn, may lead to a particular behavioral response by the individual. The model also shows that the nature of these emotional and rational responses is also affected by a host of influences under the general categories of the individual’s personal characteristics, environment, and genetics. Thus, for instance, an advertisement is interpreted according to the culture of the individual and then produces a happy (or unhappy) response in the individual and prompts the individual to buy (or not to buy) the advertised brand.

Figure 1.1 A Model of Consumer Behavior.

Defining Emotion and Reason

Emotions such as joy and sorrow are basic, primal motivations in the human condition, and they are also crucial determinants in our choices of products and services and in our processing of commercial messages like advertising.

In addition, choices of products and services are also based on ratiocination and reason; consumers analyze and process information in terms of the attributes of products and services in order to arrive at an optimal decision concerning their alternative choices. Thus, consumers assign both emotional and rational values to products and services, and the study of these values is critical to the understanding of marketing and consumer behavior. To cite Belk (1988), “We cannot hope to understand consumer behavior without first gaining some understanding of the meanings that consumers attach to possessions” (p. 139).

These “meanings” reside in the archetypal constructs of emotion and reason, which may be viewed as two separate yet often complementary means of gaining knowledge about the world. Emotion and reason may be defined as knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge by description, respectively. “Knowledge by acquaintance” (emotion) is immediate and direct subjective experience that is “known” as self-evident. This is the process which William James (1890) wrote about: “I know the color blue when I see it, and the flavor of a pear when I taste it … but about the inner nature of these facts or what makes them what they are I can say nothing at all” (p. 22).

In contrast, “knowledge by description” (reason) results from the interpretation of sensory data and involves judgments about phenomena. As Bertrand Russell (1912) observed, “My knowledge of a table as a physical object … is not direct knowledge. Such as it is, it is obtained through acquaintance with the sense-data that make up the appearance of the table” (pp. 73–74). Thus, the brain appears to involve two functionally different ways of knowing. Knowledge by acquaintance (emotion) is the holistic and synthetic integration of sensory data from the external and internal bodily environments. In contrast, knowledge by description (reason) is the sequential and analytic processing of information based on an appraisal of the environment (Buck, 1988; Tucker, 1981).

An example may help here. Think about your response to music. If you are an average music listener you probably do not think of “B flats” and “C minors” when you hear a piece of music. That would be a rational reaction to music or knowledge of music by description (i.e., you could describe the piece to someone else in terms of the musical notations, and if they spoke the same “language,” they would be able to understand your meaning). But, if you are like me, you probably just react spontaneously or emotionally to music and you “know” quite well whether you like the piece or not, but you cannot really describe it to someone else. You know the music by acquaintance, or by your own emotional response to it. I have “known” the music of Nat King Cole all my life and loved it, but I could never really properly describe it to you. I might tell you that it was “great” and “beautiful” and “uplifting,” but those would just be adjectives. To really feel the music, you would have to hear it for yourself. Emotions cannot really be described. They have to be experienced firsthand.

The Communication of Emotion and Reason

Thus, emotion and reason are both ways of “knowing” and understanding reality, but they work very differently. As described by Buck (1984), emotion can be spontaneously communicated, whereas rational messages are symbolically communicated. Thus, communication of a stimulus has two aspects—spontaneous and symbolic. Spontaneous communication is biologically shared, nonintentional or automatic, and nonpropositional. It requires only knowledge by acquaintance and is expressed through signs that make motivational-emotional states externally accessible. Symbolic communication is socially shared, intentional, and propositional. It requires knowledge by description and is based upon learned symbols, which have a learned and arbitrary relationship with their referents. These are two simultaneous streams of communication that usually interact and modify one another. It must be stressed that these are not two ends on a single continuum, but instead represent two independent yet interactive dimensions. However, although “pure” spontaneous communication is possible, “pure” symbolic communication is not. In other words, symbolic communication is always accompanied by spontaneous communication (Buck, 1984).

