ASSOCIATION FOR CONSUMER RESEARCH

Labovitz School of & , University of Minnesota Duluth, 11 E. Superior Street, Suite 210, Duluth, MN 55802

Living Legacies: Exploring Influences on Family Consumption Behavior Session Chair: Eric Arnould, University of Nebraska Discussion Leader: Suraj Commuri, University of Missouri

Living Legacies: Exploring Influences on Family Consumption BehaviorSession Chair: Eric J. Arnould, University of ArizonaDiscussant: Suraj Commuri, University of MissouriEnacting the Family Legacy: How Family Themes Influence Consumption BehaviorAmber M. Epp, University of Nebraska-LincolnEric J. Arnould, University of ArizonaStudied across diverse disciplines, researchers have demonstrated that family legacies are powerful drivers of behavior, but consumer researchers lack an understanding of how legacies shape consumption-related behavior in particular. Specifically, this study explores how families’ intangible legacies or narrative themes influence family consumption behavior. We examine both the processes of influence and the consumption-related outcomes relevant to identity. Based on projective research and narrative analysis, study findings offer preliminary indications of the diverse and evocative influences that family legacies have on consumer activities and contribute to research streams on collective identity projects, socialization processes and intergenerational transfers. Maybe It IS Your Father’s Oldsmobile: The Symbolic Dimensions of Intergenerationally Transferred Possessions and the Adoption of Corresponding Possession MeaningsCarolyn F. Curasi, Georgia State UniversityAlthough research suggests that some familial possessions serve as symbolic vehicles with the ability to imaginatively extend the family forward in time, the role of possessions in constructing and preserving group identity has received little quantitative research attention. Consumers’ feelings about familial possessions, the symbolic dimensions of these items and the generalizability of these feelings are examined in this personal interview and survey-based research employing a national, random sample. Quantitative and qualitative findings suggest that consumers care very deeply about possessions received from older family members and identify with the values expressed in the accompanying stories. Thus, maybe it is your father’s Oldsmobile. Money and Meaning: The Role of in Inter Vivos GiftingTonya P. Williams, Northwestern University.Money has been recognized as having the potential to transfer meaning based on its sources and uses. The relationship between money, as an asset, and consumer behavior has been examined with a focus on the individual. The intergenerational consumer behavior literature provides theorizing on meaning transfer through possessions. This research seeks to understand intergenerational meaning transfer via assets, an alienable possession. The preliminary analysis of 53 depth interviews provides insight to assets as vehicles for intergenerational meaning transfer and sustenance. A conceptual model centered on social capital is presented as the medium of meaning transfer via assets intergenerationally.

[to cite]: Session Chair: Eric Arnould and Discussion Leader: Suraj Commuri (2006) ,"Living Legacies: Exploring Influences on Family Consumption Behavior", in NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 33, eds. Connie Pechmann and Linda Price, Duluth, MN : Association for Consumer Research, Pages: 82-86.

[url]: http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/12392/volumes/v33/NA-33

[copyright notice]: This work is copyrighted by The Association for Consumer Research. For permission to copy or use this work in whole or in part, please contact the Copyright Clearance Center at http://www.copyright.com/. SPECIAL SESSION SUMMARY Living Legacies: Exploring Influences on Family Consumption Behavior Eric J. Arnould, University of Arizona Amber M. Epp, University of Nebraska

SPECIAL SESSION OVERVIEW legacies. Williams used in-depth interview data and investigated Family legacy offers a unifying construct through which to the role of inter vivos monetary in transferring shared familial view diverse areas of family consumer research. Family legacies meanings. To summarize, the session examined legacies of beliefs, are studied across disciplines including family therapy (Gold and values, and family meanings that can be passed across generations Morris 2003; King and Wynne 2004;), psychology (Bennett, Wolin of family and are central to a collective sense of identity. and McAvity 1988), family studies (Piercy and Chapman 2001), Drawing on his knowledge and research on families, Suraj accounting (Swaim 2004), communication studies (Vangelisti, Commuri served as discussion leader in the session. Commuri’s Crumley and Baker 1999), literature (Stone 1988) and family thoughtful commentary sparked discussion on the career of com- nursing (Plager 1999). With its origins entrenched in the psychol- mitment to a legacy, considering the formation, acquisition, adap- ogy and family therapy literatures, researchers often focus on how tation and reformation of legacies over