Journal of Happiness Studies (2006) 7:343–360 Ó Springer 2006

DOI 10.1007/s10902-005-3649-5

EMILY L. POLAK and MICHAEL E. McCULLOUGH

IS GRATITUDE AN ALTERNATIVE TO MATERIALISM?

ABSTRACT. Materialistic strivings have been implicated as a cause of

unhappiness. Gratitude, on the other hand – both in its manifestations as a
chronic affective trait and as a more temporary emotional experience – may be
a cause of happiness. In the present paper we review the empirical research on
the relationships among materialism, gratitude, and well-being. We present
new correlational data on the gratitude–materialism relationship and propose
that gratitude may have the potential to reduce materialistic strivings and
consequently diminish the negative effects of materialistic strivings on psy-
chological well-being. We conclude with some recommendations for future
research on the relationships among gratitude, materialism, and well-being.

KEY WORDS: gratitude, happiness, materialism, positive psychology

Many contemporary social theorists recognize that materialism

is a pervasive problem for individuals, relationships, and society,
although there is less consensus about what can be done to alle-
viate it. Belk (1985) defined materialism as the value a consumer
places on material possessions and concluded that materialism is
a broad construct that subsumes personality traits such as envy,
lack of generosity, and possessiveness. Richins and Dawson
(1992) conceptualized materialism as the placing of a relatively
high value on the possession of wealth and material goods. In-
glehart (2000) defined materialism (in contrast to post-material-
ism) as a persistent emphasis on lower-order needs for material
comfort and physical safety over higher-order needs such as self-
expression and quality of life. Kasser and colleagues used the
term ‘‘materialistic value orientation’’ to define the consump-
tion-based culture’s set of aims, beliefs, goals, and behaviors
(Kasser et al., 2004).
There are conflicting ideas about materialism in societal mes-
sages. At present, society places considerable emphasis on mate-
rialistic values, but at the same time, it emphasizes more
collective-oriented values such as family cohesion, community
344 EMILY L. POLAK AND MICHAEL E. McCULLOUGH

ties, and religious fulfillment (Burroughs and Rindfleisch, 2002).

Similarly, psychological theories have expressed opposing views
about materialism. For example, theorists working from an evo-
lutionary perspective (e.g., Wright, 2000) have proposed that
conspicuous consumption (Veblen, 1899/1965) and the desire to
acquire new technologies (i.e., ‘‘gadgets’’) are human universals
whose functions are not only to obtain competitive advantage
but also to signal one’s wealth, status, or resourcefulness, and
therefore, one’s desirability as a mate, leader, or coalition part-
ner (Zahavi, 1975). Indeed, recent research illustrates that peo-
ple often go to great lengths in efforts to advertise their status
through conspicuous consumption (Van Kempen, 2003).
Other psychological approaches, however, counsel caution
against materialistic strivings, irrespective of any social func-
tions that such strivings might serve. Humanistic and existential
psychologists acknowledge that material possessions are neces-
sary for meeting basic physical needs, but they argue that a
focus upon possessions and wealth ultimately undermines the
search for happiness and psychological fulfillment (Kasser,
2002). For example, Burroughs and Rindfleisch (2002) argued
that materialism creates a conflict of values (individualistic ver-
sus collectivistic) that creates psychological tension, thereby hin-
dering psychological well-being.
Insofar as materialistic strivings truly deter psychological
well-being, it may be valuable to identify psychological processes
that can be used to counteract these strivings. One possible can-
didate is the emotion of gratitude (McCullough et al., 2001,
2002). For reasons we will elaborate, we think that a positive
other-oriented emotion such as gratitude may have the power to
change social cognition, motivation, and social relationships in
precisely the ways that are likely to reduce materialistic strivings
and their deleterious effects on psychological well-being.
In the present paper, we first examine the empirical research
on materialism and its links to well-being. Second, we review
the existing research on gratitude and its links to well-being. We
then review the existing research on gratitude and materialism,
report new correlational data on the gratitude-materialism rela-
tionship, and briefly conclude with some suggestions for future
research on gratitude, materialism, and well-being.
 GRATITUDE, MATERIALISM, AND HAPPINESS 345

WHY ARE PEOPLE MATERIALISTIC?

Kasser and colleagues (2004) suggested that a materialistic val-

ues orientation develops through two routes: Developmental
experiences that create feelings of insecurity and exposure to
social models that encourage materialistic values.

