Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Journal of
CONSUMER
PSYCHOLOGY
Journal of Consumer Psychology 20 (2010) 176 – 184
Research Note
Interpersonal influences on adolescent materialism: A new look at the role of
parents and peers
Lan Nguyen Chaplina,b,⁎, Deborah Roedder Johnc
a
b
University of Arizona, Eller College of Management, 1130 E. Helen St., Tucson, AZ 85721, USA
Villanova University, Villanova School of Business, Bartley Hall, Marketing, 800 Lancaster Ave., Villanova, PA 19085, USA
c
Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, 321 19th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA
Received 15 July 2009; revised 28 January 2010; accepted 11 February 2010
Available online 16 March 2010
Abstract
What causes adolescents to be materialistic? Prior research shows parents and peers are an important influence. Researchers have viewed
parents and peers as socialization agents that transmit consumption attitudes, goals, and motives to adolescents. We take a different approach,
viewing parents and peers as important sources of emotional support and psychological well-being, which increase self-esteem in adolescents.
Supportive parents and peers boost adolescents' self-esteem, which decreases their need to turn to material goods to develop positive selfperceptions. In a study with 12–18 year-olds, we find support for our view that self-esteem mediates the relationship between parent/peer
influence and adolescent materialism.
© 2010 Society for Consumer Psychology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Rising levels of materialism among adolescents have raised
concerns among parents, educators, and consumer advocates. More
than half of 9–14 year-olds agree that, “when you grow up, the
more money you have, the happier you are,” and over 60% agree
that, “the only kind of job I want when I grow up is one that gets me
a lot of money” (Goldberg, Gorn, Peracchio, & Bamossy, 2003).
These trends have lead social scientists to conclude that adolescents
today are “…the most brand-oriented, consumer-involved, and
materialistic generation in history” (Schor, 2004, p. 13).
What causes adolescents to be materialistic? The most consistent
finding to date is that adolescent materialism is related to the
interpersonal influences in their lives—notably, parents and peers.
The vast majority of research is based on a social influence
perspective, viewing parents and peers as socialization agents that
transmit consumption attitudes, goals, and motives to adolescents
through modeling, reinforcement, and social interaction. In early
research, Churchill and Moschis (1979) proposed that adolescents
learn rational aspects of consumption from their parents and social
aspects of consumption (materialism) from their peers. Moore and
⁎ Corresponding author. Villanova School of Business, 800 Lancaster
Avenue, Villanova, PA 19085, USA. Fax: +1 520 621 7483.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (L.N. Chaplin),
[email protected] (D.R. John).
Moschis (1981) examined family communication styles, suggesting
that certain styles (socio-oriented) promote conformity to others'
views, setting the stage for materialism. In later work, Goldberg et
al. (2003) posited that parents transmit materialistic values to their
offspring by modeling these values. Researchers have also reported
positive correlations between materialism and socio-oriented family
communication (Moore & Moschis, 1981), parents' materialism
(Flouri, 2004; Goldberg et al., 2003), peer communication about
consumption (Churchill & Moschis, 1979; Moschis & Churchill,
1978), and susceptibility to peer influence (Achenreiner, 1997;
Banerjee & Dittmar, 2008; Roberts, Manolis, & Tanner, 2008).
We take a different approach. Instead of viewing parents and
peers as socialization agents that transmit consumption attitudes
and values, we consider parents and peers as important sources
of emotional support and psychological well-being, which lay
the foundation for self-esteem in adolescents. We argue that
supportive parents and peers boost adolescents' self-esteem,
which decreases their need to embrace material goods as a way
to develop positive self-perceptions. Prior research is suggestive
of our perspective. In studies with young adults, researchers
have found a link between (1) lower parental support (cold and
controlling mothers) and a focus on financial success aspirations (Kasser, Ryan, Zax, & Sameroff, 1995: 18 year-olds) and
(2) lower parental support (less affection and supervision) in
1057-7408/$ - see front matter © 2010 Society for Consumer Psychology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2010.02.002
L.N. Chaplin, D.R. John / Journal of Consumer Psychology 20 (2010) 176–184
divorced families and materialism (Rindfleisch, Burroughs, &
Denton, 1997: 20–32 year-olds). These studies do not focus on
adolescents, do not examine peer factors, nor do they include
measures of self-esteem or self-worth. But, they do suggest that
parents and peers can influence materialism in ways other than
transmitting consumption attitudes and values, which has been
the focus of prior research on adolescent materialism.
In this article, we seek preliminary evidence for our view by
testing whether self-esteem mediates the relationship between
parent/peer influence and adolescent materialism. We include
parent and peer factors that inhibit or encourage adolescent
materialism, which allows us to test self-esteem as a mediator
under both conditions. For parental influence, we include
parental support (inhibits materialism) and parents' materialism
(encourages materialism). Both factors have appeared in prior
materialism studies, but our interest here is whether self-esteem
is a mediator of their influence on materialism. For peer
influence, we include peer support (inhibits materialism) and
peers' materialism (encourages materialism), with our interest
being whether self-esteem is a mediator of their influence on
materialism. These peer factors are new to materialism research
and offer potentially new insights. Contrary to prior materialism
research, which views peers as encouraging materialism among
adolescents, we also consider the possibility that peers may be a
positive influence by providing emotional support in the same
way that parents do.
