Television consumption and Institutional Anomie Theory

Institutional Anomie Theory and Cybercrime—Cybercrime and the American Dream, Now Available Online

“…Other researchers testing solely the more individualized component of IAT have generally found support for this version of the theory (e.g., Muftic, 2006; Rosenberger, 2016; Stults & Falco, 2014; Tuliao & Chen, 2017). For example, Muftic (2006) studied cheating prevalence in college students, and found that measures associated to economic goals of the American Dream such as individualism, universalism, achievement orientation, and “monetary fetishism” (i.e., marketized values), and level of commitment to noneconomic institutions such as family and polity, influence cheating.…”

Perceived marketization in Poland: Translating key concepts of institutional anomie theory to the micro level

“…Another fruitful micro-level study, by Rosenberger (2016), revealed highly interesting insights into the relationship between cultural and institutional dynamics. Rosenberger employed measures of an individual commitment to the American Dream, as well as integration in non-economic institutions, and identified the amount of TV consumption as one important driving force and transmitter of the American Dream and economic dominance.…”

“…Previous operationalizations of the main concepts of IAT at the individual level have mostly concentrated on processes of penetration. Most commonly, researchers operationalized the commitment to the ‘American Dream’ ethos as the individual-level counterpart of economic dominance (Hirtenlehner et al, 2013; Muftić, 2006; Rosenberger, 2016). In contrast, other researchers created alternative instruments for measuring a ‘syndrome of market anomie’ (Karstedt and Farrall, 2006) or ‘values of the market economy’ (Stults and Falco, 2014) as described above.…”

“…Originally, IAT was cast at the macro level of explanation and received satisfactory support in numerous macro-level studies (Messner and Rosenfeld, 2006). More recently, theoretical attempts (Messner et al, 2008) and empirical attempts (Muftić, 2006; Stults and Falco, 2014; Rosenberger, 2016) to transfer the theory to the micro level have emerged followed by efforts to apply the IAT framework to a multi-level setting (Groß et al, 2018; Hirtenlehner et al, 2013; Hövermann et al, 2016). Because the bulk of the previous individual-level studies mostly dealt with one of the three processes described in IAT – the process of penetration of market values into other non-economic social institutions – the proposed operationalizations suffer from a lack of complexity.…”