Methodological issues in consumer research:
towards a feminist perspective
Avers that consumer research
has been criticized for its
preoccupation with empirical
issues (Ryan, 1986) and its
neglect of the experiential
perspective of consumers as
individuals (Belk, 1984,
Fennell, 1985). Additionally,
alleges that consumer
research has been tradition-
ally subject to gender bias
(e.g. Bristor and Fischer,
1993) and that dominant
ideologies have been mascu-
line in nature (Hirschman,
1993). Reviews developments
in consumer research in the
light of current thinking and
explores ontological and
methodological issues in the
study of consumer behaviour.
Develops a feminist frame-
work which goes beyond the
rejection of positivist
approaches towards a holis-
tic, experiential understand-
ing of consumer behaviour.
Marketing Intelligence &
Planning
14/2 [1996] 13–18
© MCB University Press
[ISSN 0263-4503]
Helen R. Woodruffe University of Salford, Salford, UK
Introduction
Traditional research protocols, it is argued
(Oakley, 1981), have assumed a predominantly
masculine model of sociology and society.
Bristor and Fischer (1993) propose that a
revision of our knowledge base in respect of
consumer (and other) research be under-
taken precisely because women are misrepre-
sented owing to gender biases and gendered
assumptions of long standing. The imposition
of “masculine” paradigms on consumer
research in the past can distort present
understanding and should be examined. This
is one of the issues explored in this paper,
along with a review of some key develop-
ments in current consumer research litera-
ture. Their applicability and relevance in the
light of new sociological developments in the
way in which the concept of consumption is
understood will also be considered.
Consumer research has come under criti-
cism for being too preoccupied with empiri-
cal issues, resulting in a lack of effort devoted
to the development of theory that is needed to
explain phenomena (Ryan, 1986). In review-
ing the development of consumer research in
the late 1980s, Ryan undertook an analysis of
the contents of the first ten years of the Jour-
nal of Consumer Research (JCR). Assuming
that the contents of the JCR during that
period reflected leading-edge research in the
field, consideration of the results of his analy-
sis is useful to this discussion:
Of the 374 articles that appeared in JCR, 70
per cent were empirical tests and 47 per cent
of these studies focused on methodological
issues centring about empirical matters
such as operationalisation, model estima-
tion procedures and the validation of experi-
mental data. The remaining studies (17 per
cent) did not contain primary data and
consisted mainly of literature reviews and
conceptual models … In short, JCR research
consists primarily of tests of social psycho-
logical theories and marketing applications.
A stream of research has yet to emerge that
can be recognised uniquely as consumer
behaviour.
Olander (1993) also criticizes consumer psy-
chology methodology in that, as he states,
“the point of departure is not a phenomenon
that one wants to explain, it is a theory or a
concept one wants to test”. He also supports
his view with data resulting from the scruti-
nization of articles from the JCR, this time
carried out by Lutz (1991). Concern for rigour
may be behind researchers’ adherence to
controlled experimental techniques, and this
has formed some of the basis for recent acade-
mic debate on the trade-off between rigour
and depth. This has led to criticism that
many of the issues addressed in consumer
research based on controlled experimenta-
tion on a small number of variables in artifi-
cial situations may be seen as “trivial” in
nature (Peter, 1990).
While consumer research is not, arguably,
restricted to consumer behaviour research,
but viewed as incorporating applied topics
such as advertising and consumer credit,
which perhaps fit more generally into the
topic of “marketing”, it is mainly consumer
behaviour research and, more specifically, the
ontology and methodology of the study of
consumer behaviour which is to be the focus
of this paper. The need for an expansion in
the ontology and methodology of consumer
research reflects “an emerging view of con-
sumer behaviour that enlarges the conven-
tional decision-oriented approach to embrace
a more experiential perspective” (Hirschman
and Holbrook, 1986). Other researchers have
also emphasized the need for consumer
research to embrace the experience perspec-
tive (e.g. Belk, 1984; Fennell, 1985).
Thompson et al. (1989) suggest that con-
sumer behaviour research has been so nar-
rowly constrained by the notion of “behav-
iour” in a behaviouristic context that “the
majority of contemporary consumer research
should be more aptly labelled consumer cog-
nition”. They propose an existential-phenom-
enological approach to consumer research,
represented by a research focus on experi-
ence from a first-person viewpoint.