time. Specifically, audience to change or re-edit the family legacy, as a way of transforming members contemplated the process of legacy transformation, sur- negative and constraining themes. Few researchers have examined vival and failure in light of disruptions, such as when associated positive outcomes related to family legacies. objects, possessions or alienable assets are destroyed. Plager (1999) defines legacy as “a living tradition, an aspect of the family’s life world reshaped over time in a family’s particular “Enacting the Family Legacy: How Family Themes situation and influenced by family, , and ” (p. 52). Influence Consumption Behavior” Family legacies are built, preserved, enacted, and fluctuate. They Amber M. Epp, University of Nebraska-Lincoln are living traditions that both the tacit and explicit consumer Eric J. Arnould, University of Arizona behaviors of families continuously amend and rework. Finally, and Consumer researchers have demonstrated links between fami- most importantly for consumer researchers, the family myths, life lies’ consumption behavior and their collective identities (Belk themes, and group conceptions that form a significant part of 1988; Epp and Price 2005; McCracken 1989; Moisio, Price and legacies influence people’s lives as consumers and beyond (Bennett, Arnould 2004). Constituted within a family’s identity, overarching Wolin and McAvity 1988; Papp and Imber-Black 1996). While family themes or legacies have been recognized by scholars and intergenerational studies in consumer research reveal that con- clinical practitioners alike. Family themes can reflect shared values sumption practices are transferred between generations (Moore- related to work, religion and family life (King and Wynne 2004). Shay and Lutz 1988; Moore, Wilkie and Lutz 2002), fewer studies For instance, common legacies reported by the families in our could be classified as exploring the centrality of family legacies in sample included legacies of close/supportive, faith/service, health/ this arena (Curasi, Price and Arnould 2004; Kozinets et al. 2005). athletics, hard work, and others. While family legacies are powerful Whether family members wholeheartedly embrace their family drivers of behavior (Papp and Imber-Black 1996), we know little legacies or vehemently reject them, research suggests that family about their influences on consumption-related behavior in particu- members are undeniably influenced by their family legacies (Stone lar. As such, the research question guiding this paper is “how do 1988). family legacies/themes influence family consumption behavior?” Exploring new theoretical and empirical views of family Specifically, we examined the intersection of socialization pro- consumption behavior as it relates to families’ intergenerational cesses, family legacy enactment and consumption outcomes. legacies, the session addressed family legacies in the form of lasting This project draws on a model of family identity enactment, themes or family myths that shape behavior and through an exami- which posits that families enact their identities in various commu- nation of both alienable and inalienable that represent and nication forms such as , narratives, intergenerational trans- constitute intergenerational family legacies. Collectively, the pa- fers, and everyday interactions, and that consumer activities serve pers represent meso-level theorizing of family consumption behav- as symbols of family identity enactment (Epp and Price 2005). Our ior. The papers drew on a variety of disciplinary and methodologi- current paper extends this idea by examining family legacies as the cal approaches that made the session dynamic and enlightening. embodiment of a family’s identity. It argues that consumption We began our exploration of family legacies with a presenta- behaviors are one way in which families enact their legacies. tion by Amber Epp, co-authored with Eric Arnould, underscoring We employed a projective technique which is an appropriate how family legacies, conceptualized as lasting themes, influence method for “understanding consumers’ inner thoughts and consumption behavior. This presentation examined both the pro- feelings…[about] what consumers often cannot or will not verbal- cesses of influence and consumption-related outcomes. In other ize in more direct, verbal measures such as interviews and surveys” words, these researchers examined how family legacies influence (Chang 2001, p. 253). Following Belk, Ger and Askegaard (1997, consumption behavior in families. The first presentation extended 2003), we used projectives to elicit participants’ family themes. on prior theoretical research that posited a model of family identity Forty participants constructed collages representing their families’ enactment (Epp and Price 2005) and described the results of a study identities and wrote essays detailing their interpretations. The based on projective techniques. The second presentation by Carolyn interpretations were filled with narratives about their families, and Curasi addressed the distinctive value of inalienable wealth in family legacies were prominently featured in the data. Analysis of