LANIER Jr. - & - RADER - 2015 - Consumption Experience - An Expanded View

Article
Marketing Theory
1–22
Consumption experience: ª The Author(s) 2015
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
An expanded view DOI: 10.1177/1470593115581721
mtq.sagepub.com
Clinton D. Lanier, Jr
University of St. Thomas, USA
C. Scott Rader
Western Carolina University, USA
Abstract
Experience has become a primary means by which we understand post-industrial, consumer
societies. Whilst we have learned much about consumption experiences, most studies have relied
on theories whose underlying assumptions have restricted our understanding of this important
topic. More specifically, whilst the experiential literature has expanded our perspective of the
broader structures of consumption experiences, it has limited our understanding by ascribing a
function(s) to these experiences. By interrogating not merely the empirical findings but also the
theoretical (and methodological) assumptions underlying the extant literature, this article aims both
to critique and to extend our current understanding of consumption experiences. Towards this end,
we propose a framework that examines consumption experiences on the dimensions of structural
relations and functional consequences. Based on the corresponding sub-dimensions of structure,
anti-structure, function and anti-function, we identify four primary types of consumption experience:
performance, liberatory, stochastic and adventure. A detailed description of each type of con-
sumption experience is provided, with special emphasis given to anti-functional experiences, the
nature of which both challenges and expands our understanding of experiential consumption.
Keywords
Adventure, anti-function, anti-structure, consumption experience, experiential consumption,
function, liberatory, performance, stochastic, structure
According to prevailing theory, as industrial economies transform into consumer societies

(Baudrillard, 1998; Featherstone, 1991; Slater, 1997), consumers increasingly seek out and engage
in consumption experiences as an essential aspect of their lives (Firat and Dholakia, 1998;
Lindgreen et al., 2009; Pine and Gilmore, 1999). Given this fundamental economic and cultural
Corresponding author:
Clinton D. Lanier, Jr, Opus College of Business, University of St. Thomas, 2115 Summit Avenue, MCH 316, St Paul, MN
55105, USA.
Email: lani1820@stthomas.edu
Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

2 Marketing Theory
shift, there has been an increased focus on understanding consumption experiences (Carù and
Cova, 2007; Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982; Jantzen et al., 2012), especially regarding the pro-
duction and consumption of market-based experiential offerings (Arnould and Price, 1993;
Kozinets et al., 2004; Tumbat and Belk, 2011). Whilst we have learned much about various types
of consumption experiences and their related experiential dimensions, our broader understanding
of these experiences is somewhat restricted by a set of theoretical assumptions that underlies
much of this research. The primary purpose of this article is to interrogate these assumptions and
propose alternative ways of conceptualizing consumption experiences.
Although the literature on experiential consumption has existed for over three decades (e.g.
Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982), only recently have scholars begun to argue that not all types of
consumption experiences fit neatly within prevailing explanations (Carù and Cova, 2003; Tumbat
and Belk, 2011). Whilst this research highlights the need for an expanded view of consumption
experiences, the experiential literature continues to explore various theoretical aspects of con-
sumption experiences rather than examine the theoretical assumptions that underlie the prevailing
conceptualizations of these consumption experiences. More specifically, research has overlooked
how the structural assumptions in this literature have produced functional conclusions regarding
the nature of consumption experiences. For example, even though the literature recognizes both
structural and anti-structural aspects of consumption experiences (e.g. Tumbat and Belk, 2011), it
still views these experiences as ultimately functional.
In order to address this limitation, we refine the prevailing definitions of structure, anti-structure
and function, and we propose a new concept of anti-function. We define structure as the relatively
stable, consistent and orderly relations and anti-structure as the relatively unstable, inconsistent
and disorderly relations among elements of a cultural form (e.g. a consumption experience). We
define function as the apparent, explicable and intended consequences and anti-function as the
ambiguous, inexplicable and unintended consequences of a cultural form. Whilst consumption
experiences have been thoroughly examined in terms of their structural and anti-structural
dimensions, as well as their functional consequences (Arnould and Price, 1993; Belk and Costa,
1998; Kozinets et al., 2004), they have not been readily examined in terms of their corresponding
and nonetheless important anti-functional consequences. In fact, functional assumptions are so
dominant in the experiential literature that even studies that address the anti-functional aspects of
consumption experiences ultimately ascribe them a function (Arsel and Thompson, 2011; Belk
et al., 2003; Goulding et al., 2009).
Given the meta-theoretical focus of this research, a secondary purpose of this article is to
address the way that we conduct consumer research and how our theoretical and methodological
approaches colour the specific findings of our research. For example, rather than critique
the selection of experiential research contexts (i.e. extraordinary vs. ordinary) based on the
researchers’ ideological assumptions (Carù and Cova, 2003), this article provides a critique of the
interpretation of these contexts based on the functional assumptions (theoretical and methodolo-
gical) underlying this research. In other words, as we attempt to describe aspects of a consumption
experience, which is inherently a functional task, we may inadvertently focus on the functional
aspects of the experience and ignore the anti-functional aspects simply due to our methodological
approaches and theoretical lens. In fact, there are often emic glimpses of anti-functional con-
sumption experiences in the extant literature that are etically interpreted so as to impute an
overriding function. The challenge is to give voice to these particular experiences without
restricting them to interpretations based on prevailing theoretical and methodological approaches.
We propose that consumption experiences exist that are not adequately described by the prevailing

Lanier and Rader 3
functional interpretations in the extant literature and that a broader framework is needed in order to
etically capture the richness of these emic experiences (Geertz, 1973).
This article is organized as follows. In the next two sections, we examine more specifically the
structural and functional perspectives in the experiential consumption literature and explore the
concepts of structure, anti-structure, function and anti-function. In the following section, we
provide a conceptual framework based on these dimensions, which outlines four primary types of
consumption experiences: (1) performance experiences, (2) liberatory experiences, (3) stochastic
experiences and (4) adventure experiences. We then examine each of the four types of con-
sumption experiences and their relationship to other experiential phenomena. Finally, we conclude
with a discussion of the implications and limitations of this research.
The structural view of consumption experiences

Although consumption experiences have been explored from a variety of theoretical perspectives
(Carù and Cova, 2003), the extant literature maintains the overall view that these experiences are
embedded in some form of sociocultural structure. Whilst the meta-theoretical focus of this article
is on the structural (and functional) assumptions that underlie consumption experience research
rather than on any specific theory, the predominant use of Victor Turner’s (1920–1983) ritual
theory dramatically highlights the structural approach taken in the literature.
In their review of the experiential literature, Tumbat and Belk (2011) argue that Turner’s (1969)
structural theory, particularly his concepts of structure and anti-structure, underlies much of our
understanding of consumption experiences (e.g. Arnould and Price, 1993; Belk and Costa, 1998;
Celsi et al., 1993; Kozinets, 2002; O’Guinn and Belk, 1989). In fact, Turner’s structural theory,
including the structural concepts of liminality and communitas, has been used by consumer
researchers to explain many different types of consumption experiences (e.g. Belk et al., 1989;
Cody and Lawlor, 2011; Denegri-Knott and Molesworth, 2010; Goulding and Saren, 2009; Sherry,
1990). Whilst the specifics of Turner’s theoretical perspective have been critiqued (Eade and
Sallnow, 1991), its underlying structural assumptions still persist in the literature.
According to Turner (1974), structure refers to the ordered arrangement of society, including
hierarchical roles, prescribed action patterns and normative categorical frames, whilst anti-
structure refers to that which lies outside of, or in opposition to, the ordered arrangements of
society, including undifferentiated community (i.e. communitas), ambiguous social positions (i.e.
liminality) and transcendence of categorical frames (i.e. sacredness). Tumbat and Belk (2011)
argue that the consumption literature tends to conceptualize ‘extraordinary’ consumption
experiences as primarily anti-structural in nature, which embody aspects of the natural, communal,
sacred, transcendent, authentic and romantic. These experiences are said to stand apart from
‘ordinary’ consumption experiences, which are primarily structural in nature and embody aspects
of the commercial, individual, profane, mundane, inauthentic and pragmatic.
Based on their research of commercial climbers of Mount Everest, Tumbat and Belk (2011)
challenge the received view that extraordinary consumption experiences are primarily anti-
structural and provide evidence that they also exhibit strong structural elements. They found
that whereas anti-structural consumption experiences emphasize transcendence of the commercial,
liberation from boundaries, harmony with nature and communal goals (Arnould and Price, 1993;
Belk and Costa, 1998; Kozinets, 2002), the experience of climbing Mount Everest exhibited strong
structural elements such as exploitation of the commercial, maintenance of boundaries, conquest of
nature and individual goals (Tumbat and Belk, 2011). Going a step further, these authors argue that