Hirschman and Holbrook (1986) see existen-
tialism and phenomenology as playing key,
but not isolated, roles in developing our
understanding of the consumer through expe-
riential research. They suggest that human-
ism, subjectivism and Platonic idealism, for
example, all have some aspects that relate to
the consumption experience, “yet no one
[ 13 ]
Helen R. Woodruffe philosophy adequately captures all facets of
Methodological issues in this concept”.
consumer research: towards What is emerging here is the view that,
a feminist perspective while there may not be one philosophy which
Marketing Intelligence & encapsulates the essence of the consumption
Planning experience, there is a need to espouse
14/2 [1996] 13–18
research methods which go beyond those
common to positivistic science and logical
empiricism. Conditions of postmodernity,
according to Elliott (1993) represent a funda-
mental challenge to marketing research
methodology. As Elliott states, “the positivist
practice of ‘scientific’ marketing research
cannot cope with such a constructed reality
and is likely to produce superficial knowl-
edge rather than meaningful understand-
ing”. Positivism, in its extreme objectivity,
ignores consumers’ impact on the social
world. Interpretivism, on the other hand,
being the antithesis of positivism, rejects the
influence of material dimensions of social
realities. Neither stance will enable
researchers to develop their understanding
of the consumer’s lived experience of con-
sumption.
“...Critical theory seeks to free people from all forms
of domination...”
Murray and Ozanne (1991) present critical
theory as an interdisciplinary approach to
seeking knowledge about consumers. They
note that critical theorists question the
extreme positions of interpretivists and posi-
tivists and stress critical theory’s focus on the
interplay and interaction between meanings
and social structures. While the goal (they
assert) of positivism is that of explanation/
prediction and the goal of interpretivism is
“understanding”, via interpretation, the
overriding goal of critical theory is emanci-
patory in nature. Critical theory seeks to free
people from all forms of domination, accord-
ing to Murray and Ozanne, and they suggest
that a critical theory of consumer research
has much to offer. This argument finds sup-
port perhaps from Hirschman’s (1991) content
analysis of articles published in the Journal
of Marketing, which shows that descriptions
of marketers’ relationships to consumers
frequently include terms which depict mar-
keters as seeking to wield power over con-
sumers. Themes such as gaining power and
control, competition, instrumentalism and
aggression/conflict occur repeatedly and
suggest that research agendas are positioned
firmly in the marketers’ interest. In a sepa-
rate article in 1993, Hirschman enjoins mar-
keters to “choose collectively to conduct our
research in ways that will benefit consumers
rather than support the status quo that all too
[ 14 ]
often manipulates, misleads and suppresses
them”.
An emancipatory agenda for consumer
research is also proposed by Olander (1993)
who argues that applied consumer research
too infrequently takes the consumer’s inter-
ests as its basis of enquiry. Holbrook (1987)
has also criticized consumer research prob-
lematics for their alignment with marketer
interests. Olander (1993) argues that individ-
ual consumers are rightfully entitled to bene-
fit from the results of consumer research, and
may wish to do so in order to get the most out
of money, time and effort spent on purchases.
He criticizes what he terms Murray and
Ozanne’s “macro-orientation” which focuses
on consumer organizations at an institution-
alized level, rather than on individual con-
sumers. Consumers are also human beings
and, as such, are uniquely individual. It
would almost certainly not be possible or
practicable to study each individual
consumer, and for many marketing applica-
tions (e.g. exploring target market segments)
an understanding of aggregate consumption
patterns and behaviour may be adequate.
However, acknowledgement of the unique
nature of consumers should be made. Con-
sumer research should not ignore differences
between individuals.
Hirschman and Holbrook (1986) propose
that in order to investigate and comprehend
experiential consumption, “a researcher
must become as personally involved with the
phenomenon as humanly possible”. In order
to do this, they suggest a two-level approach:
role taking and personal immersion. In role
taking, the researcher conducts science by
means of personal, emotional involvement
with other humans, typically via case study
or participant observation methods. This
needs support from the immersion of the
investigator into the phenomenon under
study. Empathy and intuition are suggested
as means to interpret the results. Interest-
ingly, this approach was seen as inevitable in
feminist research interviewing by Oakley
(1981), as it was impossible for the feminist
researcher to divorce her own emotional
feelings from those of the women being inter-
viewed. This overview has highlighted the
increasing divergence between the realities
of researching and understanding consumers
and the constraints of traditional methods of
scientific enquiry.