Our research offers several contributions to understanding
materialism in adolescents. First, we provide a broader
perspective on the role of parents and peers as influences on
adolescent materialism. The social influence perspective, which
views parents and peers as transmitting consumption attitudes
and values, has dominated materialism research with children
and adolescents since its early days. We provide a broader
perspective by considering parents and peers as much more than
socialization agents—they contribute heavily to the sense of
self-esteem that adolescents possess, which influences materialism. Second, our perspective provides a process explanation
for why parents and peers influence materialism that can be
empirically tested. Prior research offers a valuable set of
findings about what factors correlate with adolescent materialism, but the process responsible for the correlation is left
untested. Finally, we provide a parsimonious explanation for
why different factors related to parent and peer influence affect
adolescent materialism. Although the number of potential
parent and peer factors is large, it is possible that there is a
common thread (self-esteem) for why these factors influence
adolescent materialism. Isolating mediators, such as selfesteem, could provide the basis for developing a conceptual
framework to tie together findings across prior studies with
different factors, providing a more unified explanation for why
certain adolescents are more vulnerable to materialism.
Conceptual overview
Among the psychological correlates of materialism, attitudes
and feelings about the self have received the most attention.
Low self-esteem, which reflects a negative attitude toward the
177
self, has been linked to materialism in adults (Mick, 1996;
Richins & Dawson, 1992) as well as children and adolescents
(Chaplin & John, 2007). Why does low self-esteem lead to
materialism? Most researchers believe that material goods are
an instrument individuals use to cope with or compensate for
doubts about their competence and self-worth (e.g., Chang &
Arkin, 2002; Kasser, 2002).
In the following sections, we relate aspects of parent and peer
interaction to self-esteem among adolescents, which forms the
basis for predicting that self-esteem mediates the relationship
between parent/peer factors and materialism. Examined are
parental support and peer support (factors predicted to inhibit
materialism) as well as parents' materialism and peers'
materialism (factors predicted to encourage materialism).
Parental and peer support
Materialism develops when people have experiences that do
not support their needs for security, safety, and self-fulfillment
(Kasser, Ryan, Couchman, & Sheldon, 2004). Parents and peers
are important sources of support and acceptance, and this
support is key to the development of healthy self-esteem in
children and adolescents. In this section, we propose that
adolescents with more supportive parents and peers possess
higher self-esteem, and as a result, find less need for material
goods to compensate for feelings of low self-worth.
Overall parental support
An impressive body of research documents the effects of
parenting style on children's social and cognitive functioning
(e.g., Baumrind, 1978; Berman, 1997). For over 50 years,
researchers have defined effective childrearing as parents
providing overall support for their children (Baumrind, 1971;
Becker, 1981; Peterson & Rollins, 1987). Overall support
includes behaviors such as encouraging children to communicate feelings, being involved in children's lives, using effective
control (i.e., encouraging autonomy and self-expression), and
providing acceptance and support1 (i.e., allowing children to
exercise independent thinking) (e.g., Darling & Steinberg,
1993; Openshaw, Thomas, & Rollins, 1984).
Overall parental support is positively associated with all
aspects of social competence, including cognitive development,
moral behavior, self-esteem, and creativity (for a review, see
Openshaw et al., 1984). Emotionally supportive relationships
encourage children and adolescents to identify with their
parents and to adopt their attitudes, values, and role expectations (Henry, Wilson, & Peterson, 1989). Parental support also
encourages children's self-expression, providing a secure base
from which they can explore and meet challenges apart from the
family (Peterson, Stivers, & Peters, 1986), thereby enhancing
self-esteem.
1
Support refers to warmth, affection, nurturance, and acceptance (Becker,
1981; Ellis, Thomas, and Rollins, 1976). Parental nurturance involves the
development of caring relationships, in which parents reason with their children
about moral conflicts, involve them in family decision making, and set high
moral expectations (Maccoby, 1984; Staub, 1988).
178
L.N. Chaplin, D.R. John / Journal of Consumer Psychology 20 (2010) 176–184
As described earlier, aspects of parental support have been
found to influence young adults' materialism and financial
aspirations. Here, we are interested in the extent to which selfesteem is a viable mediator of the relationship between parental
support and adolescent materialism. Adolescents who lack the
kind of parental support that fosters the development of a
healthy and complete self-concept are more likely to have lower
self-esteem. As a result, these adolescents are more likely to rely
on possessions to feel better about themselves, and therefore,
become more materialistic. Thus, we predict:
H1:. Self-esteem mediates the relationship between overall
parental support and adolescent materialism.
