Consumer Wisdom: A Theoretical Framework of Five Integrated FacetsMichael Gerhard LuchsCollege of William & MaryDavid Glen MickUniversity of VirginiaAccepted by Amna Kirmani, Editor; Associate Editor, Hans BaumgartnerWe establish a parsimonious theoretical framework of consumer wisdom based on five mutually reinforcingpsychological facets. Our research draws from wisdom literature and a set of 31 phenomenological interviewswith informants who were identified through a multi-stage nomination process. The five facets of consumerwisdom that emerged are Intentionality, Contemplation, Emotional Mastery, Openness, and Transcendence.Together, they comprise a data-grounded, aspirational model of consumer wisdomfor researchers as well asconsumersto understand, maintain, and improve personal and collective well-being. We discuss the implications of the framework and directions for future research.Keywords Wisdom; Well-being; Mindfulness; Values; Morality; ChoiceIntroductionThe formal beginnings of the academic field of consumer research can be traced to the 1960s, with thefounding of the Society for Consumer Psychology(1962) and the inauguration of the Association forConsumer Research (1969). Over its first half-century, a diversity of topics has been addressed, including many related to the challenges or dark side ofconsumption. These include impulsive and compulsive buying, addictions (e.g., drugs, nicotine, gambling), materialism and status competition, decisionbiases (e.g., myopia, overconfidence), and ecologicaldeterioration, among others. Research has also suggested that reckless consumption decisions (e.g.,smoking, poor diet, alcohol abuse, sedentary lifestyles) are the leading cause of premature death inthe United States (Keeney, 2008). However, consumer research on related remedies and alternativeshas been historically scant, until recently.A growing number of consumer researchers haveturned more intensively to studying personal andcollective well-being. One subset affiliates with theTransformative Consumer Research movement (seeMick, Pettigrew, Pechmann, & Ozanne, 2012; e.g.,motivating sustainable consumption, improvingnutrition labeling, fortifying retirement savings,protecting vulnerable consumers). Another involvespublic policies on helping consumers to helpthemselves (Lynch & Wood, 2006). Research isalso now appearing on meaningful consumerchoice in terms of long- versus short-term happiness (Aaker, 2014). And there has appeared theadmirable idea of citizen-consumers within an elevated marketing system (Webster & Lusch, 2013).Across research on the tragedies, enrichments,and dilemmas of modern consumption, one couldreasonably expect that the concept that encapsulatesthe apex of human functioningas recognized byphilosophers, religious leaders, and social scientistswould have been by now woven into new theories and empirical findings in the field. Yet, wisdomis hardly to be found. The irony is glaring whenone considers proclamations from antiquity to modern psychology on the nature, significance, andurgency of wisdom:First among the virtues found in the state, wisdom comes into view. (Plato, Republic)(Wisdom is) the foundation of all good qualities.Without the guidance of wisdom, all the otherperfections, like generosity and ethics, are like agroup of people without a leader. (The DalaiLama, 1994, p. 179)Received 5 October 2017; accepted 4 February 2018Available online 17 February 2018This research was supported by the Templeton Foundationthrough a grant awarded to Michael Gerhard Luchs by theEnhancing Life Project, a project of the University of ChicagoSchool of Divinity and Ruhr-University Bochum, Germany. Thesecond author acknowledges the support of the McIntire Schoolof Commerce, University of Virginia.Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed toMichael Gerhard Luchs, Henry and Phyllis Shook Term Distinguished Associate Professor of Business, College of William &Mary, Williamsburg, VA 23187-8795, USA. Electronic mail maybe sent to [email protected].© 2018 Society for Consumer PsychologyAll rights reserved. 