Search results

Prior research has indicated that narratives may lead to fantasy which may evoke narrative transportation. Researchers have also established that narrative transportation affects persuasion, changes in attitudes and brand evaluations. To this end, several studies have focused on narrative consumption (i.e. being hooked into a narrative) and the aforementioned consequences of narrative transportation. However, research investigating the role that fantasy plays in consumers’ journey from narrative consumption to narrative transportation is scant. The purpose of this paper is to develop a multidimensional scale for measuring narrative-driven fantasy in order to detail which dimensions of fantasy facilitate narrative transportation. Further, this paper posits that prior research has overlooked the mediating role that fantasy plays within the narrative consumption and narrative transportation process. As the exploration of overlooked mediators is important for theory development, this paper uses the scale developed here to test for fantasy as a mediator.

This research involves four studies, taking a multi-methodology approach including one-on-one interviews and questionnaires. Exploratory factor analysis and sequential equation modeling are used to develop a valid scale for fantasy.

This work results in the development of an eight-item scale of narrative-driven fantasy, highlighting two dimensions of fantasy: identification and passport. Further, this work finds that both dimensions of fantasy mediate the relationship between the level of narrative consumption (being hooked into the narrative) and narrative transportation.

The studies were conducted with respondents only from the USA, potentially limiting its generalizability to other countries and cultures. This research has several implications. This paper introduces a model that highlights fantasy’s role within the narrative consumption and narrative transportation fields of study. It also delineates a scale that measures the different dimensions of fantasy. This scale can be used to gain further understanding of the strength and type of fantasy that narratives consumed via various mediums (music, movies, commercials) evoke, the relationship between these measures and narrative transportation, and the subsequent changes in intentions and attitudes. Further, the identification of fantasy as a mediator in the relationship between narrative consumption and narrative transportation allows for further theory development and exploration.

The fantasy scale that is detailed in this paper may be used to indicate which celebrities, music, images, movies, commercials, products, brands and other stimuli best evoke narrative-based fantasy. The scale should apply to all types of fantasizing, enhancing the understanding of what increases levels of fantasy and the effects of such fantasy on persuasion.

This research extends the literature on consumer engagement in narrative consumption and transportation by providing novel and valid scale measures for narrative-based fantasy. The fantasy scale provided is internally consistent and proves accurate across many samples and stimuli. The scale is also short (only eight items) and easy to administer. Additionally, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this work is the first to generate insights into the mediating role that fantasy plays within the narrative consumption and narrative transportation framework.

In 1978, Philip Klein wrote about institutional economists of the Veblen-Commons-Mitchell-Ayres variety: Whatever we call ourselves, we are not given much credit generally among our fellow economists, but I think there is evidence that an ever-wider group of economists has begun to hear what we are saying and to accept a number of our premises…institutionalism must be viewed as either never having died or as being in the process of a resurrection which I suggest will endure (Klein, 1978, p. 252).Klein’s optimism seems justified by the following quote from Joseph Stiglitz’s new book, Globalization and its Discontents: Old-fashioned economics textbooks often talk about market economics as if it had three essential ingredients: prices, private property, and profits. Together with competition, these provide incentives, coordinate economic decision making, ensuring that firms produce what individuals want at the lowest possible cost. But there has also long been a recognition of the importance of institutions (Stiglitz, 2002, p. 139; emphasis in original).Klein and other original institutionalists should be buoyed when they hear such a statement from a recent Nobel Prize winner. One problem, however, is that the “old-fashioned textbooks” are still being published in 2003. The quote also raises a question: just who recognized the importance of institutions and when did they recognize it? Statements such as the above by Stiglitz irk original institutionalists, but why? Is it because he underestimates the prominence of perfect competition in current texts, because he is understating original institutionalists’ positions as “keepers of the faith,” or both? In any case, we may not be able to hoist the V(eblen)-C(ommons) banner and claim total victory but, increasingly, more of economics today is institutional economics. A recent article by Allan Schmid demonstrates that indeed though everyone is not an institutionalist in the Veblen-Commons mold, “good economists find it useful to embrace some of its various elements” (Schmid, 2001, p. 281).