Peer support
Discussions of materialism among adolescents inevitably
turn to the influence of peers, with observers pointing to peer
pressure as the reason why adolescents value material goods
and popular brands. Here, we examine peer influence from quite
a different and more positive perspective, viewing peer support
as an important contributor to adolescent self-esteem, which
diminishes materialistic tendencies.
Research in child development documents the fact that
children's peer groups (classmates, teammates, neighborhood
friends) are important socializing agents who contribute to a
child's psychosocial development (Weiss & Ebbeck, 1996).
Specifically, peers have emerged time and again as an important
source of self-worth for children by providing positive feedback
and reinforcement (Klint & Weiss, 1986). Studies have found
that children's friendships allow opportunities for emotional
support and self-esteem affirmation (Weiss & Ebbeck, 1996). In
fact, low peer acceptance can have a negative effect on
children’s and adolescents' self-esteem (Rigby, 2000; Sharp,
1995), with peer rejection strongly associated with low selfesteem (Damon, Lerner, & Eisenberg, 2006).
We propose that peer support positively affects adolescents'
self-esteem, which in turn diminishes materialism. Supportive
peers increase adolescents' sense of security and competence
(Weiss & Ebbeck, 1996), which decreases the likelihood that
they will look to material goods to compensate for feelings of
low self-worth. In contrast, adolescents with less supportive
peers are more likely to have lower self-esteem. As a result, they
may rely more on material goods as a way to fit in, deal with
peer pressure, and gain acceptance. Formally:
H2:. Self-esteem mediates the relationship between peer
support and adolescent materialism.
Parents' and peers' materialism
Prior research has viewed materialistic parents and peers as
fostering adolescent materialism through their transmission of
values, whereby adolescents observe their parents' and peers'
materialistic tendencies and model their behavior. We take a
different approach. In this section, we discuss how materialistic
parents and peers, who focus on material goods more than
strong interpersonal relationships, can negatively affect adolescents’ self-esteem, which fosters a need to embrace material
goods to compensate for feelings of low self-worth. We discuss
these views in more detail below.
Parents' materialism
Materialism develops when individuals are exposed to social
models that encourage materialistic values (Kasser et al., 2004).
Parents are important models for their children, and prior
research finds higher levels of materialism among adolescents
who have parents holding similar materialistic values (Flouri,
1999; Goldberg et al., 2003). A desire for material goods may
be taught by parental example if parents spend too much time
working for external success and higher standards of living.
Parents can teach their children all the right things about
materialism, but if children see it is important to their parents,
they will gravitate to materialistic tendencies through modeling
their parents. Thus, prior research views the role of parents as
fostering materialistic tendencies in children through their
transmission of values.
In contrast, we view materialistic parents as detrimental to
adolescents' self-esteem, which leads to materialistic tendencies. Parents who focus on material goods as a source of life
satisfaction communicate a sense that one's worth is tied to
material possessions. More enduring sources of self-esteem,
such as pride in one's achievements or close relationships with
family and friends, receive less emphasis in the household.
Without a balanced view of life, adolescents with materialistic
parents suffer from lower self-esteem. As a result of having
lower self-esteem, they rely on possessions to compensate.
Thus, we predict:
H3:. Self-esteem mediates the relationship between parents’
materialism and adolescent materialism.
Peers' materialism
Peers are often seen as more important than parents in
influencing the adoption of materialistic values. Surprisingly,
there is little empirical evidence that the level of materialism
among one's peers increases adolescent materialism. However,
the same transmission of values is likely to be exerted by peers
as by parents. For example, when adolescents communicate
with their peers about consumption (e.g., what the cool brands
are, what's in and what's out, how much they spent on a pair of
sneakers, etc.) and observe the acquisitive desires of their peers,
they are likely to model such behavior and want the same things
their peers want or have.
In contrast to this view, we examine how peers' materialism
can affect adolescents' self-esteem, which then influences
materialism. Materialism is both a manifestation of an
underlying insecurity and a coping strategy used to alleviate
problems and satisfy one's needs (Kasser, 2002). As children
learn the social significance of consumption products (e.g., kids
who wear “Abercrombie and Fitch” are cool and popular; kids
who shop at Kmart are unpopular and not fun), those with
highly materialistic peers may experience lower feelings of selfworth for a couple of reasons. First, not being able to compete
with their wealthier peers who can afford expensive and popular
brand names may lead to lower self-esteem in children. Second,
L.N. Chaplin, D.R. John / Journal of Consumer Psychology 20 (2010) 176–184
since more materialistic individuals place less emphasis on
building strong interpersonal relationships (Kasser, 2002;
Richins & Dawson, 1992), children with highly materialistic
peers are likely to feel less close to their peers and less secure
with their friendships, which contributes to lower feelings of
self-worth. As a result of having lower self-esteem, these
children are likely to place more importance on possessions and
therefore become more vulnerable to developing materialistic
values. Thus, we forward the following hypothesis:
H4:. Self-esteem mediates the relationship between peers'
materialism and adolescent materialism.
