After one week spent on research, I can truthfully say that I was woefully uneducated about the range of theories, books, and genera energy devoted to consumerism and grocery shopping. Because my topic is a bit of an oddball, there is no book already written about “The Psychology and Sociology of Extreme Couponing.” Instead, my research into the literature has taken a sideways approach. I’ve looked at discussions on the history of consumerism, explaining individual consumption, the consuming culture, the age of cheap, consuming as a way to create identity, competitive spending, how grocery shoppers make decisions, and how we navigate grocery stores. All of these things relate to my question of what factors influences extreme couponers, but I’m the one putting the puzzle together.

While consumerism is mainly thought of today as centered in the United States, it began started in Western Europe in the 17th and 18th centuries. Before then, there were of course bits and pieces that looked like consumerism, certainly among the rich: the fashion of the Chinese and Japanese courts was sometimes determined by trendsetters, the revival of classical styles during the Renaissance resembled a fad, and there has always been an acceptance in the merchant class of nearly every society that acquiring and displaying goods conveys wealth. However, “consuming” as a status symbol, and identity, or just a pastime couldn’t exist as part of a society. The only people able to consume on such a high level were the extremely rich (who originally got that position through politics or wars), new items to be consumed were not consistently generated, many world religions were actually against such self-indulgent activity, and past societies generally preferred holding to traditional standards. Society was about surviving and maintaining a person’s level in society.

So how did this preoccupation with consumption start? Consumerism started with a fully developed commercial economy and access to global trade, including new goods. For example, sugar, which started out as an exotic luxury for the rich since Alexander the Great, had become a necessity for even the lowest worker by the French Revolution. As with many other items, this change in needs occurred as a result of the creation of the shop. With the shop, as opposed to a market, the shopkeeper feels pressure to get people into his store; this led to new marketing methods, buying on credit, and advertisements. Shopping focused on clothes, household items, and children’s toys, as new styles could easily be invented and sold. The increased usage of currency rather than bartering allowed for the middle and lower class to emulate high society’s shopping as well as demonstrate their own worth. New needs were continuously created, and acquiring goods became the measurement of a satisfactory life, as seen by the increase of detailed wills. Pleasurable pastimes also became a consumption: as coffee became a necessary item, it also became a social one, and coffeehouses were a way to spend money on an activity. This translated into restaurants, circuses, and other entertainment.

This initial change doesn’t explain everything. Most of the lower classes didn’t interact with the rich socialites who decorated their houses with the latest styles, religious teaching still opposed gratuitous material wealth, and society had strict rules preventing people from bettering their station through the mere acclimation of goods. The second wave of consumerism that developed into modern society came out of the United States, and is the reason the US is the poster child for consumption. The US colonies were closely tied to Europe in trade during the rise of Western European consumerism, and the favorable ratio of people to resources created a higher material standard. However, it was not until after 1800 that consumerism finally took off: the use of currency increased; social classes did not have the rigid background of Europe, and more opportunity arose to use goods as a social identity; and the home, with the creation of parlors, were more able to display a person’s wealth to the public world. The continued rapid development as opposed to Europe’s plateau may be attributed to a sense of inferiority to Europe and an attempt to compensate for the States’ “backwardness.” The rapid social change of the 19th century helped to increase the creation of new needs and deteriorating social distinctions, allowing the US to surpass Europe in consumerism by the late 1800’s.

After the Industrial Revolution, things just kept changing. The department store, catalogs, advertising agencies (which began in the 1870’s surprisingly), and credit facilities increased the desire for more and newer goods. Society satiated their desire through the invention of snacking, new forms of transportation, yearly models of cars, activities that required money and equipment, commercial performances. In an age of democracy, ads and products cut across social and ethnic lines: everyone has to brush their teeth! Parenting included comforting babies with new toys in the name of emotional development, and cigarettes (mostly) lost their male exclusivity. Envy became praised. Relationships became about consumer goods through gifts and activities, turning courtship into dating. Even holidays, with their religious meaning, became an avenue for another excuse to buy. Work becomes an instrument for gains to support all of this.

This evolution has certainly not been without comment. Religious groups, political groups, and now environmental groups have attacked consumerism in different forms as morally wrong, vulgar, and harmful to the environment. As our “wants” become “needs,” we require more and more in order to, in our opinion, survive. The basic structure of employment requires that we survive off consumer goods produced by one organization, but earned through sacrificing time and money to a completely different organization. Consuming is obligatory, and so can be manipulated into the wrong kind of consumption. Products are created to be less durable so they must be replaced (known as “planned obsolescence). Even the small amount of time not send on earning money and then spending it is often taken up through passive consumption of television or other entertainment, which leaves less time for autonomous activities that contribute to a person’s growth and development in the form of self-actualization. Consuming becomes our identity: what we own defines who we are.

Whew! That was a lot of background. If you’ve made it this far, take a break with an adorable puppy video.

