updating heider's balance theory in consumer behavior: a ... 21heider balance...

475

MAR WILEJ RIGHT BATCH

Base of text

Psychology & Marketing� 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Vol. 18(5):475–495 (May 2001)

Top of text

Top of CT

Base of DF

Updating Heider’s BalanceTheory in ConsumerBehavior: A Jewish CoupleBuys a German Carand AdditionalBuying–ConsumingTransformation StoriesArch G. WoodsideBoston College

Jean-Charles ChebatEcole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales

ABSTRACT

Consumer researchers describe Heider’s (1958) balance theorywithout showing how the theory relates to recent theoreticaldevelopments in consumer behavior. Empirical examination of thetheory is also lacking in consumer-psychology literature. This articleupdates Heider’s balance theory in consumer behavior by developingthe theory’s links to theories of perceptual, attitudinal, and behaviorautomaticity and controlled thinking (see Bargh, 1994; Bargh, Chen,& Burrows, 1996) and cognitive-experiential self-theory (Epstein,1994). Propositions central for applying balance theory to consumerpsychology link automatic-controlled memory retrievals andstorytelling of unbalanced (i.e., paradoxical) situations thatstimulate further thinking and action. Research using storytelling(e.g., see Fischer, 1999; Schank, 1990) methods aids in examiningthese theory developments empirically. � 2001 John Wiley & Sons,Inc.

476 WOODSIDE AND CHEBAT

MAR WILEJ LEFT BATCH

shortstandard

Top of textBase of text

Base of RF

One of Heider’s (1958, p. 210) central working hypotheses “. . . is atendency toward balanced states in human relationships.” Heider dem-onstrates that this hypothesis extends to consumer-psychological per-spectives, such as product ownership:

p owns x induces p likes x, or p tends to like something he owns. Irwinand Gebhard (1946) concluded from their experiments with childrenthat a clear majority of them “expressed a preference for an objectwhich was to be given to them as compared with an object which wasto be given to another child” (p. 650), and, “the results may illustratesome general principle whereby ownership enhances the value of anobject to the owner” (p. 651). Ownership might be considered “one formof nearness.” (p. 651) (Heider, 1958, pp. 194–195, italics in original)

Solomon (1999, pp. 217–218) convincingly argues that balance theorymay be applied usefully to understand consumer behavior and designeffective marketing strategies. However, Heider’s contributions havenot been integrated into recent theoretical and empirical work in con-sumer psychology. This article makes two contributions. First, we dem-onstrate how balance theory is useful theoretically for linking modes ofthinking and behavior (see Bargh and co-workers, 1994, 1996; Epstein,1994). Second, we describe empirical examinations in consumer re-search of balance-theory hypotheses. The article bridges past andpresent theoretical literature streams relevant to consumer researchersinterested in how individuals resolve psychological unbalanced statesand maintain/achieve balanced states.The first section is a brief review of balanced and unbalanced states.

The second section links balance theory and recent advances inmultiplepsychological processing theories. The second section includes a binary-flow model based on balance theory and theories on automatic to con-trolled thinking. The third section explores the use of the storytellingresearch paradigm (see Schank, 1990) for examining balance theoryhypotheses in consumer-behavior contexts. The final section coverslimitations and suggestions for theory and research extending balancetheory.

A BRIEF REVIEW OF BALANCED AND UNBALANCEDSTATES

Heider (1958, Chap. 7) distinguishes two types of relations between sep-arate entities: unit and sentiment relations.

Separate entities comprise a unit when they are perceived as belongingtogether. For example, members of a family are seen as a unit; a personand his deed belong together. (p. 176)

UPDATING HEIDER’S BALANCE THEORY 477


shortstandard


Base of RF

U denotes the cognitive unit between two entities, and notU the factthat the two entities are segregated. (p. 201)

A sentiment relation refers to the positive (L or �) or negative (DLor �) feelings or valuation that one gives to an entity, such as a person,activity, or object.These relations may be for dyads, triads, or more complex cases, but

all relations are from the perceiver’s subjective point of view. Thus, al-though a brand may possess a given attribute or provide a specific ben-efit, if a consumer perceives the opposite, a notU relation results be-tween brand and attribute/benefit.Heider describes the two relation concepts to result in four possibili-

ties between two entities: “U, notU, L, and DL.” Although one of thesefour relation states might be viewed as excluding the other three, heemphasizes:

By a balanced state is meant a situation in which the relations amongthe entities fit together harmoniously; there is no stress toward change.A basic assumption is that sentiment relations and unit relations tendtoward a balanced state. This means that sentiments are not entirelyindependent of the perceptions of unit connections between entities andthat the latter, in turn, are not entirely independent of sentiments.Sentiments and unit relations are mutually interdependent. It alsomeans that if a balanced state does not exist, then forces toward thisstate will arise. If a change is not possible, the state of imbalance willproduce tension. (Heider, 1958, p. 201)

Although unit and sentiment relations are nonorthogonal, they rep-resent independent theoretical and empirical constructs grounded incognition (i.e., units) and affection (i.e., sentiments). When tensioncaused by imbalance arises in the mind of the individual, then the in-dividual is likely to exercise some mental and physical effort to elimi-nate the tension.