4 Marketing Theory
most consumption experiences exhibit both structural and anti-structural features, and consumers
must negotiate such dualities when co-creating the experience.
One of the major criticisms of the structural approach as exemplified by Turner is that it
assumes an objective, overarching and unchanging structure to society (e.g. Weber, 1995). Post-
structuralism argues that there is not a single universal structure of society but there exists mul-
tiple, conflicting and changing structures that are constantly negotiated (Barthes, 1972; Derrida,
1978; Foucault, 1980). Additionally, post-structuralism maintains that everything is situated within
a structure and that nothing exists outside of a structure (i.e. there is no position that is not informed
by some structure) (Derrida, 1978; Foucault, 1980). Consequently, post-structuralism would either
deny the existence of anti-structure or redefine it simply as another (opposing) structure. At the
same time, it does admit that some structures are more dominant than others and that structures
exist in a dialectical relationship of dominance, resistance and co-optation (Foucault, 1977). The
consumption literature has examined how consumers negotiate the tensions and conflicts among
various structures in a variety of experiential contexts (Arsel and Thompson, 2011; Goulding et al,
2009; Thompson and Hirschman, 1995).
At a meta-theoretical level, post-structuralism is not without its own issues. The argument
that everything exists and is organized within a structure makes it somewhat difficult to
explain the presence of different structures and structural change. In the classic Parmenides
argument (Ring, 1987), if everything is structure and nothing exists outside of structure, then
everything collapses into a single structure in which change is simply an illusion. In other
words, if multiple structures exist, then there must also exist a non-structural ‘space’ that
separates these structures or they ultimately reduce to a single structure in which change
is difficult to explain. Turner (1969) recognized this issue as he attempted to account for
change in society through the presence of a non-structural space (i.e. anti-structure). Post-
structuralism directly challenges this solution by embedding everything within structure. At
the same time, post-structuralism admits that all structures have inconsistencies, contra-
dictions and limitations that cannot be fully addressed or dismissed (Derrida, 1978; Foucault,
1977). The primary question is whether or not Turner’s well-used structure/anti-structure
dichotomy is obsolete in the face of post-structuralism or whether there is a way to rede-
fine these concepts in light of this newer theoretical perspective.
The functional view of consumption experiences

Whilst we have learned much about consumption experiences through the lens of both structur-
alism (Turner, 1969) and post-structuralism (Foucault, 1980), the underlying structural assump-
tions of these two theoretical perspectives have somewhat restricted our understanding of this
important topic. That is, the utilization of structural-based theories to explore consumption
experiences has forced researchers to accept the functional implications that these theories impose
upon their research. The experiential literature assumes that consumption experiences have
identifiable and interpretable consequences (e.g. feelings, fantasy and fun) (Holbrook and
Hirschman, 1982) and that these consequences (i.e. functions) are often linked to the intentions
(i.e. aims, motives or desires) of those involved (Arnould et al., 1999; Kozinets, 2002; Tumbat and
Belk, 2011). The theories on which the literature is based reinforce this connection between
structure and function, as we briefly explain subsequently.
In terms of structural theory, Turner’s (1969) perspective is based on ritual behaviours, which
are highly scripted, tightly controlled and formally performed symbolic activities that both reflect

Lanier and Rader 5
and reinforce the broader social structures to which they belong (Rook, 1985). Whether these
rituals are considered sacred or profane (Belk et al., 1989), they are ultimately functional in that
they provide social cohesion and societal integration (Van Gennep, 1960) and facilitate the
movement of meaning (McCracken, 1988). Likewise, although the liminal stage of social rituals is
considered anti-structural, it still exists within the broader structural context of the pre-liminal and
post-liminal stages and functionally contributes to the meaning of these other two (Turner, 1969).
Additionally, whilst individuals in the liminal realm are granted freedoms not afforded to those
outside of this realm, this situation does not ultimately undermine the social structure but rather
contributes to its maintenance (Turner, 1969). In fact, the ultimate function of the anti-structural
aspects of social rituals is to allow individuals to transition between established sociocultural
roles within the existing social hierarchy (Van Gennep, 1960). Consequently, both structure and
anti-structure have explicit consequences for the broader sociocultural order and implicitly support
a functional view of experience. This is evident in the structural-based experiential literature that
finds that consumption experiences allow consumers to cope with the demands of modern society,
manage their socially embedded identities and develop meaningful lives (Arnould and Price, 1993;
Belk and Costa, 1998; Kozinets, 2002). Likewise, despite bifurcating consumption experiences
into their structural and anti-structural dimensions, Tumbat and Belk (2011) maintain clearly
defined functional consequences for both of these dimensions in terms of their effect on interac-
tions, goals, boundaries and community.
The post-structuralism perspective that all human existence is situated within discursive
structures that organize and constitute human life necessarily imputes certain functions (i.e.
consequences) to these structures. For Barthes (1972), the function of these discursive structures is
to naturalize ideologically based cultural norms and practices. For Foucault (1980), the function of
these discourses is to institutionalize and reinforce power through the establishment and mainte-
nance of regimes of truth. For Derrida (1978), the function of his method of deconstruction is to
uncover the contradictions and inconsistencies of these discursive structures in order to reveal the
cultural manipulations of power. Consequently, post-structuralism does not deny the existence of
function (though it does deny a universal and unchanging function); rather, it maintains and
reproduces functional assumptions by attributing specific consequences to every structure and
assumes that these functions, no matter how multiple, contested or changing, are a fundamental
part of the structural discourse. This is evident in the post–structural-based experiential literature
that is replete with interpretations of the functional consequences of various discursive structures
on consumers experiences, such as shaping consumers’ body image (Thompson and Hirschman,
1995), providing personal transformation and spiritual enrichment (Thompson, 2004) or experi-
encing distinct forms of pleasure (Goulding et al., 2009). Whilst it is true that these functions are
often contextual, heterogeneous and changing, this does not deny that functions exist or that the
structures in which they embedded are functionally oriented.
As one of the foremost theorists on functionalism, Robert K. Merton (1910–2003) provides a
means to examine and unpack the concept of function. He defines function as the objective
consequences of a structure and distinguishes functions (i.e. positive consequences) from dys-
functions (i.e. negative consequences) (Merton, 1957). It is important to note that whilst Merton
focuses on ‘objective’ consequences, he admits that the type of function is relative since the
consequences of a structure (e.g. outsourcing) may be functional for some (e.g. owners)
and dysfunctional for others (e.g. workers). In addition, he also acknowledges the existence of
non-functions (i.e. consequences that are irrelevant to a particular structure), but views them
primarily as historical anachronisms that were once functional (or even dysfunctional) but are now

6 Marketing Theory
obsolete. Despite this seemingly relativistic view, Merton still maintains his objectivity by arguing
that all types of functions can be identified and explained.
In addition to his typology of functions, Merton (1957) argues that the concept of function (i.e.
the objective consequence of a structure) is often confused with the subjective dispositions (e.g.
goals, motives and desires) of individuals within the structure. Undoubtedly, these two are often
connected, as one often undertakes a task with a particular consequence in mind, but as Merton
argues:
it need not be assumed that the reasons advanced by people for their behaviour (‘we act for personal
reasons’) are one and the same as the observed consequences of these patterns of behaviour. The
subjective disposition may coincide with the objective consequence, but again, it may not. The two
vary independently. (1957: 24–5, italics in original)
As a result, Merton also made a distinction between functions (and dysfunctions) that are manifest
(i.e. intended consequences) and those that are latent (i.e. unintended consequences). Whilst the
experiential literature clearly acknowledges that dysfunctions exist within a consumption experi-
ence (e.g. Thompson and Tambyah, 1999), the overall focus is often on how consumers intention-
ally negotiate these tensions to produce positive outcomes (e.g. constructing a cosmopolitan
identity). What is lacking in the literature is an examination and understanding of the latent func-
tions (i.e. unintended consequences) of consumption experiences.
Classification of consumption experiences

Whilst the experiential literature has greatly improved our understanding of consumption
experiences by expanding the focus to include both extraordinary and ordinary experiences and
addressing a vast array of experiential aspects from a variety of theoretical perspectives, we
contend that this understanding is still somewhat circumscribed by an overriding functional per-
spective. In order to extend our understanding even further, this article proposes that we reconsider
consumption experiences from a broader two-dimensional perspective that explicitly examines the
relationship between the structural and functional aspects of these experiences.
The first dimension, which we label structural relations, retains the structure/anti-structure
dichotomy developed by Turner (1969), but redefines these concepts in light of more contem-
porary theoretical developments (e.g. post-structuralism). That is, rather than posit structure and
anti-structure as opposing entities or discourses, they are subsumed into a broader dimension that
focuses on the nature of the relations (e.g. material, symbolic or discursive) that underlie and
constitute a specific cultural form. In terms of its sub-dimensions, structure refers to those internal
relations that are relatively stable, consistent and orderly, and which contribute to the maintenance
of the cultural form, and anti-structure refers to those internal relations that are relatively unstable,
inconsistent and disorderly, and which contribute to the disruption of the cultural form. In keeping
with Turner’s (1969) perspective, whilst structure often constrains human actions within the social
order, anti-structure often liberates human behaviour from adherence to social norms. In keeping
with post-structuralism, structure and anti-structure are not proposed as separate spheres of
existence that stand in opposition to one another, but are relational characteristics of any given
cultural form, which always contains elements of both.
The second dimension, which we label functional consequences, maintains the basic con-
ceptualizations developed by Merton (1957), but proposes a new function/anti-function

