Authenticity in Consumption

838

� 2009 by JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH, Inc. ● Vol. 36 ● February 2010All rights reserved. 0093-5301/2010/3605-0011$10.00. DOI: 10.1086/615047

The Quest for Authenticity in Consumption:Consumers’ Purposive Choice of AuthenticCues to Shape Experienced Outcomes

MICHAEL B. BEVERLANDFRANCIS J. FARRELLY*

Drawing from image-elicited depth interviews, we investigate whether consumerspursue the consumption of authentic objects with specific personal goals in mind.We find that consumers are motivated to focus on those particular cues in objectsthat for them convey authenticity (what is genuine, real, and/or true) and that thisdecision-making process is driven by a desire to draw different identity benefits(control, connection, virtue) from authentic objects. Our interpretive analysis elab-orates contributions to theorizing related to consumer agency in seeking authenticconsumption experience. We provide cultural explanations for the desire to assertthe authentic self in these particular ways.

The nature of authenticity in consumption is contested.Researchers explain authenticity as original and staged

(MacCannell 1973), fabricated (Belk and Costa 1998), iconic,indexical, and hypothetical (Grayson and Martinec 2004), self-referential hyperauthenticity (Rose and Wood 2005), symbolic(Culler 1981), existential (Wang 1999), literal or objective(Beverland, Lindgreen, and Vink 2008), legitimate (Kates2004), sincere (Beverland 2006), approximate and moral(Leigh, Peters, and Shelton 2006), and emergent (Cohen1988). Differences also emerge as to the nature of the objects(or cues) that can convey authenticity. For example, authen-ticity has been identified in the patently fake (Brown 2001),obvious reproductions (Bruner 1994), and mundane mass-market objects (Miller 2008), while others consider such ex-amples the very antithesis of authenticity (Eco 1986).

What can account for such difference in conceptualizations,objects, and cues? Our findings help to explain this diversityby demonstrating that the process of authenticating an object

*Michael B. Beverland is professor of marketing, School of Economics,Finance and Marketing, RMIT University, GPO Box 2476V, Melbourne, VIC3001, Australia ([email protected]; [email protected]).Francis Farrelly is associate professor of marketing, Department of Marketing,Monash University, Caulfield East, VIC 3145, Australia ([email protected]). The authors contributed equally and are listed inalphabetical order. We thank Kay Laochumanvanit for technical assistanceand the Australian Research Council (ARC-DP0985178) for financial support.Thanks also to Tandy Chalmers, Carla Taines, Kelly Tian, the editors, andthree reviewers for feedback on earlier versions of this article.

John Deighton served as editor and Eric Arnould served as associate editorfor this article.

Electronically published August 19, 2009

or experience is contingent on the consumer’s goals. In doingso, we extend previous research identifying the relationshipbetween goals and authenticating acts (“self-referential be-haviors that reveal or produce the true self”; Arnould andPrice 2000, 8), a focus on sincerity of intent in defining anauthentic member of a subculture (Belk and Costa 1998;Leigh et al. 2006), the relationship between shifting com-munity goals and the nature of brand authenticity (Kates2004), and the active information processing strategies em-ployed to find authenticity in the less likely of objects suchas reality television (Rose and Wood 2005) and fictional tour-ist sites (Grayson and Martinec 2004). Rose and Wood (2005)note that much may be gleaned by better understanding how“personal predilections” shape the way authenticity is con-structed. To this end we seek to account for what constitutesauthenticity by examining how goals underpin assessmentsof authenticity including the purposive strategies employedby consumers to achieve this assessment.

This article has the following structure. First, we providesupport for the relationship between consumer goals andauthenticity through a brief review of the relevant litera-ture. Second, we outline the interpretive methods em-ployed to address our research objectives. Third, we pre-sent our findings and identify three goals underpinningself-relevant assessments of authenticity (control, connec-tion, and virtue). We also provide a sociocultural accountfor these findings and identify four strategies employed byconsumers when conferring authenticity to an object. Weconclude the article with a discussion of theoretical con-tributions and suggestions for future research.

THE QUEST FOR AUTHENTICITY IN CONSUMPTION 839

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND:AUTHENTICITY AND CONSUMER GOALS

The notion that assessments of authenticity in objects areunderpinned by consumer goals is based on the notion thatconsumers actively seek authenticity to find meaning in theirlives, and in line with associated personal goals (self-rele-vant objectives people pursue in their daily lives; Emmons2005) prefer brands and experiences that reinforce their de-sired identity (or identities). Arnould and Price (2000) offerinsight into why such goals have become a critical part ofthe authentication process. They establish that the loss oftraditional sources of meaning and self-identity associatedwith postmodern market characteristics (caused by global-ization, deterritorialization, and hyperreality) has encour-aged consumers to become active and adept in appropriatingauthenticity.

Often described in terms of a “search” or “quest,” thedesire for authenticity is also said to be a response tostandardization and homogenization in the marketplace(Thompson, Rindfleisch, and Arsel 2006). Arnould andPrice (2000) identify two means of appropriating authen-ticity to achieve self-authentication. The first is where theconsumer cocreates product value or a consumption expe-rience as part of self-authentication (an authenticating act).The second, described as authoritative performance, is acultural display (such as rituals, festivals, or protest actions)representative of a social unit (e.g., family, affinity group,profession, and ethnic group) and what the consumer deemsare important aspects of life. Common to both is that theconsumer is purposeful in linking the object or experienceto stories of the self.

There is widespread agreement that authenticity is a so-cially constructed interpretation of the essence of what isobserved rather than properties inherent in an object (Bev-erland 2006; Beverland et al. 2008; Grayson and Martinec2004; Rose and Wood 2005; Thompson et al. 2006). Con-sistent with goal-driven behavior, the essence of what isobserved can represent who one desires to be (Cohen 1988;Culler 1981; Ferrara 1988; Postrel 2003), a personal pointof view (Wang 1999), knowledge and expectations (Belkand Costa 1998; Holt 1998) including a person’s need tomatch the object with their idea of how it should be (Graysonand Martinec 2004), and belief systems and stereotypes(Bruner 1994; Rose and Wood 2005). The link betweengoals and authenticity is also evident across the literatureon subcultures of consumption and brand communities withrespect to the consumer’s purposeful efforts to participateand gain status (such as consuming the “right” brand orengaging in legitimate behavior; Kates 2004; Leigh et al.2006; Quester, Beverland, and Farrelly 2006).

Bruner (1994) and numerous others (Arnould and Price2000; Chronis and Hampton 2008; Leigh et al. 2006; Postrel2003; Rose and Wood 2005; Wang 1999) have pointed outthat the meaning given to authenticity is context and goaldependent. Different interpretations of authenticity are oftena by-product of the personal goals that influence which prop-

erties of a context are uniquely identified as significant andrelevant. In the case of the New Salem site Bruner discusses,some visitors gave preferential treatment to nostalgia for asimpler bygone era. For others authenticity was conferredif the site catalyzed ideas around progress. The goals thatdistinguish the curator from the merchandise seller, the fam-ily, or the teacher who brings students to the site for edu-cational purposes underpin different interpretations of whatis authentic.

It has also been demonstrated that the conferring of au-thenticity to an object involves conscious negotiation orproduction of meaning, including the active use of brandcues. For example, Beverland et al. (2008) consider therelationship between different levels of goals (from situa-tional to identity based) and the degree to which consumersactively scrutinize brand materials. When confronted withthe need to make quick decisions about the authenticity ofa class of beer, for example, consumers reduce claims to afew verifiable indexical cues (see also Chronis and Hampton2008). When seeking long-term identity goals such as sup-porting local communities, consumers drew on a broaderrange of cues to actively construct a sense of authenticitythat reinforced their desired sense of self. Leigh et al.’s(2006) study of the MG brand community identifies thecreative use of cues among community members when as-sessing the authenticity of members. In this case, communitymembers overlook breaches of indexicality (such as modernadaptations to historic sports cars and the use of nonstandardor original parts) and focus on cues that signal the sincerityof the owner’s efforts to maintain public awareness of thebrand.

Two recent studies demonstrate how consumers activelyfind authenticity in seemingly fake or contrived objects. Roseand Wood (2005) reveal how consumers actively negotiatethe paradox between the subjectively real and the contrivedor fantastic to find authenticity in reality television. Under-pinning our view that goals influence assessments of authen-ticity is the observation that Rose and Wood’s (2005) infor-mants were as likely to value the contrived elements of realitytelevision shows as the connections to personal reality becauseboth facilitated purposeful efforts to establish authenticity.Grayson and Martinec (2004) establish that consumers pur-posefully blend fact and fiction to authenticate objects suchas the so-called historical residence of a fictional characterSherlock Holmes. In doing so, these consumers actively con-struct authenticity because they are motivated to realize as-sociated benefits, such as a sense of escape (from the pho-niness associated with modern life), feelings of assuredness(based on perceived evidence that what one believes in isreal), and connection with the past (cf. Rose and Wood 2005).

Significantly, despite the multiplicity of terms and inter-pretations applied to authenticity, ultimately what is consistentacross the literature is that authenticity encapsulates what isgenuine, real, and/or true (Arnould and Price 2000; Bendix1992; Berger 1973; Costa and Bamossy 1995; Thompson etal. 2006). And, as others have highlighted, consumers do notfind authenticity in the fake but rather are able to find elements

840 JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH

TABLE 1

INFORMANT DETAILS

Informant Age Family statusEducationalbackground Profession

Andrew 31 Single Trade certificate Credit controllerAnita 27 Married High school AccountsBernard 39 Single High school UpholstererCaroline 54 Single Postgraduate High school teacherJohn 37 Single Trade certificate Truck driverJudy 51 Married High school Customer serviceKate 46 Married Undergraduate AdministratorLouise 30 Single Postgraduate Human resources managerMario 30 Married High school Business ownerMeg 32 Married Postgraduate Financial analystMichael 55 Married Postgraduate RetireeNick 28 Single Postgraduate AccountantPhil 40 Married Undergraduate SurveyorRenee 23 Single High school Customer service supportRoss 60 Married Postgraduate Managing directorRowena 33 Single High school TempingSandra 37 Married High school Hospitality workerScott 33 Single Postgraduate Channel managerTony 53 Married Undergraduate Plant supervisorWilliam 61 Single Postgraduate Chemical engineerZoe 38 Single High school Sales assistant

of what is genuine, real, or true in consumption experiencesor objects that others may deem to be altogether unreal orfalse (Grayson and Martinec 2004; Rose and Wood 2005).What needs to be better understood is how these differentinterpretations come into being, and it is here that much isto be gained from an exploration of the nature and role ofpersonal goals and their cultural underpinnings.