A lack of development of new theory has
been identified (Ryan, 1986), together with a
fixation for testing existing theories and
concepts (Olander, 1993). There is an idea,
axiomatic to the progress of meaningful dis-
course on consumer behaviour, that
consumer research must embrace the experi-
Helen R. Woodruffe ential aspects of consumption (Belk, 1984;
Methodological issues in Fennell, 1985; Hirschman and Holbrook, 1986)
consumer research: towards and that positivist approaches are inadequate
a feminist perspective in this context (Elliott, 1993; Hirschman and
Marketing Intelligence & Holbrook, 1986; Knights et al., 1993; Thomp-
Planning son et al., 1989). Alternative approaches
14/2 [1996] 13–18
include existential-phenomenology (Thomp-
son et al., 1989) and critical theory (Murray
and Ozanne, 1991). An awareness of the
importance of emancipatory consumer
research emerges (Murray and Ozanne, 1991;
Olander, 1993), and this concurs with the
postmodernists’ call for “a diversity or multi-
plicity of narratives, a liberation from all
conformity, and a freedom to experience as
many ways of being as desired” (Firat and
Venkatesh, 1993). The author’s belief is that
these emergent themes in consumer and
social research echo many features of femi-
nist thinking and research, aspects of which
will be explored further.
As mentioned earlier, gender issues attract
attention in consumer research as well as
other areas of social research, and this is
reflected in the literature. The nature of the
topics researched in relation to gender is
diverse (e.g. Richins, 1991; Worth et al., 1992,
Elliott et al., 1993) but what is of interest here
is not the range of topics but the methodologi-
cal aspects of such research. For example,
research which is undertaken into gender
issues is not necessarily based on a feminist
perspective. Indeed, treatment of and assump-
tions about sex and gender are the subject of
significant debate between the major feminist
perspectives of liberal feminism, women’s
voice/experience feminism and poststruc-
turalist feminism (Bristor and Fischer, 1993).
The goal of liberal feminism, for instance, is
the application of liberal principles to women
and men and a resultant sexual equality.
Thus the validity of research into gender
issues based on single sex samples for gener-
alized consumer behaviour knowledge with-
out corresponding research involving the
other sex would be questioned by liberal
feminists.
Gender issues in qualitative research gen-
erally have been a focal point for a number of
feminist writers (Oakley, 1981; Oleson, 1994),
while Bristor and Fischer (1993) have given
specific consideration to gender within a
feminist perspective in consumer research.
They observe that because gender is a social
concept referring to the ways in which traits,
attitudes and beliefs and behavioural tenden-
cies stem from psychological, sociological
and cultural roots, then consumption activi-
ties are fundamentally gendered. Hirschman
(1993) and Stern (1993) have developed
feminist-based critiques of current ideologies
and thinking in consumer research which
examine issues of gender and gendered
assumptions very closely. Stern proposes the
postmodern feminist perspective as an addi-
tion to consumer research on gender which,
to date, according to Stern, has not drawn on
feminist or deconstructionist theory.
Gender-related language in our culture
shapes what is viewed as knowledge. This is
of particular concern to feminist poststruc-
turalists who criticize the language of con-
sumer research (Bristor and Fischer, 1993)
which, for example, includes several terms to
describe various types of female consumer,
such as “stay-at-home housewives” or “just-a-
job working women” (e.g. Bartos, 1989). As no
corresponding set of terms exists to define
male consumers, this illustrates how women
are frequently defined in terms of their mari-
tal status while men’s status is taken for
granted. Bristor and Fischer trace links
between gender imagery and marketer/con-
sumer relationships back to some of the ear-
liest marketing texts, such as Frederick’s
Selling Mrs Consumer (1929). As they point
out,
such texts explicitly cast the consumer as
female and pit the marketing manager
(referred to with masculine pronouns)
against the consumer, advising him on how
to get her to buy something she may not
otherwise have purchased.
The allegation that theories in every
discipline have been affected by gender bias
(England, 1993) is at the core of feminist
studies which ask the question (Gagnier,
1990), “What are the aspects of reality that
bear upon the construction of gender and
the situation of women?” It is useful at this
stage to review current thinking in
feminist theory in order to understand how
feminist perspectives and ideologies are
constructed and to assess the ways in which
a feminist approach can be used in
consumer research.