Materialism and Insecurity

The first developmental route to materialism – insecurity – comes
into play when people have not had their basic psychological
needs met – needs such as safety, competence, connectedness,
and autonomy (Kasser et al., 2004). Kasser and Sheldon (2000)
identified materialism as both a symptom of insecurity and an
effort to cope with insecurity. Insofar as materialism is often an
attempt to cope with psychological insecurity, it is a poor one
because materialistic striving tends to exacerbate the very feelings
of insecurity that it is intended to eliminate. In support of this
contention, Kasser and Sheldon activated participants’ feelings
of insecurity by having them write about death. The participants
who wrote about death had higher financial expectations for the
future, became greedier, and consumed more resources in a
forest-management game than did participants in a control con-
dition. Similarly, Chang and Arkin (2002) performed an experi-
ment demonstrating that people experiencing chronic self-doubt
showed higher materialism if they were primed to experience
insecurity. Specifically, Chang and Arkin found that people with
chronic perceptions of anomie (i.e., the belief that society is los-
ing its norms and ethical values) show higher materialism if
primed with the concept of normlessness (i.e., they were induced
to think about lack of social regulation and moral standards in
society).
Other research shows that parenting styles that fail to satisfy
children’s needs may lead to higher materialism in children
(Kasser et al., 2004). Rindfleisch et al. (1997) found that young
adults raised in families in which the parents were divorced or
separated were more materialistic and exhibited higher levels of
compulsive consumption than did those who were raised in in-
tact families. Related to materialism, compulsive consumption
has been defined as ‘‘a response to an uncontrollable drive or
346 EMILY L. POLAK AND MICHAEL E. McCULLOUGH

desire to obtain, use, or experience a feeling, substance, or

activity that leads the individual to repetitively engage in behav-
ior that will ultimately cause harm to the individual and/or oth-
ers’’ (O’Guinn and Faber, 1989, p. 147).
Economic deprivation is another developmental source of
insecurity that leads to materialism. Cohen and Cohen (1996)
showed that teenagers high in materialism tend to come from
socially and economically disadvantaged backgrounds. Further,
cross-cultural work by Abramson and Inglehart (1995) showed
that large-scale economic factors also influence materialism.
People living in poorer countries were more materialistic than
those living in richer countries, generations raised in poor eco-
nomic times are more materialistic than those raised in richer
times, and national recessions tend to result in increased materi-
alism. Poor economic conditions, therefore, can cause feelings
of insecurity for which people sometimes compensate by turning
to materialistic pursuits (Van Kampen, 2003).

Exposure to Materialistic Role Models

The second developmental route to materialism is exposure to
materialistic models. Ahuvia and Wong (2002) found that indi-
viduals who reported growing up in a materialistic environment
tended to be more materialistic themselves. Further, society is
inundated with advertisements containing materialistic themes,
and people frequently assimilate materialistic values from such
sources unconsciously. For example, television is an arena for
exposure to incessant materialistic messages. Accordingly, mate-
rialism has been associated with a high amount of television
watching across numerous cultures (e.g., Sirgy et al., 1998). Tele-
vision reveals a discrepancy between people’s own lives and cul-
tural ideals, and these unrealistic media images reduce life
satisfaction (Kasser, 2002; see also Braun & Wicklund, 1989).

ASSOCIATIONS OF MATERIALISM WITH PSYCHOLOGICAL

WELL-BEING

Research on the relative happiness of wealthy and poor people

makes it clear that financial success beyond what is necessary
 GRATITUDE, MATERIALISM, AND HAPPINESS 347

for sufficient food, shelter, and clothing has a relatively small

effect on well-being (Kasser, 2002; Myers and Diener, 1996).
Moreover, researchers routinely find that individuals who focus
on the acquisition of material objects exhibit reduced life satis-
faction (Richins and Dawson, 1992), diminished levels of happi-
ness (Belk, 1985), and higher levels of depressive symptoms
(Kasser and Ryan, 1993). In addition to being less satisfied with
life as a whole, materialistic people also tend to be less satisfied
with other aspects of their lives such as their standards of liv-
ing, their family lives, and the amounts of fun and enjoyment
they experience (Richins and Dawson, 1992; Sirgy et al., 1998).
Similar associations have been documented in samples of
individuals rich and poor, and young and old, from around the
world. For example, recent research in Singapore has shown
that individuals with a high materialistic orientation were less
satisfied with their lives overall and with their friends, material
comfort, and money than those with a low materialistic orienta-
tion (Kau et al., 2000). Furthermore, Cohen and Cohen (1996)
found that adolescents who admire others because of their mate-
rial possessions are at an increased risk for various DSM-IV
psychological disorders. Indeed, placing a high priority on being
wealthy was associated with almost every Axis I and Axis II
diagnosis that Cohen and Cohen (1996) assessed. Therefore, the
pursuit of wealth and possessions as an end unto itself is associ-
ated with lower levels of well-being, lower life satisfaction and
happiness, more symptoms of depression and anxiety, more
physical problems such as headaches, and a variety of mental
disorders (Kasser, 2002). In summary, it seems that people often
pursue materialistic goals because they believe that wealth and
goods can provide them with happiness. However, materialism
has exactly the opposite effect: It has a negative association with
nearly every quality of life measure studied to date.