METHODSAs we are working within the meaning-based tradition of

research, we adopted an interpretative approach. Both authorsconducted all interviews, which were held in the informants’homes. Our primary data were derived from semistructureddepth interviews with 21 informants (see table 1 for details).We used a recruitment agency to locate informants, and weinstructed the agency to provide a diverse sample in termsof age, gender, income, and educational background in orderto gain a rich range of experiences and insights into viewsof authenticity. Long interviews allowed access to consum-ers’ firsthand personal experiences and meanings associatedwith authenticity and inauthenticity. To facilitate articulationof unconscious meanings and motivations, we asked infor-mants to have at hand possessions, pictures, or memorabiliareflective of important experiences and favored (hated) ob-jects. To stimulate further discussion, we developed a fileof around 100 images, including pictures of day-to-day life,tourist sites, historic figures/events and artifacts, local andforeign brands (new and old versions where relevant), andcultural icons such as sporting paraphernalia. The choice ofitems was informed by the literature on authenticity. Theseimages were made available to informants at the interviewafter they had discussed their own objects. These techniques

were particularly useful in facilitating informants to artic-ulate their views of authenticity (cf. Belk, Ger, and Aske-gaard 2003).

The authors asked a mix of grand tour questions andfloating prompts (McCracken 1988). At the beginning ofthe interview, informants were asked to think about thegeneral meaning of authenticity to them. Since the infor-mants would often approach this question with personalstories or experiences, further prompts were used to under-stand the significance of such events. Following a generaldiscussion of authenticity and authentic experiences, we fo-cused on commercial objects, including brands and events.Informants were asked to discuss three brands they thoughtwere authentic and three they considered inauthentic. In-formants selected these from their own experience or fromthe image file discussed earlier. The informants sometimesstruggled initially to define authenticity, and they often en-riched, refined, and in some cases altered their view duringthe interview in a spirit of joint discovery and critical re-flexivity. This enrichment occurred because of the availabilityof prompts and the noninvasive nature of the interviewingand because informants relaxed as they told their stories.Although the interviews were broad and only semistructured,informants were asked to elaborate on various statements theymade; provide more explanation for the experiences, objects,people, advertisements and brands they referred to; and elab-orate on the personal relevance of the subject matter. Giventhis method, informants spoke for virtually the entire period,with the researchers only engaging in floating prompts (fol-lowing the initial grand tour question), asking for clarificationon certain terms and every so often summarizing informantresponses or views. Interviews lasted on average 2 hours,


FIGURE 1

AUTHENTICATING OBJECTS, BRANDS, AND EXPERIENCES (OBE)

although several lasted considerably longer. Interviews wereaudio recorded and transcribed verbatim, resulting in over2,200 pages of text.

Both authors analyzed the transcripts. We first read thetranscripts and conducted our own interpretation beforemeeting to discuss the findings in more detail. Our initialclassification involved establishing the links between lifestories and judgments of authenticity and whether thesetransferred to objects. In our close readings of the textualdata, we noted that participants’ comments suggested ben-efits, standards, and motivations and that these factors un-derpinned their attraction to cues conveying an object’sauthenticity. At this point, theoretical categories were elab-orated on during open and axial coding procedures. Wethen began a process of dialectical tacking, moving backand forward between our findings and the relevant liter-ature to deepen our understanding of the nature of au-thenticity and the processes by which consumers assessobjects and the underlying goals involved (cf. Spiggle1994). As a final step, we interviewed one more informantto further explore situations where consumers dealt withconflict between different goals.

VALUED IDENTITY BENEFITS OF SELF-AUTHENTICATION: FEELINGS OF

CONTROL, CONNECTION, AND VIRTUE

Our findings highlight the inseparable link between de-terminations of authenticity and informant personal goals(i.e., the desire for self-authentication), as well as the criticalneed to look beyond assessment of the object to more fully

appreciate the meaning of authenticity (Rose and Wood2005). A summary of the findings is provided in figure 1.When conferring authenticity to commercial objects such asexperiences, brands, and events, our informants realized pos-itive identity benefits in the form of a favorable character-ization of the true self. Three distinct personally relevantbenefits (also referred to herein as goals) were evident acrossour cases (table 2 provides summary details): control, con-nection, and virtue (each desired benefit reflected wider so-ciocultural norms). Importantly, whether in the case ofbrands, objects, or experiences, these identity benefits werea reflection of the interpretation of what was consideredgenuine, real, and/or true. Informants were also active inapplying standards and information-processing strategies tocues when assessing authenticity.

Feeling in Control

The first account of authenticity related to agency and thedesire of informants to achieve mastery over their environ-ment (see also Leigh et al. 2006). In this sense, control isan end-state (whereby consumers seek to be “in control”;Richins 2005) rather than a process. Hochschild (1983) ob-served airline cabin crew sometimes engaging in small rule-breaking actions to regain a sense of control over their work.Importantly, Hochschild’s research identified that theseworkers were seeking control in order to reaffirm their iden-tity as professional skilled individuals (i.e., such actionswere driven by a desire to reaffirm work role authenticity).Extending this line of research, a number of informant pas-sages associated authenticity with feeling a sense of personal


control over their surroundings and life in general. For ex-ample:

Interviewer: Your picture of surfing. That’s authentic?

Phil: Surfing has taught me lots of things like persistencebecause it takes ages and because it is up to you to keepimproving all the time for yourself. No coaches, as you say,you might go with your mates but once you are out there itis just you, and I like it like that because . . . you rely onyour abilities. And that lesson and experience is the mostauthentic thing of all that you carry with you. And it is good,you know, in knowing what you are about and makingchoices even with surf brands—I mean why buy Quiksilveror Volcom or Ripcurl just because it is the brand of todaythat supposedly carries the cool factor, buy it because youreckon it’s good for you, maybe because it helps to be betterin the water. This says something about you that is real andas I say I use this outside of surfing too in my work and thatis absolutely real to me anyway.

Like several of our informants Phil merged his notion ofwhat was real (including surfing experiences and buyingbrands and products) with a conception of self associatedwith self-improvement and self-reliance through personalachievement and informed choices. Achievement in surfingrequires persistent effort and dedication. Although one canreceive coaching and guidance, mastery of the activity isself-determined. As well, standing alone in surfing is au-thentic because it provides lessons for success in other ac-tivities such as business decisions and consumption choices.Phil rejects social influences such as fashion or peer pres-sure, preferring to select brands that help him achieve per-sonal mastery. For Phil, these brand choices represent anauthenticating act (Arnould and Price 2000).

Just as Phil identifies authenticity through the applicationof qualities unique to the individual (knowledge, experienceand skill), Tony associates authenticity with deliberatechoices, careful analysis, and realistic expectations. For ex-ample:

Tony: First of all authenticity is not a mistake . . . authen-ticity is a checking process.

Interviewer: Checking process?

Tony: I mean to determine whether something is authenticor not you need to be able to test the system.

Interviewer: And anything else?

Tony: Realistic I suppose is authentic.

Interviewer: What do you mean by realistic?

Tony: It’s a realistic achievement, a realistic goal . . . a visionas something that I have that I aspire to, that I know that Ican get.

Interviewer: Right.

Tony: I’m getting towards the end of my working life whereI have managed to be able to achieve and accumulate like

wealth, possessions, and that becomes a part of the historyof my life, which becomes authentic. So that sort of coverseverything, my home, my car.

Interviewer: So why are they authentic?

Tony: Because it’s a realistic achievement. It’s things thatyou could turn round and say, because I studied and I wasdiligent I was able to achieve these things. I mean, I don’tknow, almost a shrine to your life.

Tony draws a connection between sustained effort overmany years and the authenticity of his objects. Like Phil,Tony transfers the lessons gained from a character-formingactivity (in this case engineering), where personal applica-tion was central to success, to other aspects of life, includingconsumption choices (see his passage on ING below). Forexample, just as an engineer achieves mastery over natureand materials through the careful application of theory toreality and an understanding of tolerances, so Tony appre-ciates the need to set realistic goals in other life events. Asa result, Tony plays a central role in shaping events for hisbenefit. Objects, such as his house and car, are the physicalmanifestation of his mastery over his environment.

The mastery evident in Phil’s and Tony’s passages wasalso central in other accounts of consumption—as noted intable 2. Rowena, for example, desires the “genuine article”in order to retain control over her health. Michael views anApple computer as authentic because it empowers him andothers to engage in tasks they could not normally manage.Apple (selected over other computers because Michael viewsthis brand as being first to market with a mass-market, easy-to-use computer) thus allows Michael to achieve mastery overevents. William also desires to retain control over his con-sumption decisions by refusing to accept marketer claims atface value. Instead, claims that are relevant to the offer (inthis case the relationship between country-of-origin, qualityperceptions, and price) are subjected to further examination.

Overall, when consumers seek to be in control, they desirepersonal sovereignty (the exclusive right to control oneself)over consumption choices and prefer objects and experi-ences that help realize associated benefits. For example,Meg’s desire for control over her diabetes forces her toreview mandatory ingredient labeling on food products,which in turn results in increased mental and physical efforton her behalf (one-and-a-half hour shopping trips) and inthe choice of brands like Yoplait that she knows from per-sonal experience have no physical side effects. Consistentwith this desire for independent judgment and empower-ment, the informants focused on performance claims whenassessing the authenticity of a brand. In cases where func-tional claims could only be experienced through use, brandswere judged authentic only after personal experience of thereputed benefits (i.e., value in use). For example:

Interviewer: What do you mean cynical?

Tony: Well, I tend to get cynical about advertising and brands.When you turn around and say authentic brands, generally Iwould say a product that’s not built by huge massive ad-


vertising dollars. It’s advertised by showing me exactly whatthe product does.

Interviewer: Right.

Tony: This sort of might indicate what I’m saying. On mycomputer I switch it on and I get that ING will give me5.25% interest. But it’s not telling me that, you know, I’ma smarter person for going to ING. You know what I mean?It’s stark. It’s clear. It’s not giving me any other reason toinvest my money in them than the fact that I get 5.25%.

Interviewer: And you can prove it?

Tony: Yes, that’s right. I can just go up to the CommonwealthBank and say, okay, how much are you going to give me?

Meg reports:

I’d say they’re [brands] authentic in terms of what they’retrying to promote, so . . . if the shampoo says it will easefrizz control in your hair and it does, then okay it’s achievedmy objective in purchasing it. If it doesn’t, then I won’t buyit again. So I think it’s the proof in the pudding. You cantell it does this and this, whiz bang, lights, cameras, andaction, but until I try the product I’ll never know that. So Ithink it needs to be very honest in terms of what it can deliver.

