Symbolic Interaction with Consumer Products: An Affect Control Theory Approach

Abstract

Symbolic interactionism is one of the few social psychology perspectives that recognizes the important role of physical artifacts, including consumer products, in social life. Consumer products are artifacts people can use to maintain the expressive order within social life – the order that is embedded within the shared meanings of a culture. As a formal theory of symbolic interactionism, affect control theory emphasizes culturally shared affective meaning, the impressions produced within social events, and identity processes that rely on those cultural meanings and social events. We contend that affect control theory provides a framework for understanding and researching how consumer products influence people's social experience and interaction. First, we specifically explore how affect control theory's concepts of affective meaning, identity modification, and impression management can be applied to understanding consumer products. Building on this foundation, we then consider how affect control theory might also contribute to three new research directions: social interaction with consumer products, affective design of consumer products, and the prosumer identity created from consumer products. Our conclusion is that affect control theory provides sociologists with a means of exploring the important and fascinating questions that emerge when we consider people's symbolic interaction with consumer products.

Who’s responsible? Representatives’ autonomy alters customers’ emotion and repurchase intentions toward organizations

“…Customers may learn about autonomy differences in many ways, including from cues directly from an encounter, from knowledge of the specific organization or through expectations based on the area of service or industry. Representatives’ nametags often directly state their positions, while clothing and props such as a business suit, cleaning apron or bellhop’s hat symbolically do so (Shank and Lulham, 2016). In service encounters, organizational knowledge can be determined by noticing who gives instruction to whom, signs as to organizational policy, or the physical arrangement of the location (Bitner, 1990; Hartline and Jones, 1996).…”

The Affective Self: Perseverance of Self-Sentiments in Late-Life Dementia

“… 2 Other recent applications include mental health and emotion, computers, work, family, measurement, and even objects (Boyle 2019; Freeland and Hoey 2018; Harkness and Kroska 2019; Lively, Steelman, and Powell 2010; Robinson 2014; Schröder, Hoey, and Rogers 2016; Shank and Lulham 2016). …”

Gender-based food stereotypes among Turkish university students

“…As an approach to understanding social behavior, the symbolic interaction theory was developed by Mead (1934) and extended by Blumer (1969). Symbolic interactionism is a perspective that recognizes the crucial role of physical artifacts in social life and consumer products are among these physical artifacts (Shank and Lulham, 2016). Revisiting the symbolic interactionism theory as a theoretical framework in their studies, Handberg et al (2015) stated that symbolic interactionism is based on three simple assumptions:…”