1057-7408/2018/1532-7663/28(3)/365392DOI: 10.1002/jcpy.1037Wisdom is what you need to understand in orderto live well and cope with the central problemsand avoid the dangers in the predicaments humanbeings find themselves in. (Nozick, 1989, p. 267)(Wisdom is) the ideal integration of knowledgeand action, mind and virtue. (Baltes & Smith,2008, p. 56)If there is anything the world needs, it is wisdom. Without it, I exaggerate not at all in sayingthat very soon there may be no world. (Sternberg, 2003, p. xviii)Similar assertions are readily found in Assmann(1994), Csikszentmihalyi (1995), Fowers (2003), Hall(2010), Kekes (1983), and Maxwell (2014), amongothers.However, wisdom might seem to consumer scholars beyond the reach of most individuals, or too pretentious, ethereal, and intractable to investigate. Yetelsewhere, in psychology particularly, wisdomresearch has accelerated during the last 20 years (Baltes & Staudinger, 2000; Ferrari & Weststrate, 2013;Grossmann, 2017; Schwartz & Sharpe, 2010; Sternberg, 1990, 1998; Sternberg & Jordan, 2005). Takentogether, these works offer hope and insights to leadpeople toward higher discernment, and even excellence, in the ways they comport their lives.Despite this promising development, Grossmann,Gerlach, and Denissen (2016) note that there stillremains meager knowledge about wisdom in everyday life, which obviously includes consumer behavior. Accordingly, we explore and seek a rich,grounded understanding of the phenomenology ofconsumer wisdom through personal stories andviewpoints. Other projects in consumer psychologyusing a similar paradigm include Baker and Hill(2013), McGrath, Sherry, and Levy (1993), and Posavac (2009). Our main intended contributions are twofold. First, we develop from these data and a selectionof compelling wisdom literature a parsimonious theoretical framework consisting of five integrated facetsof consumer wisdom, the first of its kind in the field.Second, we employ the emergent framework to provide new directions for research on consumer wisdom, covering a range of topics and varied methods.Selective Literature Review on WisdomHistorical and Modern Sources. For centuries inboth Eastern and Western philosophies, livingwisely across activities and contexts has been considered the pinnacle of human behavior (Assmann,1994; Fowers, 2003; Hall, 2010; Walsh, 2015). Developing and enacting wisdom has also been identifiedas the principal manner by which personal flourishing and the common good are achieved and sustained (Ardelt, 2004; Csikszentmihalyi, 1995;Sternberg, 1998).The Oxford English Dictionary defines wisdomas the Capacity of judging rightly in matters relating to life and conduct; soundness of judgment inthe choice of means and ends. Put differently, wisdom is doing the right thing in the right way forthe right reasons to live a good life (Schwartz &Sharpe, 2010). Hence, as revealed below, wisdomscore mission of rightness and goodness continuallyinvolves values and morality (Baltes & Staudinger,2000; Fowers, 2003; Kekes, 1995; Sternberg, 1998).Different types of wisdom have been identifiedover the years. A renowned Aristotelian distinctionis that between phronesis, the practical kind (Fowers, 2003; Schwartz & Sharpe, 2010), versus sophia,the philosophical kind (Trowbridge, 2011). The former emphasizes observation and applied reasontoward the pursuit of specific objectives. The latteremphasizes introspection and intuition that evoketimeless first principles, including a holistic perspective through which commonly perceived boundaries dissolve (notably the Self (ego) versus theOther), as emphasized in Eastern perspectives suchas Buddhism (Mick, 2017). The last 35 years of psychology research on wisdom has concentrated onphronesis (Trowbridge, 2011). A sub-goal in our project is to probe for both types of wisdom in actualconsumer behavior.The significance of wisdom is counter-weightedby the recognition that it is among the most elusiveof concepts (Sternberg, 1990; Walsh, 2015). Not surprisingly then, there is neither a consensus definition nor a predominant theory (Gluck et al., 2013; Grossmann, 2017; Trowbridge, 2011). There are alsodifferent emphases in empirical approaches, ranging from analysis of iconic wisdom figures (e.g., theBibles King Solomon, Mahatma Gandhi, EleanorRoosevelt, Martin Luther King Jr.), to the collectionof primary data via interviews, diaries, surveys,and even experiments. Given the complexity of wisdom and diversity of approaches in examining it, aplentitude of positive human virtues and characteristics has been associated over the years with wisdom (as many as 48, according to MacDonald(2011) such as attentiveness, empathy, responsibility, patience, humility, equanimity, wonder, joy,and desiring the welfare of the whole). Within the366 Luchs and Mickrealm of modern empirical research on