In each passage above, informants related authenticity tofunctional performance benefits and thus desired factual in-formation because it enabled them to make informed de-cisions. The ING brand has particular value to Tony becausethe espoused claims, rather than being advertising puffery,provide him with information critical to establishing thetruth as to what is the best brand. The brand focuses on“what matters” in relation to banking—interest rates. Megalso desires information that conveys just the core benefitof the brand. However, unlike interest rates, the performancebenefits of Meg’s shampoo must be experienced directly.Thus, Meg prefers marketers to make realistic claims thataddress practical problems (“frizz control”) that she can con-firm through experience.

Feeling Connected

A second account of authenticity discussed by our infor-mants related to a feeling of being connected to importantothers, to community, place, culture, or to society in general.Key benefits associated with feeling connected were an ide-alization of community, personal enrichment through beingpart of something, and being proximate to like-minded oth-ers—consistent with the desire to develop an authentic selfas an active member of the community. These informantaccounts expressed a distinct preference for brands that rep-resented a means to experience connection. Central to thisaccount of authenticity was a strong preference for proximityto place, people, and culture because such activities repre-sented a higher ideal—that of valuing fellowship within acommunity. For example:

Scott: I was in Egypt and I had a guide who was local . . .

so the authenticity of the tour feels something a bit differentthan if you had an Australian trying to take that tour.

Interviewer: So what creates that authentic feeling, do youthink?

Scott: I think it’s the knowledge of the person. For example,I could have the knowledge of Egypt but I’m not Egyptian,so I think it’s the culture and understanding and feeling ofbeing Egyptian that would give it the authenticity of travelingthrough the pyramids . . . the authenticity in, I suppose, atravel perspective is that you’re enveloped by the experience,meaning that you do not feel like you’re three or four degreesof separation, in a way you’re with that one other person, soyou only feel like you’re two degrees away. So getting theauthentic feel of being wherever you are . . . it is enrichedto a point where you feel like you’re part of it, you don’tfeel that far away from it. And it narrows the gap betweenme and somebody who has lived there all their lives.

Throughout his interview, Scott states his desire to bepersonally enriched by connection to place and to have lo-cals reflect back to him what it means to be part of a par-ticular society. Central to Scott’s account of his travels ishis preference for proximity to local people. For example,while Scott was touring Egypt, having a local guide relaythe nature of place to him enabled him to come the closestthat he could to understanding what it really means to beEgyptian.

In their accounts of connection, informants repeatedly men-tioned places, events, community, and tradition as part of theiridentity. For example (see table 2), being part of the localcycling community and participating in a fund-raising ride(Around the Bay in a Day) is real for Nick because it connectshim with like-minded others. This desire to be part of some-thing with like-minded others is what Relph (1976) refersto as existential insidedness, where individuals relate to aplace or a community event as though they are inside it. Byengaging in this relatively grueling ride, Nick, who is anexperienced cyclist and part of the St. Kilda, Melbourne,cycling fraternity (“I do maybe three days per week. I livein St. Kilda, so there’s a fairly big cycling culture downthere. I go before work, about 5:30. There’s large groups,so it’s a fairly social sport”) reinforces his desired self assomeone who plays a part in the community. This ideali-zation of community and participation in communal life (asa means of ensuring continuity) is identified in Zoe’s passagebelow:

Zoe: There is a surf school and ongoing events like smalllocal surf competitions and get-togethers and that is very realfor me. Funnily enough, there is talk that one of the localsurf shops outlets wants to sponsor it, which is good becausethey see the need to keep it going too. It is really important,and it says a lot about people in the area and how surfingbrings people together . . . who might not know each otherbut all want to be there for the same reasons. It is a greatway for the kids to learn a great outdoor sport but just toexperience life in a community and getting together with the

TABLE 2

ELEMENTS OF INFORMANTS’ AUTHENTICITY GOALS

Goal Definition Informant exemplars

Control Mastery of self andenvironment

Interviewer: So what does a brand need to be authentic?Rowena: A name you would know and trust like Yoplait yoghurt.Interviewer: What is it about Yoplait? Is authenticity important when buying something?Rowena: It’s important to me, particularly foodwise because I’ve got diabetes, so I’ve got

to be careful with what I eat.

Michael: Apple computer.Interviewer: How is that authentic?Michael: That authenticates the ability to retain and develop our knowledge. So it gives

us a greater view of the world. It’s been able to allow us to achieve things that wewould never have been able to achieve. The reach for the stars, if you like.

Interviewer: So authentic includes things humans cannot do by ourselves?Michael: Not so much can’t do by ourselves but certainly can’t do as quickly. More accu-

rately as well, of course.

William: When you see something and they say it’s authentic most people look withskepticism, whereas I look at it to say, why are they saying it? Like Swiss watches.The Swiss watch industry gained reputation for being the most accurate, but now youcan buy Swiss watches which weren’t made in Switzerland.

Interviewer: Okay.William: But they’re trying to use the Swiss name to get that image and genuineness.

Connection Relating to others, culture,time and place, andcommunity

Nick: On Sunday, I was in an event “Around the Bay in a Day.” That was a great experi-ence because the objective of it is to raise funds for the Smith Family so it’s a goodcause as well. It was very well run, although we had to wait for a ferry for 2 hours.. . . That was the only downer but you can’t expect anything more than that. . . .There were about 9,000 people that did it, so it’s quite a big event. . . . It is authenticbecause the people that are there are there because they want to be there. . . . It isthe whole event because there’s so many people doing it and you’re passing people,you’re riding with people, talking with people the whole way, and it’s just a whole dayexperience. . . . At the end you sit around and talk to people and you tell stories orwhatever.

Interviewer: How does it fit to authenticity?Nick: Well as I said everyone’s there because they want to be there and they feel right

into it, if you know what I mean. It feels right because people are there because theywant to be, not because they’re supposed to be or they’re putting on a front. . . .There’s a feeling of realness.

Interviewer: Any brands in particular?John: Benson and Hedges, Winfield, Marlboro.Interviewer: Why?John: They’re legendary cigarette manufacturers. You see them all around the world in

advertising. They’ve become very much inauthentic at the moment because obviouslyfor health reasons, they’re not able to market their products like they used to be ableto so therefore people stop taking notice of these companies.

Interviewer: Because of what they did?John: No, I don’t think it’s because of what they did. See, there’s no place for their

products.Interviewer: So what part of the brand has become inauthentic?John: The advertising of it.Interviewer: Why?John: Because the companies are not allowed to advertise as much anymore so people

aren’t as aware of these products as much because it’s not in their face all of the time.Interviewer: Okay, so something that is authentic has to be popular and recognized

more?John: Yes, definitely, otherwise it loses its image, loses its authenticity.

Virtue Being true to a set of moralvalues

Caroline: I think it springs from selflessness. Like if you don’t think about yourself all thetime and you act authentically you are looking outwards rather than inwards. You arenot doing things for your own sake or your own self.

Interviewer: How is that authentic?Caroline: For me authentic behavior is behavior that is worthwhile and moral and honest.

. . . Nike have been implicated in some pretty awful things and child labor and makingshoes at low cost and then selling them for an exorbitant price, so I would think thatthey are an inauthentic brand.


TABLE 2 (Continued)

Goal Definition Informant exemplars

Interviewer: What is it about Nike?Renee: I put them in an inauthentic category just because although they became the

market leader and did a lot of creative stuff, I think that they’ve exploited their reputa-tion in the meanwhile by general employment practices.

Interviewer: Employment practices?Renee: They’ve made a lot of money partly because they’re authentic but at the same

time they are paying low wages and they do a lot of exploitation as well.

Interviewer: What is it?Judy: It’s the Barbie doll.Interviewer: It’s the Barbie doll, yes.Judy: Yes, because it’s promoting certain values through what it is.Interviewer: So that values make it inauthentic?Judy: They promote a kind of an ideal of how girls should look.Interviewer: So what’s the consequence of that?Judy: Because hardly any girls look like that. . . . The Cabbage Patch dolls are better

because they look real, they look like real babies, and some of them are ugly andsome have dark skin and some have no hair.

other parents and kids and pitching in to make sure somethinglike this runs. One of the guys made a big barbecue trolleythat we wheel around, and it might be a small thing but, youknow, it is often the centerpiece after all the surfing is done,and people gather around it . . . someone else might havebrought some music and all are welcome. And the little thingslike that make these things a community and that is importantfor us here and why it is a great place to live.

Interviewer: So things that contribute to the community areauthentic?

Zoe: Yes.

For several of our informants, important local events rep-resented an authoritative performance (Arnould and Price2000) in the way they enabled characterization of a self thatsought to celebrate and sustain community. In Zoe’s pas-sage, the surf school and local surf events fostered sharedvalues. Her mention of “pitching in” (whether this involvedsponsorship, providing music, or the barbecue trolley) sym-bolizes the importance given to unity and having as a com-mon objective the desire to connect (with members of thecommunity) and the positive socialization of the children.Adding weight to the power of these events as authoritativeperformances is their widespread support as evidenced byhow long they have been in existence, growth in partici-pation, and the wider involvement of institutions such asthe local school and surf shop.

The valuing of connection to place and community wasalso reflected in purchase behavior. Louise recounted herdesire to buy something that reminded her of her time spentin London. A common ritual among young Australians isthe “Big OE” or overseas experience whereby people spendtime following high school or university working and trav-eling overseas (for historical reasons London is the desti-nation of choice). At the end of her stay in London, Louisesought an item that would connect her back to place andher memories of friends made there. For example:

Louise: I bought a bracelet that was very authentic.

Interviewer: So what was it about that bracelet?

Louise: I was in London and I went down to my favoritemarket, which is Portobello Road, and I really wanted to buysomething that reminded me—I was about to leave London,I’d been living there for about 5 years—and I wanted to buysomething that reminded me of my experience in London,and I didn’t want anything too materialistic, I wanted some-thing special. So I went to the market, and I bought threerose gold charms, and I knew that by buying those it wouldbe something that I’d wear all the time and it would remindme of London.

When seeking an object that connected her back to hertime in London, Louise deliberately chose to go to the mar-kets at Portobello Road—a favorite among Londoners.Rather than selecting an object that Australians might as-sociate with “Englishness” (i.e., typical tourist items), Lou-ise selects something that reflects her almost insider status(i.e., her two degrees of separation). This object connectsher back to a place and time she values and would signalto other expatriates and Londoners insider knowledge, po-tentially allowing her to form connections with them.