The very existence of feminist theory is a
subject of a great deal of controversy (Eng-
land, 1993); on the one hand some feminists,
especially academics, see theory as vital for
feminists to engage with, in order to chal-
lenge existing forms of academic knowledge
(Stacey, 1993); on the other hand, feminist
writers acknowledge that theory represents
a distortion of women’s experience in the
structures of men’s stories of the world (Frye,
1990) and therefore can, of itself, be a form of
oppression. The resulting mélange of femi-
nist views – rich in its diversity, or confusing
to the point of bewilderment – can perhaps be
best encapsulated in the title of Stacey’s
paper, “Untangling feminist theory” (1993).
As Stacey indicates, it may be more appropri-
ate to highlight the existence of many
[ 15 ]
Helen R. Woodruffe different feminist theories, rather than one
Methodological issues in coherent body of work which can be named
consumer research: towards feminist theory. Gagnier’s definition of femi-
a feminist perspective nist theory (1990) reflects this multiplicity:
Marketing Intelligence & “Feminist theory could be defined as sys-
Planning temic synthesis of the data of feminist stud-
14/2 [1996] 13–18
ies, including causality, methodology, and
metaphysics as well as normative issues in
ethics or politics”.
A common foundation, however, to virtu-
ally all feminist views can be identified in the
belief that women are subordinated by men
and two major emphases within feminist
thinking emerge; the exclusion of women
from traditionally male activities and institu-
tions, and the devaluation of, and low mater-
ial rewards accorded to activities and traits
traditionally deemed appropriate for women
(England, 1993). Both of these have
contributed to the subjugation of women
generally, and the treatment of the concept of
woman in a masculine structured “men’s
world”. But one of the main difficulties in
developing a specific body of feminist theory
pertaining to women is that women are not
all alike. Differences among women across
cultures, locales and generations mean that
there can be no single concept of woman
(Frye, 1990), and “woman” is not the only
concept or social category under which
women live.
“...A move towards more individualistic treatment of consumers
may be a key starting point in developing feminist oriented
consumer research...”
Women may be rich, poor, educated, white,
black, lesbian, politically active or not politi-
cally active, voters, consumers, mothers,
wives, daughters. This mirrors exactly the
difficulties in consumer research. Who or
what is the consumer? A move towards more
individualistic treatment of consumers may
be a key starting point in developing feminist
oriented consumer research.
Bristor and Fischer (1993) brought together
feminist perspectives from three major stand-
points (liberal feminism, womens’
voice/experience feminism and poststruc-
turalist feminism) and developed a critical
analysis of various aspects of consumer
research: objectivity; problematics; theories;
methods of data collection; and methods of
data analysis. They identified many ways in
which unwarranted assumptions are embed-
ded in, and perpetuated by, consumer
research practices. Their conclusions suggest
key ways in which research can be organized
to achieve the goals of reducing sex/gender
biases, thereby developing more accurate and
useful knowledge.
[ 16 ]
Conclusion
The purpose of this discussion is to look
towards a new directional focus for future
research into consumer behaviour, consumer
research and gender within a feminist frame-
work. Much of what has been covered thus far
must be taken on board now. Important issues
relating to consumer research generally have
been identified; the need for development of
new theory; rejection of positivist approaches
and overemphasis on testing existing theo-
ries and concepts; adoption of an experiential
perspective of consumption; the development
of alternative approaches such as existential
phenomenology and critical theory; the emer-
gence of emancipatory consumer research
with focus on the individual. These issues
have been considered in the light of feminist
research and some similarities highlighted.
Bristor and Fischer (1993) have developed a
useful set of guidelines for the advancement
of consumer research in the context of height-
ened sensitivity to gender and sex (and also
issues of culture, race, class and sexual orien-
tation). They suggest that research should
incorporate the following:
• Problematics that reflect the perspectives
and concerns of those groups that have
been systematically marginalized.
• Theories and concepts that are inclusive of
marginalized groups, or that specifically
delimit the domain of their applicability.
• Data collection methods that recognize
emergent subjective experiences of women
and minority groups as epistemologically
valid, and instruments that are sensitive to
the effects of gendered or otherwise biased
language.
• Data analysis methods that do not assume a
priori that there are, or that there are not,
differences related to sex, gender or other
biological, social or cultural categories, but
that facilitate examining their presence
and their nature.
