Why Do People Watch Scary Movies, Stay in Ice Hotels or Eat Bacon-Flavoured Ice-Cream?
We live in a society of total consumption: not just the physical consumption of things but also the conceptual consumption of ideas. We're always on the lookout for tasty new morsels of information and unusual experiences to add to our ever-expanding mental collections.
Mere things like your wattle and daub hut, several oxen and a shiny necklace are no longer impressive; now you need to have followed the Inca trail, formed an opinion on G. K. Chesterton's Christian apologetics and be familiar with the Higgs boson's role in a grand unified theory.
Negative conceptual consumption
The idea that people are voracious consumers of concepts is far from new, but it is only just starting to filter into the psychological literature. In an article published in the new Annual Review of Psychology, Dan Ariely and Michael I. Norton point out that conceptual consumption is especially useful for explaining why people choose certain types of apparently negative experiences (Ariely & Norton, 2009; PDF).
Take horror movies for example. Over the years all sorts of explanations have been offered for why people voluntarily expose themselves to scary movies: that there is a certain type of pleasure mixed in with the fear (Andrade & Cohen, 2007); that they are relieved when it's over; that they enjoy the 'rush' while knowing there is no threat. But as any horror nut will tell you, there's more to it than that.
Horror movies may be a minority taste but there are all sorts of other common situations in which people choose experiences they know are going to be unpleasant. In a study carried out by Keinan and Kivetz (2008) participants were offered the choice of a free trip to either a Marriott Hotel in Florida or an ice hotel in Quebec. Strangely (for me anyway!) the majority preferred the ice hotel despite thinking the Marriot would be more pleasurable.
People will also happily make strange choices about food. In another study by Keinan and Kivetz (2008) participants were offered a choice between 'normal' flavours of ice-cream and a tasty bowl of bacon ice-cream. By now you'll be unsurprised to learn that many preferred bacon flavour despite knowing it would be less pleasurable.
The experiential CV
All three of these examples are partly explained by people's desire for conceptual consumption. When people choose the ice hotel, the scary movie and the bacon ice-cream, they are choosing more than just the experience itself. They know the movie will frighten them, the icy bed will be uncomfortable and the bacon ice-cream will be weird, but there is a clear payoff in conceptual consumption. It's not just bragging rights, they also like the very idea of each of these things and they want to 'possess' the experience.
It's also about self-image. People want to see themselves, and be seen by others, as interesting people who choose a variety of different experiences for themselves. It's what Keinan and Kivetz refer to as ticking the boxes on our experiential CVs. Collecting experiences is really very similar to collecting bottle-tops, postcards or Furbies, but much cooler -- perhaps because the balance of consumption is weighted away from the physical and more towards the conceptual.
Positive conceptual consumption
The fact that conceptual consumption can be used to understand why people choose apparently negative experiences is it's strength. Why people might choose positive experiences is less of a mystery, but the idea can still expose some interesting quirks:
- Feature creep: people frequently choose products with many features which they never use. This may be primarily so they can then show off their purchase to others. Just the idea of having a better camera than other people is enough to snuff out boring thoughts about usability. Of course manufacturers are well aware of this, hence electronics are packed with endless features most of us never use.
- Charity: giving to charity seems to confer positive benefits on the giver. Giving our own money to others does actually seem to make us happier than spending it on ourselves (Dunn, Aknin & Norton, 2008). Here it's possible that the idea of charity makes us happier than having the money or equivalent goods.
- Second Life: people in virtual worlds happily convert their real-world money into virtual money to buy clothes for their avatars (the object representing themeselves) or to decorate their virtual homes. When viewed through the lens of conceptual consumption this makes perfect sense.
Looking around, conceptual consumption is everywhere. Things like books, TV programmes, blogs, newspapers and magazines -- all of which give us new ideas and new ways of seeing the world -- are just the tip of the iceberg. Even what we might think of as primarily physical consumption isn't really that physical after all. Advertisers understand this only too well: what they are trying to sell aren't just products but ideas, often in the form of 'lifestyles'.
As Ariely and Norton point out even something as simple as eating a cookie is fraught with conceptual questions. What about the diet we just started? Is the cookie organic? What will our co-workers think if they see us eating it? The questions go on and on.
Our minds love consuming concepts almost as much as our bodies crave food. Like our appetite for food, though, our appetite for ideas is only satisfied for a short period before we become hungry again, so hopefully this nugget of conceptual consumption will keep you going until the next click...
[Image credits: Big Fat Rat & Ultrahi]
Join 22301 readers
At what point do I stop spending my time, energy, and money on conceptual consumption? Is there a more worthy cause calling my attention? Ahhh – the motive - very interesting!