The value attached to being a part of a community wasalso reflected in informants’ accounts of brands and au-thenticity. John’s passage in table 2, for example, reflectsthe relationship between being accepted by the mainstreamand authenticity. Offering an unusual take on the legitimacyof cigarette brands, John evaluates them as historic iconsthat are now no longer viewed as authentic. Critically, thisloss of status is not due to the health risks associated withcigarettes but to consensus in the community that the ad-vertising of such products should be banned. As a result,these brands are no longer real because they do not play avisible part in community affairs as they did when they weresponsors of major sporting events. It is the case that changesin societal attitudes toward smoking have seen this activity


move from the mainstream to the periphery, with the resultthat cigarette brands no longer define individuals (it wascommon among smokers to identify with advertisementscelebrating the “Marlboro man” or the “Alpine woman”) orprovide the basis for connection.

Nick’s selection of the cycling brand Campagnolo reflectsthis valuing of contribution to community. For example, hereports:

Campagnolo is more traditional. I think it’s going back tothe grass roots of cycling. Whereas Shimano make fishingrod reels and all that sort of stuff; so you get the feeling thatCampagnolo are completely focused on what they’re doingfor cycling and that makes them a little bit more authentic.. . . I always relate the general sense to a feeling you get,its just people talking about them [Campagnolo] more thananything else. I’ve never used them before but I assumethey’re better.

For Nick the Campagnolo brand is run by passionatecyclists (like him) who dedicate themselves to producingquality products that benefit the sport. This brand is valuablebecause it provides him with a means to indirectly connectto a living tradition of cycling (i.e., the grass roots). Theimportance Nick attaches to this view is further revealed bythe fact that, although he has never used the brand, othercyclists constantly talk about it as the quality leader, whichlends it subcultural legitimacy (cf. Kates 2004) and thereforeauthenticity. This valuing of brands as conduits for con-nection was central to many informant accounts. For ex-ample:

Interviewer: How about the Simpsons? (Picture prompt.)

Rowena: It’s big, worldwide.

Interviewer: Big?

Rowena: I can identify it you know. I’m on that couch at 6o’clock at night watching the reruns of The Simpsons, wordfor word. It’s been around for 12–15 years. It’s a popularprogram and you can—little kids can relate to it, my grand-mother can relate to it, so you know.

In her discussion of authenticity Rowena stresses howThe Simpsons enable her to connect with her children andparents, as well as other people in general (by being ableto recount “every word”). For Nick and Rowena, these ob-jects are valuable because they enable them to engage inshared experiences on a daily basis. Again, central to bothNick’s and Rowena’s accounts of authenticity is an ideal-ization of “being together” or community and of how par-ticular brands allow one to feel engaged with others (cf.Thompson 1997). Rose and Wood (2005) examined howsuch a contrived event as reality television could be au-thentic. We believe that one reason is that these highly pop-ular shows (Big Brother, Survivor, and American Idol) allowpeople to connect to shared experiences by providing thebasis for “water cooler conversations.” For example, Row-ena’s stress on being able to recount episodes of the Simp-

sons (such as mimicking signature phrases) would enableher to communicate with others who shared her love of theshow.

Feeling Virtuous

The final account of authenticity we identified capturedinformants who represented their authentic self by makingjudgments based on purity of motive. Conferring authentic-ity in these accounts was akin to expressing one’s morals.Associated benefits included the feeling of virtuousness thatcomes with staying true to one’s morals and the spiritualenrichment that comes from seeing desired universal valuesin practice. Caroline, who defines herself as a “nonmateri-alist” and “not much of a consumer,” repeatedly recalledher experiences in India when discussing authenticity:

Interviewer: What about your pictures of India?

Caroline: I have done a lot of traveling in my life, and beforeI went to India every year, I went to a different country, andthen I got to India, and I have been back 13 times becauseI feel there is a level of honesty and everything that is lackingin other places.

Interviewer: Okay. I have never been to India so could youmaybe explain what is it about India that is authentic?

Caroline: I feel unlike other countries it’s been less touchedby Western consumerism, Western values, Western civiliza-tion . . . so when I first went there it was a country like Ihad never encountered . . . the food was different, the re-ligion, the way people related, their values. They seem tolive life on a different level, concerned with different thingsthat I think are more authentic and more meaningful.

Interviewer: What are the things that they are concernedwith?

Caroline: The way they approach people I think is moreauthentic. They are concerned with family, with a basic sortof values perhaps because life is harder for them. Again Iam generalizing because recently now they are open to theWest, you know, there’s Star TV in India, there’s computers,outsourcing, so they are changing very, very rapidly, whichI find sad.

Interviewer: Yes.

Caroline: But before all that they are concerned with theuniversal things about life that are nothing to do withconsuming.

Caroline’s passage reveals that she regularly seeks spir-itual enrichment by traveling to India. She gains a numberof positive outcomes from such self-authenticating acts.First, she believes that by traveling to places where peoplelive her values, she can engage in more meaningful rela-tionships, particularly as the local inhabitants are more gen-uine because they are less interested in material pursuits(“People didn’t want anything from you so they were in-


terested in you as a person”). Second, Caroline is able topresent herself to others as someone of moral convictionbecause she is active in living her values. Caroline’s accountof authenticity idealizes a set of values she feels she cannotfind in her everyday life in Australia. Her attraction to thesevalues is emphasized in Caroline’s discussion of the totalityof differences between Australia and India (in terms of food,religion, customs, and values). These differences demon-strate that another world (a world she values) is possible ifone is prepared to reject consumerism.

Consistent with Caroline’s attempt to transcend materi-alist pursuits, informants’ accounts of virtue revealed no-tions of innocence and being free from false pretense. Forexample:

Interviewer: Can you explain in detail what you see in thispicture?

Anita: Yes. There’s a small child with his socks down playingwith a cricket bat that’s been handmade by a couple of piecesof wood. There’s a couple of kids looking, and there’s anotherchild squatting down behind him ready to catch the ball.

Interviewer: So what do you see, and how is it related toauthenticity?

Anita: Well, I thought it was related to authenticity becauseit looks like an honest, down-to-earth picture, just the in-nocence of children playing. You can’t get more truthful thanchildren playing.

Caroline: I picked Michelangelo’s Pieta because I think thatencapsulates really authentic emotion. It’s the mother withthe dead son and the grief, and it’s a very emotional piecethat taps into universal feelings.

Interviewer: So the sculpture describes the authenticfeelings?

Caroline: Yes. The person who sculptured it has produceda sculpture that is about very authentic basic human emotion.Every mother would experience that if she lost a son.

Interviewer: So not Michelangelo himself that you wouldassociate with authenticity but the feelings?

Caroline: Yes, what he has produced. He may have sculp-tured that for money. Someone may have commissioned him,in which [case] the authenticity doesn’t really come fromhim, but he has produced something beautiful and honest.To me it’s authentic.

Anita’s and Caroline’s focus on notions of universal in-nocence, honesty, and truth characterized other accounts ofvirtue. For Anita, children were seen as authentic becausetheir play was not compromised by self-interest. Carolinealso draws a link between authenticity and universal emo-tions. She virtually dismisses the role played by the artist(and his motives) and those of his sponsor, attributing au-thenticity only to the universal emotion conveyed in thework itself.

Consistent with the accounts of control and connection,informants applied notions of virtue to their assessments ofbrands. Caroline and Renee judge Nike to be inauthenticbecause of a lack of morals (see table 2 for further exam-ples). For example, although Renee recognizes that the brandbecame a market leader through creativity, it is the perceivedlack of social ethics that drives her judgment, including hersubsequent decision to stop using Nike. Judy judges Barbieto be inauthentic because of the negative impact on the bodyimage of young girls (while Cabbage Patch dolls are au-thentic for the opposite reason). For these three (and other)informants, breaches of ethical norms resulted in a lossof authenticity because the brands were judged as lackingmoral fiber. For example:

Mario: McDonald’s I suppose would be the prime exampleof dishonesty.

Interviewer: How?

Mario: Well, in the past they have always kind of promotedtheir food as giving well-being and happiness and really itwas a bad product.

Interviewer: Authenticity and honesty, are they the same?

Mario: Yes, for me for something to be authentic it’s got tobe honest.

Interviewer: Okay.

Mario: And not trying to cheat someone or market somethingwhen they know that it’s not a good product.

Central to accounts of virtue were notions of honesty anda lack of ulterior motive. Both Mario’s and Renee’s (seetable 2) assessments of McDonald’s and Nike reflect thisideal. In both cases, the offending brands are viewed astrying to gain something by stealth, such as perceptions ofquality or higher margins. Once these brands have been“found out” they are judged as inauthentic brand partnersbecause of their suspect motives. In each case, brands arejudged against a moral standard—McDonald’s was viewedas deceitful because of the gap between the marketing mes-sages and the healthiness of the their products, while Nikewas a cynical exploiter of workers and consumers becausethey presented themselves as the world leader yet failed tolive up to this claim in their day-to-day business practices.

Consistent with notions of transcending the self, whenseeking virtue, informants were critical of luxury brandsbecause their pricing was not proportional to the product’sutility. This business strategy reflected false pretense or thepromotion of conspicuous consumption. Such selfish mo-tives were seen as out of step with the real necessities ofliving. In contrast, brands focused on serving people’s basicneeds were judged more favorably. For example:

Caroline: Like some of those handbags that cost hundredsof dollars. Chanel and Givenchy. . . . They are just a handbagbut I think to create a desire amongst people for somethingthat costs so much money which is out of proportion to the


worth of the item is immoral when people are starving. That’snot authentic to me. It’s not honest. I am looking for thingsto have a meaning, and if you pay for something it’s got tohave a commensurate value.

Interviewer: What about the VW Beetle?

Caroline: I think so because the original car was made foreveryone to be able to afford, so I suppose it’s authentic.

Caroline’s passages reinforce her earlier statements aboutpursuing what is meaningful, in this case by challenging themorals of brands that charge so much for a functional item.Her stress on a universal claim—people’s basic need forfood—over all other claims that Chanel and Givenchy maymake about quality or symbolic value is consistent with herearlier statements in which she attributes authenticity to anentirely different set of values than those held by luxurygoods companies. Caroline’s choice of the old VW Beetlecontrasts with her criticism of luxury accessory brands ear-lier. Caroline values the Beetle because it was developedfor the common person and because it was affordable. Theobject is authentic because there is a reasonable relationbetween price and function, and importantly, because thecar was developed to provide transportation for the massesrather than for perceived superficial values such as prestigeor status. Caroline’s emphasis on the motive for productionas the source of the brand’s authenticity reinforces her viewof self as a person of moral conviction.