GRATITUDE: AN ANTIDOTE TO MATERIALISM?

What can be done to counteract the negative effects of

materialism on psychological well-being? We propose that
348 EMILY L. POLAK AND MICHAEL E. McCULLOUGH

gratitude – either as a global personality disposition or as a

temporary emotion or mood state – may be able to counteract
materialistic strivings and their negative effects on well-being.
Gratitude has been defined as ‘‘an estimate of gain coupled with
the judgment that someone else is responsible for that gain’’
(Solomon, 1977, p. 316). Bertocci and Millard (1963) noted that
gratitude is the recognition that one has been the beneficiary of
someone else’s kindness, and Emmons (2004, p. 9) defined grati-
tude as ‘‘the recognition and appreciation of an altruistic gift.’’
Thus, gratitude results from two cognitions: (a) that one has
obtained a positive outcome and (b) that an external agent is
responsible for it (McCullough et al., 2002).
McCullough et al. (2001) conceptualized gratitude as a moral
emotion because it typically results from and causes behavior
that is motivated by concern for another person. They proposed
that gratitude has three functions: First, it can serve as a moral
barometer because it provides a reading of the moral signifi-
cance of a situation, signaling the recognition that one has been
a beneficiary of another person’s benevolent actions. Second, it
can act as a moral motive in that gratitude motivates the per-
son to respond in a benevolent and prosocial way (e.g., see
Tsang, in press). Finally, it also plays the role of a moral rein-
forcer because expressing one’s gratitude to a benefactor func-
tions as a social reward and therefore encourages the benefactor
to engage in other forms of prosocial behavior in the future. In
addition to gratitude’s moral dimensions, a variety of studies
have demonstrated that gratitude is positively related to well-
being, most likely in a causal fashion.

Gratitude and Self-Report Measures of Subjective Well-Being

Several non-experimental studies have shown that gratitude is
positively associated with subjective well-being. In a series of
studies, McCullough et al. (2002) obtained positive associations
between gratitude as an affective trait (i.e., a personality-based
proneness to experience grateful emotion) and measures of posi-
tive emotionality, vitality, happiness, satisfaction with life, hope,
and optimism. For example, their six-item self-report measure
of the disposition to experience gratitude (the Gratitude Ques-
tionnaire, or GQ–6) was correlated at r=0.53 with Diener
 GRATITUDE, MATERIALISM, AND HAPPINESS 349

et al.’s (1985) Satisfaction with Life Scale. They also found that
the disposition to experience gratitude was negatively related to
symptoms of depression and anxiety. Watkins et al. (2003), and
more recently Adler and Fagley (2005), also found that longer
and more sophisticated measures of gratitude as an affective
trait were positively associated with measures of positive affect,
happiness, and satisfaction with life.
Adler and Fagley’s (2005) study in particular sheds some
light on how gratitude might deter materialism and its negative
effects on subjective well-being. Adler and Fagley created eight
subscales for measuring various aspects of appreciation. Of
those eight subscales, it was a subscale measuring appreciation
for what one has in life (measured with items such as ‘‘I remind
myself to think about the good things that I have in my life’’)
that was most strongly related to subjective well-being (i.e.,
higher positive affect, lower negative affect, and higher satisfac-
tion with life). This finding suggests that a chronic tendency to
savor and appreciate the positive circumstances of one’s exis-
tence (e.g., health, relationships, stable work, a privileged
upbringing, etc.) – a trait that is in some ways the mirror oppo-
site of materialism – may be a particularly important way to
reduce materialistic strivings and their negative effects on
subjective well-being.
McCullough et al. (2004) examined the associations of sub-
jective well-being and the disposition to experience gratitude in a
slightly different way: They correlated measures of subjective
well-being (e.g., trait positive affect, negative affect, optimism,
etc.) with the mean level of gratitude that participants reported
in their daily mood reports over the course of several weeks. In
both studies (grateful mood was measured for 21 consecutive
days in Study 1 and 14 consecutive days in Study 2), satisfaction
with life, positive affect, and optimism were positively related to
the mean levels of grateful mood that people reported in their
daily diaries. Depressive symptoms were negatively associated
with the mean level of grateful mood in participants’ daily mood
reports. In other words, people with higher satisfaction with life,
positive affect, and optimism, and lower depressive symptoms,
tended to experience higher levels of gratitude in their daily
mood on a day-to-day basis. Taken together, these four studies
350 EMILY L. POLAK AND MICHAEL E. McCULLOUGH

provide strong support for the proposition that grateful people

tend to report being happier, more optimistic, more satisfied
with their lives, and less anxious and depressed than do their less
grateful counterparts.