wisdom, thecharacteristics that emerge, including what theyentail, depends in part on the context of interestand research approach.Three Contemporary Social Science Streams onWisdom. Three wisdom research streams havebeen prominent in psychology and sociology overthe last two decades. The first is the Berlin paradigm in which researchers have examined howindividuals analyze and resolve difficult life problems through interviews with small samples ofolder adults who have been nominated by peers fortheir wisdom (Baltes & Staudinger, 2000). From thatorientation, the researchers define wisdom as ahighly valued and outstanding expertise in dealingwith fundamental, that is, existential problemsrelated to the meaning and conduct of life (Kunzmann & Baltes, 2003, p. 117). Properties of wisdomderived from the Berlin paradigm include theaddressing of significant and demanding questions(and related strategies) for coping with lifes vicissitudes; knowledge and humility about the limits ofknowledge and the uncertainties of the world; asynchronization of values, goals, and action; andthe use of knowledge and judgment for the wellbeing of oneself and of others.A second stream sources from Sternbergs balance theory of wisdom. He maintains that wisdomis above all a metacognitive style, composed of theapplication of successful intelligence and creativityas mediated by values toward the achievement of acommon good. Such wisdom is attained through abalance among (a) intrapersonal, (b) interpersonal,and (c) extrapersonal interests, over (a) short, and(b) long terms by (a) adapting to existing environments, (b) shaping existing environments, and (c)selecting new environments (Sternberg, 1998, 2003).This dense conceptualization has strengths of focusing on the meta-functionality of wisdom (i.e., firstseeing the bigger picture of situations and decisionsin need of wisdom), the central role of balancingmultiple and often contradictory issues, the inescapable role of values and ethics, the importance ofboth short-term and long-term orientations, and arequirement to consider a wide range of stakeholders in anticipating the consequences of any particular decision or behavior. Despite its thoroughness,or perhaps because of it, the balance theory of wisdom has not been the focus of much empiricalresearch. Exploring this perspective is another subgoal of our work.The third paradigm focuses on wisdom as alatent construct with measurable dimensions. It hasbeen most notably developed by Ardelt (2003,2008), and more recently by others such as Bangen,Meeks, and Jeste (2013), Gluck et al. (2013), and Thomas et al. (2017) (see also Webster, 2003).Ardelt portrays wisdom as a three-dimensional construct that melds cognitive, reflective, and affectivequalities. The first encompasses a desire to understand the deeper meaning of phenomena andevents in life, especially with regard to intrapersonal and interpersonal issues. The second involvesself-examination and the use of multiple perspectives to deal with different phenomena and situations. The third reflects compassion and sympathyfor others. From this orientation, Ardelt has developed a scale and shown that overall wisdom scoresare positively related to a sense of mastery and subjective health, among other variables.The dimensions of wisdom that emerge fromresearch depend, however, on the context understudy. Todays sociopsychological research on wisdom has been primarily evident within the subfields of cognitive psychology, life span psychology,and gerontology. However, it is also appearing inapplied settings such as medicine, public policy,education, and leadership (Etheridge, 2005; Intezari& Pauleen, 2017; Plews-Ogan, Owens, & May, 2012;Sternberg, 2001; see website for the University ofChicagos Center for Practical Wisdom). Consumerbehavior has not been the subject of any wisdomresearch until relatively recently.Limited Prior Consumer Research on Wisdom. Thewords wise and unwise have appeared occasionally inconsumer and decision-making research, yet nearlyalways in an informal manner, without regard towisdom literature (e.g., Bazerman & Greene, 2010,subsection title; Hammond, Keeney, & Raiffa,1998; Chapter 11 title; Schwarz & Xu, 2011;abstract; Zeckhauser, Keeney, & Sebenius, 1996,book title).Nevertheless, a recent conceptual paper by Mickand Schwartz (2012) proposed 12 qualities of wisdom for consumer behavior derived from prior literature (e.g., adopting a wide perspective, learningfrom prior