Summary of the Accounts: The Goal ContingentNature of Authenticity

The three goal-inspired accounts of authenticity shouldbe viewed as being representative of self-relevant concep-tualizations of authenticity rather than as a by-product ofpersonality traits. This is demonstrated in two ways. First,the accounts of authenticity covered above reveal the sameinformant (such as Meg and Rowena) seeking multiplebenefits. Second, the following two passages identify con-flict between competing goals. In Ross’s discussion ofMcDonald’s, two benefits of authenticity (control and vir-tue) are important.

I think they’re [McDonald’s] authentic for what they, maybethey’re not, may be—I think it really comes back to the finelines of what’s authentic. Certainly, it raises some seriousconcerns about health issues when you’re talking aboutMcDonald’s, which you would say was authentic; it’s clearthey’re delivering the same product the same way and in thesame environment every time. So they’re trying to deliverwhat I would say was an authentic product. In terms of whatthey’ve don’t tell you, these things are going to lead to highobesity, but I don’t think that makes them not authentic.

Although Ross recognizes that McDonald’s products maybe “morally gray,” he can still find authenticity in the productwhen he is seeking a guaranteed consumption experience(regardless of global location). Ross compartmentalizes au-

thenticity around a series of situations—McDonald’s maynot be an authentic product when seeking something healthy,but it is if one desires fast food. A second example providesfurther evidence of a goal-contingent view of authenticity.In Phil’s account, reference was made to the need to berealistic in establishing what was authentic. He spoke of hiswork and his desire to be environmentally conscious:

Well, I was thinking and the fact is that my four-wheel driveis still authentic in its own strange way. I value the environ-ment, and it really does affect what I buy, and I think youshould have values that you stick to. Yet I know that drivinga big four-wheel drive seems a contradiction, but when weare talking about authenticity, I still see it as authentic in thatit helps me do my job but also reminds me that I need tokeep making an effort in other ways.

Phil’s passage above involves a tension between two de-sired identity benefits—control and virtue. Phil spoke withpride about his achievements in building his own businessand of his four-wheel drive as being necessary to performeffectively (he needed a car well suited to carrying heavysurveying equipment). But as a committed environmentalisthe was also aware that such a vehicle has high emissions andlow fuel economy. Like Ross, Phil does not consider the four-wheel drive inauthentic but rather views the “offending” ob-ject as a reminder that he must make extra effort to look afterthe environment.

AUTHENTICATING STANDARDS: ACULTURAL ACCOUNT

A central tenet of consumer culture theory is that humanagency operates within a social context (Arnould and Thomp-son 2005; Ratner 2000)—that is, individual expressions reflectmore widely held social views or dominant myths (Hirschman2000; Thompson 1997). We propose that the three personalgoals (the desire for control, connection, and virtue) reflectedinformants’ desire to respond to dominant sociocultural norms(Gergen 1991; Lifton 1993). Put another way, prevailing cul-tural influences give rise to the standards that are applied inthe conferring authenticity to objects, brands, and experiences(Ferrara 1998; Taylor 1991). The standards underpinning ac-counts of control, connection, and virtue reflect three domi-nant sociocultural norms: being practical (control), partici-pating (connection), and morality (virtue). For example,informant accounts of control reflected attempts at situationalproblem solving and an identity associated with achievingperformance-related goals. Accounts of connection focusedon immersion in something larger than oneself and “doingone’s bit” as a community member. Accounts of virtue re-flected the widely held view that there are universal moralprinciples of right and wrong.

Being Practical

With regard to control, we identified four critical stan-dards: firsthand experience, independent judgment, verifia-


bility, and instrumentality. These four standards reflected adesire for consumer sovereignty, practical problem solving,and efficacy across a range of situations. Brand authenti-cation influenced by the desire for control involved an ap-plication of standards appropriate to informed decision mak-ing. The significance of firsthand experience, independentjudgment, and verifiability was evident in Tony’s emphasison testing the system when dealing with brands like ING,Meg’s desire for direct experience of product performanceclaims, Rowena’s desire for healthy products, and Phil’sfocus on selecting surf brands based on his own judgmentand not that of others.

When seeking control, informants desired messages thatconveyed verifiable performance benefits, such as high in-terest rates, frizz control, or ingredient information, and theyrejected more emotive claims. The skepticism (or cyni-cism—see Tony) toward marketing claims preexperienceand the desire for verification of these claims (e.g., Meg andhair care products and William and Swiss watches; see table2) provides further evidence of a requirement for indepen-dent judgment through firsthand experience and personalverification.

The informants’ passages also provide evidence of theirdesire for instrumentality (of brands and self). For example,Tony appreciates ING’s campaign because it enables himto make accurate comparison with other brands, therebyincreasing his chances of getting the best possible result—apoint reinforced by Michael’s comments about Apple andPhil’s selection of surf brands. Phil’s appropriation of themeaning of surfing and his SUV provide other examples ofinstrumentality in the way they reflect his ability to be suc-cessful. Our informants shaped desired benefits by usingtheir experience and ability to make informed choices (seealso Holt and Thompson 2004).

The nature of control and its associated standards haverarely been explained culturally to better understand au-thenticity—in fact, the benefits and standards associatedwith control are often viewed as inauthentic because theyindicate self-interested problem solving (see, e.g., Taylor1991; Hochschild [1983] provides a rare counterexample).As well, such actions are often viewed solely through thelens of intentionality or agency (see Postrel [2003] for anexample), which holds that individual actions occur withlittle recourse to wider social forces (Ratner 2000). However,the cultural idealization of the aforementioned standards areevidenced in the love of sporting achievement, the deni-gration of academics (in Australia often referred to as im-practical “pointy heads”), and the preference for pragmatismover ideology in many “New World” countries (Blainey1994). Many top-rating shows in Australia are crime orpolice dramas, such as the Crime Scene Investigation (CSI)franchise, which has taglines such as “Trust the evidence”and “Let’s see where the evidence leads.”

The informants’ attitudes toward brands and associatedmarketing messages reflected a dominant cultural themeusually associated with the inauthentic (insofar as com-mercial motives are rejected as not authentic by the “sov-

ereign consumer”; Postrel 2003). The informants’ accountsreveal a desire for agency through independent decisionmaking—choices not influenced by the emotions that oftenunderpin marketer-driven iconic cues. The standards usedby informants when seeking control reflected what is called“economic rationalism” within Australia. Often commen-tators will denigrate this term when discussing authenticityby arguing that it leads to the dominance of large corpo-rations, reduction in consumer choice, and the loss of con-sumer power (e.g., Boyle 2003; Harris 2001; Seabrook2000).

However, free market politicians and business commen-tators regularly emphasize the power of the consumer to ceasedoing business with even the largest organizations (Rand1967), and consumer agencies regularly test the functionalperformance of brands to identify the best-performing prod-uct/service and the best value for the money. Thus, in stressingfunctional performance benefits, consumer sovereignty, andrational decision making, informants are reflecting a culturallyembedded norm that values an empowered, sensible consumeras opposed to a consumer as dupe (in fact, irrational acts suchas impulse purchasing or extending mortgages to pay forluxuries are regularly denigrated at the cultural level as beingthe expenditure of the “credit rich” or “spoilt” youngsters).To date, these seemingly pragmatic norms have not beenidentified in research on authenticity.

Participating

In the case of the connection-based accounts, we iden-tified three standards driving judgments of authenticity:proximity, communal norms, and ubiquity. Across the in-formants’ accounts of connection, emphasis was given tobeing close to others. Brands and events provided the con-duit for people to connect by bringing community membersor loved ones together as part of an authoritative perfor-mance (Arnould and Price 2000). For example, in Scott’sdiscussions of his various encounters in Morocco, he em-phasized getting an understanding of the meaning of every-day Moroccan life (communal norms), but as he felt he couldnot fully appreciate this without living there, he was lessconcerned about traveling to the back region than having alocal guide who could relay information.

Louise, Nick, and Zoe stress being close to others (asrepresented by people, place, time, and culture) as centralto authentication. This view is also shared by Rowena andreemphasized in her desire to see tennis stars “up close andpersonal” and “out there sweating and working hard for thecrowd. . . . You can really see these people giving their allrather than being on the news.” Therefore, when seekingconnection, informants often sought situations that put themin close proximity to others. Such a desire also feeds intotwo other related standards—communal norms and ubiquity.

Nick stresses the importance of partaking in a communalcycling event because it represents an activity that genuinemembers of the St. Kilda cycling fraternity engage in. Healso points out that people are there because they want tobe and that they undertake the grueling annual event out of


a sense of duty. This sense of duty was reinforced by Nick’sattitude that one should follow the rules of events and adopta “mustn’t grumble” attitude to minor inconveniences suchas waiting for ferries and the early morning start. Zoe em-phasizes similar themes, stressing the importance of “puttingin” and “giving back” in her discussion of the role of com-munity members and organizations in bringing people to-gether and ensuring the vibrancy of the community throughthe socialization of children into such rituals. Scott’s ac-ceptance of a local guide’s views as more real or true thanwhat an outsider can experience also indicates how com-munal norms form the basis for assessment. This emphasison communal norms to establish authenticity also translatedinto a preference for brands that were thought to reinforcecultural traditions. For example:

Scott: I think they’ve [Kraft] dropped the Australian part toit because they can’t claim that anymore, but I don’t thinkthat they need to actually keep telling people that, becausepeople know it, or they believe. It’s originally Australian,. . . it’s still around now, we’re basically the only countryin the world that eats it, and as far as we’re concerned it’sstill Australian. It’s not an Australian-owned brand, but forall intents and purposes Vegemite is Australian.

Interviewer: Because Australians eat it?

Scott: Yes, and our parents and our grandparents had it whenthey were growing up as well, so as far as we’re concernedit’s an authentic, original Australian product.

Scott’s passage represents several aspects of the standardsunderpinning informant accounts of connection. BecauseVegemite is no longer an Australian-owned brand (thus oneform of indexical connection to place has been lost), Kraftdownplays any direct link to place. However, Scott regardsthis as unnecessary because the brand is an established iconamong all Australians, remains a part of the fabric of Aus-tralian identity, and is therefore authentic despite beingowned by a global parent company. The brand still enableshim to connect with place because it is widely adopted bythe community, is shared across generations, and remainssomething that “all true Aussies eat.” For Scott, the con-sumption of Vegemite marks one out as Australian.