Gratitude and Subjective Well-Being as Measured by Alternatives

to Self-Report
An important question about the relationship between gratitude
and subjective well-being is whether the association is simply
due to method variance that the predictor variables and crite-
rion variables have in common. Fortunately, three studies have
addressed this possibility by correlating measures of trait grati-
tude with non-self-report measures of subjective well-being.
First, Woodward (2000) found that a measure of gratitude as
a personality trait was positively related to the pleasantness rat-
ings that participants ascribed to affectively neutral words. This
association indicates that grateful people tend to endow affec-
tively neutral stimuli with more positive affect than do less
grateful people. McCullough et al. (2002) circumvented the
problem of shared method variance by asking participants’
friends and relatives about the participants’ levels of gratitude.
Those informant reports were moderately correlated with the
participants’ self-reports of subjective well-being. In a third rele-
vant study, Watkins et al. (2004) found that people with high
scores on a personality measure of gratitude tended to recall
positive autobiographical memories more readily than did peo-
ple who scored lower on the gratitude measure. Therefore, it
appears that the links of gratitude as an affective trait with
measures of psychological well-being are not solely due to over-
lapping method variance: Chronically grateful people really do
seem to have higher subjective well-being than do their less
grateful counterparts.

Is the Relationship Between Gratitude and Subjective Well-Being

a Causal One?
From several studies in which investigators have manipulated
gratitude experimentally, it now seems clear that the effects
of gratitude on subjective well-being are at least partially causal
in nature. First, in a series of three studies, Emmons and
 GRATITUDE, MATERIALISM, AND HAPPINESS 351

McCullough (2003) provided experimental evidence that grati-

tude leads to improvements in psychological well-being. Partici-
pants in their first experiment were instructed to record their
emotions, physical symptoms, and health behaviors once a week
for 10 consecutive weeks. They were also randomly assigned to
one of three conditions in which they were asked to write about
(a) things for which they were grateful, (b) hassles they encoun-
tered in everyday life, or (c) daily life experiences. Participants
in the gratitude condition felt better about their lives overall
and were more optimistic in their expectations for the upcoming
week than were participants in the other conditions. They also
had fewer physical complaints than participants in the hassles
condition and spent more time exercising than did subjects in
either of the other conditions.
In their second study, Emmons and McCullough (2003) had
participants complete diary entries each day for 2 weeks rather
than once a week. In this study, keeping track of things for
which one was grateful on a daily basis led to higher levels of
positive affect as well as a higher likelihood of having helped
another person in some way than did a condition in which par-
ticipants kept track of daily hassles or a condition in which
participants kept track of ways in which they were better off than
other people. In their third study, Emmons and McCullough
(2003) studied a sample of individuals with neuromuscular dis-
ease. They found that participants who completed a daily grati-
tude writing condition experienced more positive affect, more
sleep, better sleep quality, greater optimism, and a greater sense
of connectedness to others than did individuals in a no-treatment
control condition in which they simply completed daily self-
report measures. In this third study, keeping a gratitude journal
also influenced spouses’ reports of participants’ life satisfaction.
Emmons and McCullough’s (2003) mediational analyses were
highly consistent with the proposition that the gratitude induc-
tions led to increases in grateful emotion, which in turn led to
more generalized increases in subjective well-being. In contrast,
there was rather weak support for the idea that the gratitude
inductions led first to generalized increases in subjective well-
being that in turn produced increases in gratitude specifically.
Therefore, the Emmons–McCullough results affirm the idea
352 EMILY L. POLAK AND MICHAEL E. McCULLOUGH

that gratitude, when manipulated experimentally, leads to more

general increases in subjective well-being.
Other findings support the proposition that gratitude improves
subjective well-being. In a laboratory study, Watkins et al. (2003)
had participants engage in one of three experimental conditions:
(a) thinking about someone to whom they felt grateful; (b) writ-
ing about someone to whom they felt grateful; or (c) writing a
letter to someone to whom they felt grateful. All three of these
experimental conditions led to greater short-term increases in po-
sitive affect and greater short-term reductions in negative affect
than did a control condition (i.e., writing about the layout of
one’s living room).
In a final relevant study, McCraty et al. (1995) found that an
experimental induction of appreciation, but not an experimental
induction of anger, led to increases in high-frequency heart rate
variability. The high-frequency band of the heart rate power
spectrum is believed to reflect the input of the parasympathetic
branch of the autonomic nervous system to the heart and is
related to a variety of salutary mental and physical health out-
comes (e.g., Hughes and Stoney, 2000). Thus, McCraty et al.’s
findings suggest that the emotional experience of appreciation
may bode well not only for psychological well-being but perhaps
also for physical well-being.