embodying and transmitting family legacies across generations of written narratives is consistent with the dominant methods for family. This paper, based on an ongoing study of inalienable studying family legacies (Androutsopoulou 2001; Vangelisti et al. wealth, examined dyadic depth interview and survey data. The third 1999). presentation by Tonya Williams explored alienable assets, in the To outline our theoretical contributions, we review relevant form of money, as a resource for building and transferring family literature across disciplines beginning with how family legacies are 82 Advances in Consumer Research Volume 33, © 2006 Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 33) / 83 passed between and within generations of family. The literature toward consumption. Whereas, legacies of health, education, hard addressing this process mirrors socialization processes in consumer work, and closeness were related to the products these families research that focus on family communication patterns (John 1999; purchased. This is surprising because it seems that if legacies Moschis 1985). For instance, a wide body of research connects the provide a blueprint for action, each of the legacies should direct transmission of legacies to family storytelling (Fiese et. al. 1995, consumption behavior. The content of the legacy should not matter, King and Wynne 2004; Vangelisti et al. 1999). In addition, Bolea but it does! More research is needed to delineate these differential (2000) asserts that each generation influences the philosophies and relationships. themes of descendants through direct messages and replication of Papp and Imber-Black (1996) demonstrate that themes oper- behavior. Similarly, Stone (1988) describes evidence of families ate at many levels and trace the evolution of themes using a family member as a model for the legacies or themes they intergenerationally. The last pattern that emerged from the data was wish to reproduce. Other forms of transmission include “kin keep- that in families with strong intergenerational influences, legacies ing” practices like sharing family photos or passing on family were reflected in more categories of consumer behavior. For these recipes, music, or rituals. Finally, family legacies can be preserved, participants, legacies that could be traced through their families to constructed and enacted in the transmission of families’ inalienable their grandparents or even great-grandparents seemed to be more wealth (Curasi et al. 2004). pervasive with regard to consumption outcomes. The While our findings confirm the transmission of legacies through intergenerational literature reveals that families transfer brands, narratives, family interaction, modeling, and verbal instruction, we attitudes and behaviors across generations (Moore, Wilkie and Lutz found that enacting and passing on legacies within the family is 2002). However, consumer researchers have yet to delineate what complex. Specifically, our data reveal the relationship between a differentiates families who engage in intergenerational transfers family’s legacies and individual family members’ commitment to from those who do not. We speculate that family legacies offer one those legacies is dynamic. In some cases, individuals embraced underlying process for explaining intergenerational consumption and/or extended the legacies and in other cases, participants re- practices. jected the legacies. Thus, consumer socialization is challenged, contested and fueled by activities related to family legacies. In “Maybe it IS Your Father’s Oldsmobile: The Construction addition, scholars should pay attention to family legacies because and Preservation of Family Identity through the Transfer of they moderate the formation and development of both familial and Possessions” individual identity projects. Carolyn F. Curasi, Georgia State University A few important questions emerged from this data that we In recent years there has been a growing body of literature could not address in this study. First, how do differences in providing insights about familial and individuals’ cherished pos- commitment to family legacies relate to consumption outcomes? sessions. These investigations, however, are typically qualitative We might speculate that when individuals embrace family legacies, projects with small purposive samples that could be influenced by we would see continuity in family identity, a continuance of self selection bias. This research project seeks to examine the intergenerational transfers and loyalty to products, brands, or pervasiveness of some of the most common themes emanating from activities that support that legacy. On the other hand, when family these previous investigations. In exploring family possession trans- members reject legacies, we might observe tension between indi- fers and the associated family identity that may also transfer, many vidual and family identity, adoption of alternative consumption literature streams inform this investigation including: cherished behaviors, and dissipation of intergenerational transfers related to possessions; identity and values; intergenerationally transferred the