Lanier and Rader 7
Functional consequences
Function Anti-function
Structure
Performance Stochastic
Structural relations
Anti-structure Experiences Experiences
Liberatory Adventure
Experiences Experiences
Figure 1. Classification of consumption experiences.
dichotomy. Whereas the structural dimension encompasses the nature of the relations underlying
particular cultural forms, the functional dimension encompasses the nature of the consequences
that result from these particular forms. In terms of its sub-dimensions, function refers to the
consequences of a particular cultural form that are apparent, explicable and often intended, and
anti-function refers to those consequences that are ambiguous, inexplicable and often unintended.
That is, whilst there may be consumption experiences whose consequences are clearly identifiable
and explainable (i.e. functional), there may be others whose consequences defy clear identification
or explanation. For example, it is not uncommon for consumers to express that they have no idea
what a particular experience means. In fact, the fan literature suggests that one of the primary
things that contribute to the popularity and the rich experience of a ‘cult’ text is its irresolvable
mystery (Hills, 2002). Consequently, whereas function facilitates the creation and movement of
cultural meanings, anti-function disrupts this process. Likewise, whilst function facilitates the
discrimination and classification of human behaviour, anti-function problematizes this process. As
with structure and anti-structure, function and anti-function are not separate spheres of existence,
but coexist within a cultural form.
Based on the two broader dimensions and their respective sub-dimensions, this article proposes
a ‘2 2’ matrix that classifies four primary types of consumption experiences: performance
experiences (i.e. structure/function), liberatory experiences (i.e. anti-structure/function), stochastic
experiences (i.e. structure/anti-function) and adventure experiences (i.e. anti-structure/anti-
function; see Figure 1). It is important to note that these consumption experiences are not
mutually exclusive but represent different contextual positions within an experience. Similar to
Burke’s (1966) terministic screens, classification of consumption experiences into their primary
types depends upon which of the dimensions are considered dominant and subordinate. For
instance, Goulding et al. (2009) interpret ‘clubbing’ as a functional experience because the anti-
functional consequence (i.e. losing it) is subordinate to the overall functional consequence
attributed to this experience (i.e. biosocial pleasure). Likewise, an experience may potentially
encompass all four types of consumption experience, which is why various consumers can have
totally different experiences within the same context. For example, Arnould et al. (1999) reveal

8 Marketing Theory
that not everyone who goes white water rafting experiences ‘river magic’. In some cases, a con-
sumption experience may change from one type of experience to another as aspects of (as well as
one’s position within) the experience change. For example, the movie 127 Hours reveals how a
performance experience (i.e. rock climbing), by way of a stochastic experience (i.e. slipping on the
rocks), quickly became an adventure experience (i.e. cutting off one’s arm), which eventually leads
to a liberatory experience (i.e. reflecting on one’s life).
Liberatory experiences
Whilst research on consumption experiences cover a wide range of experiences, a major focus of
the experiential literature has been on liberatory experiences (e.g. Arnould and Price, 1993; Belk
and Costa, 1998; Celsi et al., 1993; Goulding and Saren, 2009; Kozinets, 2002; Schouten and
McAlexander, 1995). Liberatory experiences are conceptualized as consumption experiences that
directly address the anti-structural (i.e. unstable, inconsistent and disorderly) relations which
underlie a cultural form(s) and which produce and promote functional (i.e. apparent, explicable and
intended) consequences that attempt to resolve the anti-structural relations, often through a new or
alternative structure. For example, Star Trek fans address the anti-structural aspects of modern
society and promote a functional utopian future based on the vision of Gene Roddenberry and the
various Star Trek texts (Kozinets, 2001).
In terms of their anti-structural dimension, liberatory experiences are often interpreted as
extraordinary (Carù and Cova, 2003) since a key feature of these experiences is consumers’ overt
(and often critical) engagement and transcendence of the structures in which they exist, be it the
commercial nature of society, the drudgery of everyday life or even the limits of human under-
standing (Arnould and Price, 1993; Belk et al., 1989; Celsi et al., 1993). By directly confronting
what are often perceived as restrictive, tedious and oppressive forces, consumers feel liberated to
participate in what they consider more relevant and personal meanings, identities and values (Belk
and Costa, 1998; Kozinets, 2002; Schouten and McAlexander, 1995). Given their functional
nature, liberation is not achieved by situating the experience within the contradictions and
inconsistencies of the structure being confronted, but within another structure that seemingly
resolves these contradictions and inconsistencies (e.g. the Burning Man festival, mountain man
rendezvous or natural health community). In fact, the anti-structural aspects (e.g. the problematic
features) of these ‘alternative’ structures are often ignored as participants’ focus on resolving the
tensions of the opposing structure (Canniford and Shankar, 2013).
In terms of their functional dimension, liberatory experiences are interpreted, at least etically, as
having a definite and intended function in that they allow consumers to take on different per-
spectives, develop new skills, construct personal meanings and alter their identities (Arnould and
Price, 1993; Goulding and Saren, 2009; Kozinets, 2002). Whilst it is true that the perspectives,
meanings and identities that are facilitated through these experiences can be quite varied, this does
not deny the broader functional nature of these experiences. In fact, one could argue that the
functions of liberatory experiences are more homogeneous than heterogeneous in that similar types
of consequences are found across contexts. In addition, despite their anti-structural nature, lib-
eratory experiences reinforce and perpetuate their functional consequences through alternative
structures that contain their own embedded rituals, cultural scripts and foundational myths
(Arnould and Price, 1993; Belk and Costa, 1998; Kozinets, 2001). Likewise, whilst research
suggests that liberatory experiences are primarily communal in nature, we contend that this is
because of the need to establish an alternative structure to substantiate the functional consequences

Lanier and Rader 9
rather than any inherent egalitarian, communitarian and collaborative nature. This need to col-
lectively embed these socially constructed meanings explains the focus in the experiential liter-
ature on consumer groups, including cultures of consumption, subcultures of consumption and
consumer tribes (Cova and Cova, 2002; Kozinets, 2001; Schouten and McAlexander, 1995). This
is not to suggest that these groups promote homogenous practices and meanings but that the
differences among them may be due to their particular functions rather than the particular cultural
context (Holt, 1997).
In addition to their anti-structural and functional dimensions, liberatory experiences are often
associated with the experiential aspects of magic, fantasy, play and creativity (Arnould and Price,
1993; Belk and Costa, 1998; Kozinets, 2001). This is not surprising since all of these aspects are
typically viewed as lying somewhat outside of the established structures of society, but whose
function is to maintain a social order (Frazer, 1922; Huizinga, 1950; Tolkien, 1964). For example,
liberatory experiences often utilize magic and fantasy to transcend mundane existence and con-
struct invented traditions that reinforce romantic beliefs, which in turn supports the alternative
meanings and identities associated with the experience (Arnould and Price, 1993; Belk and Costa,
1998). Whilst the general concept of play has been used to explain these experiences, liberatory
experiences appear to manifest themselves more specifically as games of mimicry (Caillois, 1958),
in which another world is created where participants assume identities and perpetuate meanings
that differ from their everyday lives (Goulding and Saren, 2009). Whilst research on liberatory
experiences claims that these factors are used to transcend the commercial, mundane and profane
in order to experience the natural, sublime and sacred, we argue that these aspects are used pri-
marily to create an experience that functionally addresses anti-structure.
Performance experiences
Although some argue that the experiential literature has focused entirely on liberatory experiences
(Carù and Cova, 2003), considerable research has been done on performance experiences (e.g.
Holt, 1995; Kozinets et al., 2004; Maclaran and Brown, 2005; Peñaloza, 2001; Sherry, 1998;
Thompson and Hirschman, 1995). Performance experiences are conceptualized as consumption
experiences that directly address the structural (i.e. stable, consistent and dominate) relations that
underlie a cultural form(s) and that produce and promote functional (i.e. apparent, explicable and
intended) consequences that ultimately reinforce and support these structural relationships. Whilst
the literature has examined various characteristics of these experiences, only recently have
attempts been made to classify them as a unique type of consumption experience. For example,
Tumbat and Belk (2011) argue that not all consumers seek out anti-structural experiences, but
often accept and directly engage the structural elements of a cultural form(s) in order to capitalize
on and exploit the functional consequences of the experience for their own ends.
In terms of their structural dimension, performance experiences are often interpreted as ordinary
in that what distinguishes these experiences, especially from liberatory experiences, is the
acceptance of the structures of society, which are often associated with the commercial, mundane
and profane. In fact, performance experiences are nothing if not a celebration of these various
structural factors, be it brand stores (Sherry, 1998), retail environments (Maclaran and Brown,
2005), sporting events (Holt, 1995), television shows (Fitchett, 2004), video games (Denegri-Knott
and Molesworth, 2010) and trade shows (Peñaloza, 2001). Whilst there may be some minor
transgressions of the structures that make up the experience (e.g. cheaters), there is not the overt
criticism or dismissal of these structures either entirely (e.g. spoilsports) or in favour of some