Gratitude and Relational Well-Being

In summary, the existing research on gratitude as a chronic
affective trait and as a more temporary emotion or mood state
is quite consistent: Gratitude promotes positive affect, reduces
negative affect, increases satisfaction with life, and may even
lead to autonomic changes that are generally thought to pro-
mote health and well-being. But gratitude not only improves
psychological well-being directly: It may also lead to changes in
people’s social behavior that could, in turn, influence their rela-
tional well-being.
For example, gratitude motivates people to act prosocially
themselves (McCullough et al., 2001). Also, grateful people are
rated as more generous and more helpful by others in their social
networks (McCullough et al., 2002) and people who are made to
feel grateful are more likely to return favors to their benefactors
 GRATITUDE, MATERIALISM, AND HAPPINESS 353

(Tsang, in press). Moreover, people who keep gratitude journals

are more likely to report having been helpful to other people than
are participants who are assigned to other writing tasks (Emmons
and McCullough, 2003). Finally, gratitude increases people’s
trust – particularly their trust in people with whom they are not
well-acquainted (Dunn and Schweitzer, 2005). Trust, of course
is essential for the deepening of social relationships. Taken
together, these results provide a clear testimonial to the social
effects of gratitude: Grateful people develop more positive per-
ceptions of, and dispositions toward, those around them.

COULD GRATITUDE REDUCE MATERIALISM DIRECTLY?

Given the positive affective and social changes that gratitude

fosters, it seems worthwhile to examine the possibility that grat-
itude can reduce materialism. Gratitude involves appraisals that
one has experienced a positive outcome and is currently in the
possession of valuable resources due to the benevolent, inten-
tional, and effortful action of another person. Modern theoriz-
ing about affect–cognition relationships gives reason to suspect
that the appraisals associated with an emotion like gratitude
can guide interpretations of new situations so that they are
viewed in a manner consistent with the activated emotion (e.g.,
Lerner and Keltner, 2000, 2001). For this reason, we expect
that gratitude – either as a chronic affective trait or as a brief
emotional or mood experience – should cause people to feel
that their lives are imbued with the good will of other people.
Therefore, people experiencing gratitude should be less prone to
materialistic strivings because they will tend to view their lives
overall as more secure and complete.

Empirical Research on the Gratitude–Materialism Relationship

Only one published study of which we are aware has examined
the association of gratitude and materialism. This study’s results
indicate that the two constructs are indeed negatively related.
McCullough et al. (2002) found that gratitude measured as an
affective trait was negatively correlated with the subscales of
two common self-report measures of materialism (Ger and
354 EMILY L. POLAK AND MICHAEL E. McCULLOUGH

Belk, 1990; Richins and Dawson, 1992). The strongest negative

association of gratitude with materialism (r=)0.38) involved a
materialism subscale that measures the belief that material pos-
sessions lead to happiness. Presently, we provide some addi-
tional correlational data that indicate that gratitude as a
personality trait is associated with two other established mea-
sures of materialistic striving.
More recently, Polak (2005) conducted a study in which
participants completed a series of self-report questionnaires
assessing their momentary feelings of gratitude and materialism.
The sample consisted of 148 undergraduate participants (97
women; 51 men) enrolled in introductory psychology classes.
Gratitude as an affective trait was measured with the GQ-6
(McCullough et al., 2002), a self-report measure consisting of
six items. Participants also reported their momentary feelings
of gratitude (that is, how they felt ‘‘right now’’) using the self-
report adjectives ‘‘grateful,’’ ‘‘thankful,’’ and ‘‘appreciative’’ on
a 5-point Likert-type scale (1=very slightly or not at all; 5=
extremely). Materialism was measured with the financial success
subscale of the Revised Aspiration Index (Kasser and Ryan,
1993) and the Materialistic Desires Scale (Kasser, 2004), which
consists of 10 items (e.g., ‘‘I wish I made more money’’).
Polak’s (2005) data come from an experimental study in
which participants were randomly assigned to mood-induction
conditions (these laboratory manipulations were not successful
so we do not consider them further). After the mood induc-
tions, participants completed the GQ)6, the gratitude manipu-
lation check questionnaire, and the two materialism measures.
The two gratitude measures were correlated at a relatively low
magnitude, r(n=148)=0.30, p<0.01, as were the two mat-
erialism measures, r(n=148)=0.20, p<0.01. The Gratitude
Questionnaire (GQ-6) was negatively correlated with both the
Materialistic Desires Scale r(n=148)=)0.24, p<0.01 and the
financial success scale, r(n=148)=)0.19, p<0.05. The measure
of current grateful emotion was correlated r(n=148)=)0.16,
and )0.041 (ns), respectively, with the Materialistic Desires
Scale and the financial success measure of materialistic striv-
ings. In sum, correlational data generated by the study showed
that gratitude as a personality trait has a small negative
 GRATITUDE, MATERIALISM, AND HAPPINESS 355

association with materialistic striving, although the state mea-

sure of gratitude was not correlated with the measures of mate-
rialism. There were no gender effects.