mistakes). The authors then constructedand interpreted hypothetical consumer scenarios toillustrate the presence or absence of these qualities.The dozen separate qualities they proposed arequite defensible, yet arguably unwieldy and unintegrated as a theoretical base, and the lack of empirical evidence constrains linking wisdom moreexplicitly to tangible consumer experiences andphenomena.In the lone empirical effort to date, Mick, Spiller, and Baglioni (2012) recruited college studentswho were asked to keep diaries on their productConsumer Wisdom 367purchases (e.g., food, clothing), and to provide foreach a rating of its perceived wisdom. Hierarchicalmodeling analysis showed that buying eventsrated wiser (a) had evidence of stronger pre-purchase intentions, (b) involved more informationsearch before purchase, and (c) revealed consideration of more factors, such as different usage benefits. These insights are sensible too, but the concisediary data, the reliance on college students withrestricted financial means and a highly circumscribed context, and the narrow spectrum of examined purchases limit broader conclusions onconsumer wisdom.Summary. This brief review underscores thatwisdom is both an eminent and intricate concept.In light of this background, we believe it is appropriate for the purposes of our project to not uncritically assume or wholesale adopt theories or themesfrom one specific stream of prior research. Rather,we maintain that the most appropriate approach isto obtain first-hand consumer data on the wisdomphenomenon, and identify which aspects naturallyarise and can then serve as solid footing for furtherdevelopment of consumer wisdom theory. In support of this approach, Sternberg (1998), Grossmann(2017), and others have steadfastly maintained thatwisdom is domain-specific. That is, aspects of itsnature and significance will depend on whether thecontext, for instance, is parenting, law enforcement,medical care, or, in our case, consumer behavior.From such local sensitivity, research can inductivelydetermine which wisdom elements surface andapply most fruitfully.Nonetheless, based on centuries of writings andprior sociopsychological research on wisdom, wealso acknowledge up front that we began withcertain oft-emphasized insights that we thenlooked for with interest in our data. One is thatwisdom is integrative insofar as it is the mastervirtue that recruits and comingles certain other virtues as a situation demands (Ardelt, 2003, 2008;Schwartz & Sharpe, 2010; The Dalai Lama, 1994).Second, wisdom must often balance or take a middle-way approach to resolving alternative or seemingly incompatible goals and options and avoidingextreme responses in most cases (Schwartz &Sharpe, 2010; Sternberg, 1998). Third, wisdomsleading objective is well-being, which is encompassed by a combination of the physical, economic, socio-cultural, psychological, emotiona
l,political, and spiritual dimensions of life (McGregor, 2010; Ryff, 1989). While we find the predominant paradigms of sociopsychological wisdomresearch compelling and useful (as summarizedabove), we also consider and endorse Aldwins(2009, p. 3) criticism that most social scientists inwisdom research have under-assimilated sophia(philosophical wisdom).MethodologyPsychology research on wisdom has drawn fromthree approaches. They are known as (a) explicit (inwhich researchers use literature and logic tohypothesize a theory, e.g., Baltes & Staudinger,2000; Sternberg, 1998), (b) phenomenological (basedon the study of lived experiences, e.g., Montgomery, Barber, & McKee, 2002), and (c) implicit(based on peoples lay opinions on wisdom, e.g.,Clayton & Birren, 1980; Sternberg, 1985). Given thelong literature on wisdom, plus multipleapproaches to determine its sociopsychologicalqualities, our methodological thrust is hybrid bydesign. It involves keen awareness of prior theoriesand research (explicit approach) combined with discovery-oriented depth interviews (phenomenological approach) and, in the end, direct queries tointerviewees for ascertaining their views throughtheir words on the meaning of wisdom and wiseconsumption (implicit approach).Informant RecruitmentFollowing the Berlin paradigm, our sampling tactic was to identify and interview people who wereconsidered exemplars of wisdom in daily life (see,e.g., Baltes, Staudinger, Maercker, & Smith, 1995).Given that wise people typically do not classifythemselves as suchhumility is a time-honoredtrait among