10 Marketing Theory
countervailing structure (Campbell, 1987). For example, consumers who playfully subvert the
games at ESPN Zone are not ultimately criticizing or revolting against the culturally embedded
structures of professional sports (Kozinets et al., 2004).
In terms of their functional dimension, performance experiences, like liberatory experiences,
are interpreted as having a definite function in that their particular consequences not only are
apparent and intended but are also required and expected for the experience to be successful. For
example, climbers are very aware of the consequences of reaching the summit of Mount Everest
and expect to reap the rewards of a successful climb (Tumbat and Belk, 2011). Unlike liberatory
experiences whose function is to create a new structure in order to facilitate alternative meanings
and identities that may only have relevance to a particular subculture (e.g. Star Trek fans), the
function of performance experience is to reinforce established meanings and enhance one’s current
identity within the broader society (e.g. the 13-year-old American who summited Mount Everest
basked in the limelight on many television talk shows). In addition, whilst research suggests that
performance experiences are primarily individualistic in nature, with a focus on social hierarchy,
direct competition and cultural capital (Holt, 1998; Kozinets et al., 2004; Tumbat and Belk, 2011),
we contend that they are ultimately communal in that they require broad participation in main-
stream values, norms and meanings in order for these functional consequences to be realized (e.g.
structural brand communities vs. anti-structural consumer tribes) (Muniz and O’Guinn, 2001;
Schouten and McAlexander, 1995).
Similar to research on liberatory experiences, this research has also examined the relationship
between the nature of performance experiences and other experiential aspects such as utopia,
fantasy, play and creativity (e.g. Fitchett, 2004; Kozinets et al., 2004; Maclaran and Brown, 2005).
Unlike liberatory experiences, these aspects are usually employed in performance experiences to
maintain and enhance established social structures and cultural meanings rather than promote their
transcendence and subversion. Research even suggests that consumers are unfazed about the use of
these seemingly unconventional aspects in a structural experience (e.g. the mix of fantasy in
‘reality’ television shows) (Rose and Wood, 2005). Whilst much of the research on performance
experiences has focused on the role of play in these types of experiences (e.g. Kozinets et al.,
2004), it has not explained how play fundamentally differs in performance experiences versus the
other types of experiences. Utilizing Caillois’ (1958) classification of games, we contend that
performance experiences manifest themselves more as agôn, or games of competition, in which the
primary focus is on manifesting ones’ superior physical, mental and/or social skills relative to
established social structures. For example, Holt’s (1995) description of baseball consumption
clearly reflects the structures and functions of US society in the competition both on the field and in
the stands, as fans compete with each other based on their superior mental, social and even physical
skills.
Stochastic experiences
Despite the prevailing idea that the modern world is completely rationalized (i.e. functional) (e.g.
Weber, 1904), we contend that the structural world is fraught with anti-functional experiences, one
of which we label stochastic experiences. Stochastic experiences are conceptualized as con-
sumption experiences that directly address the structural (i.e. stable, consistent and dominate)
relations that underlie a cultural form(s), but which manifest anti-functional (i.e. ambiguous,
inexplicable and unintended) consequences that actually reinforce and support these structural
relationships. For example, whilst the consumption experience of gambling has been

Lanier and Rader 11
conceptualized (and ultimately rationalized) in a variety of ways (Cosgrave, 2006), another way to
view gambling is that it provides an experience in which the rational (i.e. structural) and the
irrational (i.e. anti-functional) not only coexist but depend upon each other for the success of the
experience. Perhaps one of the reasons why gambling is cast in such a negative light (at least by
the dominant social order) is not so much due to its destructive characteristics but because it
reveals that the world cannot be completely rationalized. In fact, the widespread legalization of
casino gambling (at least in the United States) and the corresponding increase in illegal and
unregulated online forms of gambling (Cotte and LaTour, 2009) may be due more to attempts to
functionalize and legitimize gambling (Humphreys, 2010) than with attempts to promote its anti-
functional nature (e.g. what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas).
In terms of their structural dimension, stochastic experiences are embedded in and often con-
trolled by established social structures (e.g. casinos, bars and clubs). In fact, there is no attempt by
consumers to transcend these structures but rather to experience the inherent anti-functional
consequences that occur within them (Goulding et al, 2009). Whilst one might argue that sto-
chastic occurrences are due to the anti-structural aspects of a system, we contend that both types of
structural relations (i.e. structural and anti-structural) are subject to these occurrences. In fact,
rather than viewing stochastic experiences as somehow outside the flow of everyday life, most
consumers view them as a fundamental part of existence (Fiske, 1989). Whilst it is true that the
anti-structural aspects of an experience often lead to anti-functional consequences (e.g. a bad call
made by a referee affecting the outcome of a sports event), for many, the structural aspects of many
experiences cannot be completely functional without the experience losing all of its appeal (e.g. a
sports game would be unappealing if the outcome was always foretold). In fact, the inexplicable
and unpredictable outcome of an underdog team shutting out a favoured team is often more
exciting than the expected and predictable outcome.
In terms of their anti-functional dimension, the consequences of stochastic experiences are
inherently random, unpredictable and uncontrollable. This is not to suggest that the outcomes of
these events are wholly unpredictable, but that there is a definite probability that the consequences
will be different from what is expected and intended. Unlike those experiences in which con-
sumers’ expectations are vague and reveal themselves over time (Arnould and Price, 1993), in
stochastic experiences, consumers’ expectations are initially very clear, but are often thwarted by
the experience. Rather than diminish the experience, this particular aspect actually enhances the
enjoyment of stochastic experiences. For example, whilst casino gamblers’ expectations and
desires are relatively straightforward (we assume most go there with the desire to win), it is the
relatively unknown and unpredictable nature of the consequences that makes the experience
appealing. In addition, whilst some consumers may utilize these experiences for functional reasons
(e.g. the identity projects of professional sports fans), the very nature of stochastic experiences
suggests that these functional consequences are more problematic than the literature suggests (e.g.
fans’ meanings and identities are subject to the vagrancies of the team).
Given the functional tendencies in the experiential consumption literature, much of the research
that addresses these types of experiences attempts to show how consumers try to manipulate these
inherently stochastic events to make them more functional and controllable (Fitchett and Smith,
2002; Kim and McGill, 2011; Szmigin et al., 2008). In fact, consumer research even labels the
deliberate enjoyment of stochastic experiences as infantile, deviant and pathological and argues
that these experiences need to be identified, labelled and controlled (Belk, 2000; Fullerton, 2007;
Rossiter and Foxall, 2008). Perhaps humans are predisposed towards functionality, which may
explain the dominant focus on liberatory and performance experiences in the literature, but it

12 Marketing Theory
appears that most consumers are at least tacitly aware of the anti-functional and stochastic aspects
of life with some of those consumers wanting to actively engage these experiences. For example,
one of the reasons why clubbing is not considered a stochastic experience is that one of its key
features, ‘losing it’, is provided a definite and intended function in the end: biosocial pleasure
(Goulding et al., 2009). Perhaps this is what distinguishes the performance-clubbing experience
from the stochastic (i.e. the ‘untaxable, unstable and unpredictable’) nature of raves (p. 768).
Unlike liberatory and performance experiences, which are primarily communal in nature, we
contend that stochastic experiences are primarily individualistic in nature in that the anti-functional
consequences are often experienced at a deeper existential level (Sartre, 1956). For example,
research suggests that many consumers engage in the stochastic experience of impulse purchases,
which involve the ‘sudden, often powerful and persistent urge to buy something immediately’
(Rook, 1987: 191). These consumers feel like they cannot control the urge and must make the
purchase despite the social consequences. These experiences differ from the more communal-
based functional experiences in that these consequences are not to be managed or controlled
(although there is considerable social pressure to do so), but to be directly engaged precisely
because they are unmanageable and uncontrollable. In fact, imposing function may actually
diminish, or fundamentally change, this type of experience. Many consumers enjoy stochastic
experiences because it affects them at this deeply personal level (e.g. the loosening of inhibitions
through alcohol consumption and the unexpected outcomes). Overlaying a night of partying with
socially acceptable functions would likely alter (and even spoil) the experience.
The relationship between stochastic experiences and the other experiential aspects of con-
sumption (e.g. magic, fantasy and authenticity) is relatively unknown. In terms of authenticity, it is
likely that the authenticity of these experiences is determined more by what they do not include or
represent versus what they do (e.g. gambling that is not ‘fixed’ is more likely to be considered
authentic), which is not fully captured in the more functional typologies of authenticity (Grayson
and Martinec, 2004). In terms of fantasy, rather than engage in a fully realized and somewhat
predictable imaginary world (Belk and Costa, 1998), it may be the disorienting nature of stochastic
experiences (e.g. the surreal atmosphere of casinos) that some consumers actually seek (Belk,
2000). Lastly, stochastic experiences appear to be related to a particular type of play, notably
paidia, which is defined as a spontaneous and unreflective activity that seeks to destroy the sta-
bility of perception, versus ludus, which is defined as a rule-bound activity focused on achieving a
goal (Caillois, 1958). These experiences are also related to alea (i.e. games of chance) in which the
player has little control over the outcome of the game and which the capriciousness of luck actually
constitutes the appeal of the game (Caillois, 1958).
Adventure experiences
If there is little consumer research into stochastic experiences, there is even less on adventure
experiences. The concept of adventure, though, has not gone unexplored, and there exists research
on adventure in the broader fields of psychology, sociology and anthropology (Csikszentmihalyi,
1990; Mitchell, 1983; Schmidt, 1979) and even more in the specific domains of tourism, travel and
leisure (Ewert, 1989; Priest, 1992; Weber, 2001). Despite this extensive research, con-
ceptualizations of adventure remain exceedingly divergent. For instance, adventure has been
defined in the tourism and leisure journals as a performance experience (Jones et al., 2003), a
liberatory experience (Walle, 1997), and a stochastic experience, albeit one that must be controlled
or avoided at all cost (Martin and Priest, 1986).