These aspects should be incorporated into
future consumer research design and
methodology generally, but they are of spe-
cific importance in respect of this paper. In
keeping with the goal of developing a feminist
perspective, the following fundamental tradi-
tional empiricist methodological principles
must be rejected (Gergen, 1988):
• the independence of science and object;
• the decontextualization of the subject
matter from the field in which it is
embedded, physically and historically;
• value-neutral theory and practice;
• the independence of “facts” from the scien-
tist;
Helen R. Woodruffe • the superiority of the scientist over other
Methodological issues in people.
consumer research: towards
a feminist perspective Instead, the researcher must be personally
Marketing Intelligence & involved with the subject, must experience
Planning the subject, if humanly possible; the inter-
14/2 [1996] 13–18 viewer must be subjective; consumption must
be explored in the context of the interplay
and interaction between meanings and social
structures; feminist theory and practice
should be incorporated into the research; the
research must be emancipatory in nature and
must take the individual’s perspective;
feminist perspectives can suggest new
problematics that focus explicitly on the
female and the feminine, when this is appro-
priate. This paper has explored consumption
and consumer research from a feminist per-
spective, and has offered some new insights
from the existing literature. It has been
demonstrated that new kinds of approach to
consumer research mean that the personal,
the subjective and the experiential are not
only acceptable but essential.
References
Bartos, R. (1989), Marketing and Women, Harvard
Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Belk, R. (1984), “A manifesto for a consumer
behaviour of consumer behaviour”, in Ander-
son and Ryan (Eds), Proceedings, 1984 AMA
Winter Educators’ Conference; Scientific
Method in Marketing, American Marketing
Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 163-7.
Bristor, J.M. and Fischer, E. (1993), “Feminist
thought: implications for consumer
research”, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 19, March, pp. 518-36.
Elliot, R. (1993), “Marketing and the meaning of
postmodern consumer culture”, in Brownlie,
D. et al. (Eds), Rethinking Marketing: New
Perspectives on the Discipline and Profession,
Warwick Business School Research Bureau,
Coventry.
England, P. (1993), “The separative self: androcen-
tric bias in neoclassical assumptions”, in
Ferber, M.A. and Nelson, J.A. (Eds), Beyond
Economic Man, University of Chicago Press,
Chicago, IL, pp. 36-53.
Fennell, G. (1985), “Things of heaven and earth:
phenomenology, marketing and consumer
research”, Advances in Consumer Research,
Vol. 12, pp. 544-9.
Firat, A.F. and Venkatesh, A. (1993), “Post-moder-
nity: the age of marketing”, International
Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 10,
North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 227-49.
Frederick, C. (1929), Selling Mrs Consumer, The
Business Bourse, New York, NY.
Frye, M. (1990), “The possibility of feminist the-
ory”, in Rhode, D.L. (Ed.), Theoretical Perspec-
tives on Sexual Difference, Yale University
Press, New Haven, CT, pp. 174-84.
Gagnier, R. (1990), “Feminist postmodernism: the
end of feminism or the ends of theory”, in
Rhode, D.L. (Ed.), Theoretical Perspectives of
Sexual Difference, Yale University Press, New
Haven, CT, pp. 21-32.
Gergen, M.M. (1988), “Toward a feminist metathe-
ory and methodology in the social sciences”,
in Gergen, M.M. (Ed.), Feminist Thought and
the Structure of Knowledge, New York Univer-
sity Press, New York, NY, pp. 87-104.
Hirschman, E.C. (1991), “A feminist critique of
marketing theory: toward agentic-command
balance”, in Costa (Ed.), Gender and Con-
sumer Behaviour, University of Utah, Salt
Lake City, UT, pp. 324-40.
Hirschman, E.C. (1993), “Ideology in consumer
research, 1980 and 1990: a Marxist and femi-
nist critique”, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 19, March, pp. 537-55.
Hirschman, E.C. and Holbrook, M.B. (1986),
“Expanding the ontology and methodology of
research on the consumption experience”, in
Brinberg, D. and Lutz, R.J. (Eds), Perspectives
on Methodology in Consumer Research,
Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, pp. 213-44.
Holbrook, M. (1987), “What is consumer
research?”, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 14, June, pp. 128-32.