wise individuals (Hall, 2010)ourrecruitment approach was multi-staged and selective. In addition to seeking initial nominations ofwise persons (as described further below), we alsoused snowball sampling among the early informants. Overall, we conducted fieldwork stretchingfrom the Northeastern and Southeastern UnitedStates to the Midwest and West, using purposivesampling to pinpoint specific individuals whowould be well-suited for an investigation of consumer wisdom.The initial nominators that we approachedwere known gatekeepers in various organizationsacross several different communities. We met withcommunity leaders, such as the city coordinatorfor Residential Sustainability Outreach in Portland,Oregon, who then introduced us to principals inother local organizations. Since we did not yet368 Luchs and Mickhave the benefit of an established definition ofconsumer wisdom, we asked these individuals tonominate potential informants after we describedattributes from prior literature that are associatedwith wisdom in general. Specifically, invokingSternbergs balance theory of wisdom (1998), wedescribed a wise individual as a good decisionmaker who effectively balances heart and mind,is concerned as much with the future as with thepresent, and considers others needs as well astheir own. We then conducted phone screeningswith each nominee and shared information aboutthe interview procedure and topic, described simply as everyday decision making. Next, wescheduled interviews to take place in informantshomes, except for two interviews that were conducted in neutral locations at the intervieweesrequest (see Table 1 for summary information onthe 31 informants).Interview ProcedureThe interviews averaged 90 min and each beganwith informants providing information about theirbackgrounds and lifestyles. Next, they werereminded that the interview was focused on everyday decision making and that we would usethe context of consumption behaviors for us tounderstand their approach (i.e., their personal philosophy and practices). We then asked them todescribe in detail a significant consumption relateddecision that they had made in the prior 612 months. We repeated this instruction for otherconsumption choices, eventually including thosethat they would consider to be relatively minorchoices. We probed as warranted at various stagesof consumer behavior, from need identification,search, and choice, to ownership, use, and (if applicable) disposition. At each stage, we asked forTable 1Informant Summary (Alphabetical by First Name)Name Age Gender Family status Occupation US region Community typeAlex 20s Male Single Student West UrbanAllen 70s Male Married Executive (ret) Southeast SuburbanBen 40s Male Married Self-employed yoga instructor Southeast SuburbanBernard 50s Male Married Teacher Midwest SuburbanBetty 60s Female Married Customer service West UrbanBill 90s Male Married Accountant (ret) Midwest SuburbanBob 50s Male Married Executive (ret) Southeast SuburbanBrent 40s Male Married Farmer Northeast RuralCaleb Teen Male Single Student West UrbanConnie 60s Female Divorced Permaculture educator West UrbanDale 60s Male Married Executive (ret) Midwest SuburbanHila 30s Female Married Customer service West UrbanIwona 30s Female Married Fitness trainer Southeast RuralJen 40s Female Married Farmer Northeast RuralJenn 40s Female Married Self-employed Southeast SuburbanJessamyn 30s Female Married Mother West UrbanJoel 50s Male Married Farmer/author Southeast RuralJohn 40s Male Married Farmer Northeast RuralKarma 40s Female Married Farmer Northeast RuralKristyn 40s Female Married Mother Southeast SuburbanLes 70s Male Married Administrator (ret) Southeast SuburbanLiz 30s Female Married Farmer Northeast RuralMatthew 30s Male Married Farmer Northeast RuralMonica 30s Female Married Administrator Southeast SuburbanNatalie 30s Female Married Consultant/journalist Southeast SuburbanOle 60s Male Married Physician West UrbanRandy 60s Male Married Salesman (ret) Midwest SuburbanRita 60s Female Divorced Self-employed executive coach Southeast SuburbanTeresa 40s Female Married Farmer Northeast RuralTom 60s Male Married Teacher (ret) West UrbanVickie 60s Female Married Accountant (ret) Midwest SuburbanConsumer Wisdom 369specifics, examples, and stories to fill in and roundout the experiences being shared.Finally, to take advantage of the opportunity ofan implicit approach to wisdom inquiry and toensure that we had not overlooked anything else inthe