legacy. Second, what might we learn by adopting a developmen- possessions; family communication; storytelling; and human tal perspective? Just as dominant narratives and are memory. challenged, reshaped and sustained, examining family legacy en- Possessions play a profound role in the construction and actment over time might suggest that family legacies that are preservation of personal identity (Csikszentmihalyi and Rochberg- inconsistent or rejected are, at that particular point in time, being Halton 1981; Mehta and Belk 1991; Belk 1988; Gentry, Baker, and challenged by individual family members. This would suggest that Kraft 1995; Kleine, Kleine, and Allen 1995). We are able to extend rejection/inconsistency is part of the process of reshaping legacies ourselves and thus our identities through our possessions, our over time. family members and the within which we are embedded Researchers have also demonstrated direct links between (Belk 1988). Some familial possessions serve as symbolic vehicles family legacies and behavioral outcomes. For instance, as Papp and with the ability to extend the familial group forward in time. Imber-Black (1996) argue, central themes underpin individual and Through the achievements of our ancestors we are able to bask in family decisions and behaviors. As such, our behaviors, and subse- the glories of their accomplishments (Curasi, Price and Arnould quent stories about our behaviors, reinforce the family legacy 2004; Weiner 1994). (Stone 1988). Further, themes “regulate interaction with the exter- Individual’s values are deeply patterned and personal, essen- nal world and can influence interpersonal involvement within the tial for understanding our personal identity. We become committed family” (Bennett, Wolin and McAvity 1988, p. 212). Emergent to those identities that best enable us to express values we feel most themes in our data offer indications of the diverse and evocative strongly about (Erickson 1995; Gecas 1986; Hitlin 2003). Although influences that family legacies have on consumption behavior, the role of possessions in constructing and preserving personal particularly related to collective identity. In particular, families in identity has received a great deal of attention, the role of possessions our study selected consumer activities based on their fit with the in the construction and definition of family identity has received legacy: shaping the activities and services families elected to relatively little research attention (Epp and Price 2005). participate in, the products and brands they selected, their attitudes Possessions transferred intergenerationally are bundled with toward media and in a few cases, their decision-making processes. object stories, serving as a means to educate and socialize younger Interestingly, legacy types were differentially related to consump- family members (Price, Arnould and Curasi 2000). The stories we tion outcomes. For instance, legacies of sophistication, frugality, hear in early childhood become important frames of reference or and hard work were reflected in the attitudes family members had mental models that later influence our behavior, including our 84 / Living Legacies: Exploring Influences on Family Consumption Behavior consumption behavior (Connerton 1995; Schank 1996; Zaltman attaching storytelling to cherished family possessions increases the 2003). We remember by telling stories (Engel 1999; Schank and potential for future family members to be educated about the values Abelson 1995) and thus, family stories attached to tangible objects viewed as important by the older members of the family (Connerton such as family heirlooms can be a very effective way to communi- 1995). This research suggests that there is a pervasive desire to learn cate rich life lessons to younger family members. family stories and to pass those forward through the lineage. This project took place in two phases. First, qualitative data This research stream could benefit from data that includes were examined for overarching themes. In addition, family posses- respondents that were under-represented in this sample, such as sion origin stories were examined for the lessons and values Hispanics and African-Americans as well as a larger percentage of communicated by the retelling of these stories. In the second younger informants. phase of this project the pervasiveness of the main themes generated in the first phase of this project were examined with data from a “Money and Meaning: The Role of Social Bonds and Capital random, national mailed sample collected in the spring of 2005. in Inter Vivos Gifting” Two hundred and fifty three respondents between the ages of 18 and Tonya P. Williams, Northwestern University 93 responded, for approximately a nine percent response rate. Possession stories commonly included lessons that served to …as I was graduating from college, I was about 22, and my teach and communicate with younger family members about strongly Dad told me to invest at least $100 each month… my Dad’s held family values. These possession stories were thick with instruction is partly responsible for me deciding that I wanted messages about family