Methodology
Sample and procedure
One hundred participants (50 boys and 50 girls) ages 12–18
were recruited from summer programs in the Midwestern part of
the United States. As parents arrived to sign their child up for
various camps (e.g., sports camps, science camps, day camps),
we asked parents to complete a survey about themselves and
about their child, which yielded a 100% response rate. Parental
consent and participant assent were obtained prior to the study.
Participants were interviewed individually. After a brief
description of the study, participants completed several tasks
that assessed levels of materialism, self-esteem, parental
support, peer support, and parental and peer materialism.
Each task was described and demonstrated by the interviewer to
ensure understanding of the task. After tasks were completed,
participants were debriefed, asked not to talk about the study
until its completion, and given small prizes for their
participation. The interviews took approximately 45 min to
complete.
Measures
Materialism
Two different measures of materialism were obtained and
subsequently used for all hypothesis tests. The first was
Goldberg et al.'s (2003) Youth Materialism Scale (YMS),
which is the only scale specifically developed for adolescent
179
populations (see Table 1). Respondents are asked to agree or
disagree with a series of statements that reflect materialistic
values, such as “When you grow up, the more money you have,
the happier you'll be.” We modified the scale, using scale points
of “YES/ yes/ no/ NO” instead of “agree/disagree.”
The second measure used a collage methodology to measure
materialism (Chaplin & John, 2007). Participants were asked to
construct a collage to answer the question, “What makes me
happy?” To make their collage, participants were given a set of
100 laminated labels/pictures mounted on five poster boards
representing different themes: hobbies, people, sports, material
things, and achievements (20 labels per theme board). For
example, “fishing” and “reading” labels were included on the
hobbies board, “getting into a good college” and “being good at
math” were found on the achievements board, “car” and “cell
phone” were included on the material things board, “lacrosse”
and “football” were pictured on the sports board, and “coach”
and “mom” were included on the people board. These items
were selected to appeal to a wide range of interests.
Participants were asked to construct their happiness collage
by choosing items from the theme boards or making their own
items using blank cards and markers we provided. When their
collage was finished, we asked participants why they had placed
certain items on the collage to check whether the items were
being accurately interpreted as material goods or non-material
goods. A photograph of the collage was then taken for later data
analysis. For each respondent, we counted the number of
“material things” included on the collage, and used this as our
materialism measure, based on the idea that choosing more
material goods—such as money and new clothes—over nonmaterialistic sentiments—such as “being with family” or
“playing sports”—indicated higher levels of materialism.
Self-esteem
Participants were given a deck of 20 3 × 5 cards, with each
card containing a statement adapted from Rosenberg's (1965)
self-esteem scale, such as “I feel good about myself” (see
Table 1). Participants were instructed to read the item on each
card and decide whether it described them “all of the time,”
“most of the time,” “sometimes,” or “never.” To record their
response, they placed the card into one of four piles labeled “all
Table 1
Measurement scales.
Measure
# of
items
Scale examples
Response scale:
Reliability (α)
⁎4 = all the time, 3 = most of the time,
2 = sometimes, 1 = never
Self-esteem
Overall parental support
20
22
⁎
⁎
Youth Materialism
10
Scale (YMS) and Peers'
Materialism
“I feel good about myself”; “I am happy with the way I look”
“My mom makes me feel very special”; “My mom puts time and
energy into helping me”
“My mom would love to buy things that cost lots of money”;
“My mom thinks the more money you have, the happier you are”
“I [My friends] would love to buy things that cost lots of money”;
“[My friends think] When you grow up, the more money you have,
the happier you'll be”
Peer support
“My friends like me for who I am”; “My friends get mad at me”
Parents' materialism
8
8
⁎
4 = YES
3 = yes
2 = no
1 = NO
⁎
.88
.89 Participants
.82 Parents
.89
.81 Participants
.83 Peers
.83
180
L.N. Chaplin, D.R. John / Journal of Consumer Psychology 20 (2010) 176–184
of the time,” “most of the time,” “sometimes,” and “never.” This
procedure was repeated for all cards in the deck.
Overall parental support
Participants were given a deck of 22 3 × 5 cards, with each
card containing a statement adapted from Buri's (1991)
Perception of Parental Authority Survey (POPS). The statements measured parents' overall support—for example, being
available for their children and encouraging them to think
independently (see Table 1). Participants read the item on each
card and responded whether it described their parents “all of the
time,” “most of the time,” “sometimes,” or “never.” This
procedure was repeated for all cards in the deck.
Parents' materialism
Participants were given a deck of 8 3 × 5 cards, with each
card containing a statement adapted from Goldberg et al.'s
(2003) and Richins and Dawson's (1992) materialism scales.
The statements measured parents' materialism—for example,
the importance their parents place on material things (see Table 1).
Participants read the item on each card and responded whether it
described their parents “all of the time,” “most of the time,”
“sometimes,” or “never.” This procedure was repeated for all
cards in the deck.
