National Differences in Materialism—Using Alternative Research Strategies to Explore the Construct

Abstract

One of the core objectives in cross-national marketing research is to establish research results which are comparable across national entities. Nevertheless, certain national idiosyncrasies (unique meaning of constructs, distinctive expressions) may hamper these cross-national research endeavors. Two different approaches have been introduced in the social sciences, in order to cope with this comparability-dilemma. The “emic” and the “etic” school of thought. These can be seen as two extremes on the continuum of cross-national research methodology. The paper tries to illustrate advantages and potential shortcomings of the etic (mostly quantitative) vs. the emic (mostly qualitative) research approach. A combination of alternative, qualitative and quantitative research strategies was used to explore national differences in materialism. A questionnaire was developed comprising both qualitative and quantitative sections on materialism. The materialism scale, as operationalized by Richins and Dawson (1992), was used for the quantitative section. The research findings call for the use of “alternative research strategies” to overcome the emic/etic duality in cross-national research. Comparative text analysis and graphical representations of consumers' statements can help to explore the reasons for conceptual differences.