values, and illustrated family values such as: to become a millionaire by the age of 40. (African-American, the status and esteem of the family lineage and name, valuing of art Male, 30s) and culture, the innate ability of the lineage to overcome hardship; the importance of carefully selecting a spouse; patriotism; the I grew up in a family business–the family was a part of the importance of family and marriage; and the valuing of religion. business and the business was a part of the family…. (White In addition, supporting previous investigations, many of our Female, 40s) informants communicated their desire to know that their cherished family possessions would be passed forward through their lineage. My aunt owned this salon–she moved into the building when Our informants discussed their hope that younger family members it was first built and I worked with her when I was younger...I would understand and pass forward the possession stories as well as came back…when she retired…I kept some of her clients the favorite object. In depth interviews informants discuss their too… (African-American Female, 50s) heirlooms as being their heritage, reflecting their personal identity. The quantitative results suggest that many of the responses of …on my 8th birthday my grandfather anointed me the future informants in the qualitative research can be generalized to a far leader of two large corporations… inheriting Coca-Cola stock larger population. For example, to the statement, “My most cher- developed [business] interests which are now managed by the ished possessions reflect who I am,” sixty-seven percent of our 4th generation of our family... (White Male, 80s) sample agreed. Almost as many, sixty-one percent, of our infor- mants also agreed with the statement, “My family possessions Consumer research includes several facets of the consumption communicate our family values.” A very large percentage of experience, yet the literature is sparse on the role of assets in respondents, eighty-six percent, agreed with the statement, “I hope consumption. In the lives of these informants and extant literature my loved ones will care about my cherished possessions.” Ninety- we observe that assets encompass, imbue, and transfer meanings five percent of respondents also revealed they plan to pass on family (Belk and Wallendorf 1990). I examine inter vivos asset gifting to possessions to family members. Responses to these statements as construct a theory of how alienable assets transfer meaning in well as others in the survey provide preliminary evidence that the contemporary American families. My research considers the allo- ideas and intentions of many informants in previous interpretive cation of assets to mental and emotional budgets and the role of the investigations can be found in the general population. Respondents respective budgets in meaning transfer. also reveal a strong symbolic element to their most cherished Gifts are the most common type of assistance between genera- possessions that gave these items a value that far exceeded their tions (Cheal 1996). giving is an embedded process of social monetary value. exchange and communication (Mauss 1967; Sherry 1983) serving Consistent with a growing body of qualitative research, a to establish, maintain, and alter social roles (Otnes et al. 1993). majority of respondents: feel that their cherished possessions re- Further, gifts serve higher- order needs of love and self-actualiza- flect who they are; hope that their loved ones will care about their tion (Belk 1996). The propensity to provide an inter vivos asset gift cherished possessions; plan to pass on family possessions to family is related to an individual’s access to means, desire, and available members; and feel their family possessions communicate their transfer options. Wealth in America is equally distributed across family values. The comments, attitudes and hopes reflected in three categories: business and , home equity, and stocks qualitative research projects were found to be pervasive in the and bonds, though there are differences in asset composition across national, random mailed survey. class (Weicher 1997). Very wealthy Americans have income pro- Values are communicated and transferred via the stories that ducing assets, such as , real estate, equities, or trusts, are bundled with cherished possessions. These stories serve as an typically involving enduring relationships. The majority of the extremely effective format with which to teach and communicate population have assets resulting from specific transactions requir- family identity and family values (Connerton 1995; Zaltman 2003). ing minimal relationship persistence, such as the purchase of Thus, this research suggests that consumers are socialized about principal residences, automobiles, or life insurance (Kennickell et those values that their older family members hold dear via the al. 1996). Though few inherit, many receive inter vivos asset gifts. storytelling rituals associated with intergenerationally transferred Americans’ acquisition thirst has been studied broadly, how- possessions. Because the human mind functions not by processing ever