Peer support
Participants were given a deck of 8 3 × 5 cards, with each
card containing a statement developed to measure peer support,
such as how often their peers are understanding and helpful (see
Table 1). Participants read the item on each card and responded
whether it applied to their peers “all of the time,” “most of the
time,” “sometimes,” or “never.” This procedure was repeated
for all cards in the deck.
Peers' materialism
Peers' materialism was measured by asking participants to
complete Goldberg et al.'s (2003) Youth Materialism Scale
(YMS) about their friends. In order to get participants to answer
the rating scale items about their friends, the pronoun “I” was
replaced with “my friends” throughout the survey (see Table 1).
Results
Measure reliability and validity
Reliability analyses were conducted for each rating scale.
These analyses indicated acceptable levels of reliability for the
Youth Materialism Scale (α = .81), modified Rosenberg's
(1965) self-esteem scale (α = .88), overall parental support
scale (α = .86), parents' materialism scale (α = .88), peer support
scale (α = .83), and peers' materialism scale (α = .89).
Additionally, we validated a number of these scales with
measures obtained from parents and camp counselors. First, for
self-esteem, we identified camp counselors or staff who had
known each participant for at least a year and asked them to rate
the participants' level of self-esteem. Correlations between
adolescents' and counselor/staff ratings indicated an acceptable
degree of convergence (r = .71, p b .01). Second, we asked the
parents of each participant to fill out the overall parental support
and parents' materialism scales (α = .82, α = .84, respectively).
Parents' responses to the parental support scale and parents'
materialism scale were correlated strongly with those of their
children (r = .91, p b .01 and r = .88, p b .01, respectively),
indicating convergent perceptions. Finally, we checked for
convergence between the two measures of materialism,
representing a standard rating scale approach (Youth Materialism Scale) and a more qualitative collage approach (Happiness
Collage), and found they were significantly correlated (r = .60,
p b .01). Taken together, data obtained with different measures
and informants (participants, parents, and camp staff) provide
confidence for our measures.2
Hypothesis tests
For each hypothesis, we tested whether self-esteem mediates
the relationship between each parent/peer factor and adolescent
materialism. Fig. 1 provides an overview of the factors involved
in each hypothesis test, along with simple correlations between
these factors. Results for mediation tests are reported below.
Overall parental support (H1)
As expected, we find a negative relationship between overall
parental support and adolescent materialism (rYMS = − .38,
p b .01; rCollage = −.25, p b .01). Adolescents with more supportive
parents were less materialistic. More critical to our hypothesis, we
find that this relationship is mediated by adolescent self-esteem.
Following Baron and Kenny (1986), we performed three separate
regressions (see Table 2). In the first two regressions, significant
effects of overall parental support on adolescent materialism as
well as overall parental support on adolescent self-esteem
emerged. Results from the third regression indicated self-esteem
to be a partial mediator of the relationship between overall
parental support and adolescent materialism. Sobel's test of
mediation was significant (ZYMS = 2.51, p b .01; ZCollage = 3.20,
p b .01). Thus, H1 was supported.
Peer support (H2)
As expected, we find a negative relationship between
peer support and adolescent materialism (rYMS = − .44, p b .01;
rCollage = − .65, p b .01). Adolescents with more supportive peers
were less materialistic. More central to our hypothesis, we find
that self-esteem mediates this relationship. Using the procedure
outlined earlier, we specified three separate regressions (see
Table 3). In the first two regressions, a significant effect of peer
support on adolescent materialism and a significant effect of
peer support on adolescent self-esteem emerged. Results from
the third regression indicated self-esteem to be a partial
mediator of the relationship between peer support and
adolescent materialism. Sobel's test of mediation was significant (ZYMS = 3.06, p b .01; ZCollage = 2.73, p b .01). Thus, H2
was supported.
2
In subsequent analyses, we obtain the same results regardless of whether we
use the parents' data or the adolescents' data.
L.N. Chaplin, D.R. John / Journal of Consumer Psychology 20 (2010) 176–184
181
Fig. 1. Self-esteem mediation hypotheses. For illustration purposes, correlations using the collage measure are reported (p's b .01). Similar correlations were obtained
with the YMS.
Parents' materialism (H3)
Our data indicate a positive relationship between parents'
materialism and adolescent materialism (rYMS = .36, p b .01;
rCollage = .45, p b .01). Adolescents with more materialistic
parents were also more materialistic. Turning to our central
interest, we found that self-esteem mediated this relationship.
Using the procedure outlined earlier, we specified three separate
regressions (see Table 2). In the first two regressions, significant
effects of parents' materialism on adolescent materialism as well
as parents' materialism on adolescent self-esteem emerged.
Results from the third regression indicated self-esteem to be a
partial mediator of the relationship between parents' materialism
and adolescent materialism. Sobel's test of mediation was
significant (ZYMS = 2.03, p = .02; ZCollage = 2.05, p b .02). Thus,
H3 was supported.