As an example, what would be spontaneous and symbolic communication in a television commercial? Anything nonverbal would be spontaneous communication: the facial expressions of the actors (even though these are obviously rehearsed!), the color and settings in the ad, and so on. Anything to do with a language that uses symbols to convey meaning would be symbolic communication. So, the words on a television screen and spoken words would be symbolic as would mathematical notations, if any. We have already seen that music could be both. The audio portion would be spontaneous communication. If any musical notation (as in a score sheet) was in the ad then that would be symbolic.

Symbolic communication can also sometimes lead to emotional outcomes. In fact, Buck (1984) says that symbolic communication is always accompanied by some spontaneous elements. Buck also says that some spontaneous communication is “pure” and without symbolic elements. Words, for instance, can sometimes have nonverbal meanings, say through tone, pitch, or rhythm. These are called “vocalics” in nonverbal communication. Also, words sometimes arouse emotions, as in a novel or poem or speech or advertising copy.

Forms of Emotions

There are various forms of emotions and various types within these forms. According to Buck (1985, 1988, 1999), emotion takes the following forms:

• Emotion I (EI), consisting of physiological responses like heart rate changes, blood pressure, sweating, and so on, which are altered in order to support action. This serves to adapt the body to changes in the environment and to keep it in equilibrium.

• Emotion II (EII), which is spontaneous, expressive behavior, such as facial expressions, gestures, posture, and the like, and which serves the function of social coordination. Although display rules may affect this behavior, these responses, by being accessible to others, reveal a person’s motivational-emotional state. Further, the responses of others to such spontaneous expression help the person to understand and label their feelings, and a social process is established that controls behavior. With regard to “display rules,” note that certain situations can inhibit the display of spontaneous feelings. There are also cultural rules about shows of emotion. These can vary by gender as well. Another example of “less than truthful” displays occurs when people practice deceit in their expressions.

• Emotion III (EIII), is immediate and direct subjective experience, although it may also be experienced indirectly as feedback from the other readouts. I shall refer to this form of emotion as affect from now on. This is what is commonly thought of as emotion. There are many different affects: joy, sorrow, fear, envy, anger, pride, and so on. Affective responses are a subset of emotional responses and refer to subjective feelings such as happiness, sadness, fear, anger, and the like. Emotional responses also include physiological reactions (EI) and facial expressions (EII). I will use the term affect for specific feelings that are qualitatively different, and use the more inclusive term emotion when that is more appropriate.

This last form of emotion is what I have already referred to as “knowledge by acquaintance,” and it serves the function of self-regulation. This subjective experience is read out to the cognitive (rational) system for appraisal, labeling, and self-regulation. The result is rational knowledge by description, which can be symbolically communicated. This last type of knowledge is sequential, analytic, and left brain–oriented, whereas knowledge by acquaintance is more holistic, synthetic, and right brain–oriented. One is immediate knowledge, the other is knowledge based on appraisal.

It is important to note the interaction between the emotional and rational systems of behavior control that is suggested by this explanation. Although an emotional stimulus impinges first on the emotional system, the subjective experience engendered informs the rational-cognitive system and is itself informed in turn through the appraisal of internal and external information. Thus, these systems of behavior control interact and inform each other, leading to goal-directed behavior.

This comprehensive framework accounts for physiological arousal (EI), spontaneous expression (EII), and subjective experience (EIII) as all being parts of the same puzzle. Moreover, the function of reason is seen in a symbiotic relationship with emotion, and it is the interaction of the two systems that determines the consequences of stimuli. The biggest virtue in Buck’s model of human behavior, based on emotional-motivational and rational-cognitive systems, is its view of the systems of emotion and reason as working simultaneously and independently and yet interacting with each other.

The following are some questions you may want to think about: Is sexual desire EI, EII, or EIII? Is it a positive emotional response like happiness, joy, elation, pride, or hope or a negative emotional response like fear, anger, disgust, shame, guilt, or sadness? What is the difference between a “positive” and a “negative” emotional response?