Unbalanced situations stimulate us to further thinking; they have thecharacter of interesting puzzles, problems which make us suspect adepth of interesting background. . . . Stories in which the stress islaid on unbalanced situations are felt to have a deep psychologicalmeaning. Dostoevski, for instance, describes again and again feelingsfull of conflict resulting from just such situations. (Heider, 1958, pp.180–181)

The work of several scholars in consumer behavior (e.g., Arnould &Wallendorf, 1994; Hirschman, 1986) and related fields of human inquiry(Bruner, 1990; Mitroff & Kilmann, 1976; Orr, 1990; Zukier, 1986), sup-port the proposition that, “. . . people think narratively rather thanargumentatively or paradigmatically” (Weick, 1995, p. 127). Research



shortstandard


Base of RF

on storytelling (e.g., see Arnould & Wallendorf, 1994; Fournier, 1998;Schank, 1990) is useful because it helps clarify and deepen knowledgeof how people resolve paradoxes triggered in their minds by unbalancedstates. Learning stories enables the researcher to perceive the complex-ity often associated with initial balanced states becoming unbalancedand the steps taken to achieve old or new balanced states. Storytellingresearch enables holistic views into initial balanced states becomingunbalanced and the steps taken to achieve the old or a new balancedstate. Also, for the person doing the (un)conscious thinking, stories serveas “guides to conduct” by facilitating the interpretation of cues turnedup by that conduct (Weick, 1995, p. 127).Most of Heider’s (1958) presentation on balanced/unbalanced states

builds on “. . . the assumption that the relation U and L can be treatedas positive relations, and notU and DL as negative relations” (p. 201).However, this proposition is not to imply that positive sentiment linksalways with a unit (U) relation, and a negative sentiment links alwayswith notU. Self-perceptions of disliking oneself or a family member areexamples of a DL and U combination. Heider (1958, p. 209) points outthat, “. . . if I dislike what I own [a negative sentiment toward an ob-ject belonging (U) to a person] I may either begin to like it (change insentiment) or sell it (change in unit relation).” When a situation is bal-anced, no tension is felt, and Heider (1958, p. 214) recognizes that con-scious thinking need not occur: “In this connection, it is important toemphasize that the action which brings about one’s own pleasure neednot presuppose conscious and calculating means-end reasoning nor thatthe person is selfishly oriented.”Displayed for consumer-brand-attribute contexts, Figure 1 summa-

rizes four sets of relationships in triads resulting in balanced states: (a)all three relations are positive and (b), (c), and (d) two relations arenegative and one is positive. In Figure 1(a), the relation between personand the attribute is positive, that is, the consumer likes the attribute.For example, a consumer likes a manual transmission in automobiles.The unit [U, shown as � in Figure 1(a)] relation is positive betweenbrand and the attribute, for example, the brand is available with man-ual transmission. The person likes the brand. Consequently, the threerelations are harmonious in Figure 1(a). Other contexts are appropriatefor consumer psychology perspectives, for example:

� person (P)–product (X)–person (O),� person (P)–product (X)–benefit (B),� person (P )–activity (A)–person (O).

Imbalance occurs when two of the relations are positive and one isnegative. Figures 2(a), 2(b), and 2(c) depict the parallel unbalancedstates for person with respect to brand and attribute. The case of three



shortstandard


Base of RF

Figure 1. Balanced states among person, brand, and attribute.

Figure 2. Unbalanced states among person, brand, and attribute.



shortstandard


Base of RF

negative relations [Figure 2(d)] is somewhat ambiguous and reflects as-sociations that are unlikely to influence balance or unbalanced states.The story of a Jewish couple buying a German car reported later in

this article reflects the transformations from a balanced state [depictedas Figure 1(c)] to an unbalanced state [depicted as Figure 2(b)] to a newbalanced state [depicted as Figure 1(a) and partially as Figure 1(b)].The discussion of the study describes the transformation and thesestates in detail.Heider (1958) is careful to emphasize that relations between entities

are not always symmetrical: (p L o) does not necessarily imply (o L p).However, he proposes that such relations tend to become symmetrical.For example, “We want people we like to like us, and we tend to likepeople who like us—and the parallel is true for negative sentiments”(p. 205). Proposing nonsymmetrical situations in consumer psychologyis useful for extending Heider’s theory. Doing so helps to achieveBecker’s (1998) and Ragin’s (1987) recommendation that theory anddata “sampling ought to be conducted so as to maximize the possibilityof finding what you hadn’t even thought to look for” (Becker, 1998, p.164). A case study of a nonsymmetrical affective relation between abrand and a person is described below.Two additional sets of propositions from Heider need to be explored

more fully in consumer psychology. First, “the possibility of a negativeattitude toward the self (p DL p) must also be considered. If p dislikeshimself he might reject a positive x as to good for him; a negative p anda positive x do not make a good unit” (Heider, 1958, p. 210). This viewreflects the argument that using a very attractive model in an adver-tisement may backfire because the intended customer perceives that apositive relation with himself or herself and the model could not occur.Second, the possibilities of a neutral attitude and a disunion unit

relation are described by Heider (1958, pp. 201–202). Although stere-otypical thinking and affective responses occur automatically (see Bru-ner, 1986; Epstein, 1994), exposure to unknown entities may generateneutral attitudes and noncategorization at least momentarily. A dis-union relation is categorizing an entity as not belonging or different,whereas the absence of a unit relation is not yet categorizing the entityas unit or disunion. Neutral affective states and an unknown unit re-lation equate with a consumer’s very fleeting initial exposure to a prod-uct or brand.