On to modern times: there are a few interesting trends that have arisen from our consumer based society. One is the observation of “overspent Americans.” The expectation of how much a person needs to have before he/she can be satisfied is based on a reference group. Through social comparison, a person determines what and how much to buy based on other people’s spending habits and material possessions. Changes in employment and television has changed who we use as reference groups. Instead of comparing ourselves to our neighbors, who probably had a similar income, we now compare to our work colleagues or television counterparts. This creates problems, as in the workplace there is a range of salaries, and glamorous television programs often portray a lifestyle not accessible to the middle or lower class viewer, and so people more often have an inappropriate reference group. While a person may not necessarily buy things purely for the sake of appearing like those he or she wishes to emulate, constant exposure to that higher class of living creates desires and wants that come to seem like needs. First we were keeping up with the Joneses; now we’re keeping up with the Kardashians. As the top 20% are getting richer, the rest of the population is getting higher and higher expectations of success and satisfaction.

The competitive spending that results from social comparisons revolves around socially visible products, like cars, clothes, and houses. This results in brand names and designer logos, which in turn encourage us to not only buy more, but buy the right kinds of things. Invisible consumption, such as travel, as gotten around this by making visible products: museum shops and souvenirs provide material proof of an otherwise intangible consumption.

“But no,” you say. “I’m independent! I make my own choices! I don’t buy into this kind of thing!” But you probably do. There are important reasons to stay in the system: image is important for jobs, socializing often costs money, technology changes and requires updates. Most people protest that they don’t feel pressured, when in fact they are strongly influenced by television and their reference groups. The process can be boiled down to this: we see, we want, we borrow, and we buy. We see ads and media that depict a glamorous, or at least comfortable life. We want the house with two cars, but also the Caribbean vacation, the dream wedding, the new clothes every season, the updated smartphone, Tivo, the granite countertops, the flat screen TV, a new restaurant every week, the brand name purse, and the esteem of everyone you meet. And the house and car of the American dream? The neighborhood better look nice and safe, and the lawn needs to always be green, and the cars will be new, and one should be an SUV.

Now, all of this doesn’t apply to all of the bottom 80%. Below the poverty lines, the focus is more on having enough food this week than getting the newest Prada sunglasses. But the idea of “success” is still portrayed as having those luxuries which some of the middle class already thinks it deserves. And even the top percent aren’t completely satisfied. There’s always more.

But there’s another section of the population running in a different current: cheapness. Globalization has led to a consumer democracy: the consumer gets to choose, and among nearly identical products, the most deciding factor is usually price. As luxuries become necessities, we expect them to be at lower and lower prices: flexible home furnishings, electronics, even travel. Airline flights are no longer prestigious; a cheap plane ticket is a human right. Higher prices don’t necessarily mean higher quality anymore. We want more, and we want it for less. Accelerating this trend is price consciousness, made possible by the Internet. We aren’t going to just go into one store and buy what we need, we’re going to make sure we have a good price. Powerful stores like Wal-mart, with a focus on low price and abundance, make that expectation part of our daily lives.

Coupons are a way to get more and pay less. Studies have shown that a positive attitude toward coupons (unsurprisingly) results most heavily from expecting monetary savings and approval from others (namely one’s spouse). Coupon usage also decreases as the opportunity cost of time increases. In transaction utility theory, a shopper’s decision to buy is based not only on the value of the goods compared with the price, but also the perceived value of the “deal,” comparing the actual price to a reference price. Buying on sale, however, generally results in a shopper buying more than they would have normally. Those shoppers who do check prices are much more in tune with how much they are actually paying for an item. The culture of consumerism dictates that we must consume in increasing amounts, not only to survive, but to enjoy life; the attitude of cheapness wants to do this with the least possible amount of money and effort.

I could write a whole book on couponers and how they fit into the cheap consumer society. But instead, I’ll be focusing on a smaller section of the coupon community: extreme couponers. These are people who devote exorbitant amounts of time and energy to save money, specifically on groceries. How do they fit into the theories of consumerism? How do they reflect the desire for discounts? Do they fit into these sociological trends at all, or are they driven by personal psychological factors? In short, how can their behavior be explained? Over the next 8 weeks I will be watching TLC’s “Extreme Couponing” and interviewing extreme couponers in the Hampton Roads/Richmond Area to hopefully find answers to these questions.

Here’s a video of a sleepy baby tiger, for those of you who made it to the end.

Reading from the week:
Consumerism in World History, Peter N. Stearns, 2006
The Myth of Consumerism, Conrad Lodziak, 2002
Cheap: the real cost of the global trend for bargains, discounts, and consumer choice, David Bosshart, 2006
The Overspent American, Juliet Schor, 1998
“The Price Knowledge and Search of Supermarket Shopper,” Peter R. Dickson and Alan G. Sawyer, 1990
“A Price Discrimination Theory of Coupons,” Chakravarthi Narasimhan, 1984
“The Theory of Reasoned Action Applied to Coupon Usage,” Terence A. Chimp and Alican Kavas, 1984
“Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice,” Richard Thaler, 1985