Peers' materialism (H4)
Our data indicate a positive relationship between peers'
materialism and adolescent materialism (rYMS = .39, p b .01;
rCollage = .51, p b .01). A higher level of peers' materialism was
associated with higher levels of adolescent materialism. More
critical to our concern, we found that self-esteem mediated this
relationship. Using the procedure outlined earlier, we specified
three separate regressions (see Table 3). In the first two regressions, significant effects of peers' materialism on adolescent
materialism as well as peers’ materialism on adolescent selfesteem emerged. Results from the third regression indicated selfesteem to be a partial mediator of the relationship between peers'
materialism and adolescent materialism. Sobel's test of mediation
was significant (ZYMS = 2.68, p b .01; ZCollage = 2.44, p b .01).
Thus, H4 was supported.
General discussion
How do parents and peers influence levels of materialism
among adolescents? Prior research has viewed parents and peers
as socialization agents that transmit consumption attitudes
and materialistic values to adolescents through modeling,
reinforcement, and social interaction. Although it is true that
parents and peers can influence adolescents in this way, we
182
L.N. Chaplin, D.R. John / Journal of Consumer Psychology 20 (2010) 176–184
Table 2
Mediation analyses for parental influences.
Dependent
variable
Materialism
Regression 1
Materialism
Regression 2
Self-esteem
Regression 3
Materialism
Materialism
Regression 1
Materialism
Regression 2
Self-esteem
Regression 3
Materialism
Independent
variable
(Collage)
Coefficient
p-value
(YMS)
Parental support
− .251
.012
Parental support
.280
Parental support
Self-esteem
R2
Coefficient
p-value
F-value
R2
6.576
.063
− .378
.000
16.322
.134
.005
8.365
.079
.280
.005
8.365
.069
− .163
− .315
.098
.002
8.834
.154
− .279
− .354
.003
.000
16.872
.243
Parents' materialism
.449
.000
24.695
.201
.356
.000
14.191
.118
Parents' materialism
− .220
.028
4.980
.048
− .220
.028
4.980
.039
Parents' materialism
Self-esteem
.388
− .275
.000
.003
18.226
.273
.274
− .372
.003
.000
16.860
.243
F-value
N = 100 (ages 12–18) for all regression models. Regressions include age and gender as control variables (p's N .30).
believe parents and peers exert their influence in a much broader
and more general way. Our perspective views parents and peers
as important contributors to the growth of self-esteem in
adolescents, which decreases the need to turn to material goods
as a way to develop positive self-perceptions. Consistent with
this perspective, our findings show that self-esteem mediates the
relationship between adolescent materialism and a set of parent
and peer factors, including parental support, peer support,
parents' materialism, and peers' materialism.
Research contributions
Our findings contribute to research on adolescent materialism in several ways. First, we introduce a new psychological
process for understanding how parents and peers influence
adolescent materialism (parent/peer factors → self-esteem →
materialism). Unlike prior materialism research, which only
reports correlations between parent/peer factors and adolescent
materialism, we were able to test the mechanism (self-esteem)
responsible for parent and peer influence. By isolating a main
driver of correlations between materialism and interpersonal
influences, not only are we able to corroborate findings from
prior research linking materialism to parent and peer influences,
but we are also able to tie together findings across prior studies
and provide a parsimonious explanation for why certain
adolescents may be more vulnerable to developing materialistic
tendencies.
Second, our findings provide additional insight on the nature
of parent and peer influences. Prior materialism research has
focused on the ways in which parents and peers have negative
Table 3
Mediation analyses for peer influences.
Dependent
variable
Materialism
Regression 1
Materialism
Regression 2
Self-esteem
Regression 3
Materialism
Materialism
Regression 1
Materialism
Regression 2
Self-esteem
Regression 3
Materialism
Independent
variable
(Collage)
Coefficient
(YMS)
p-value
F-value
r2
Coefficient
p-value
F-value
r2
Peers' materialism
.510
.000
34.444
.260
.389
.000
17.434
.142
Peers' materialism
− .301
.002
9.751
.090
− .301
.002
9.751
.081
Peers' materialism
Self-esteem
.442
− .227
.000
.012
21.494
.293
.284
− .346
.002
.000
17.052
.245
Peer support
− .647
.000
70.392
.412
− .440
.000
23.567
.186
Peer support
.344
.000
13.144
.109
.344
.000
13.144
.109
Peer support
Self-esteem
− .593
− .156
.000
.056
38.042
.428
− .331
− .318
.000
.001
19.152
.268
N = 100 (ages 12–18) for all regression models. Regressions include age and gender as control variables (p's N .30).
L.N. Chaplin, D.R. John / Journal of Consumer Psychology 20 (2010) 176–184
influences on adolescents. Parents are often viewed as
furthering materialism by being too materialistic, too autocratic
and controlling, or too uninvolved in their children's lives
(Flouri, 1999; Kasser et al., 1995; Moore & Moschis, 1981).