RECENT ADVANCES IN MULTIPLE PSYCHOLOGICALPROCESSING THEORIES

Beliefs (i.e., associations between entities), attitudes, and even behav-iors frequently become activated automatically on the mere presence ofan entity, without conscious intention or awareness (i.e., preconsciously)



shortstandard


Base of RF

(see Bargh and co-workers, 1989, 1996; Epstein,1994; Fazio, 1986, 1990;Holden, 1993; Holden & Lutz, 1992; Woodside & Trappey, 1992). Sev-eral scholars have proposed and empirically supported the view thattwo fundamentally different modes of processing information exist; Ep-stein (1994) refers to these as rational and experiential.These two think-ing modes can conflict with each other. “The experiential system canoverride the rational system even when subjects know the appropriaterational response. The experiential system is more responsive to con-crete than to abstract representations” (Epstein, 1994, p. 718).

Experiential (Preconscious) vs. Rational Thinking

Characteristics of experiential vs. rational thinking systems include thefollowing propositions:

� Encoding reality in concrete images, metaphors, and narratives vs.encoding reality in abstract symbols, words, and numbers

� Rapid automatic processing oriented toward immediate action vs.slower processing oriented toward delayed action

� Crudely differentiating; stereotypical thinking vs. highly differen-tiating

� Experienced passively and preconsciously vs. experienced activelyand consciously

� Self-evidently valid perspectives vs. trying to think logically and byjustifying

� A holistic view vs. an analytic view (Adapted from Epstein, 1994).

Automatic and Unaware Thinking Affecting Behavior

In a series of intriguing experiments Bargh et al. (1996) were able toshow that subjects can be primed by completing simple tasks to exhibitbehaviors automatically. For example, subjects asked to create sen-tences from words relating to the elderly stereotype (e.g., rigid, bitter,and helpless) vs. subjects completing the same tasks with control wordswalked more slowly after the study was apparently completed comparedto subjects in the control condition. In a final debriefing “no subjectsexpressed any knowledge of the relevance of the words in the scrambled-sentence task to the elderly stereotype. Furthermore, no participant be-lieved that the words had an impact on his or her [walking speed] be-havior” (Bargh et al., 1996, p. 237).Related to Bargh’s work on preconscious automatic thinking and be-

havior, and within consumer-marketer influence contexts, Zaltman(1997) and his colleagues (Braun & Zaltman, 1998; Zaltman & Coulter,1995) provide compelling evidence that consumers’ memory processesare sometimes frail. “Consumers might be influenced to misremember



shortstandard


Base of RF

or refabricate information from their own past experiences, attitudes,or expectations” (Braun & Zaltman, 1998, p. 33). Thus, a requirementarises to go beyond self-reporting by consumers for estimating the im-pacts of marketing influences. A key finding in the work of Zaltman andhis colleagues is that consumers may greatly underestimate their useof external information in making purchasing decisions (cf. LaDoux,1996; Russo, Johnson, & Stephens, 1989).

Balance Theory and Peripheral/Central Routes to Persuasion

Substantial research findings support the related proposition in con-sumer psychology that mere exposure can change attitude and causepurchase choices (see Fazio, Powell, & Williams, 1989; Krugman, 1965;Petty, Unnava, & Strathman, 1991; Woodside, 1994; Zajonc & Markus,1982). Consequently, peripheral advertising persuasion (i.e., low-involvement processing following the mere exposure to advertising) canaffect attitude and brand choice. Discussions of peripheral routes to per-suasion match well with Heider’s view of entities in a balanced state.Little to no controlled thinking is likely to occur in such situations.Heider (1958) predicts the circumstances when automatic thinking

and behavioral effects are most likely to be overridden: when a personperceives tension that an imbalanced state exists. The active mentalsteps (i.e., controlled thinking) occurring to reduce tension and achievebalance is analogous to the Petty and Cacioppo (1986) central route topersuasion assumptions. Within the central route to persuasion, con-sumers actively acquire additional information and create heuristics toresolve dilemmas (e.g., purchase vs. nonpurchase and brand choice se-lection).Although he does not relate his work to that of Heider (1958), Bargh

(1989) develops views similar to those expressed by Heider (1958, p.214), that much of thinking “need not presuppose conscious and calcu-lating means–end reasoning.” Also, Bargh (1989) develops a detailedmodel on how automatic and controlled thinking processes are contin-gent and related rather than separate and unique processes, “Thus, at-tention, awareness, intention, and control do not necessarily occur to-gether in an all-or-none fashion. They are to some extent independentqualities that may appear in various combinations” (Bargh, 1989, p. 6).Heider advocates a similar view when he identifies circumstances whenimbalance replaces balanced states.In consumer contexts, order of attribute/benefit-to-brand retrieval re-

flects strength of cue–object link: a strong positive link facilitates top-of-mind automatic retrieval of the object upon presentation of the cue(Cohen, 1966; Farquhar, Herr, & Fazio, 1990; Holden & Lutz, 1992;Woodside & Trappey, 1992). Positive and unit dyads and triads arereadily accessible for consumers, reflecting associate-to-brand accessi-bility as well as consumer-brand-purchase thoughts (see Axelrod, 1968,



shortstandard


Base of RF

Figure 3. Modeling unaware perceiving, automatic perceiving, judging, and precon-scious links of environmental features and behavior.