This paper is an initial attempt to discuss the American institutionalist movement as it changed and developed after 1945. Institutionalism in the inter-war period was a relatively coherent movement held together by a set of general methodological, theoretical, and ideological commitments (Rutherford, 2011). Although institutionalism always had its critics, it came under increased attack in the 1940s, and faced challenges from Keynesian economics, a revived neoclassicism, econometrics, and from new methodological approaches derived from various versions of positivism. The institutionalist response to these criticisms, and particularly the criticism that institutionalism “lacked theory,” is to be found in a variety of attempts to redefine institutionalism in new theoretical or methodological terms. Perhaps the most important of these is to be found in Clarence Ayres’ The Theory of Economic Progress (1944), although there were many others. These developments were accompanied by a significant amount of debate, disagreement, and uncertainty over future directions. Some of this is reflected in the early history of The Association for Evolutionary Economics.

In the years following the publication of A Theory of Consumption (1923), Hazel Kyrk’s book became the flagship of the field that would later be known as the economics of consumption. It stimulated theoretical and empirical work on consumption. Some of the existing literature on Kyrk (e.g., Kiss & Beller, 2000; Le Tollec, 2020; Tadajewski, 2013) depicted her theory as the starting point of the economics of consumption. Nevertheless, how and why it emerged the way it did remain largely unexplored. This chapter examines Kyrk’s intellectual background, which, we argue, can be traced back to two main movements in the United States: the home economics and the institutionalist. Both movements conveyed specific endeavors as responses to the US material and social transformations that occurred at the turn of the 20th century, notably the perceived changing role of consumption and that of women in US society. On the one hand, Kyrk pursued first-generation home economists’ efforts to make sense of and put into action the shifting of women’s role from domestic producer to consumer. On the other hand, she reinterpreted Veblen’s (1899) account of consumption in order to reveal its operational value for a normative agenda focused on “wise” and “rational” consumption. This chapter studies how Kyrk carried on first-generation home economists’ progressive agenda and how she adapted Veblen’s fin-de-siècle critical account of consumption to the context of the household goods developed in 1900–1920. Our account of Kyrk’s intellectual roots offers a novel narrative to better understand the role of gender and epistemological questions in her theory.

The last few decades have seen the rise of a new field of inquiry – human–animal studies (HAS). As a rich, theoretically and disciplinarily diverse field, HAS shines a light on the various relations that humans have with other animals across time, space and culture. While still a small, but rapidly growing field, HAS has supported the development of multiple theoretical and conceptual initiatives which have aimed to capture the rich diversity of human–animal interactions. Yet the methodologies for doing this have not kept pace with the ambitions of such projects. In this chapter, we seek to shed light on this particular issue.

We consider the difficulties of researching other-than-human beings by asking what might happen if methods incorporated true inter-disciplinarity, for instance if social scientists were able to work with natural scientists on multi-species ethnographies. The lack of established methodology (and the lack of cross disciplinary research between the natural and social sciences) is one of the main problems that we consider here. It is an issue complicated immensely by the ‘otherness’ of animals – the vast differences in the ways that we (humans) and they (animals) see the world, communicate and behave. This chapter provides the opportunity for us to consider how we can take account of (if not resolve) these differences to arrive at meaningful research data, to better understand the contemporary world by embarking upon more precise investigations of our relationships with animals.

Drawing upon a selection of examples from contemporary research of human–animal interactions, both ethnographic and scientific, we shed light on some new possibilities for multi-species research. We suggest that this can be done best by considering and applying a diversity of theoretical frameworks which deal explicitly with the constitution of the social environment.

Our methodological exploration offers the reader insight into new ways of working within the template of human animal studies by drawing upon a range of useful theories such as post-structuralism and actor network theory (ANT) (for example, Callon, 1986; Hamilton & Taylor, 2013; Latour, 2005; Law, Ruppert, & Savage, 2011) and post-humanist perspectives (for example, Anderson, 2014; Haraway, 2003; Wolfe, 2010). Our contribution to this literature is distinctive because rather than remaining at the philosophical level, we suggest how the human politics of method might be navigated practically to the benefit of multiple species.