I think this is why StumbleUpon is so addictive. With just one click, I might see something conceptually delightful. It happens often enough to reinforce the behavior and encourage continued Stumbling.
Jeremy,
You wrote:
'By now you'll be unsurprised to learn that many preferred bacon flavour despite knowing it would be less pleasurable.'
How could they *know*? If I like ice cream and I like bacon, why should it necessary follow that bacon ice cream will be less pleasurable? Surely even the *expectation* isn't necessarily a less pleasurable experience:
Pleasurable experience + pleasurable experience = less pleasurable experience?
Dealing with sexual abuse and PTSD is actually choosing a negative experience. It made a lot of sense to me as a teen to say no thank you. What changed my mind? I didn’t really choose to deal with sexual abuse, I chose to stop lying. Why did I choose to stop lying? Deep, deep down (trust me not a surface thing) I believed lying was wrong. The new environment I had chosen as an adult to be a part of emphasized what I already believed – lying was wrong. Maybe the question psychology should be asking is how do we keep consumption from allowing us to drift into open sea?
“When I unlocked the door I was astounded,for things were not as I presumed. It wasn’t a fortress I had built; I had merely built a tomb.”
This was an excellent post. I learned a lot. I fully agree with the ideas expressed here as well. I think it's completely compulsive, our need for more. It may be only natural, but understanding these urges is just another step in grappling them. I think it can make a significant difference in spending and the amount of time we actually spend on one thing.
This post just brings up other topics to mind like Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and Attention Deficit Disorder. There's no doubt an inherent relation to this... Hmm, Thanks for writing this. Was a lot of food for thought :)
I think another factor needs to be involved, which is cost of the conceptual consumption. While there is undoubtedly a desire to experience new things, what often interferes in everyday life is cost. In the travel example, people chose the ice hotel over the Marriott because the perceived cost was only that of a potential poor experience - not a monetary expense. Even something as cheap as ice cream comes under fire here. It's your money on the table - do you want to try bacon ice cream or go with something tried and true?
Trying something potentially unpleasant is usually enticing for the experiential value of it, but is it worth the real-life monetary costs? Usually not. (Movies are another thing entirely because while we don't know how exactly the movies seek to shock us, we have a gauge of the response we will have to the responses due to previous experiences.)
It must be evolutionary. Humanity survived because of the inventions- and we still have the craving for new ideas and concepts
The article talks about the 'conceptual consumption of ideas'. That doesn't really describe wanting to have a negative/unusual/positive experience does it? Consuming concepts is one thing, a thirst for new experiences I feel is different. Additionally, some of the examples don't strike me as being conceptually *or* experientially interesting.
I enjoy horror films, and very rarely is there anything remotely conceptually interesting about them! IMHO it's usually sci-fi where you can get this*. Eating bacon ice-cream is certainly not conceptually interesting! (And how do these guinea pigs 'know... it would be less pleasurable'?) The ice hotel at least would provide some level of conceptual interest, but I would argue very little compared to the uniqueness of the experience. These seem experiential, not conceptual. Once you say that some people (because it definitely isn't all) like to have a broad range of experiences, it doesn't sound particularly revealing.
Now we move on to giving to charity. That this could be consuming a concept I find completely bewildering! My guess was that most of those who choose to give, read a little bit of promotional material and appease their conscience by making donations. Certainly charity/development marketing material is all very similar as precious little has changed regarding the plight of the world's unfortunates. Personally I don't feel that giving to charity is consuming a concept or taking in a new experience. Likewise with eating a cookie! Yes, those from certain societies might think carefully before engaging in such a rash course of action. But how is considering the ramifications of my actions, including how it may affect others' opinions of me, conceptual consumption? And for those able to buy cookies, the experience of eating one will probably not be new/interesting.
At this point I'm failing to grasp the explanatory power of conceptual consumption. The article states, 'conceptual consumption can be used to understand why people choose apparently negative experiences [which] is it's [sic] strength'. There are already (numerous) other explanations (some mentioned) anyway: horror films are a safe rush; you can brag to your mates about staying in an ice hotel; maybe bacon ice-cream's really nice! Likewise, the positive 'experiences' seem to be equally explicable by other means. We have a loosely defined concept, apply it even more loosely to get examples, and I can't find any substance.
I guess I'm just not getting the value of the concept!
Sorry to be negative, all comments made with respect to stir thoughts, etc. etc.!
* Lamentably sci-fi now seems to mean fantastic graphics, formulaic plot and sub-standard acting. I'm referring to Philip K. Dick short story style sci-fi - playing with concepts.
Andy