1986; Haley & Case, 1979). Thus, a spreading activation (Collins & Lof-tus, 1975) of entities, all or nearly all in balanced relations, occurs au-tomatically among attributes, benefits, brands, and (purchase/use) be-haviors.

A Contingency View of Thinking Processes and BalanceTheory

Figure 3 builds on Heider’s (1958) assumptions to summarize the con-ditional relationships between automatic and controlled thinking. Box2 in Figure 3 reflects the proposition that unaware perceiving of entitiesand features in environments does occur. Such unaware perceiving canlead automatically to unconscious beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors(Boxes 3, 4, and 5 in Figure 3). Such unconscious processing occurs oftenfor balanced states. One example: “I’ve been a faculty member here for28 years and I have never seen a problem [with gender discrimination],”a statement made by a male faculty member, 60 years old, at a businessschool faculty meeting in 1996. This expressed view was followed bycontradictory views expressed by all female faculty members (two per-sons) who had been on the same faculty for 10 years each.Figure 3 steps from 2-7-8-10-11 are the spreading activation in au-

tomatic thinking resulting from a balanced state. Noticing a dyad ortriad linkage in the environment resulting in an imbalanced state (Box9) causes a person tension and activates controlled thinking to achieve



shortstandard


Base of RF

the original balanced state or to transform cognitions–affections–behaviors to reach a new balanced state (Box 12). Because of the tensionand substantial cognitive efforts involved in resolving imbalancedstates, the original balanced state has a natural advantage over alter-native and novel balanced states. Thus, several strong and new linkageswith new entities may need to be formed to overcome the automaticrelations among entities retrieved automatically for the original bal-anced state. The narrative of a Jewish couple buying a German carillustrates this proposition.

STORYTELLING RESEARCH PARADIGMS

“Stories are crucial for sensemaking” (Weick, 1995, p. 120). Schank(1990, p. 12) proposes that, “Human memory is story-based. Not allmemories are stories. Rather, stories are especially interesting priorexperiences, ones that we learn from.” Heider (1958, p. 181) views sto-ries stressing unbalanced situations to have deep psychological mean-ing. Storytelling-related studies in consumer research are extensive,though rarely related to the work of Heider (see Fournier, 1998 for apartial review of this literature). Fournier (p. 366) expresses the use-fulness of the approach:

A critical insight emerging from this analysis concerns the holisticcharacter of consumer-brand relationship phenomena and, by exten-sion, the perspective that is required for their study. The data submitthe important point that deep knowledge of the consumer-brand rela-tionship is obtained only through consideration of the larger whole inwhich that relationship is embedded. . . . This study makes a strongcase for understanding the broader context of people’s life experiencesas a basis for anticipating the constellation of brands with which re-lationships are likely to develop.

Schank (1990) and Schank and Abelson (1977) provide tools usefulfor collecting and understanding other people’ stories: in order to un-derstand a story, it needs to be broken down into the conceptual actionsunderlying the events. These actions are then understood in terms ofthe “scripts, plans, goals, and themes” to which they refer. A script is aset of expectations about what will happen next in a well-understoodsituation. “My contention here is that when results, especially unex-pected results [e.g., imbalanced states], are added to the package ofthemes, goals, and plans, an inherent prediction is added that allows astory to be found [by person in his/her memory] by looking at the struc-tures that were involved and the results that were obtained. Attachedto this package is a lesson—in essence the abstraction of the contentsof a story uniquely derived from that story” (Schank, 1990, p. 93, boldadded). A lesson sometimes implies that a paradox presented in a story



shortstandard


Base of RF

Figure 4. Original balanced state for Posner and VW case study.

has been resolved. For example, “a Jewish couple buys a German car,”might suggest that the entities, Jewish couple and German car, repre-sent an imbalanced dyad; the lesson may be that some justifications arepossible for the couple to buy the car.The dynamic paradigm of transformation from balanced to imbal-

anced to balanced states is a storytelling approach. This approach in-cludes reaching beyond Box 12 in Figure 3 to describe how the mainactors in the story resolve the felt tension incurred by the imbalancedstate. Thus, a description of the three acts in such stories would include(a) an initial balanced state generated automatically following aware orunaware perceiving of an object, (b) active (i.e., controlled thinking) no-ticing of an entity and relation that causes an imbalanced state, and (c)mental and behavioral steps taken to reduce or eliminate the felt ten-sion of the imbalanced state. Examples of such three-act stories follow.