Lanier and Rader 13
In line with our aim to focus on the theoretical assumptions underlying our understanding of
consumption experiences, this article draws upon a small group of theorists (e.g. Gurevitch, 1988;
Schuetz, 1944; Simmel, 1997) who have examined adventure’s deeper and historical usage. They
argue that adventure is not simply an aspect of an experience but is a specific type of experience
that is distinguished by its ability to resist any attempt to subsume it into a structural form or
functional consequence. For example, Simmel (1997) argues that adventure has four distinct
characteristics: (1) it is set apart from everyday life; (2) it actively engages the indefinite, uncertain
and indeterminate aspects of existence; (3) it transforms the person into an ahistorical person; and
(4) it is a process rather than content. Based on this research, adventure experiences are con-
ceptualized as consumption experiences that directly address the anti-structural (i.e. unstable,
inconsistent and disorderly) relations that underlie a cultural form(s) and which manifest anti-
functional (i.e. ambiguous, inexplicable and unintended) consequences that do not attempt to
resolve these anti-structural issues in some alternative cultural form, but which maintain these
issues in order to challenge all cultural forms. For example, unlike punk music, which developed a
distinct, though heterogeneous, subculture of consumption (e.g. distinct practices, meanings and
identities) in reaction to the harsh social conditions of its members (e.g. Hebdige, 1979), death
metal does not seek to critique the structural aspects of society in favour of some ‘liberatory’
alternative, but instead seeks to intensify these issues, thus revealing the inherent anti-structural
aspects of society and undermining not only the specific cultural forms being addressed, but all
cultural forms, including their respective practices, meanings and identities (Phillipov, 2012).
In terms of their anti-structural dimension, adventure experiences are set apart from everyday
life, though not necessarily in relation to the context of the experience (e.g. some exotic location),
but in terms of the types of relations that they engage within these contexts (i.e. unstable,
inconsistent and disorderly). As such, these experiences can take place as much on a remote
mountain top as they can in one’s home. Adventure experiences can be considered extraordinary in
that they directly engage those anti-structural relations that are usually ignored or avoided and that
are often culturally inappropriate, prohibited or illegal. Consequently, they typically stand out from
our ordinary lives and put us in situations that we normally do not encounter. Likewise, whilst
social structures are often overtly transgressed (deliberately or not), this transgression is not meant
to critique or even facilitate the structures in which these anti-structural relations are embedded
(Turner, 1969); rather, it serves to undermine and subvert the very nature of all structures (Derrida,
1978). Unlike liberatory experiences, which attempt to resolve the anti-structural issues (within an
alternative structure), adventure experiences leave these issues unresolved. For example, whilst
some consumers may indeed seek to live abroad in order to assimilate into the local culture by
managing the structural tensions among the various cultural forms in which they exist (Thompson
and Tambyah, 1999), others seek to live abroad and not assimilate in order to deliberately expe-
rience these structural conflicts (Elsrud, 2001).
In terms of their anti-functional dimension, the consequences of adventure experiences, like
stochastic experiences, are inherently random, unpredictable and uncontrollable and are often
unintended. For example, whilst death metal is typically criticized for promoting violent, antisocial
and destructive behaviour (leading to its ban in many countries), the deeper fear seems to be that
the sanctioned authorities are uncertain about the social consequences of music that directly
addresses patently taboo topics (Phillipov, 2012). In fact, whilst many art forms do address these
issues, they typically resolve them in a manner that is socially acceptable (e.g. the ever popular
police television programmes always solve their cases). Unlike stochastic experiences, which
engage the anti-functional aspects of life within the safety of established structures, thus leaving

14 Marketing Theory
cultural meanings and identities intact, adventure experiences engage anti-function in the void of
anti-structure, potentially undermining any sense of meaning and identity. Whilst this is often the
unintended consequence of a particular consumption experience, it can also be the intended
consequence in which consumers deliberately seek out an adventure in order to potentially
experience this total disruption of function. For example, long-term backpackers deliberately and
constantly place themselves in unfamiliar, uncomfortable and potentially unsafe situations in order
to challenge their particular meanings, identities and sense of control (Elsrud, 2001). Since there is
no guarantee that these experiences will result, adventure experiences are more unpredictable and
uncontrollable than stochastic experiences.
Like stochastic experiences, we contend that adventure experiences are primarily individualistic
in nature. Whilst not denying the social component of all experiences, adventures are experienced
at a deeply personal level. Likewise, even though adventure experiences share the anti-structural
dimension with liberatory experiences, the difference is that adventure experiences are not
‘boundary open’ and ‘conflict-attenuated’ events that bring people together around deeper
meanings and purpose (Arnould and Price, 1993) but are rather disruptive and disturbing events
that destabilize people’s lives by challenging the very meaning and purpose of cultural forms and
their corresponding communal functions (Novak, 1970). Although a simple binary classification of
liberatory experiences as positive and adventure experiences as negative does not fully capture the
nature of either of these experiences, adventure experiences involve an irresolvable existential
anxiety that is often removed from liberatory experiences. For example, although Arnould et al.
(1999) state that the confrontation of existential threats is important to the liberatory experience of
river rafting, it is overcoming these threats that produces the coveted river magic. In fact, one
researcher states, ‘I felt no nameless dread. I felt good. I felt aroused and calm at the same time.
I felt connected to the environment. I felt connected to myself’ (p. 58).
Adventure experiences do not provide a safe passage through the existential threats embodied in
the experience, but force the person to deal with them head on without some comfortable func-
tional support to ease their anxiety. Whilst this situation seems to correspond with the notion of risk
that is normally associated with adventure (Ewert, 1989), the risks of adventure are not physical or
psychic phenomena that need to be controlled and managed (e.g. Celsi et al., 1993), which are
actually performance risks, but are existential phenomena that can never be fully controlled or
managed. For example, Kane and Zink’s (2004) study of heli-kayaking (i.e. flying by helicopter to
a remote location and kayaking out) finds that attributions of function are usually made post hoc in
order to interpret the event once the actual anti-functional adventure is over. The essence of
adventure is the confrontation with anti-structural forces without any functional recourse other
than one’s will in the immediacy of being (Nietzsche, 1968). Unlike liberatory or performance
experiences, adventure is the realization that these existential threats ultimately cannot be managed
or resolved but must be simply endured or even accepted, as all structural forms have intractable,
inexplicable and irresolvable issues.
As with stochastic experiences, the relationship between adventure experiences and other
experiential phenomena (e.g. authenticity, play and fantasy) is relatively unknown. For example, it
is argued that whilst the commercialization (i.e. functionalization) of adventure is ultimately a
contradiction, the experience can remain authentic if everyone accepts this deception (Fletcher,
2010). The problem with this argument is that it tries to reconcile adventure with traditional
conceptualizations of authenticity rather than understand the authenticity of these experiences. In
terms of play, there appears to be a link between adventure and ilinix (i.e. games of vertigo), in
which the focus is on temporarily destroying stability of perception and inducing a sense of anxiety