In the accounts in which emphasis was given to the impor-tance of connection, informants regularly selected high-profileestablished mass market brands—objects not usually associatedwith authenticity. These brands are often viewed in highlybenevolent terms (Rowena: “It’s [McDonald’s] good for theeconomy; it’s good for Melbourne”), with their ubiquity a signof their relevance (and therefore value) to the community andtheir democratic nature (because they are available to all com-ers). For example:

Interviewer: McDonald’s is authentic?

Zoe: Yes.

Interviewer: What is it about McDonald’s?

Zoe: McDonald’s, it’s everywhere.

Interviewer: What do you mean—being everywhere isauthentic?

Zoe: It’s just everywhere, McDonald’s is McDonald’s.

Interviewer: What is it about the brand?

Zoe: Everyone loves it. And it’s just there, in your face,everywhere. It’s just something that everyone indulges inwithout, you know, worrying. McDonald’s is just there, it’sjust there to be enjoyed all the time.

Interviewer: It’s affordable?

Zoe: Yes.

Rowena comments:

Nike, it’s a common brand. The golden arches—Big Mac,you get deals, cheeseburger, french fries, worldwide. Youcan’t miss it. You go down St. Kilda Road or wherever andsee the arches and you know. You can find it anywhere. Oryou see signs saying McDonald’s 500 meters next right.

In Zoe’s and Rowena’s discussion of McDonald’s andNike, it was the ubiquity and common nature of these brandsthat made them authentic. The value Rowena placed on main-stream shared experiences and traditions resulted in a pref-erence for mass brands as demonstrated in the value she at-tributed to the widely shared ritual of watching The Simpsonsand the fact that all ages can participate in the experience.The passages above highlight how authenticity is attributedsymbols that literally define the social landscape (in this way,authenticity through connection is influenced by cognitivelegitimacy—a determination driven by whether the object inquestion is an inevitable part of the environment and nec-essary for a comprehensible account of social reality; Such-man 1995, 582–83). Major brands are highly visible repre-sentations of the social fabric because of their omnipresenceand their age (i.e., they were institutionalized; Suchman 1995)and because they have evolved in line with changes in com-munal norms. These characteristics of brands that allow con-nection also explain John’s view regarding the decline in theauthenticity of cigarette brands and the authenticity attributedto Campagnolo by Nick (despite the fact that he has no directexperience of the brand).

Although community tradition is often seen as one pillar ofauthenticity (Arnould and Price 2000; Kozinets 2002), uniqueto our data on connection is the preference for ubiquitous, mass-marketed objects and emphasis on the mainstream as authentic.This finding sits in direct contrast to research claiming thatmass-marketed objects, or objects that appear tainted by themarket or motivated by commercial considerations, lack au-thenticity (Beverland 2006; Boyle 2003; Kates 2004). In theiraccounts of connection as an expression of authenticity, theinformants are reflecting a number of cultural norms all ofwhich can be broadly classified as “participating.”

First, within Australia much of the popular cultural dis-course celebrates mainstream traditions, the everyday, andmiddle-class values, as demonstrated by the popularity of


reality television shows and the increasing casualization ofnews and current affairs shows hosted by “ordinary” pre-senters (who operate solely on a first name or nicknamebasis) addressing day-to-day issues such as parenting tipsand financial advice for teens (McCamish 2008). Also, popculture (including brands) has been elevated in status, whilenotions of “high culture” as special are downplayed or chal-lenged as elitist. Second, emphasis is placed on mutual re-sponsibility, or everyone doing their part to make societybetter, and there is genuine concern at the decline in vol-unteering, manners, local customs, and traditional events (cf.Putnam 2001). Further evidence of the sense of responsi-bility can be found in the public debates around nationaland local identity (i.e., what it means to be an “Australian”or a “Melbournian”). Fueling this debate is the acknowledg-ment of renewed interest in shared traditions by younger gen-erations (such as dramatic increases in attendance at the dawnservice to remember Australian and New Zealand soldierswho fought in the two world wars) and a sense that otherimportant traditions are under attack from policies usuallylambasted as “political correctness gone mad” or “un-Aus-tralian” (e.g., attempts to remove Christmas celebrations fromschools under the guise of multiculturalism).

Third, despite claims that traditional family units are indecline, families are the preferred unit within much socialdiscourse in Australia. The 2007 election featured a contestbetween two parties—one stressing the needs of “workingfamilies” and the other of “mortgage belt families.” We be-lieve a desire to preserve mainstream traditions, “do yourpart,” and value “family” results in a preference for ubiquitouscommercial objects because they reflect these values. For ex-ample, the brands referred to in informant accounts of con-nection were part of mainstream popular culture, espouse theimportance of “giving back,” provide the conduit for sharedintergenerational traditions, and have become a part of thesocial landscape to the extent that they gained iconic status.The very ubiquitous nature of these objects reflects that theyare inclusive and open to all in the community.

Morality

For virtue, we identified the two interconnected standardsof purity and universality. Purity represents a consistent ap-plication of a set of morals, while universality means thatthese standards override other considerations. Purity wasdemonstrated by associations between notions of innocence(often reflected in images of children playing) and selfless-ness. Universality was reflected in connections betweenidentity characterizations, such as “nonmaterialist,” and gen-eral condemnations of commercial culture, a preference forcultures wholly different from Western ways of life, theapplication of universal assessments reflected in terms suchas “dishonest,” “cheated,” and “worthwhile,” and a pref-erence for brands that addressed universal needs (such astransport) rather than prestige or patriotism (these informantsdisliked Vegemite because it was promoted as “Australian”).The application of universal standards was reflected in in-formant assessments of people (Ben Johnson) and brands

(Nike and McDonald’s) that have breached ethical standardsor have failed to take into account their wider impact onsociety (Barbie). Regardless of the recognized merits ofbrands such as Nike or McDonald’s, informants seekingvirtue were intolerant of moral lapses. Behavior perceivedas unethical overshadowed all other considerations in judg-ing the brand as (in)authentic.

Caroline’s account of her travels to India reveals how thesestandards underpin her assessment of authenticity. In her com-parative assessment of Western versus Indian culture, Carolinebelieves India symbolizes her values (whereas “the West” maybe considered profane) and represents the universal applica-tion of these values across different areas of life. When com-bined, these two standards allow Caroline to feel that hervalues are both moral and practical and that holding them ispossible. Caroline’s emphasis on the lack of materialism (bothhers and that of the Indian locals) is representative of a uni-versal judgment—both against what she views as meaninglessmaterial pursuits and in terms of giving necessary priority tocore values (interpersonal relationships, family, sharing, andsurvival). This point is reinforced in Caroline’s sadness re-garding India’s rapid economic growth, adoption of Westerngoods, and the displacement of core values. This process ofestablishing purity carries over to brands—hence, Caroline’spreference for utilitarian brands whose motivation is to fulfillthe needs of everyone (e.g., her positive assessment of theVW Beetle because of its affordability) and through her re-jection of upscale brands that charge prices well in excess ofthe product’s utility value (e.g., Chanel and Givenchy).

Despite sustained philosophical attacks on notions of cer-tainty in universal standards, concern with morality and uni-versal standards of right and wrong remain as widely heldsociocultural norms. The informants’ accounts reflected uni-versal norms, such as the lack of authenticity in contem-porary consumer culture (often associated with “Westernculture”), universal notions of right and wrong, environ-mentalism, and a sense of a “fair go” (as reflected in con-cerns about Nike’s employment practices—the notion of a“fair go” is a cornerstone of Australian identity; Blainey1994). In each case, authenticity is associated with certainmoral ideals that may involve disillusionment with the West-ern world (Taylor 1991), idealization of the innocence of“primitive societies” or nature (seen as innocent, pure, orfree from self-interest; Campbell 1987; MacCannell 1973),and a desire to transcend self-interest (Trilling 1972). Al-though practical people are celebrated in society, so too aremoral purists who sit outside institutions (such as univer-sities, churches, and parliament). These individuals are oftenaffectionately referred to as “impractical dreamers” or ashaving “their hearts in the right place” (Blainey 1994). Suchviews represent a moral longing on behalf of society totranscend practical selfish concerns.

The use of these varying standards in the different ac-counts suggests that informants engage in selective infor-mation processing and interpretation depending on the de-sired benefits sought (i.e., consumers may draw on all three


accounts at different times to advance different identitygoals)—an issue we turn to next.

AUTHENTICATING STRATEGIESThe previous section demonstrated that informants ac-

tively sought self-authentication across a wide variety ofcontexts. In each account informants related authenticity topositive identity benefits and in so doing gave precedenceto certain information cues while downplaying or ignoringothers that were inconsistent with their assessment. In thisway each informant was an active consumer (or creator) ofauthenticity rather than a passive receiver of information.The active processing of information to give preference toself and/or situationally relevant cues has been revealed ina number of studies on authenticity (as identified in theTheoretical Background). This processing involves moti-vated reasoning and more particularly the biasing and elab-oration of certain pieces of information for use as evidencein determining what is authentic (Kunda 1990). Goffman(1959) identified that, while there is a strong desire to haveothers know us as we really are, the reality of time and amyriad of other pressures result in purposeful editing anda selective projection of information in an attempt to conveythe authentic self. As part of the motivated reasoning pro-cess, our informants employed four strategies (placement,inference, reduction, and projection).

The first strategy we identified was placement. Interest-ingly, where Arnould and Price (2000) identified internalorientations (such as spontaneity or intrinsic valuing) con-ducive to self-authentication, we found that informants lo-cated themselves externally in particular places or situationsconducive to self-authentication. This involved traveling toplaces, attending events, engaging in particular experiences,and remaining loyal to certain brands. Across our accountswas a deliberate search for particular places that offered thepossibility of self-authentication. In the section above, var-ious informants stressed the number of times they had trav-eled overseas or emphasized their regular attendance at keyevents or ritualistic attendance at certain events. In seekingoutcomes associated with virtue, Caroline traveled widelybefore settling on India as a favored destination (and, asidentified in her passage, she seeks a particular part of In-dia—that not tainted by Western consumerism). Accountsof connection were replete with examples of placement,including using shows such as The Simpsons as a conduitfor familial connection and shared experience (Rowena).Finally, accounts of control featured stories about going tothe back region to seek out “life as it really is,” as opposedto “the front people put on” (William and Kate). In eachcase, placement involved informants availing themselves ofa means to enact their identity goals.

Motivated reasoning involves accentuating informationthat confirms identity or preferred outcome/position whilegiving less credence to contradictory evidence (Kunda1990). Within the passages provided, informants regularlyinferred meaning from events, people, or cues in their in-terpretation of authenticity. For example, to feel part of a

shared experience, informants seeking to connect would in-fer shared motives and values among other participants attheir chosen event—Nick, for example, took it for grantedthat other cyclists shared the same motives for being at theRound the Bay in a Day ride. Likewise Zoe inferred like-mindedness and commitment to community from the intent(sponsorship) of local surf shops. Caroline infers from thefriendliness of locals and their impoverished conditions thatthey have transcended selfish motives or material desires.Tony and the other informants infer from emotional brandmessages a desire to trick consumers into parting with theirmoney.