Theories of Emotion

Theories of emotion have variously dealt with the relationship between physiological response, cognition (reason), and emotion. There are two basic schools of thought. Psychophysiological theories see arousal as a necessary and sufficient condition for the primary emotions, which are programmed in their response. On the other hand, psychosocial theories view emotions as malleable states that are defined by cognitive appraisal of the stimulus, so that arousal by itself is a necessary but not sufficient condition for the existence of emotion. As we shall see, these theories may not be incompatible, in that they may more realistically be seen as different aspects of emotional functions.

Whereas psychosocial theories consider the cause of emotion to be an aspect of emotional relationships with others, psychophysiological theories of emotion locate the cause primarily within the individual. The Jamesian theory of emotion (described in the next section) propounded this view-point by stating that visceral and skeletal changes produced by stimuli were the source of emotional experience without the mediating influence of cognition. Taking his cue from Darwin’s (1872) seminal treatise of emotional expression, Tomkins (1962) posited the facial feedback hypothesis, in which particular facial expressions are typical of each of the primary affects and provide feedback to the viscera, resulting in emotion. The role of cognition or reason in restraining such facial displays for social purposes has been raised in criticism of such a view of emotion that is involuntary and independent of reason.

Early Psychophysiological Theories

At the end of the last century, William James and Carl Lange, working independently, propounded a view that has come to be known as the James-Lange Theory. The theory stated that visceral and skeletal muscle changes produced emotion without the intervention of cognition (understanding) of the emotion. These physiological changes, in other words, completely constitute emotion. Cannon (1927) critiqued the notion that the viscera¹ were the source of emotions and instead attempted, quite wrongly it turned out, to establish the “thalamic theory” (i.e., that the thalamus is the center for emotional experience). Cannon showed that when the viscera are removed, emotion still persists, and also that artificially induced visceral changes do not always produce emotion. In general, he argued that the viscera do not account for the variety of emotions and are too slow and diffuse to be the center for emotional experiences. Instead, he proposed the “emergency theory” in which bodily sensations serve to adapt us to the environment and, thus, maintain homeostasis by preparing the body to defend itself through a “fight-or-flight” response.

Facial Feedback Theory

Taking his cue from Darwin’s seminal treatise on emotional expression, Silvan Tomkins (1962) posited the “facial feedback hypothesis.” He argued that variations in the “density of neural firing” from the central nervous system activate the skin and facial muscles and provide feedback to the viscera, resulting in emotion. Particular facial expressions were also considered to be typical of each of the primary affects. Although there is a lack of evidence to suggest that facial feedback causes emotion, Ekman and Freisen (1975) have found evidence to support the other notion that specific affects are associated with universal facial expressions.

Schachter and Singer’s Self-Attribution Theory

Whereas Tomkins’s theory asserted that emotions are involuntary and independent of cognition, Schachter and Singer (1962) presented a “self-attribution theory” of emotion in which emotion is a function of both physiological arousal and cognitive appraisal of the reasons for arousal. Using epinephrine-induced states, they showed that cognitions are used to label unexplained arousal states. Both behavioral and self-report measures in their study showed that subjects, in the same unexplained arousal state, experienced very disparate emotions (anger and euphoria) according to the situational cues provided to them by confederates in the study. They argued that subjects felt a need to explain and understand their bodily feelings and used cognitive appraisal of the environment to label these feelings.

Psychosocial Theories

Psychosocial theories of emotion (Averill, 1980; deRivera, 1984; Mandler 1982) describe the reciprocal relationship between emotion and the social environment. Emotion is based on social interaction (not automatic arousal) and itself defines the interaction and the relationship. In fact, emotion is viewed as emotional relationships, because “We are always in some emotional relationship with others” (deRivera, 1984, p. 142). Such theories are cognition or reason driven, because the environment has to be appraised in order to understand the social situation and, thus, arrive at an emotion. Emotion, in these cases, cannot be predicted from any environmental stimulus alone, because the outcome also is...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Halftitle
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Author’s Note
• 1. Introduction
• 2. Emotion and Reason
• 3. Attitude Formation
• 4. Involvement
• 5. Theories of Learning
• 6. Personality and the Self
• 7. Risk
• 8. Trust and Commitment
• 9. Value
• References
• Index