there is a dearth of research concerning assets individuals use letters and words but through processing images, and metaphors, to achieve goals. Money has a social component, though few Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 33) / 85 researchers have considered money beyond a vehicle of exchange Cheal, David (1996), “Gifts in Contemporary North America,” (Zelizer 1989; Zhou and Pham 2004). Gifts of alienable assets have in Gift Giving: A Research Anthology, Cele Otnes and not been broadly studied, however relationships supporting gifting Richard Beltramine, Eds. Bowling Green: Bowling Green of heirlooms have been examined and contributed to theories of State University Popular Press. meaning transfer (Curasi et al. 2003; Price et al. 2000). Researchers Cheal, David (1988), . Cambridge: University have also shown that alienable assets are imbued with meaning and Press. emotion (Belk and Wallendorf 1990), yet the literature is silent Connerton, Paul (1999), How Remember. Cambridge, regarding gifts of alienable assets as vehicles for transferring UK: Cambridge University Press. meaning. Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly and Eugene Rochberg-Halton (1981), Family, consumption, and wealth accumulation have been The Meaning of Things: Domestic Symbols of the Self, primarily examined through the frame of the life cycle model, and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. non-income related influencers. Family and non-income related Curasi, Carolyn Folkman, Linda L. Price and Eric J. Arnould influencers have been included in the study of meaning creation and (2004), “How Individuals’ Cherished Possessions Become transfer in consumer behavior (Curasi et al. 2003; Otnes et al. 1993; Families’ Inalienable Wealth,” Journal of Consumer Price et al. 2000). Consumer researchers have examined gift giving Research, 31 (3), 609-623. as transferring family legacy, or achieving symbolic immortality Engel, Susan (1999), Context is Everything: The Nature of through tangible possessions. This literature has focused primarily Memory. New York: W.H. Freeman. on the transfer of inalienable possessions (Weiner 1992) and the Epp, Amber M. and Linda L. Price (2005), “Rethinking Family implication for family relationships (Curasi et al. 2003). Though Consumption: An Exploration of Family Identity,” Advances this literature speaks to meaning transfer processes, it does not in Consumer Research, 32, 9-13. address how meaning is maintained across generations when assets Erickson, Rebecca j. (1995), “The Importance of Authenticity have salient alienable characteristics. for Self and Society,” Symbolic Interaction, 18, 121-144. The role of money as a vehicle for meaning as well as a Fiese, Barbara H., Karen A. Hooker, Lisa Kotary, Janet resource for consumption is a critical piece of the consumer Schwagler, and Meredith Rimmer (1995), “Family Stories in behavior puzzle. Through understanding how individuals acquire the Early Stages of Parenthood,” Journal of Marriage and and account for resources, I present a model of alienable assets as the Family, 57, 763-770. vehicles of meaning transfer. The model put forth describes how Gecas, Viktor, (1986), “The Motivational Significance of Self assets traverse market and family space as well as mental and Concept for Socialization Theory,” in The Self-Society emotional budgets in the creation and transfer of meaning across Dynamic: Cognition, Emotion, and Action, edited by Judith relationships. A. Howard and Peter L. Callero. New York: Cambridge University Press. REFERENCES Gentry, Jim, Stacey Menzel Baker and Frederic B. Kraft (1995), Androutsopoulou, Athena (2001), “The Self-Characterization as “The Role of Possessions in Creating, Maintaining, and a Narrative Tool: Applications in Therapy with Individuals Preserving One’s Identity: Variations Over the Life Course,” and Families,” Family Process, 40, 70-95. Advances in Consumer Research, 22, 413-18. Belk, Russell (1988), “Possessions and the Extended Self,” Gold, Joshua M. and Gretchen M. Morris (2003), “Family Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (September), 139-168. Resistance to Counseling: The Initial Agenda for Belk, Russell (1996), “The Perfect Gift,” in Gift Giving: A Intergenerational and Narrative Approaches,” Family Research Anthology, Cele Otnes and Richard Beltramine, Journal, 11 (4), 374-380. Eds. Bowling Green: Bowling Green Popular Press. Hitlin, Steven (2003), “Values As the Core of Personal Identity: Belk, Russell W., Guliz Ger and Soren Askegaard (2003), “The Drawing Links Between Two Theories of Self,” Social Fire of Desire: A Multisited Inquiry into Consumer Passion,” Psychology Quarterly, 66 (2), 118-137. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 326-351. John, Deborah Roedder (1999), “Consumer Socialization of Belk, Russell W., Guliz Ger and Soren Askegaard (1997), Children: A Retrospective Look at Twenty-Five Years of “Consumer Desire in Three Cultures: Results from Projective Research,” Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (December), Research,” Advances in Consumer Research, 24, 24-28. 