Lanier and Rader 15
(Caillois, 1958). At a deeper level, there are indications in the more theoretical discussions on these
topics (Huizinga, 1950; Frazer, 1922; Tolkien, 1964) that these experiential phenomena (e.g. play,
magic and fantasy) play a major role not simply within the established structures and functions of
society but also in their very constitution, perpetuation and destruction (Cox, 1969; Jung, 1969;
Schlobin, 1979). Although we may be eternally plugged into some form of cultural code from
which we cannot escape (Arnould, 2007), this code is far from perfect, absolute or all-powerful, as
it is often turned in upon itself to reveal its flaws, boundaries and limits (Foucault, 1977). It is in
these adventurous moments that the creative force of fantasy, magic and play can have dramatic
results.
Discussion
Whilst it may be tempting to argue that all consumption experiences are embedded in some type of
structure (e.g. material, symbolic or discursive) and therefore have a definite function, this article
maintains that this is not an empirical fact but a theoretical assumption. No doubt, this assumption
is foundational to Western philosophy and underlies much intellectual thought up to our present
day. It may be, though, that the structural assumptions that underlie much of the research on
consumption experiences naturally lend themselves to functional explanations. By examining the
structural assumptions of this research and their functional equivalents, this article contends that
not all consumption experiences can be explained by a purely functional approach. At the same
time, recognizing the benefits of utilizing these assumptions and realizing the difficulty of any
theoretical explanation that eschews them, we have sought to refine and extend the structural–
functional framework to include not only anti-structural experiences but also anti-functional
experiences. Just as anti-structure does not refute the deeper elemental relations that underlie a
specific cultural form, anti-function does not deny the consequences of these forms but posits a
completely different type of outcome. Going further, rather than interpret anti-function as a means
of establishing alternative functions, which in effect would extend a function to anti-function, we
argue that anti-function cannot be subsumed into function but coexists with its functional equiv-
alent. As a result, the concept of anti-function not only takes us beyond the scope of the functional
analysis in the literature but also forces us to reassess the anti-structural analysis of these
experiences.
One of the implications of differentiating the various types of consumption experiences is that
rather than being rare occurrences, anti-functional experiences may be just as prevalent as func-
tional experiences. In this case, the literature may have led us a bit astray by focusing, at least
etically, on idealistic rather than realistic experiences (i.e. focusing on experiences that lend
themselves to coherent explanations and interpretations vs. those that do not). One has to wonder if
all of the consumption experiences examined in the literature are inherently unproblematic (i.e.
every aspect can be explained). Unfortunately, we never get to see the data that do not fit the
proposed functional interpretations, but rather we are told that there are simply boundary condi-
tions to the interpretation, with the added assumption that those things that lie beyond the
boundaries are equally explainable or interpretable. The fact that many consumers have to engage
in certain practices to smooth over the problems of particular experiences (Canniford and Shankar,
2013) suggests that this is not the case. Whilst it is certainly possible that some consumers find
anti-functional experiences unappealing, this should not imply that all consumers necessarily view
them as unattractive. It may be that our lives are filled with anti-functional consumption experi-
ences that we neither try to deliberately avoid nor try to actively resolve, but which we embrace

16 Marketing Theory
despite, or perhaps because of, their particular nature. As researchers, we would be extremely
remiss if we discount a whole realm of human experience simply to focus on what we can explain
or interpret based on accepted theoretical perspectives.
Another implication of this research is that not only may anti-functional experiences be more
prevalent than we think but they may also be increasing in our rapidly expanding consumer culture.
As a result, it is important to understand the role that marketing plays in these types of experiences.
In this age of co-optation (Thompson and Coskuner-Balli, 2007), it appears that marketing cannot
fully appropriate anti-functional experiences into its structural–functional logic without destroying
or fundamentally changing them from anti-functional to functional experiences. Some researchers
have argued that if consumers at least think they are getting an anti-functional experience, then this
is all that matters (Fletcher, 2010). Even these researchers, though are forced to admit that con-
sumers know the difference between these types of experiences and that the effect of a simulated
anti-functional experience is not the same as a genuine anti-functional experience. In fact,
anti-functional experiences may arise as the unintended result of marketing’s co-opting forces.
That is, the more the marketplace tries to co-opt anti-functional experiences, the more it creates
experiences that are beyond its control, creating a vicious circle that stresses its underlying
structure and reveals its limits (Russo, 2009).
Less of an implication than a cautionary note, this research contends that it is very important
that researchers do not associate a type of consumption experience with a specific context. For
example, gambling is not necessarily a stochastic experience any more than river rafting is a
liberatory experience or climbing Mount Everest is a performance experience. Simmel (1997)
made it very clear that the content of an experience does not make it an adventure, though most
researchers have ignored this admonition as they enumerate various adventure activities (Ewert,
1989). Whilst certain contexts may lend themselves to one type of experience over another, the
experience is neither guaranteed by nor limited to these contexts. As a result, just because
researchers can empirically find consumers that engage in gambling for functional reasons does
not preclude the fact that there may be others who engage in gambling for anti-functional reasons.
At the same time, even though there are river rafting consumers who did not have a ‘magical’
liberatory experience (Arnould et al., 1999), this does not undermine the experience of those who
did. We need to make sure that we do not discount any consumer experiences merely due to the
context.
A limitation of this article is that it does not directly address how consumers actually consume
experiences. The primary purpose of the article is not to provide a micro-level analysis of con-
sumer practices in regards to these experiences, but to provide a macro-level theoretical per-
spective on the broader nature of these experiences. With that said, how consumers consume these
experiences is a very important topic that needs to be explored. For example, in his study of
baseball fans, Holt (1995) outlines four types of consumption practices based on the dimensions of
structure and purpose. His focus on purpose naturally leads him to provide functional explanations
of these consumptions practices. Whilst this typology is very valuable in describing functional
experiences, it does not capture the essence of consuming anti-functional experiences. Alter-
natively, research into media fandom (e.g. Fiske, 1989; Jenkins, 1992; Sandvoss, 2006) may
provide rich insights into anti-functional consumption practices. Whilst some fans certainly
consume media products for functional purposes (e.g. Kozinet’s, 2001, ‘meanings’ of Star Trek),
other fans are known for their anti-functional practices of opposing, subverting and even exploding
the meanings of media texts (Pearson, 2010). In fact, many fans balk at efforts by producers and
other fans to stabilize and contain this process (Lothian, 2009).

Lanier and Rader 17
A deeper limitation is that whilst the proposed framework has provided a means to distinguish
anti-functional from functional experiences, it could be critiqued as having committed the same
error that is perpetuated in the broader literature. That is, by conceptualizing anti-function in terms
of the deeply rationalized concepts of structure and function and situating it in a matrix, the article
has inadvertently functionalized anti-function, thus contributing to the problem. We contend that
our approach was not to rationalize anti-function or provide a definitive explanation of this
dimension of consumption experiences but simply to utilize the language of existing theory to
expose an aspect of life that has been virtually ignored in the literature. The bigger question is
whether we can research these types of experiences without forcing them into a particular
explanation or interpretation. The challenge will be to develop an approach that does not attempt to
impose function on anti-functional experiences. Perhaps, this can be done by focusing on the
potential rather than the actual, as well as the unintentional versus the intentional, consequences of
consumption experiences. In addition, rather than simply state the boundary conditions of our
functional explanations, we could speculate on what we may have overlooked based on data that
have been discarded from our interpretations as a result of the inherent functional nature of our
research.
Conclusion
If we assume that there are no un-interpreted facts (Nietzsche, 1907) and that data do not speak for
themselves (Geertz, 1973), then it is imperative for researchers not only to apply their theoretical
lenses to interpret consumer experiences but also to interrogate the theoretical lenses themselves to
determine what they are and are not allowing us to see. These theoretical lenses may be severely
limiting our perspective of consumption experiences to only functional experiences that are
amenable to coherent interpretations. Whilst we accept the idea that there is no privileged position
from which to interrogate these lenses, we feel that there is value in examining one lens through
another lens to see what it both hides and reveals. This article has attempted to show that whilst the
predominant structural lens (which includes both structure and anti-structure) has allowed us to
learn much about various consumption experiences, it has also restricted our understanding to
primarily functional interpretations. By interrogating this lens and its structural and functional
assumptions, this article has proposed a framework to classify consumption experiences based on a
novel conceptualization of the factors underlying these assumptions. The resulting framework
identified two types of consumption experience (i.e. stochastic experience and adventure experi-
ence) that have gone underexplored in the experiential literature. In fact, we contend that research
that has come close to addressing these experiences (e.g. Arsel and Thompson, 2011; Belk et al.,
2003; Goulding et al., 2009) has been prevented from doing so due to the limitations of the inherent
structural–functional assumptions underlying the experiential consumption literature. A major
contribution of this article has been to provide a new language to help us transcend these lim-
itations and broaden our understanding of experiential consumption and the specific types of
consumption experience.
Through this new perspective, this article has proposed an alternative means that allows us not
only to explore stochastic and adventure experiences in more depth but also to refine our under-
standing of both performance and liberatory experiences. In addition, this theoretical classification
may help to expand our understanding of the related experiential aspects of consumption (e.g.
authenticity, fantasy, magic, play and creativity). Rather than operate similarly across each type of
experience, we believe that these aspects manifest themselves differently in the four types of