Peer influence is usually characterized in only negative ways,
with high levels of materialism among adolescents being
attributed to peer pressure to possess the latest styles, brands,
and electronic gadgets. Our results show that parents and peers
can also have positive effects on the lives of adolescents,
thereby reducing materialistic tendencies. Parents and peers can
provide support and acceptance, which fosters a healthy sense
of self-esteem among adolescents and reduces their need to
compensate for poor self-esteem through material goods.
Third, we validate relationships found in prior materialism
research with adolescents using more efficacious measurement
procedures. In the past, most researchers have elicited data for
parent/peer factors and adolescent materialism from only one
informant, the adolescent or parent, using paper-and-pencil
survey measures. In our research, we used multiple informants
(adolescents, parents, camp counselors) to measure factors such
as parental support, parents' materialism, and adolescent selfesteem, which allowed us to validate adolescent self-reports.
Furthermore, we were able to corroborate the results of our
meditational analyses, with data from adolescents, with
meditational analyses using data for several measures from
parents (for parental support and parents' materialism). These
findings reduce the possibility that our results were compromised by adolescents' response biases or correlated measurement errors. In addition to multiple informants, we used
different methods to measure adolescent materialism (collage
method) and parent/peer factors (paper-and-pencil), which
reduces the possibility that the relationship between these
factors is attributable to common methods of measurement.
Future research
Our research provides a starting point for a broader view of
parent and peer influence on adolescent materialism, which
proposes that parent/peer factors → self-esteem → materialism.
To fully examine the role that self-esteem plays in adolescent
materialism, a more expansive research effort will be needed.
We included several parent and peer influence factors in our
research, but there are a variety of other factors that should be
included in future work, such as family income, family
structure, and susceptibility to peer influence. Given that selfesteem is a partial mediator of the relationship between parent/
peer factors and adolescent materialism, it would be fruitful to
consider others that may influence this relationship. Including a
larger set of factors, with a larger sample size, would allow
researchers to build a more integrated model explaining how
different parent and peer factors jointly influence adolescent
self-esteem and materialism.
A more expansive modeling effort could also shed light on
causal relationships among parent/peer factors and adolescent
materialism. Given the nature of this topic, researchers use
survey correlational methods, which are often subject to the
criticism that “correlation does not imply causation.” The
183
inability to distinguish cause and effect is particularly noticeable
for simple correlations between two variables, such as the one
between adolescent materialism and parents' materialism.
However, systems of relationships found in more complex
models often reduce this concern. For example, our findings
imply that higher levels of parents' materialism → lower
adolescent self-esteem → higher adolescent materialism. It is
conceptually improbable that higher adolescent materialism →
lower adolescent self-esteem → higher levels of parents'
materialism. Similarly, it is difficult to envision an argument
that would favor a mediation path such as higher adolescent
materialism → lower adolescent self-esteem → lower parental
support versus our conclusion that lower parental support →
lower adolescent self-esteem → higher adolescent materialism.
However, a causal modeling approach could provide even
further insight into these issues.
Efforts in this direction would be a welcome addition to
research on adolescent materialism. Questions about how
materialism develops in adolescents are not only intriguing but
are important to a wide range of constituents—parents, educators,
and public policy officials. Questions about the role of selfesteem, self-identity, and self-worth in forming consumption
behaviors and values are increasingly important to consumer
researchers (Oyserman, 2009; Shavitt, Torelli, & Wong, 2009;
White & Argo, 2009). Addressing these questions holds the
promise of providing a stronger foundation to build informed
discussions on the topic of materialism, about how values develop
in our families and communities, and how children become
socialized as consumers in contemporary society.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the guidance provided by the JCP
editor, associate editor, and reviewers. The authors thank the
staff, parents, and students of the St. Paul area recreation centers
for their participation. This research was funded by support
from the Eller College of Management at the University of
Arizona and the Carlson School of Management at the
University of Minnesota.
References
Achenreiner, G. (1997). Materialistic values and susceptibility to influence in
children. In M. Brucks, & D. J. MacInnis (Eds.), Advances in consumer
research (Vol. 24, pp. 82−88). Provo, UT: Association for Consumer
Research.
Banerjee, R., & Dittmar, H. (2008). Individual differences in children's
materialism: The role of peer relations. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 34, 17−31.
Baron, R., & Kenny, D. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in
social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 51, 1173−1182.
Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental
Psychology, 4, 1−103.
Baumrind, D. (1978). Reciprocal rights and responsibilities in parent–child
relations. Journal of Social Issues, 34, 179−196.
Becker, G. (1981). A treatise on the family. Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Berman, S. (1997). Children's social consciousness and the development of
social responsibility. New York: State University of New York Press.
184
L.N. Chaplin, D.R. John / Journal of Consumer Psychology 20 (2010) 176–184
Buri, J. (1991). Parental authority questionnaire. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 57, 110−119.
Chang, L. C., & Arkin, R. M. (2002). Materialism as an attempt to cope with
uncertainty. Psychology and Marketing, 19, 389−406.
Chaplin, L. N., & John, D. R. (2007). Growing up in a material world: Age
differences in materialism in children and adolescents. Journal of Consumer
Research, 37, 480−493.