Reduction involves eliminating superfluous elements tofind the essence of a brand. For example, despite Tony’sclaim that ING only focuses on rational product performancein its advertisements, this statement represents the result ofremoving the lifestyle messages in the brand’s marketingcommunications (advertising for the brand features Scottishcomedian Billy Connolly, who emphasizes that by choosingING you are a smarter person—in contrast to Tony’s claimto the contrary). William’s assessment of the redesigned VWBeetle involves stripping away the marketing claims andfocusing on whether the new version resembles the originalone he owned and loved—“I don’t believe what they haveput down as words because it’s just marketing words andhype. But I look at the product itself, and I can relate to theproduct because you can still see an outline of the old car.”Likewise, accounts of virtue involve reducing the brand toa “moral core,” while accounts of connection focused onevidence that suggested being part of a community—suchas heritage, adoption by the mass market, and ubiquity.

The strategy of projection has been identified in previousresearch on authenticity, particularly where informants mustnegotiate paradoxical situations. For example, several ofRose and Wood’s (2005) informants projected desired valuesonto cast members in reality television shows in order tobuild an authentic connection with the show. Our informantsprojected their desired identities onto events in order to re-inforce their personal narrative and gain desired benefits.For example, in seeking virtue, Caroline projected her desiredvalues onto Indian locals whose friendliness reflected a certainmoral stance. Tony engaged in projection in his discussionof the ING brand. Central to Tony’s account of ING’s au-thenticity is that it provides him with factually testable in-formation to allow him to make the best possible judgment.This reflects Tony’s desired identity (as did Michael’s dis-cussion about Apple) as someone who has achieved the bestpossible outcomes by applying his resources (knowledge, ef-fort, skills, wisdom). Rowena and Zoe project their motivesfor attending various events onto other attendees to reinforcethe belief that they are connected to a community. Nick pro-jects his belief that he is a “true cyclist” onto the Campagnolobrand—he determines that Campagnolo creates quality prod-ucts to benefit the cycling community because it focuses onlyon cycling.


FIGURE 2

THE MANIFESTATION OF AUTHENTICITY IN OBJECTS, BRANDS, AND EXPERIENCES (OBE)

DISCUSSION

Our findings contribute to our understanding of the con-sumption and production of authenticity in a number ofways. We identify that, when consumers have differentgoals, they seek authenticity in different kinds of experi-ences. Three broad goals are identified (control, connection,and virtue) that drive the systematic selection and evaluationof different consumption experiences as being (in)authentic.However, despite the different goals, experiences, and cues,our informants shared a common quest—the desire for thereal, true, and genuine (i.e., the authentic). That is, consum-ers ultimately seek the same thing (authenticity) in differentobjects, brands, and events for different reasons (control,connection, and/or virtue). In articulating our findings, wealso provide an overarching framework for understandingconsumer judgments of authenticity. Our findings demon-strate a hierarchy of meaning and causality in regard to theproduction of the authentic. This is identified in figure 2.

Figure 2 identifies the interconnectedness between con-sumers’ search for authenticity; different categories of ex-periences that lead to assessments of genuineness, reality,and truth (control, connection, and virtue); and specific ex-periences that lead to assessments of control, connection,and virtue. Importantly, notions of control, connection, andvirtue are not in and of themselves authentic; rather theyare viewed as authentic only when they lead to genuineness,reality, and/or truth. Specific objects, brands, and eventsprovide the means by which consumers make assessments

of control, connection, and virtue, and therefore judgmentsof authenticity. The same event may be judged (in)authenticby the same or different consumers depending on the goal.For example, the Simpsons may provide the route to con-nection (and genuineness and authenticity) for Rowena be-cause of the show’s ubiquity, while in a different contextthe show may provide her with a feeling of control becauseof its child-friendly content (lack of profanity, violence, rac-ism, etc.).

In identifying the influence of personal goals on judgmentsof authenticity, we counter claims by Baudrillard (1988) andEco (1986) that authenticity is impossible where commonstandards for what is real or fake are lacking. The problemwith this line of thinking is that it presupposes universal stan-dards. However, as our findings clearly show, different per-sonal goals and standards enable people to find authenticityin a range of objects, brands, and events that others may deemas fake. Therefore, we add support to Rose and Wood’s (2005)notion of hyperauthenticity, in which consumers actively con-struct personally useful notions of the authentic. In doing so,we also identify the consumer as an adept, creative, and ca-pable producer of authenticity against a background of seem-ingly competing societal norms.

In contrast to previous research or philosophical reflectionson authenticity, the informants in this study found authenticityin functional and ubiquitous objects. Far from needing to berescued from mass culture (Benjamin 1960; Boyle 2003),authenticity was found in mainstream events and brands, in-


cluding fast food, mass fashion and entertainment, and bath-room products. Our research also helps to explain Graysonand Martinec’s (2004) finding that consumers attributed au-thenticity to a Sherlock Holmes tourist site. For many Anglo-Saxon consumers, Sherlock Holmes was a childhood heroand a part of social reality. Thus, such a tourist site enablesvisitors to reconnect with shared childhood experiences andprovides a coherent account of Holmes’s life that fits withthe socially constructed view of reality. Put simply, the object(the Holmes site) is a vehicle for people to connect.

By identifying the goal-contingent nature of authenticityjudgments and the standards and strategies employed, thesefindings provide a bridge between previous and future re-search on the consumption of authenticity. They also gosome way toward reducing the fragmented nature of researchon authenticity (see Beverland 2005). To date, the majorityof this research has focused on the cues that indicate au-thenticity. Although such research is necessary, there aretwo major limitations in such studies: first, they result in adiversity of conceptualizations of authenticity; second, theyare unable to account for unexpected results, such as con-sumer inclination to attribute authenticity to the fictional(Grayson and Martinec 2004). The identification of a con-tingent relationship between consumer goals and particularcues overcomes this latter limitation, suggesting that therelationship between how one achieves self-authenticationand authenticates an object is tighter than previously sug-gested (Grayson and Martinec 2004; Leigh et al. 2006).

As well as providing an overarching framework for pre-vious research on cues, we also identify processes consumersuse to realize the benefits of authenticity. Rose and Wood’s(2005) focus on the processes underpinning authenticityjudgments represents an important point of departure fromprevious research because it avoids dichotomies betweenthe real and the fake and focuses on how consumers interpretauthenticity in everyday events. We extend this by drawingexplicit links between identity goals and the means by whichconsumers authenticate brands, thus locating process issueswithin the consumer’s life world.

One such example of process strategy that adds to ourunderstanding of the inclination to negotiate paradox (Roseand Wood 2005) and suspend disbelief (Belk and Costa1998; Grayson and Martinec 2004) is that, through repeatedexposure (placement) to the context—for example, onlinesocial networks—other goal-oriented processes such as in-ference or projection become paramount as they enable con-sumers to attach themselves to idealized values or identitiesthat validate their concept of self (Schau and Gilly 2003).Extending this further, and consistent with Rose and Wood’s(2005) thinking, advancement of the self-authentication goal(e.g., validation through online social networking of the im-portance one places on community) may in future engage-ments overshadow any concerns that elements of the ex-perience might be inauthentic.

We also extend Arnould and Price’s (2000) focus on out-comes of self-authentication by identifying how consumersdeal with the seeming flux of the postmodern marketplace.

By accounting for goals (benefits), standards, and processes,we highlight the creativity or adeptness of consumers infinding authenticity in the postmodern world. Just as anoveremphasis on the self or the other may lead to isolationand alienation or a lack of individuality, our informants areaware of the need to forge an identity that marries the self-interest with community norms while tapping into universalmoral norms. These findings suggest that consumers arevery adept at adjusting to changes in the macro environment(see Thompson 2000). Far from struggling to distinguishreal from fake (hyperreality) or suffering identity crises fromdeclines in traditional markers of authenticity, our infor-mants were highly competent when it came to sorting realfrom fake, creating the genuine through selective use of cuesand finding, retaining, reinforcing, reimagining, and creatingtraditions. Also evident in the findings is the consumers’chameleon-like ability to adapt to, or morph across, chang-ing surroundings by drawing on particular strategies, stan-dards, and cues to achieve self-authentication.

Figure 2 identifies the relationship between specific objects,brands, and experiences and the search for authenticity. Inthis search, consumers may look for indexical cues that signalauthenticity. However, consumers may also transform iconiccues (using the four strategies identified herein) into indexicalones. That is, successful goal attainment involves consumerstaking personal ownership of experiences, thus giving objects,brands, and/or events an indexical character. Although Bev-erland et al. (2008) suggest that indexicality and iconicity areinterrelated, our findings identify why this is so and howiconic cues are transformed into indexical ones. Future re-search is needed to examine whether some goals are morepowerful than others in achieving this transformation.

Several other potential lines of inquiry emerge from ourfindings. First, it is unlikely that we have uncovered all thegoals, underpinning standards, and strategies that underpindifferent interpretations of authenticity in consumption. Re-search is therefore needed to expand upon our findings. Futureresearch on the effectiveness of each strategy (or strategies)in achieving self-authentication goals is also needed. Al-though we identified four strategies underpinning authenticityjudgments, we were not able to examine whether consumersused single strategies or specific mixtures of strategies whenseeking particular goals. For example, is placement criticalfor connection but not so important for control? Further in-terpretive and experimental research is needed to explore thisissue.

The second stream of future research requires a shift offocus from the authentic/inauthentic dichotomy to how con-sumers reconcile competing interpretations of what is au-thentic. Informants such as Ross and Phil adopt differentapproaches when dealing with conflicts between differentstandards. Ross, for example, compartmentalizes meaningsassociated with McDonald’s so that it is seen as authenticwhen desiring a quick and safe meal overseas but is judgedless than favorably when viewed from a moral standpoint.Phil, in contrast, synthesizes the competing standards ofcontrol and virtue by using the SUV both as a symbol of


his personal effectiveness and material gain and as a re-minder to be even more mindful of environmental issues inother aspects of his life. Future research is needed to explorethe means by which consumers deal with competing stan-dards. Such research could explore the creative approachesused by consumers to manage this tension and the capabil-ities underpinning this creativity.