Knights, D., Odih, P. and Lewis, B. (1993), “Gender,
time and financial services consumption”,
paper presented at the Re-thinking Marketing
Conference, Warwick Business School, July.
Lutz, R.B. (1991), “Editorial”, Journal of Con-
sumer Research, Vol. 17 No. 4.
Murray, J.B. and Ozanne, J.L. (1991), “The critical
imagination: emancipatory interests in
consumer research”, Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 18, September, pp. 129-44.
Oakley, A. (1981), “Interviewing women: a contra-
diction in terms”, in Roberts, H. (Ed.), Doing
Feminist Research, Routledge, London.
Olander, F. (1993), “Consumer psychology for the
consumer’s sake?”, Journal of Economic
Psychology, Vol. 14, North-Holland, Amster-
dam, pp. 565-76.
Oleson, V. (1994), “Feminist and models of qualita-
tive research”, in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln,
Y.S. (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research,
Sage, Beverley Hills, CA and London.
Peter, J.P. (1990), “Philosophical tensions and
consumer inquiry”, in Kassarjian, H. and
Robertson, T. (Eds), Handbook of Consumer
Theory and Research, Prentice-Hall, Engle-
wood Cliffs, NJ.
Richins, M.L. (1991), “Social comparison and the
idealized images of advertising”, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 18, June, pp. 71-83.
Ryan, M.J. (1986), “Implications from the “old’ and
‘new’ physics for studying buyer behaviour”,
in Brinberg, D. and Lutz, R. (Eds), Perspectives
on Methodology in Consumer Research,
Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, pp. 37-63.
Stacey, J. (1993), “Untangling feminist theory”, in
Richardson, D. and Robinson, V. (Eds), Intro-
[ 17 ]
Helen R. Woodruffe ducing Women’s Studies, Macmillan, London,
Methodological issues in pp. 49-73.
consumer research: towards Stern, B. (1993), “Feminist literary criticism and
a feminist perspective the deconstruction of ads: a postmordern
Marketing Intelligence & view of advertising and consumer responses”,
Planning Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 19, March,
14/2 [1996] 13–18 pp. 556-66.
Thompson, C.J., Locander, W.B. and Pollio, H.R.
(1989), “Putting consumer experience back
into consumer research: the philosophy and
method of existential-phenomenology”, Jour-
nal of Consumer Research, Vol. 16, pp. 133-45.
Woth, L.T., Smith, J. and Mackie, D.M. (1982),
“Gender schemacity and preference for gen-
der-typed products”, Psychology and Market-
ing, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 17-30.
Further reading
Bauman, Z. (1988), Freedom, Open University
Press, Milton Keynes, cited in Warde (1992).
Bergson, H. (1902), “L’effort intellectuel”, Revue
Philosophique de la France et de L’Etranger,
No. 53, pp. 1-27, cited in Hirschman and Hol-
brook (1986).
Berkeley, G. (1971), “A treatise concerning the
principles of human knowledge”, Scholar
Press, Maston, Aldershot, cited in Hirschman
and Holbrook (1986).
[ 18 ]
Elliott, R. (1994), “Addictive consumption: func-
tion and fragmentation in postmodernity”,
Journal of Consumer Policy, Vol. 17 No. 2.
Elliott, R., Eccles, S. and Hodson, M. (1993), “Re-
coding gender representations: women, clean-
ing products, and advertising’s ‘new man’”,
International Journal of Research in Market-
ing, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 311-24.
Featherstone, M. (1990), “Perspectives on con-
sumer culture”, Sociology, Vol. 24 No. 1.
Fraser, N. (1991), “What’s critical about critical
theory? The case of Habermas and gender”, in
Shanley, M.L. and Pateman, C. (Eds), Feminist
Intepretations and Political Theory, Blackwell,
Oxford.
Gronmo, S. (1988), “Compensatory consumer
behaviour: elements of a critical sociology of
consumption”, in Otnes, P. (Ed.), The
Sociology of Consumption, Solum Forag/
Humanities Press, New York, NY.
Jahoda, M., Lazarsfeld, P.F. and Zeisel, H. (1993),
“Die Arbeitslosen von Marienthal”, Hirzel,
Leipzig, cited in Gronmo (1988).
Warde, A. (1992), “Notes on the relationship
between production and consumption”, in
Burrows, R. and Marsh, C. (Eds), Consumption
and Class, Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp. 15-31.