183-213. Belk, Russell W. and Melanie Wallendorf (1990), “The sacred Kennickell, Arthur B., Douglas A. McManus, and R. Louise meanings of money,” Journal of Economic Psychology, 11 Woodburn (1996), “Weighting Design for the 1992 Survey (1), 35-67 of Consumer Finances,” Federal Reserve System, Freddie Bennett, Linda A., Steven J. Wolin, and Katherine J. McAvity Mac, Internal Revenue Service. (1988), “Family Identity, Ritual, and Myth: A Cultural King, Deborah A. and Lyman C. Wynne (2004), “The Emer- Perspective on Life Cycle Transitions,” In Celia Jaes Falicov gence of “Family Integrity” in Later Life,” Family Process, (Ed.), Family Transitions, New York: The Guilford Press. 43, 7-21. Bolea, Patricia Stow (2000), “Talking About Identity: Indi- Kleine, Susan Schultz, Robert E. Kleine III, and Chris T. Allen vidual, Family, and Intergenerational Issues,” In Rena D. (1993), “How is a Possession “Me” or “Not Me?” Character- Harold (Ed.), Becoming A Family: Parent’s Stories and izing Types and an Antecedent of Material Possession Their Implications for Practice, Policy, and Research, New Attachment,” Journal of Consumer Research, 22 (Decem- Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. ber), 327-43. Byng-Hall, John (1998), “Evolving Ideas About Narrative: Re- Kozinets, Robert, John Sherry, Mary Ann McGrath, Stefania editing the Re-editing of Family Borghini, Nina Diamond and Albert Muniz (2005), “Ameri- Mythology. Journal of Family Therapy, 20, 133-141. can Girl: The Family Brand,” Advances in Consumer Chang, Jennifer E. (2001), “The Revival of Projective Tech- Research, 32, 9-13. niques: Past, Present, and Future Perspectives,” Advances in Mauss, Marcel (1967), The Gift. New York: Norton. Consumer Research, 28, 253-254. 86 / Living Legacies: Exploring Influences on Family Consumption Behavior McCracken, Grant (1989), “’Homeyness’ A Cultural Account of Zaltman, Gerald (2003), How Customers Think: Essential One Constellation of Consumer and Meanings,” Insights into the Mind of the Market. Harvard Business Interpretive Consumer Research, Elizabeth Hirschman, ed., School Press: Boston, Massachusetts. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 168-183. Zelizer, Viviana A. (1989), “The Social Meaning of Money: Mehta, Raj and Russell W. Belk (1991), “Artifacts, Identity, and “Special Monies”,” American Journal of Sociology, 95 (2), Transition: Favorite Possessions of Indians and Indian 342-77. Immigrants to the United States,” Journal of Consumer Zhou, Rongrong and Michel Tuan Pham (2004), “Promotion and Research, 17, 398-411. Prevention across Mental Accounts: When Financial Moisio, Risto, Eric J. Arnould, and Linda L. Price (2004), Products Dictate Consumers’ Investment Goals,” Journal of “Between Mothers and Markets,” Journal of Consumer Consumer Research, 31, 125-35. Culture, 4(3), 361-385. Moore, Elizabeth S., William L. Wilkie & Richard J. Lutz (2002), “Passing the Torch: Intergenerational Influences as a Source of Brand Equity” Journal of Marketing, 66 (April), 17-37. Moore-Shay, Elizabeth S. and Richard J. Lutz (1988), “Intergenerational Influences in the Formation of Consumer Attitudes and Beliefs About the Marketplace: Mothers and Daughters,” Advances in Consumer Research, 15, 461-467. Moschis, George P. (1985), “The Role of Family Communica- tion in Consumer Socialization of Children and Adoles- cents,” Journal of Consumer Research, 11, 898-913. Otnes, Cele, Tina M Lowrey, and Young Chan Kim (1993), “Gift Selection for Easy and Difficult Recipients: A Social Roles Interpretation,” Journal of Consumer Research, 20 (2), 229. Papp, Peggy and Evan Imber-Black (1996), “Family Themes: Transmission and Transformation,” Family Process, 35, 5- 20. Piercy, Kathleen W. and Jeffery G. Chapman (2001), “Adopting the Caregiver Role: A Family Legacy,” Family Relations, 50(4), 386-394. Plager, Karen A. (1999), “Understanding Family Legacy in Family Health Concerns,” Journal of Family Nursing, 5 (1), 51-71. Price, Linda L, Eric J Arnould, and Carolyn Folkman Curasi (2000), “Older consumers’ disposition of special posses- sions,” Journal of Consumer Research, 27 (2), 179. Schank, Roger C., (1996), Tell Me a Story: A New Look at Real and Artificial Memory. New York: W. H. Scribners. Schank, Roger C., and R. P. Abelson, (1995), “Knowledge and Memory: The Real Story,” Advances in Social Cognition, 8, 33-43. Sherry, John F., Jr. (1983), “Gift Giving: An Anthropological Perspective,” Journal of Consumer Research, 10 (2), 157. Stone, Elizabeth (1988), Black Sheep and Kissing Cousins: How our Family Stories Shape Us (pp. 165-195), New York, Times books. Swaim, Mike (2004), “Wealthy Client Advisor,” Journal of Practice Management, 3(1), 9-12. Thomas, Nicholas (1991), Entangled Objects: Exchange, Material Culture, and in the Pacific. Cam- bridge: Harvard University Press. Vangelisti, Anita L., Linda P. Crumley, and Jennifer L. Baker (1999), “Family Portraits: Stories as Standards for Family Relationships,” Journal or Social and Personal Relationships, 16, 335-368. Weicher, John C (1997), “Increasing inequality of wealth?,” Public Interest (126), 15. Weiner, Annette B., (1994), Cultural Difference and the Density of Objects,” American Ethnologist, 21 (1), 391-403.