conversation, we introduced the terms wiseconsumption and wise consumer, and askedinformants to tell us what they thought these termsmight mean or entail in their daily lives. Wedeferred disclosing our specific interest in consumerwisdom until the end of each interview becauseprior research has suggested that people tend toconflate wisdom and intelligence (Sternberg, 1985)and we did not want to prematurely constrain ourconversations to a restricted laypersons understanding of this complex and multi-dimensionalconstruct.Data and AnalysisInterviews were video- and audio-recorded, andfield notes were typed and elaborated within a dayof each interview. In total, 507 pages of singlespaced transcription notes were compiled andimported into the software program MaxQDA foranalysis. An initial high-level coding scheme wasdeveloped based on our review of wisdom researchconducted in psychology over the last 30 years.Guided by Spiggle (1994), the scheme was developed through iterations of inductive content analysis, which led to formal codes (wisdom facets), subcodes (facet dimensions), and memos related to theinterpretative analyses. As transcripts were marked,codes were added or expanded or, conversely, collapsed or deleted to reflect the emergent meaningsof each code and sub-code. Next, we revisited allcoded passages in a second comprehensive review,this time reviewing passages by code and sub-code.Throughout this final stage, we refined the memosand recoded passages as needed. In doing so, wewere able to distill the meanings and boundaries ofour codes toward the identification of the facetsand dimensions that collectively constitute the foundation for our emergent theoretical framework.FindingsOur analysis yielded five integrated facets of consumer wisdom that we label Intentionality, Contemplation, Emotional Mastery, Openness, andTranscendence. Figure 1 depicts the facets and theirdimensions as they relate to each other and to theirrespective emphases on personal and collectivewell-being. Table 2 provides the definitions for consumer wisdom and each of its facets and theirdimensions, and it also expounds on these dimensions through the cognitive, affective, and behavioral tendencies that comprise each.In the pages ahead, we define each wisdom facetand their respective dimensions, and we exemplifytheir lived nature through the interview data. ThisFigure 1. A graphical depiction of the theoretical framework of consumer wisdom.370 Luchs and MickTable 2Consumer Wisdom Definitions and TraitsConsumer wisdom is the pursuit of well-being for oneself and for others through mindful management of consumption-related choices and behaviors,as realized through the integrated application of Intentionality, Contemplation, Emotional Mastery, Openness, and Transcendence.Facet DimensionTraits (cognitive, affective, and behavioral characteristics and tendencies)Intentionality in wiseconsumption includesthe commitment to andpractice of ongoinglifestyle envisionmentand the consciouspersonal resourcemanagement needed torealize thisenvisionment.Lifestyle envisionment: the ongoingdefinition and pursuit of apersonalized, virtuous patternof living Assumes personal responsibility for ongoing lifestyle management Defines a meaningful lifestyle vision that aligns with values andresources Decides how to selectively use consumption to enable envisionedlifestyle Critically evaluates whether and how patterns of consumptionbehaviors support envisioned lifestyle Limits consumption and material responsibilities to enable envisioned lifestyle by reducing resource needsPersonal resource management: arealistic planning andmanagement of fungibleresources to build and preservethe lifestyle that one aspires to Actively budgets and manages a financial plan to afford envisioned lifestyle and save for unexpected needs and for the future Practices caution and restraint; not-spending as the default Periodically shifts budget allocations to make explicit trade-offsaway from spending that does not sufficiently contribute to envisioned lifestyle toward expenditures that provide greater value Focused on real, personally relevant, and long-term value potential (skeptical of exaggerated claims of value, intolerant of poorquality, appreciative of great design, willingness to trade-offquantity of goods for quality, minimizes costs without compromising quality) Resourceful and averse to waste Extends value of goods as long as possible (caring for andrepairing