It may also be possible to gain a richer understanding of theprocessing of information by examining if the self-authenti-cation motive biases information processing in predictableways. Beverland et al. (2008) propose that literal or indexicalauthenticity is desired when correct but prompt in situ decisionsare necessary. For example, in the context of beer selection,cues that clearly reinforce one message and the absence of cuesthat undermine this message are desired when informants wantto make the correct beer choice. Thus, Beverland et al. (2008)provide evidence for a relationship between a desired benefitand the process of reduction. We find a similar result in relationto control—brand claims are reduced to key performance-re-lated information. Future research could investigate these re-lationships using controlled experiments.

Gergen (1991) proposes that the postmodern self is es-sentially a relational self. The pluralistic framework pro-posed here supports such a view as consumers draw oncapabilities to relate to their immediate surroundings, a senseof community, and humanity in general. As well, the ca-pabilities demonstrated by our informants in reconcilingconflicts between competing interpretations of authenticitysuggest that the capable consumer is similar to the proteanself, whereby authenticity is realized by not only recognizingbut embracing the complexity and ambiguity of postmodernlife. The three interpretations of what is real, genuine, ortrue provide insight into how consumers manage to createa self that is at once fluid and grounded (the protean self),in that they emphasize the continuous effort consumers en-gage in when seeking to create a self capable of the multiplepresentations necessary in a postmodern environment (Lif-ton 1993, 8–9).

REFERENCES

Arnould, Eric J. and Linda L. Price (2000), “Authenticating Actsand Authoritative Performances: Questing for Self and Com-munity,” in The Why of Consumption: Contemporary Per-spectives on Consumer Motives, Goals, and Desires, ed. S.Ratneshwar, David Glen Mick, and Cynthia Huffman, Lon-don: Routledge, 140–63.

Arnould, Eric J. and Craig J. Thompson (2005), “Consumer CultureTheory (CCT): Twenty Years of Research,” Journal of Con-sumer Research, 31 (March), 868–82.

Baudrillard, Jean (1988), America, London: Verso.Belk, Russell W. and Janeen Arnold Costa (1998), “The Mountain

Man Myth: A Contemporary Consuming Fantasy,” Journalof Consumer Research, 25 (December), 218–40.

Belk, Russell W., Guliz Ger, and Søren Askegaard (2003), “TheFire of Desire: A Multisited Inquiry into Consumer Passion,”Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (December), 326–51.

Bendix, Regina (1992), “Diverging Paths in the Scientific Search forAuthenticity,” Journal of Folklore Research, 29 (2), 103–32.

Benjamin, Walter (1960), The Work of Art in the Age of MechanicalReproduction, New York: Schocken.

Berger, Peter (1973), “Sincerity and Authenticity in Modern So-ciety,” Public Interest, 31 (Spring), 81–90.

Beverland, Michael B. (2005), “Crafting Brand Authenticity: TheCase of Luxury Wine,” Journal of Management Studies, 42(5), 1003–30.

——— (2006), “The ‘Real Thing’: Branding Authenticity in theLuxury Wine Trade,” Journal of Business Research, 59 (Feb-ruary), 251–58.

Beverland, Michael B., Adam Lindgreen, and Michiel W. Vink(2008), “Projecting Authenticity through Advertising: Con-sumer Judgments of Advertisers’ Claims,” Journal of Adver-tising, 37 (1), 5–16.

Blainey, Geoffrey (1994), A Shorter History of Australia, Melbourne:Heinemann.

Boyle, David (2003), Authenticity: Brands, Fakes, Spin, and theLust for Real Life, London: HarperCollins.

Brown, Stephen (2001), Marketing: The Retro Revolution, London:Sage.

Bruner, Edward M. (1994), “Abraham Lincoln as AuthenticReproduction: A Critique of Postmodernism,” AmericanAnthropologist, 96 (2), 397–415.

Campbell, Colin (1987), The Romantic Ethic and the Spirit ofModern Consumption, London: Blackwell.

Cohen, Erik (1988), “Authenticity and Commoditization in Tour-ism,” Annals of Tourism Research, 15 (3), 371–86.

Chronis, Athinodoros and Ronald D. Hampton (2008), “Consum-ing the Authentic Gettysburg: How a Tourist Landscape Be-comes an Authentic Experience,” Journal of Consumer Be-haviour, 7 (2), 111–26.

Costa, Janeen Arnold and Gary J. Bamossy (1995), “Culture andthe Marketing of Culture: The Museum Retail Context,” inMarketing in a Multicultural World: Ethnicity, Nationalism,and Cultural Identity, ed. Janeen Arnould Costa and Gary J.Bamossy, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 299–328.

Culler, Jonathan (1981), “Semiotics of Tourism,” American Journalof Semiotics, 1 (1/2), 127–41.

Eco, Umberto (1986), Travels in Hyperreality: Essays, San Diego,CA: Harcourt.

Emmons, Robert A. (2005), “Striving for the Sacred: PersonalGoals, Life Meaning, and Religion,” Journal of Social Issues,61 (4), 731–46.

Ferrara, Alessandro (1998), Reflective Authenticity: Rethinking theProject of Modernity, London: Routledge.

Gergen, Kenneth J. (1991), The Saturated Self: Dilemmas of Iden-tity in Contemporary Life, New York: Basic Books.

Goffman, Erving (1959), The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life,Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Grayson, Kent and Radan Martinec (2004), “Consumer Perceptionsof Iconicity and Indexicality and Their Influence on Assess-ments of Authentic Market Offerings,” Journal of ConsumerResearch, 31 (September), 296–312.

Harris, Daniel (2001), Cute, Quaint, Hungry and Romantic: TheAesthetics of Consumerism, Cambridge, MA: Da Capo.

Hirschman, Elizabeth (2000), Heroes, Monsters and Messiahs:Movies and Television Shows as the Mythology of AmericanCulture, Kansas City: McNeel.

Hochschild, Arlie R. (1983), The Managed Heart: Commerciali-zation of Human Feeling, Berkeley: University of CaliforniaPress.


Holt, Douglas B. (1998), “Does Cultural Capital Structure AmericanConsumption?” Journal of Consumer Research, 25 (June), 1–25.

Holt, Douglas B. and Craig J. Thompson (2004), “Man-of-ActionHeroes: The Pursuit of Heroic Masculinity in Everyday Con-sumption,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (September),425–40.

Kates, Steven M. (2004), “The Dynamics of Brand Legitimacy:An Interpretive Study in the Gay Men’s Community,” Journalof Consumer Research, 31 (September), 455–64.

Kozinets, Robert V. (2002), “Can Consumers Escape the Market?Emancipatory Illuminations from Burning Man,” Journal ofConsumer Research, 29 (June), 20–38.

Kunda, Ziva (1990), “The Case for Motivated Reasoning,” Psy-chological Bulletin, 108 (3), 480–98.

Leigh, Thomas W., Cara Peters, and Jeremy Shelton (2006), “TheConsumer Quest for Authenticity: The Multiplicity of Mean-ings within the MG Subculture of Consumption,” Journal ofthe Academy of Marketing Science, 34 (4), 481–93.

Lifton, Robert J. (1993), The Protean Self: Human Resilience inan Age of Fragmentation, New York: Basic Books.

MacCannell, Dean (1973), “Staged Authenticity: Arrangementsof Social Space in Tourist Settings,” American Journal ofSociology, 79 (3), 589–603.

McCamish, Thornton (2008), “Journeys on a Small Screen,” Sun-day Age, April 27, 15.

McCracken, Grant (1988), The Long Interview, Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage.

Miller, Daniel (2008), The Comfort of Things, Cambridge: Polity.Postrel, Virginia (2003), The Substance of Style: How the Rise of

Aesthetic Value Is Remaking Commerce, Culture, and Con-sciousness, New York: HarperCollins.

Putnam, Robert D. (2001), Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Re-vival of American Community, New York: Simon & Schuster.

Quester, Pascale, Michael B. Beverland, and Francis Farrelly(2006), “Brand-Personal Values Fit and Brand Meanings: Ex-ploring the Role Individual Values Play in Ongoing BrandLoyalty in Extreme Sports Subcultures,” in Advances in Con-sumer Research, Vol. 33, ed. Cornelia Pechmann and LindaL. Price, Duluth, MN: Association for Consumer Research,21–27.

Rand, Ayn (1967), Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, New York:Signet.

Ratner, Carl (2000), “Agency and Culture,” Journal of the Theoryof Social Behaviour, 30 (4), 413–34.

Relph, Edward (1976), Place and Placelessness, London: Pion.Richins, Marsha (2005), “What Consumers Desire: Goals and Mo-

tives in the Consumption Environment,” in Inside Consump-tion: Consumer Motives, Goals, and Desires, ed. S. Ratnesh-war and David Glen Mick, New York: Routledge, 340–48.

Rose, Randall L. and Stacy L. Wood (2005), “Paradox and theConsumption of Authenticity through Reality Television,”Journal of Consumer Research, 32 (September), 284–96.

Schau, Hope Jensen and Mary C. Gilly (2003), “We Are What WePost? Self-Presentation in Personal Web Space,” Journal ofConsumer Research, 30 (December), 385–405.

Seabrook, John (2000), Nobrow: The Culture of Marketing, theMarketing of Culture, New York: Random House.

Spiggle, Susan (1994), “Analysis and Interpretation of QualitativeData in Consumer Research,” Journal of Consumer Research,21 (December), 491–503.

Suchman, Mark C. (1995), “Managing Legitimacy: Strategic andInstitutional Approaches,” Academy of Management Review,20 (3), 571–610.

Taylor, Charles (1991), The Ethics of Authenticity, Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.

Thompson, Craig J. (1997), “Interpreting Consumers: A Herme-neutical Framework for Deriving Marketing Insights from theTexts of Consumers’ Consumption Stories,” Journal of Mar-keting Research, 34 (November), 438–55.

—— (2000), “Postmodern Consumer Goals Made Easy!” in TheWhy of Consumption: Contemporary Perspectives on Con-sumer Motives, Goals, and Desires, ed. S. Ratneshwar, Da-vid Glen Mick, and Cynthia Huffman, London: Routledge,120–39.

Thompson, Craig J., Aric Rindfleisch, and Zeynep Arsel (2006),“Emotional Branding and the Strategic Value of the Doppel-ganger Brand Image,” Journal of Marketing, 70 (1), 50–64.

Trilling, Lionel (1972), Sincerity and Authenticity, Cambridge,MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Wang, Ning (1999), “Rethinking Authenticity in Tourism Expe-rience?” Annals of Tourism Research, 26 (2), 349–70.

Copyright of Journal of Consumer Research is the property of Journal of Consumer Research, Inc. and its

content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's

express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

Documents

Authenticity in Consumption