A Jewish Couple Buys a German Car

Appendix 1 is an abridged story written by the husband (Posner, 1998)of the Jewish couple buying a German car. Figure 4 includes thethoughts appearing to come to mind automatically for Posner shown asthree balanced-triad states. Each triad includes two negative relationsand one positive relation.Figure 5 includes additional entities retrieved without effort and au-

tomatically from long-termmemory and reported in Posner’s story. Notethat all triads are balanced states in Figure 5: three positive relationsor two negative and one positive relations. The currency of some of therelations is apparent in a 1999 Associated Press news story entitled,“Volkswagen Sued for Holocaust Acts” (Chilsen, 1999). The lawsuit saysthat up to 400 children were killed from maltreatment and poor condi-



shortstandard


Base of RF

Figure 5. Extended original balanced state for Posner and VW case study.

Figure 6. Activation of conscious thinking by Gerald and Trisha Posner.

tions in a nursery near a Volkswagen plant where their parents wereforced to build munitions and the “Beetle.”As shown in Figure 6, seeing the “New Beetle” VW car creates an

imbalanced state in the Posners’ minds: two plus relations and one neg-ative relation. Several ways may be available to resolve this imbalance.For example,

1. The Posners may develop negative sentiments toward the NewBeetle, replacing the initial positive sentiments they hold.

2. The Posners may try to break the unit relation between the NewBeetle and German car by learning about VW manufacturingplants in other countries and convincing themselves that VW isreally not a German enterprise any longer.

3. Gerald Posner may try to emphasize that he is “only half-Jewish”



shortstandard


Base of RF

Figure 7. Information search, conscious thinking, and applied preconscious thinkingby Gerald and Trisha Posner to achieve a new balanced state.

and that no family member died in the Holocaust, to disconnectwith the Jewish unit relationship shown in Figures 5 and 6.

How did the Posners resolve the imbalance?The mental battle seesawed between the original balanced state and

creating a new balanced state. Figure 7 depicts entities supporting theoriginal balanced state: Holocaust survivors file class-action lawsuitsand see the movie, Saving Private Ryan. Four entities that support anew balanced state and occurred before the Posners bought the NewBeetle are shown in Figure 7. This new balanced state includes trans-forming the Posners-and-German-car relation from a negative to posi-tive sentiment. The acceptance of this transformation is confirmed bythe support received from Trisha Posner’s mother for the entity of buy-ing the New Beetle.Although the view may be expressed that the outcome of this story is

a self-fulfilling prophecy, the act of buying the VW car is uncertain eventoward the end of the story. Certainly the possibilities of outcomes otherthan the Posners’ purchase are plausible. The need for the presence inworking memory of several new entities and relations to transform aninitial balanced state into a new balanced state is a central conclusionfrom analyzing the story. The recognition by senior VWmanagement ofthe firm’s war crimes, or other similar acts, appear to be a necessary



shortstandard


Base of RF

Figure 8. Moving to and from Finland.

entity in transforming the Posners to a new balanced state, allowingthem to buy the New Beetle.

Moving to and from Finland

Appendix 2 tells the amusing story of moving to and from Finland in adiary format. The global entity, “Scenic beauty,” summarizes the thirdentity between the diarist and Finland in the initial balanced state. SeeFigure 8. Note that unit relations (U) are shown between snow andsnowplow and snow and shoveling snow in Figure 8(a); positive senti-ments are never indicated in the story for the snowplow or shovelingsnow.In Figure 8(b) several new entities occur that transform the balanced

state into an imbalanced state. The two positives and one negative inthe main triangle in Figure 8(b) indicate the imbalanced state.The new balanced state includes a negative person-and-Finland re-

lation, replacing the initial positive relation. Note also that scenic beautyis no longer an entity in the new balanced state. A key conclusion isthat transformations between original and new balanced sates may in-volve learning new core entities in relations and eliminating older ones.

A Parent Buys Barq’s Root Beer

Figure 9 summarizes the final story: A parent of a teenage son buysBarq’s Root Beer. The customers targeted for Barq’s are teenage boys(J. Koerner, personal communication, February 20, 1998). Before theCoca-Cola Company purchased the firm, Barq’s sponsored heavy-metalmusic to build a unit relation between the brand and an entity knownto be liked by the target market. Consumer research indicated that oneof the reasons teenage males liked heavy metal music was that theyknew their parents disliked such music. Acts related to the music are a



shortstandard


Base of RF

Figure 9. Possible nonsymmetrical relationship between person and brand.

way to establish independence and to rebel against parental authority.Note that the positive and negative sentiments expressed between par-ent and teenage son in Figure 9 captures family love and authority dis-like.This story illustrates a nonsymmetrical relation between two entities:

parent and Barq’s. Parents of teenage boys are not the intended targets.More pointedly, the story illustrates how anthropomorphizing brandsmay be occurring in creating images. The consumer researcher mightexpect to hear the teenage son saying, “Hey Dad, you’re not supposedto like Barq’s.”The initial imbalanced state in Figure 9 may be transformed into a

balanced state in several ways, including:

1. The company embraces parents as customers.2. The parents start to dislike Barq’s to demonstrate acceptable pa-

rental behavior to their sons.

Barq’s targets males not females because of prior positive responsesto promotional activities among males and little response among fe-males. Also, teenage females are found to accept a drink alternativesuggested by males more often than the reverse (J. Koerner, personalcommunication, February 20, 1998).

LIMITATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR THEORY ANDRESEARCH

The presented discussion is intentionally limited to describing the valueof Heider’s theory in consumer research. The case studies generalize to



shortstandard


Base of RF

the theoretical views presented earlier, and the cases are not intendedto be representative of any human populations.Heider’s (1958) views on balanced and imbalanced states offer useful

insights for understanding consumers’ automatic and controlled think-ing processes. Basic assumptions in his theoretical work help explainhow balanced states occur, how imbalanced states occur, and the actionstaken in again achieving a (new) balanced state. Bargh (1998) in par-ticular describes how much of what we call thinking includes elementsof automatic and controlled processes. Such views are grounded in theassumptions and predictions described by Heider.Heider’s work helps to solve the dilemmas of when and how balanced

and imbalanced states occur in product- and brand-purchase situations.His work is also useful in understanding how consumers resolve imbal-anced states.In order to relate balanced and imbalanced transformations, inter-

pretive research methods such as autodriving (see Heisley & Levy,1991), Zaltman’s (1997) metaphor-elicitation procedure, and participantobservation studies (see Arnould & Price, 1993) are useful for learningthe stories consumers retrieve from memories. Researchers should gobeyond data based on consumers’ self-reporting of automatic retrievalsresulting in balanced states. Our knowledge is scant on preconsciousprocessing by consumers that they are never aware of, as well as howconsumers reach and resolve imbalanced states.The question is not, therefore, how often automatic thoughts, atti-

tudes, and behaviors occur, but whether and how often they are con-trolled or overridden by some conscious intention and purpose. “Controlover automatic influences requires three things: (a) awareness of the[automatic] influence or at least the possibility of the influence, (b) mo-tivation to exert the control, and (c) enough attentional capacity (or lackof distractions) at the time to engage in the control process” (Bargh etal., 1996, p. 241). Heider’s propositions on thinking being stimulated bymoving from balanced to unbalanced situations are insightful precur-sors supporting Bargh’s conclusions.

APPENDIX 1

VW Day, Sometimes Buying a Car Means Burying the Past

Why would any Jew buy a BMW, Mercedes, or Volkswagen? It was mymantra, repeated frequently to friends, especially those with Jewishsurnames and a German car. Before anybody could answer, I’d cite thewartime slave labor used by all three firms and that their factoriesfueled the Nazi effort. My worst vitriol was reserved for lowly Volk-swagen. The “people’s car” was conceived by Hitler, who reportedlyhelped with the original design.



shortstandard


Base of RF

Even after the war, there were links with unsavory characters. AdolfEichmann was a foreman at an Argentine Mercedes factory before theIsraelis tracked him down in 1960. Franz Stangl, the Treblinka death-camp commandant, worked for Volkswagen in Brazil before he wasfound in 1967.

I am 44-years-old and only half-Jewish. No family members died inthe Holocaust. My heartfelt objections are purely emotional—not nec-essarily reasonable—and grew from my research for two books aboutthe Third Reich and war criminals. My anger was deep-set, and whileI realized the new generation bore no guilt for its parents’ crimes, I didnot want my hard-earned money going to companies that were eventangentially connected to the Nazi war effort.

My wife, Trisha, an English Jew, encouraged my unusual senti-ments. Yet, most disagreed. My Jewish father thought my position tooextreme. Friends pointed out that the Israelis used Mercedes armytrucks. I was not impressed. An English Jew who was a ranking officerof BMW asked, “Would you buy an Italian car?” Yes. “What aboutclothes from Spain?” Yes. “Well then, your objection to buying Germancars is strictly based on time. A succession of Roman Emperors tried towipe out every Jew in the empire, and the Spanish had the Inquisition.Your objection to Germany is because it was so recent.” He was right,but if I were to boycott all countries that had at some point institution-alized anti-Semitism and sanctioned killing Jews, there would be fewthings to buy. Reason be damned, it was Germany that had earned mywrath.

Then a strange thing happened. Last spring, while strolling inWash-ington, I passed a car with which I was immediately enamored—Volk-swagen’s New Beetle. Trisha was with me and shared my enthusiasmfor the startling design. We actually began debating whether we mightone day want one. It was the first crack in my “boycott German cars”veneer. I started visiting dozens of New Beetle Web sites and readmag-azines that gave it kudos. But buying one was no easy step. We wereproud not to have owned a car during 20 years in New York. And weasked all the practical questions: Do we need the extra responsibilityfor only a few trips out of the city? What about upkeep? A fortune forinsurance? And, of course, the fundamental obstacle—it was German.

Trisha and I flip-flopped frequently. Yes, it was a great car, and itwas time to bury the past. No, we didn’t need it, and would probablybe happier in 20 years if we put the $20,000 into a mutual fund. Maybethe long waiting lists were a sign the car was not for us. The desire forone might just be a mid-life crisis, and if we were patient, it would pass.

I told some friends of my unexpected Beetle obsession. “Didn’t youfeel like scratching a Mercedes after you saw Schindler’s List,” askedone. “What about VW’s failure to pay war reparations,” asked another.The reparations obstacle seemed resolved when Volkswagen abruptlyreversed itself in early July and announced it would finally establish afund to compensate wartime slave laborers. The angst returned whenHolocaust survivors filed two class-action lawsuits contending VW’s of-fer was inadequate.