Churchill, G., & Moschis, G. P. (1979). Television and interpersonal influences on
adolescent consumer learning. Journal of Consumer Research, 6, 23−35.
Damon, W., Lerner, R., & Eisenberg, N. (2006). Handbook of child psychology:
Social, emotional, and personality development. New Jersey: Wiley.
Darling, N., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting style as context: An integrative
model. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 487−496.
Ellis, G. J., Thomas, D. L., & Rollins, B. C. (1976). Measuring parental support:
The interrelationship of three measures. Journal of Marriage & The Family,
38, 713−722.
Flouri, E. (1999). An integrated model of consumer materialism: Can economic
socialization and maternal values predict materialistic attitudes in
adolescents? Journal of Socio-Economics, 28, 707−724.
Flouri, E. (2004). Exploring the relationship between mothers' and fathers'
parenting practices and children's materialist values. Journal of Economic
Psychology, 25, 743−752.
Goldberg, M. E., Gorn, G. J., Peracchio, L. A., & Bamossy, G. (2003).
Understanding materialism among youth. Journal of Consumer Psychology,
13, 278−288.
Henry, C. S., Wilson, S. M., & Peterson, G. W. (1989). Parental power bases and
processes as predictors of adolescent conformity. Journal of Adolescent
Research, 4, 15−32.
Kasser, T. (2002). The high price of materialism. Mass.: MIT Press.
Kasser, T., Ryan, R. M., Couchman, C. E., & Sheldon, K. M. (2004).
Materialistic values: Their causes and consequences. In T. Kasser, & A. D.
Kanner (Eds.), Psychology and Consumer Culture (pp. 11−28). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Kasser, T., Ryan, R. M., Zax, M., & Sameroff, A. J. (1995). The relations of
maternal and social environments to late adolescents' materialistic and
prosocial values. Developmental Psychology, 31, 907−914.
Klint, K. A., & Weiss, M. (1986). Dropping in and dropping out: Participation
motives of current and former youth gymnasts. Canadian Journal of
Applied Sport Sciences, 11, 106−114.
Maccoby, E. E. (1984). Socialization and developmental change. Child
Development, 55, 317−328.
Mick, D. G. (1996). Are studies of dark side variables confounded by socially
desirable responding? The case of materialism. Journal of Consumer
Research, 23, 106−119.
Moschis, G. P., & Churchill, G. A. (1978). Consumer socialization: A
theoretical and empirical analysis. Journal of Marketing Research, 15,
599−609.
Moore, R. L., & Moschis, G. P. (1981). The role of family communication in
consumer learning. Journal of Communications, 31, 42−51.
Openshaw, K. D., Thomas, D. L., & Rollins, B. C. (1984). Parental influences of
adolescent self-esteem. Journal of Early Adolescence, 4, 259−274.
Oyserman, D. (2009). Identity-based motivation: Implications for action
readiness, procedural-readiness, and consumer behavior. Journal of
Consumer Psychology, 19, 250−260.
Peterson, G. W., & Rollins, B. C. (1987). Parent–child socialization. In M. B.
Sussman, & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Handbook of marriage and family
(pp. 471−507). New York: Plenum.
Peterson, G. W., Stivers, M. E., & Peters, D. F. (1986). Family versus
nonfamily significant others for the career decisions of low-income youth.
Family Relations: Journal of Applied Family & Child Studies, 35,
417−424.
Richins, M., & Dawson, S. (1992). A consumer values orientation for materialism
and its measurement: Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer
Research, 19, 303−316.
Rigby, K. (2000). Effects of peer victimization in schools and perceived social
support on adolescent well-being. Journal of Adolescence, 23, 57−68.
Rindfleisch, A., Burroughs, J. E., & Denton, F. (1997). Family structure,
materialism, and compulsive consumption. Journal of Consumer Research,
23, 312−325.
Roberts, J. A., Manolis, C., & Tanner, J. (2008). Interpersonal influence and
adolescent materialism and compulsive buying. Social Influence, 3,
114−131.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. New Jersey:
Princeton University Press.
Schor, J. B. (2004). Born to buy. New York: Scribner.
Sharp, S. (1995). How much does bullying hurt? The effects of bullying on the
personal wellbeing and educational progress of secondary aged students.
Educational and Child Psychology, 12, 81−88.
Shavitt, S., Torelli, C. J., & Wong, J. (2009). Identity-based motivation,
constraints, and opportunities in consumer research. Journal of Consumer
Psychology, 19, 261−266.
Staub, E. (1988). The evolution of caring and nonaggressive persons and
societies. Journal of Social Issues, 44, 81−100.
Weiss, M., & Ebbeck, V. (1996). Self-esteem and perceptions of competence in
youth sport: Theory, research, and enhancement strategies. The Encyclopedia
of Sports Medicine, 6, 364−382.
White, K., & Argo, J. J. (2009). Social identity threat and consumer preferences.
Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19, 313−325.