18 Marketing Theory
consumption experience. Thus, rather than view these aspects as singular and adhering to a single
set of assumptions, they may be more pluralistic and take on fundamentally different forms
depending on the underlying nature of each type of consumption experience. The endurance of
these concepts suggests that they are very robust and are not constrained by any particular context
or theoretical approach.
If we are truly in an experience economy in which the dominant mode of consumption is
experienced based (Pine and Gilmore, 1999), then it is important for us as researchers to constantly
push the boundaries of our theoretical understanding of this important phenomenon. In the 1950s,
Levy (1959) proposed that there was a whole experiential side of consumption that we were
missing. In the 1980s, Holbrook and Hirschman (1982) provided us a framework for exploring
various aspects of consumption experiences. More recently, Carù and Cova (2003) argued that
consumption experiences are not merely extraordinary but are often quite ordinary and not con-
fined to the commercial realm. This article continues in this vein by suggesting that there are some
consumption experiences that cannot be wholly explained or interpreted by the current theoretical
lens being used in the experiential literature. We provide a starting point from which to examine
these consumption experiences and encourage more theoretical and empirical investigation into
the exceedingly vast and complex nature of consumption experiences.
References
Arnould, E.J. (2007) ‘Should Consumer Citizens Escape the Market’, Annals of the American Academy of
Political and Social Science 611(1): 96–111.
Arnould, E.J. and Price, L.L. (1993) ‘River Magic: Extraordinary Experience and the Extended Service
Encounter’, Journal of Consumer Research 20(1): 24–45.
Arnould, E.J., Price, L.L. and Otnes, C. (1999) ‘Making Magic Consumption: A Study of White-Water River
Rafting’, Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 28(1): 33–68.
Arsel, Z. and Thompson, C.J. (2011) ‘Demythologizing Consumption Practices: How Consumers Protect
Their Field-Dependent Identity Investments from Devaluing Marketplace Myths’, Journal of Consumer
Research 37(5): 791–806.
Barthes, R. (1972) Mythologies. New York: Hill and Wang.
Baudrillard, J. (1998) The Consumer Society: Myths and Structures. London: Sage.
Belk, R.W. (2000) ‘May the Farce be With You: On Las Vegas and Consumer Infantalization’, Consumption,
Markets and Culture 4(2): 101–24.
Belk, R.W. and Costa, J.A. (1998) ‘The Mountain Man Myth: A Contemporary Consuming Fantasy’, Journal
of Consumer Research 25(3): 218–40.
Belk, R.W., Ger, G. and Askegaard, S. (2003) ‘The Fire of Desire: A Multisited Inquiry into Consumer
Passion’, Journal of Consumer Research 30(3): 326–51.
Belk, R.W., Wallendorf, M. and Sherry, J.F. (1989) ‘The Sacred and Profane in Consumer Behaviour:
Theodicy on the Odyssey’, Journal of Consumer Research 16(1): 1–38.
Burke, K. (1966) Language as Symbolic Action. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Caillois, R. (1958) Man, Play and Games. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Campbell, C. (1987) The Romantic Ethic and the Spirit of Modern Consumerism. London: Basil Blackwell.
Canniford, R. and Shankar, A. (2013) ‘Purifying Practices: How Consumers Assemble Romantic Experiences
of Nature’, Journal of Consumer Research 39(5): 1051–69.
Carù, A. and Cova, B. (2003) ‘Revisiting Consumption Experience: A More Humble but Complete View of
the Concept’, Marketing Theory 3(2): 267–86.
Carù, A. and Cova, B. (eds) (2007) Consuming Experience. New York: Routledge.
Celsi, R.L., Rose, R.L. and Leigh, T.W. (1993) ‘An Exploration of High-Risk Leisure Consumption through
Skydiving’, Journal of Consumer Research 20(1): 1–23.

Lanier and Rader 19
Cody, K. and Lawlor, K. (2011) ‘On the Borderline: Exploring Liminal Consumption and the Negotiation of
Threshold Selves’, Marketing Theory 11(2): 207–28.
Cosgrave, J.F. (ed.) (2006) The Sociology of Risk and Gambling. New York: Routledge.
Cotte, J. and LaTour, K.A. (2009) ‘Blackjack in the Kitchen: Understanding Online versus Casino Gambling’,
Journal of Consumer Research 35(5): 742–58.
Cova, B. and Cova, V. (2002) ‘Tribal Marketing: The Tribalisation of Society and Its Impact on the Conduct
of Marketing’, European Journal of Marketing 35(5/6): 595–620.
Cox, H. (1969) The Feast of Fools: A Theological Essay of Festivity and Fantasy. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990) Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper & Row.
Denegri-Knott, J. and Molesworth, M. (2010) ‘Concepts and Practices of Digital Virtual Consumption’,
Consumption, Markets and Culture 13(2): 109–32.
Derrida, J. (1978) Writing and Difference. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Eade, J. and Sallnow, M.J. (eds) (1991) Contesting the Sacred: The Anthropology of Christian Pilgrimage.
New York: Routledge.
Elsrud, T. (2001) ‘Risk Creation in Traveling: Backpacker Adventure Narration’, Annals of Tourism Research
28(3): 597–617.
Ewert, A. (1989) Outdoor Adventure Pursuits: Foundations, Models and Theories. Columbus: Publishing
Horizons.
Featherstone, M. (1991) Consumer Culture and Postmodernism. London: Sage.
Firat, A.F. and Dholakia, N. (1998) Consuming People: From Political Economy to Theaters of Consumption.
London: Routledge.
Fiske, J. (1989) Understanding Popular Culture. Boston: Unwin Hyman.
Fitchett, J.A. (2004) ‘The Fantasies, Orders, and Roles of Sadistic Consumption: Game Shows and the Service
Encounter’, Consumption, Markets and Culture 7(4): 285–306.
Fitchett, J.A. and Smith, A. (2002) ‘Consumer Behaviour in an Unregulated Market: The Satisfaction and
Dissatisfactions of Illicit Drug Consumption’, Journal of Consumer Behaviour 1(4): 355–68.
Fletcher, R. (2010) ‘The Emperor’s New Adventure: Public Secrecy and the Paradox of Adventure Tourism’,
Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 39(1): 6–33.
Foucault, M. (1977) ‘A Preface to Transgression’, in D. F. Bouchard (ed) Language, Counter-Memory,
Practice, pp. 29–52. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Foucault, M. (1980) Power/Knowledge. New York: Pantheon.
Frazer, J.G. (1922) The Golden Bough. New York: Macmillan.
Fullerton, R.A. (2007) ‘Psychoanalyzing Kleptomania’, Marketing Theory 7(4): 335–52.
Geertz, C. (1973) The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.
Goulding, C. and Saren, M. (2009) ‘Performing Identity: An Analysis of Gender Expressions at the Whitby
Goth Festival’, Consumption, Markets and Culture 12(1): 27–46.
Goulding, C., Shankar, A., Elliot, R. and Canniford, R. (2009) ‘The Marketplace Management of Illicit
Pleasure’, Journal of Consumer Research 35(5): 759–71.
Grayson, K. and Martinec, R. (2004) ‘Consumer Perceptions of Iconicity and Indexicality and Their
Influence on Assessments of Authentic Market Offerings’, Journal of Consumer Research 31(2):
296–312.
Gurevitch, Z.D. (1988) ‘The Other Side of Dialogue: On Making the Other Strange and the Experience of
Otherness’, American Journal of Sociology 93(5): 1179–99.
Hebdige, D. (1979) Subculture: The Meaning of Style. London: Methuen.
Hills, M. (2002) Fan Cultures. New York: Routledge.
Holbrook, M.B. and Hirschman, E.C. (1982) ‘The Experiential Aspects of Consumption: Consumer Fantasy,
Feelings and Fun’, Journal of Consumer Research 9(2): 132–40.
Holt, D.B. (1995) ‘How Consumers Consume: A Typology of Consumption Practices’, Journal of Consumer
Research 22(1): 1–16.