In late summer, a dealer in upstate New York called. The car I



shortstandard


Base of RF

wanted—in silver—would soon arrive. The next day we saw “SavingPrivate Ryan” and watched uncomfortably as German troops moweddown hundreds of GI’s on the beaches of Normandy. We almost can-celled the order. The car arrived just before Labor Day. It is thoroughlycaptivating. And whenever I have second thoughts about driving aGerman car, I calm myself with the reminder that Mexican workerssouth of the border manufacture the New Beetle.

When Trisha telephoned her 85-year-old mother in London, a con-servative Jew, and told her we had bought the Beetle, the answer wasquick. “Congratulations darling. Maybe the war is finally over.” (GeraldPosner, New York Times Magazine, Sunday, October 4, 1998, p. 128)

APPENDIX 2

Moving to and from Finland

Dear Diary.Aug. 1. Moved to our new home in Finland. It is so beautiful here.

The hills are so picturesque. Can hardly wait to see them covered bysnow. God’s country. I love it here.

Oct. 14. Finland is the most beautiful place on Earth. The leaves areturning all different colors. I love the shade of red and orange. Wentfor a ride through some beautiful hills and spotted some deer. They areso graceful, certainly they are the most beautiful animals on Earth. Ican’t imagine anyone wanting to kill such an elegant creature. The verysymbol of peace and tranquility. Hope it will snow soon. I Love It Here.

Dec. 2. It snowed last night. Woke up to find everything blanketedin white. It looks like a postcard. We went outside and cleaned the snowoff the steps and shoveled the driveway. We had a snowball fight (Iwon). When the snowplow came by we had to shovel the drivewayagain. What a beautiful place. Mother Nature is perfect harmony. ILove It Here.

Dec. 12. More snow last night. I love it. The snow plow did his trickagain (that rascal). A winter wonderland. I Love It Here.

Dec. 22. More of that shit fell last night. I’ve got blisters on my handsfrom shoveling. I think the snowplow hides around the corner andwaitsuntil I’m done shoveling this driveway. Asshole!

Dec. 23. “White Christmas” my busted ass! More Friggin snow. If Iever get my hands on that son-of-a-bitch who drives that snowplow, Iswear I’ll castrate the dumb bastard. Don’t know why they don’t usemore salt on the roads to melt this fucking ice.

Dec. 28. More white shit last night. Been inside since Christmas dayexcept for shoveling out the driveway every time “Snowplow Harry”comes by. Can’t go anywhere. Got buried in a mountain of white shit.The weatherman says expect another 25 cm of shit tonight. Do youknow how many shovels full of snow 25 cm is?

Jan. 1. Happy Fucking New Year, The weatherman was wrong



shortstandard


Base of RF

(again). We got 34 cm of white shit this time. At this rate it won’t meltbefore July. The snowplow got stuck up the road and shithead had theballs to come to the door and ask to borrow MY shovel. After I told himI had broken 6 shovels already shoveling all the shit he pushed into mydriveway, I broke my last one over his fucking head.

Jan. 4. Finally got out of the house today. Went to the store to getfood and on the way back a Goddamn deer ran in front of the car andI hit the bastard. Did about 9000 Finmarks damage to the car. Thosefucking beasts ought to be killed. Wish the hunters had killed them alllast November.

May 3. Took the car to the garage in town. Would you believe thething is rotting out from all that fucking salt they keep all over theroad. Car looks like a piece of shit!

May 10. Moved to Holland. I can’t imagine why anyone in their frig-gin mind would ever want to live in that God forsaken country of Fin-land. (Author unknown, received from O. Koll, personal communica-tion, 2000).

REFERENCES

Arnould, E. J., & Price, L. L. (1993). River magic: Extraordinary experienceand the extended service encounter. Journal of Consumer Research, 20, 24–45.

Arnould, E. J., & Wallendorf, M. (1994). Market-oriented ethnography: Inter-pretation building and marketing strategy formulation. Journal of Market-ing Research, 31, 484–504.

Axelrod, J. N. (1968). Attitude measures that predict purchase. Journal of Ad-vertising Research, 8, 3–17.

Axelrod, J. N. (1986). Minnie, Minnie tickled the parson. Journal of AdvertisingResearch, 26, 89–93.

Bargh, J. A. (1989). Conditional automaticity: Varieties of automatic influencein social perception and cognition. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.),Unintended thought (pp. 3–51). New York: Guilford Press.

Bargh, J. A. (1994), The four horsemen of automaticity. In R. S. Wyer & T. K.Srull (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition (pp.1–40). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bargh, J. A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996). Automaticity of social behavior:Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journalof Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 230–244.

Becker, H. S. (1998). Tricks of the trade. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Braun, K. A., & Zaltman, G. (1998). Backward framing through memory re-construction (Working Paper No. 98-109). Boston: Marketing Science Insti-tute.

Bruner, J. S. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity Press.

Bruner, J. S. (1990). Culture and human development: a new look. HumanDevelopment, 33, 344–355.

Chilsen, J. (1999, May 6). Volkswagen sued for Holocaust acts. The Advocate,p. 23A.



shortstandard


Base of RF

Cohen, L. (1966). The level of consciousness: A dynamic approach to the recalltechnique. Journal of Marketing Research, 3, 142–148.