SUMMARY AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

People who place too much emphasis on materialistic pursuits –

people for whom obtaining wealth and material possessions
takes priority over meaningful relationships, community involve-
ment, and spirituality – tend to be unhappy people. In general,
they are dissatisfied with their lives, they tend to experience high
levels of negative emotion and low levels of positive emotion,
and they are at risk for a variety of mental disorders. In con-
trast, grateful people – people who readily recognize the many
ways that their lives are enriched by the benevolent actions of
others – tend to be extraordinarily happy. They experience high
levels of positive emotion, low levels of negative emotion, are
generally satisfied with their lives.
In other words, the hedonic profiles of materialistic people
and grateful people are mirror opposites. Is this just a coinci-
dence, or is there a deeper connection between materialism and
gratitude? We think the latter is the case: Gratitude and materi-
alism are negatively associated, and we suspect that their con-
nection could be a causal one.
The first cause for our suspicion that gratitude might red-
uce materialism is Lerner and Keltner’s (2000, 2001) work on
affect–cognition relationships. Lerner and Keltner have shown
that emotions such as anger and fear can produce changes in
judgment and social cognition. Jackson et al. (2001) applied
Lerner and Keltner’s thinking to gratitude, demonstrating that
gratitude causes people to make stable, controllable causal attri-
butions regarding an individual who has enjoyed good fortune.
In other words, gratitude causes people to focus on other indi-
viduals as causal agents, and benevolent ones at that: Recall
Dunn and Schweitzer’s (2005) finding that the experience of
grateful emotion leads people to become more trusting toward
third parties (particularly people with whom they are not well
acquainted). In this vein, we think that a specific emotion like
356 EMILY L. POLAK AND MICHAEL E. McCULLOUGH

gratitude – because it is associated with appraising one’s own

positive outcomes as being due to the intentional, benevolent,
costly, valuable behavior of other people – might also cause
people to view their own lives as more secure, safe, and fulfill-
ing. In other words, gratitude may produce the sense that one is
surrounded by beneficent causal agents. As a result (we sus-
pect), gratitude may obviate the need for materialistic striving
as a way of coping with existential insecurity (Kasser, 2002).
A second cause for our suspicion that gratitude might reduce
materialism is an evolutionary analysis of gratitude and its
functions. Since Trivers (1971), evolutionary theorists have sus-
pected that gratitude functions as a signal and reinforcer of
strong, beneficial social connections. Humans experience grati-
tude because this emotion helps us to know to whom we should
turn in future times of need and because it motivates us to treat
our benefactors with kindness in the future. In other words,
gratitude alerts us that there are people out there with our well-
being in mind and it motivates us to deepen our own reservoirs
of social capital through reciprocation. And indeed, the existing
research shows that grateful people do tend to reciprocate
favors (Tsang, in press) and that they tend to be more generous
and supportive of people in their lives (McCullough et al.,
2002). As a result, we suspect that grateful people do not simply
perceive more social support in their lives: We think they really
do have more social support. Because of these large reservoirs
of social support, grateful people may not be plagued by the
insecurity that materialistic striving is often intended to allevi-
ate. Thus, grateful people may spend less of their time striving
after wealth and material possessions and more of their time on
more meaningful pursuits, such as leading a life of purpose and
cultivating quality relationships.
In light of the negative associations between gratitude and
materialism (McCullough et al., 2002; Polak, 2005), examining
the association of gratitude as an acute affective experience with
actual materialistic behavior in the laboratory seems particu-
larly worthwhile at this time. Researchers conducting experi-
mental work along these lines might try to induce gratitude
using methods developed by McCraty et al. (1995), Watkins
et al. (2003), Jackson et al. (2001), or Dunn and Schweitzer
 GRATITUDE, MATERIALISM, AND HAPPINESS 357

(2005). Other mood induction techniques for inducing gratitude

might include the film/story technique (i.e., watching films
or reading stories designed to cause gratitude) or a gift proce-
dure in which subjects receive an unexpected gift to show the
experimenter’s appreciation for participating in the experiment
(Westermann et al., 1996). Research using exchange games
might be useful as well (e.g., Tsang, in press).
In addition to laboratory studies, daily diary or experience sam-
pling studies could shed light on whether momentary experiences
of gratitude help to deter materialistic strivings in people’s daily
lives. Moreover, although it may be the case that gratitude reduces
materialistic strivings, it is also possible that materialistic strivings
inhibit gratitude. This too could be explored in laboratory re-
search as well as in daily diary or experience sampling studies.
The prioritizing of material wealth over other values is a signif-
icant social problem. By increasing satisfaction with life, increas-
ing people’s sense of security, and giving them the distinct sense
that other people care about them, gratitude might help to allevi-
ate the materialistic striving and its negative effects. Thus, we
think the link between gratitude and materialism is a connection
well worth exploring in future research on happiness.