20 Marketing Theory
Holt, D.B. (1997) ‘Poststructuralist Lifestyle Analysis: Conceptualizing the Social Patterning of Consumption
in Postmodernity’, Journal of Consumer Research 23(4): 326–50.
Holt, D.B. (1998) ‘Does Cultural Capital Structure American Consumption?’, Journal of Consumer Research
25(1): 1–25.
Huizinga, J. (1950) Homo Ludens. Boston: The Beacon Press.
Humphreys, A. (2010) ‘Semiotic Structure and the Legitimation of Consumption Practices: The Case of
Casino Gambling’, Journal of Consumer Research 37(3): 490–510.
Jantzen, C., Fitchett, J., Østergaard, P. and Vetner, M. (2012) ‘Just for Fun? The Emotional Regime of
Experiential Consumption’, Marketing Theory 12(2): 137–54.
Jenkins, H. (1992) Textual Poachers. New York: Routledge.
Jones, C.D., Hollenhorst, S. and Perna, F. (2003) ‘An Empirical Comparison of the Four Channel Flow Model
and Adventure Experience Paradigm’, Leisure Sciences 25(1): 17–31.
Jung, C.G. (1969) The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Kane, M. and Zink, R. (2004) ‘Package Adventure Tours: Markers in Serious Leisure Careers’, Leisure
Studies 23(4): 329–45.
Kim, S. and McGill, A.L. (2011) ‘Gaming with Mr. Slot or Gaming the Slot Machine? Power, Anthro-
pomorphism, and Risk Perception’, Journal of Consumer Research 38(1): 94–107.
Kozinets, R.V. (2001) ‘Utopian Enterprise: Articulating the Meanings of Star Trek’s Culture of Consump-
tion’, Journal of Consumer Research 28(1): 67–88.
Kozinets, R.V. (2002) ‘Can Consumers Escape the Market? Emancipatory Illuminations from Burning Man’,
Journal of Consumer Research 29(1): 20–38.
Kozinets, R.V., Sherry, J.F. Jr., Storm, D., Duhachek, A., Nuttavuthisit, K. and Deberry-Spence, B. (2004)
‘Ludic Agency and Retail Spectacle,’ Journal of Consumer Research 31(3): 658–72.
Levy, S. (1959) ‘Symbols for Sale’, Harvard Business Review 37(July–August): 117–24.
Lindgreen, A., Vanhamme, J. and Beverland, M.B. (eds) (2009) Memorable Customer Experiences:
A Research Anthology. Surrey: Gower.
Lothian, A. (2009) ‘Living in a Den of Thieves: Fan Video and Digital Challenges to Ownership’, Cinema
Journal 48(4): 130–36.
Maclaran, P. and Brown, S. (2005) ‘The Center Cannot Hold: Consuming the Utopian Marketplace’, Journal
of Consumer Research 32(2): 311–23.
Martin, P. and Priest, S. (1986) ‘Understanding the Adventure Experience’, Journal of Adventure Education
3(1): 18–21.
McCracken, G. (1988) Culture and Consumption: New Approaches to the Symbolic Character of Consumer
Goods and Activities. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Merton, R.K. (1957) Social Theory and Social Structure. Glencoe: The Free Press.
Mitchell, R.G. (1983) Mountain Experience: The Psychology and Sociology of Adventure. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Muniz, A.M. and O’Guinn, T.C. (2001) ‘Brand Community’, Journal of Consumer Research 27(4): 412–32.
Nietzsche, F.W. (1907) Beyond Good and Evil: Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future. New York: The
Macmillan Company.
Nietzsche, F.W. (1968) The Will to Power. New York: Random House.
Novak, M. (1970) The Experience of Nothing. New York: Harper & Row.
O’Guinn, T.C. and Belk, R.W. (1989) ‘Heaven on Earth: Consumption at Heritage Village, USA’, Journal of
Consumer Research 16(2): 227–38.
Pearson, R. (2010) ‘Fandom in the Digital Era’, Popular Communication 8(1): 84–95.
Peñaloza, L. (2001) ‘Consuming the American West: Animating Cultural Meaning at a Stock Show and
Rodeo’, Journal of Consumer Research 28(3): 369–98.
Phillipov, M. (2012) Death Metal and Music Criticism: Analysis at the Limits. Plymouth: Lexington Books.
Pine, B.J. II and Gilmore, J.H. (1999) The Experience Economy: Work is Theatre and Every Business is a
Stage. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Lanier and Rader 21
Priest, S. (1992) ‘Factor Exploration and Confirmation of the Dimensions of an Adventure Experience’,
Journal of Leisure Research 24(2): 127–39.
Ring, M. (1987) Beginning with the Pre-Socratics. Palo Alto: Mayfield Publishing.
Rook, D.W. (1985) ‘The Ritual Dimension of Consumer Behavior’, Journal of Consumer Research 12(3):
251–64.
Rook, D.W. (1987) ‘The Buying Impulse’, Journal of Consumer Research 14(2): 189–99.
Rose, R.L. and Wood, S.L. (2005) ‘Paradox and the Consumption of Authenticity through Reality
Television’, Journal of Consumer Research 32(2): 284–96.
Rossiter, J.R. and Foxall, G.R. (2008) ‘Hull-Spence Behaviour Theory as a Paradigm for Consumer
Behaviour’, Marketing Theory 8(2): 123–41.
Russo, J.L. (2009) ‘User-Penetrated Content: Fan Video in the Age of Convergence’, Cinema Journal 48(4):
125–30.
Sandvoss, C. (2006) Fans: The Mirror of Consumption. Cambridge: Polity.
Sartre, J.P. (1956) Being and Nothingness. New York: Philosophical Library.
Schlobin, R.C. (1979) The Literature of Fantasy. New York: Garland.
Schmidt, C.J. (1979) ‘The Guided Tour: Insulated Adventure’, Urban Life 7(4): 441–67.
Schouten, J.W. and McAlexander, J.H. (1995) ‘Subcultures of Consumption: An Ethnography of the New
Bikers’, Journal of Consumer Research 22(1): 43–61.
Schuetz, A. (1944) ‘The Stranger: An Essay in Social Psychology’, American Journal of Sociology 49(6):
499–507.
Sherry, J.F. Jr. (1990) ‘A Sociocultural Analysis of a Midwestern American Flea Market’, Journal of Con-
sumer Research 17(1): 13–30.
Sherry, J.F. Jr. (1998) ‘The Soul of the Company Store: Nike Town Chicago and the Emplaced Brandscape’,
in J. F. Sherry, Jr. (ed) ServiceScapes: The Concept of Place in Contemporary Markets, pp.109–46.
Chicago: NTC.
Simmel, G. (1997) ‘The Adventure’ in D. Frisby and M. Featherstone (eds) Simmel on Culture, pp. 221–32.
London: Sage.
Slater, D. (1997) Consumer Culture and Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Szmigin, I., Bengry-Howell, A., Griffin, C., Hackley, C., Mistral, W. and Weale, L. (2008) ‘Re-framing
‘‘Binge Drinking’’ as Calculated Hedonism: Empirical Evidence from the UK’, International Journal
of Drug Policy 19(5): 359–66.
Thompson, C.J. (2004) ‘Marketplace Mythology and Discourses of Power’, Journal of Consumer Research
31(1): 162–80.
Thompson, C.J. and Coskuner-Balli, G. (2007) ‘Countervailing Market Responses to Corporate Co-optation and
the Ideological Recruitment of Consumption Communities’, Journal of Consumer Research 34(2): 135–52.
Thompson, C.J. and Hirschman, E.C. (1995) ‘Understanding the Socialized Body: A Poststructuralist
Analysis of Consumers’ Self-Conceptions, Body Images, and Self-Care Practices’, Journal of Consumer
Research 22(2): 139–53.
Thompson, C.J. and Tambyah, S.K. (1999) ‘Trying to Be Cosmopolitan’, Journal of Consumer Research
26(3): 214–41.
Tolkien, J.R.R. (1964) ‘Leaf and Tree’, in J. R. R. Tolkien (ed.) The Tolkien Reader, pp. 31–99. New York:
Ballantine.
Tumbat, G. and Belk, R.W. (2011) ‘Marketplace Tensions in Extraordinary Experiences’, Journal of Con-
sumer Research 38(1): 42–61.
Turner, V.W. (1969) The Ritual Process: Structure and Antistructure. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Turner, V.W. (1974) Dramas, Fields, and Metaphors: Symbolic Action in Human Society. Ithaca: Cornell
University Press.
Van Gennep, A. (1960) The Rites of Passage. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Walle, A.H. (1997) ‘Pursuing Risk or Insight: Marketing Adventures’, Annals of Tourism Research 24(2):
265–82.

22 Marketing Theory
Weber, D. (1995) ‘From Limen to Border: A Meditation on the Legacy of Victor Turner on American Cultural
Studies’, American Quarterly 47(3): 525–36.
Weber, K. (2001) ‘Outdoor Adventure Tourism: A Review of Research Approaches’, Annals of Tourism
Research 28(2): 360–77.
Weber, M. (1904) The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. New York: Scribner.
Clinton D. Lanier, Jr. is an associate professor of marketing in the Opus College of Business at the Univer-
sity of St Thomas. His research interests focus primarily on experiential marketing and consumption, con-
sumer culture theory and marketing theory. He has published his research in the Journal of Marketing
Management, International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing, Academy of Marketing
Studies Journal The Routledge Companion to Digital Consumption, Brand Mascots and Memorable Customer
Experiences. Address: Opus College of Business, University of St Thomas, 2115 Summit Avenue, MCH 316,
St Paul, MN 55105, USA. [email: lani1820@stthomas.edu]
C. Scott Rader is an assistant professor of marketing at Western Carolina University. His research interests
include the consumption of technology, experiential consumption and cross-cultural consumer behaviour. He
has published in the Journal of Communication Management, Journal of Marketing Management, Interna-
tional Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing and Academy of Marketing Studies Journal.
Address: Western Carolina University, 7 Killian Building Lane, Forsyth 224E, Cullowhee, NC, USA. [email:
srader@wcu.edu]

LANIER Jr. - & - RADER - 2015 - Consumption Experience - An Expanded View

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

LANIER Jr. - & - RADER - 2015 - Consumption Experience - An Expanded View

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Article

According to prevailing theory, as industrial economies transform into consumer societies

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

The structural view of consumption experiences

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

The functional view of consumption experiences

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Classification of consumption experiences

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Anti-structure Experiences Experiences

Figure 1. Classification of consumption experiences.

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIV FEDERAL DA PARAIBA on October 15, 2015

Anda mungkin juga menyukai