In this chapter I address: (a) current perspectives on the teacher–student relationship; (b) assessment issues; and (c) the implications of early student-teacher relationships for school adjustment. While substantial progress has been made on the conceptualization and measurement of the teacher–child relationship construct, it is important to empirically establish the multidimensionality of the construct across the school years. Research that examines the perspectives of both teachers and children is also critically needed in light of growing evidence that the teacher–child relationship is crucial in the early school years. The evidence on the role of the teacher–student relationship on school adjustment indicates that low relational negativity seems to particularly benefit children who present with troubling behaviors early in school. However, the nature of the association between early school adjustment and the teacher–child relationship is far from conclusive. Attention to constructs that represent warmth, closeness, caring, and nurturance is needed for research to explore what aspects of these constructs might serve as buffers against adversity.

Dan Hammond’s written comments on a paper I presented at the ASSA/HES meetings in January on Chicago economics and institutionalism (Hammond, 2003; Rutherford, 2003a) questioned the usefulness of the concept of “institutional economics” as a category with which to discuss the history of American economics from about 1918 on. My paper and Hammond’s comments form the background to this roundtable discussion. Although my original piece is not reproduced here, I will begin with some direct comments on what I take to be Hammond’s main points of contention.

The current increase in social media activity related to brand–consumer interactions is progressively influencing the manner in which brands and their customers communicate. Whereas this attention to social media is warranted, researchers and brand managers must also recognize that consumers connect and engage with brands across other communication platforms as well. Accordingly, this study aims to examine brand–consumer interactions taking place across social, online and physical platforms, as well as consumer motives for initiating these brand interactions across various platforms.

A mixed-method approach integrating quantitative and qualitative data was used. We administered a written diary to 102 individuals over a two-month period, in which study participants recorded their motivations and platform use in their interactions with a brand. We evaluated latent-class mixture models for complex data and multi-level latent-class mixture models to identify classes of interactions based on participants’ motivations and platform use as well as customer segments based on the identified motives-by-platform classes.

The findings reveal ten categories of motives for interacting with brands, including promotions and incentives, timely information, product information, engagement, browsing, purchase, customer service, branded content, entertainment, and personalization/exclusivity. Furthermore, six motives-by-platform interaction classes are identified. The findings suggest three consumer segments differentiated by their motives-by-platform profiles.

This study adds to past research investigating the motives behind brand–consumer interactions in social media by investigating both social media and non-social media-related interactions, and offering a typology of interaction profiles that considers interaction motives and platform preferences.

This study illustrates that consumers are driven to interact with brands based upon the ten motive categories. These motives, in turn, are associated with different platform uses. Thus, it is important for brands to adopt ambidexterity across multiple communication platforms.

This research adds to the understanding of brand–consumer interactions conducted on online and offline communication platforms.

This paper applies and empirically tests a real options approach to conceptualizing the value of patents. Based on a theorem derived by Merton (1973), we propose that greater dispersion in the citations of a firm's patents represents greater flexibility for the firm to exercise the option rights embedded in the patents and thus enhances the option value of the patents. A test of this proposition using a sample of 128 US-based biotechnology firms found corroborative results.

Neuroimaging research has substantially enhanced our understanding of the neurobiological mechanisms of typical and atypical learning in children. These developments can advance the design of novel approaches to diagnosis and intervention for learning disabilities. Despite the promise of educational neuroscience, there are still walls between neuroscience and special education researchers such that more collaboration and understanding are needed between these disciplines. This chapter attempts to break down the walls by discussing how neuroimaging techniques can be incorporated into special education research. We also present arguments as to why neuroscience is “the next big thing” in special education research and the obstacles that must be overcome in order for neuroscience to be incorporated into education research. To describe how neurobiology might impact special education, we focus primarily on reading disability. We believe that educational neuroscience can aid in the identification and intervention of other learning disorders as well.