Collins, J., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading activation theory of semanticprocessing. Psychological Review, 87, 407–428.

Epstein, S. (1994). Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic uncon-scious. American Psychologist, 49, 709–724.

Farquhar, P. H., Herr, P. M., & Fazio, R. H. (1990). A relational model of cat-egory extensions of brands. InM. E. Goldberg, G. Gorn, & R.W. Pollay (Eds.),Advances in consumer research (pp. 97–105). Provo, UT: Association forCon-sumer Research.

Fazio, R. H. (1986). How do attitudes guide behavior? In R. M. Sorentino &E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations ofsocial behavior (pp. 89–137). New York: Guilford Press.

Fazio, R. H. (1990). Multiple processes by which attitudes guide behavior: Themode model as an integrative framework. Advances in Experimental SocialPsychology, 23, 75–109.

Fazio, R. H., Powell, M. C., & Williams, C. J. (1989). The role of attitude ac-cessibility in the attitude-to-behavior process. Journal of Consumer Re-search, 16, 280–288.

Fischer, E. (1999). Tales of food and eating. In E. J. Arnould & L. M. Scott(Eds.), Advances in consumer research (Vol. 26, p. 483). Montreal: Associa-tion for Consumer Research.

Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship the-ory in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 343–373.

Haley, R. I., & Case, P. B. (1979). Testing thirteen attitude scales for agreementand brand discrimination. Journal of Marketing, 43, 20–32.

Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.Heisley, D. D., & Levy, S. J. (1991). Autodriving: A photoelicitation technique.Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 257–272.

Hirschman, E. C. (1986). Humanistic inquiry in marketing research: Philoso-phy, method, and criteria. Journal of Marketing Research, 23, 237–249.

Holden, S. J. S. (1993). Understanding brand awareness: Let me give you ac(l)ue. In L. McAlister & M. L. Rothschild (Eds.), Advances in consumer re-search (Vol. 20, pp. 383–388). Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Re-search.

Holden, S. J. S., & Lutz, R. J. (1992). Ask not what the brand can evoke; askwhat can evoke the brand? In J. F. Sherry, Jr., & B. Sternthal (Eds.), Ad-vances in consumer behavior (Vol. 19, pp. 101–107). Provo, UT: Associationfor Consumer Research.

Irwin, F. W., & Gebhard, M. E. (1946). Studies in object-preferences: The effectof ownership and other social influences. American Journal of Psychology,59, 633–651.

Krugman, H. (1965). The impact of television advertising: Learning withoutinvolvement. Public Opinion Quarterly, 29, 349–356.

LaDoux, J. E. (1996). The emotional brain: The mysterious underpinnings ofemotional life. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Mitroff, I. I., & Kilmann, R. H. (1976). On organization stories: an approach tothe design and analysis of organizations through myths and stories. In R. H.Kilman, L. R. Pondy, & D. P. Slevin (Eds.), The management of organizationdesign (Vol. 1, pp. 189–207). New York: North-Holland.



shortstandard


Base of RF

Orr, J. E. (1990). Sharing knowledge, celebrating identity: Communitymemoryin a service culture. In D. Middleton & D. Edwards (Eds.), Collective remem-bering (pp. 169–189). London: Sage.

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Centraland peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer.

Petty, R. E., Unnava, R., & Strathman, A. J. (1991). Theories of attitudechange. In T. S. Robertson & H. H. Kassarjian (Eds.), Handbook of consumerbehavior (pp. 241–280). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Posner, G. (1998, October 4). VW day, Sometimes buying a car means buryingthe past. New York Times Magazine, p. 128.

Ragin, C. C. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative andquantitative strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Russo, J. E., Johnson, E. J., & Stephens, D. L. (1989). The validity of verbalprotocols. Memory and Cognition, 17, 759–769.

Schank, R. C. (1990). Tell me a story: A new look at real and artificial memory.New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding:An inquiry into human knowledge. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Solomon, M. R. (1999). Consumer behavior (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice-Hall.

Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand. Oaks, CA: SageWoodside, A. G. (1994). Modelling linkage advertising: Going beyond bettermedia comparisons. Journal of Advertising Research, 34, 22–31.

Woodside, A. G., & Trappey, R. J., III (1992). Finding out why customers shopin your store and buy your brand: Automatic cognitive processing models ofprimary choice. Journal of Advertising Research, 32, 59–78.

Zajonc, R. B., & Markus, H. (1982). Affective and cognitive factors in prefer-ences. Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 123–131.

Zaltman, G. (1997). Rethinking market research: Putting people back in. Jour-nal of Marketing Research, 34, 424–437.

Zaltman, G., & Coulter, R. H. (1995). Seeing the voice of the customer: Meta-phor-based advertising research. Journal of Advertising Research, 35, 35–51.

Zuikier, H. (1986). The paradigmatic and narrative modes in goal-guided in-ference. In R. M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivationand cognition (pp. 465–502). New York: Guilford.

Correspondence regarding this article should be sent to: Arch G. Woodside,Wallace E. Carroll School of Management, Boston College, 140 CommonwealthAvenue, Chestnut Hill, MA 02467 ([email protected]).

updating heider's balance theory in consumer behavior: a ... 21heider balance...

Documents