REFERENCES

Abramson, P.R. and R. Inglehart: 1995, Value Change in Global Perspective

(University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor).
Adler, M.G. and N.S. Fagley: 2005, ÔAppreciation: Individual differences in
finding value and meaning as a unique predictor of subjective well-beingÕ,
Journal of Personality 73, pp. 79–114.
Ahuvia, A.C. and N.Y. Wong: 2002, ÔPersonality and values based material-
ism: Their relationship and originsÕ, Journal of Consumer Psychology 12,
pp. 389–402.
Belk, R.W.: 1985, ÔMaterialism: Trait aspects of living in the material worldÕ,
Journal of Consumer Research 12, pp. 265–280.
Bertocci, P.A. and R.M. Millard: 1963, Personality and the Good: Psycho-
logical and Ethical Perspectives (McKay, New York).
Braun, O.L. and R.A. Wicklund: 1989, ÔPsychological antecedents of con-
spicuous consumptionÕ, Journal of Economic Psychology 10, pp. 161–187.
Burroughs, J.E. and A. Rindfleisch: 2002, ÔMaterialism and well-being: A con-
flicting values perspectiveÕ, Journal of Consumer Research 29, pp. 348–370.
358 EMILY L. POLAK AND MICHAEL E. McCULLOUGH

Chang, L.C. and R. Arkin: 2002, ÔMaterialism as an attempt to cope with

uncertaintyÕ, Psychology and Marketing 19, pp. 389–406.
Cohen, P. and J. Cohen: 1996, Life Values and Adolescent Mental Health
(Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ).
Diener, E., R.A. Emmons, R.J. Larsen and S. Griffin: 1985, ÔThe Satisfaction
with Life ScaleÕ, Journal of Personality Assessment 49, pp. 71–75.
Dunn, J.R. and M.E. Schweitzer: 2005, ÔFeeling and believing: The influence of
emotion on trustÕ, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 88, pp.
736–748.
Emmons, R.A.: 2004, The psychology of gratitude: An introduction, in R.A.
Emmons and M.E. McCullough (eds), The Psychology of Gratitude (Oxford
University Press, New York), pp. 3–16.
Emmons, R.A. and M.E. McCullough: 2003, ÔCounting blessings versus bur-
dens: An experimental investigation of gratitude and subjective well-being in
daily lifeÕ, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 84, pp. 377–389.
Ger, G. and R.W. Belk: 1990, ÔMeasuring and comparing materialism cross-
culturallyÕ, Advances in Consumer Research 17, pp. 186–192.
Hughes, J.W. and C. Stoney: 2000, ÔDepressed mood is related to high-
frequency heart rate variability during stressorsÕ, Psychosomatic Medicine
62, pp. 796–803.
Inglehart, R.: 2000, ‘Globalization and postmodern values’, Washington
Quarterly 23, pp. 215–228.
Jackson, L.A., D.A. Lewandowski, R.E. Fleury and P.P. Chin: 2001, ÔEffects
of affect, stereotype consistency and valence of behavior on causal attribu-
tionsÕ, Journal of Social Psychology 141, pp. 31–48.
Kasser, T.: 2004, Materialistic Desires Scale. Unpublished questionnaire
(Knox College, Galesburg, IL).
Kasser, T.: 2002, The High Price of Materialism (The MIT Press, Cambridge,
MA).
Kasser, T. and R.M. Ryan: 1993, ÔA dark side of the American dream: Cor-
relates of financial success as a central life aspirationÕ, Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology 65, pp. 410–422.
Kasser, T., R.M. Ryan, C.E. Couchman and K.M. Sheldon: 2004, Material-
istic values: Their causes and consequences, in T. Kasser and A.D. Kanner
(eds), Psychology and Consumer Culture: The struggle for a Good Life in a
Materialistic World (American Psychological Association, Washington,
DC), pp. 11–28.
Kasser, T. and K.M. Sheldon: 2000, ÔOf wealth and death: Materialism, mortality
salience, and consumption behaviorÕ, Psychological Science 11, pp. 348–351.
Kau, A.K., J. Kwon, T.S. Jiuan and J. Wirtz: 2000, ÔThe influence of materi-
alistic inclination on values, life satisfaction and aspirations: An empirical
analysisÕ, Social Indicators Research 49, pp. 317–333.
Lerner, J.S. and D. Keltner: 2000, ÔBeyond valence: Toward a model of
emotion-specific influences on judgement and choiceÕ, Cognition and Emo-
tion 14, pp. 473–493.
 GRATITUDE, MATERIALISM, AND HAPPINESS 359

Lerner, J.S. and D. Keltner: 2001, ÔFear, anger, and riskÕ, Journal of Person-
ality and Social Psychology 81, pp. 146–159.
McCraty, R., M. Atkinson, W.A. Tiller, G. Rein and A.D. Watkins: 1995, ÔThe
effects of emotions on short-term power spectrum analysis of heart rate
variabilityÕ, American Journal of Cardiology 76, pp. 1089–1092.
McCullough, M.E., R.A. Emmons and J. Tsang: 2002, ÔThe grateful disposi-
tion: A conceptual and empirical topographyÕ, Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology 82, pp. 112–127.
McCullough, M.E., S.D. Kilpatrick, R.A. Emmons and D. Larson: 2001, ÔIs
gratitude a moral affect?Õ, Psychological Bulletin 127, pp. 249–266.
McCullough, M.E., J. Tsang and R.A. Emmons: 2004, ÔGratitude in inter-
mediate affective terrain: Links of grateful moods to individual differences
and daily emotional experienceÕ, Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology 86, pp. 295–309.
Myers, D.G. and E. Diener: 1996, ‘The pursuit of happiness’, Scientific
American 26, pp. 70–72.
O’Guinn, T.C. and R.J. Faber: 1989, ÔCompulsive buying: A phenomenolog-
ical explorationÕ, Journal of Consumer Research 16, pp. 147–157.
Polak, E.: 2005, Gratitude, materialism, and well-being. Unpublished master’s
thesis. (University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL).
Richins, M.L. and S. Dawson: 1992, ÔA consumer values orientation for
materialism and its measurement: Scale development and validationÕ, Jour-
nal of Consumer Research 19, pp. 303–316.
Rindfleisch, A., J.E. Burroughs and F. Denton: 1997, ÔFamily structure,
materialism, and compulsive consumptionÕ, Journal of Consumer Research
23, pp. 312–325.
Sirgy, M.J., D.J. Lee, R. Kosenko, H.L. Meadow, D. Rahtz, M. Cicic, G. Xi
Jin, D. Yarsuvat, D.L. Blenkhorn and N. Wright: 1998, ÔDoes television
viewership play a role in the perception of quality of life?Õ, Journal of
Advertising 27(1), pp. 125–142.
Solomon, R.C.: 1977, The Passions (Anchor Books, Garden City, NY).
Trivers, R.L.: 1971, ÔThe evolution of reciprocal altruismÕ, Quarterly Review of
Biology 46, pp. 35–57.
Tsang, J., (in press). ‘Gratitude and prosocial behavior: An experimental test of
gratitude’, Cognition and Emotion.
Kempen, [Link]: 2003, ÔFooling the eye of the beholder: Deceptive status sig-
naling among the poor in developing countriesÕ, Journal of International
Development 15, pp. 157–177.
Veblen, T.: 1899/1965, The Theory of the Leisure Class (A. M. Kelley,
Bookseller, New York).
Westermann, R., K. Spies, G. Stahl and F.W. Hesse: 1996, ÔRelative effec-
tiveness of mood induction procedures: a meta-analysisÕ, European Journal
of Social Psychology 26, pp. 557–580.
360 EMILY L. POLAK AND MICHAEL E. McCULLOUGH

Watkins, P.C., D.L. Grimm and R. Kolts: 2004, ÔCounting your blessings:
Positive memories among grateful personsÕ, Current Psychology: Develop-
mental, Learning, Personality, Social 23, pp. 52–67.
Watkins, P.C., K. Woodward, T. Stone and R.L. Kolts: 2003, ÔGratitude and
happiness: Development of a measure of gratitude, and relationships with
subjective well-beingÕ, Social Behavior and Personality 31, pp. 431–452.
Woodward, K.M.: 2000, The Effect of Gratitude on Mood States. Paper
presented at the annual convention of the Western Psychological Associa-
tion (Portland, OR).
Wright, R.: 2000, Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny (Vintage Books,
New York).
Zahavi, A.: 1975, ÔMate selection – A selection for a handicapÕ, Journal of
Theoretical Biology 53, pp. 205–214.

Address for correspondence:

MICHAEL E. McCULLOUGH
Department of Psychology
University of Miami
PO Box 248185 Coral Gables
FL 33124-0751
USA

E-mail: mikem@[Link]