possessions, yet limited attachment to possessions tomitigate investment of time and energy) Avoids debt in general, with selective long-term investmentexceptions (home mortgage, education, etc.)Contemplation in wiseconsumption is thepractice of thoughtfulconsideration ofdiscrete consumptionoptions at a given timethrough retrospection,prospection, and prudentreasoning.Retrospection: situational andongoing reflection on theconsequences of ones own andothers past consumptionchoices and behaviors Reflects and learns from prior consumption choices and behaviors Learns from others consumption behaviors, both directly andthrough observationProspection: imagining andsimulating the effects ofpossible consumption options Imagines future outcomes and consequences Researches product long-term reliability, costs Simulates or tries product to experience possible purchase outcome Borrows as a form of product trialPrudent reasoning: the thoughtfuleffort applied to makingdecisions by synthesizing,balancing, and reconcilingaccumulated knowledge,insights, preferences, and values Knowledgeable about attributes of various consumption processoptions (e.g., online, retail) Knowledgeable about the value and motivations of various market participants Has practical knowledge about products and services in general Seeks additional information about products and services toinform decisions Considers multiple perspectives Critically evaluates whether and how specific consumptionbehaviors serve their needs and align with values and lifestyle Effectively integrates and uses procedural and factual information to make the best decisions(Continued)Consumer Wisdom 371Table 2ContinuedFacet DimensionTraits (cognitive, affective, and behavioral characteristics and tendencies)Emotional mastery inwise consumption isthe mindfulness towardand strategic use ofconsumption emotionsto enhance well-being,including an activeavoidance of negativeemotions and pursuit ofpositive emotions.Avoidance of negative emotions:recognizing the potential forand circumventing consumerbehaviors that could lead toadverse emotions Avoids specific retail and other consumption contexts to preventtemptation Seeks specific retail and other consumption contexts that promote wise consumption Plans ahead to define intended consumption behaviors, goals, orconstraints prior to decision context Recognizes potential for, and actively avoids, regret, guilt andstress in consumption choices Displays patience and delayed gratification Learns from prior consumption mistakes that led to negativeemotions Avoids comparisons to others and aspirational spending Does not obsess; avoids taking frugality, simplicity, and prudence so far that they consume too much time or cause stressPursuit of positive emotions: theactive pursuit of positiveemotions mediated byconsumption choices andbehaviors Reflects on what they have, engendering a sense of gratitude Enables pursuit of positive emotions and emotional statessuchas joy, harmony, and flowthrough selective spending on tangible goods, services, and experiencesOpenness in wiseconsumption includesthe adoption of aconsumption-mediatedgrowth mindset, and theselective trial andadoption of alternativeconsumption practices.Growth mindset (Dweck, 2006): abelief that ones personalqualities, including skills andintelligence, can be cultivatedby their efforts, strategies, andhelp from others Attracted to products or services that provide new experiences Seeks development of new skills and knowledgeAlternative consumption: nontraditional consumptionbehaviors, including consumerproduction/co-production,borrowing/sharing, buyingused goods, buying custom orsmall-batch produced goods,and actively extending thevalue of goods already owned Co-creates, grows, makes, or fixes things on their own Rents, borrows/shares as alternatives to ownership Purchases used goods Open to sharing or exchanging knowledge and skills Seeks custom or small-batch items for self or for gifts Open to unconventional means of value exchangeTranscendence inconsumer wisdom is anunreserved compassionfor all entities affectedby consumption and astrong sense ofinterbeing.Compassion: self- and otherdirected kindness and empathy,and a concern for the generalwelfare of others A holistic sense of self, caring for self, and individuality Prefers consumption options that promote local economy, businesses, and employees Prefers consumption options that promote social well-beingthroughout the global supply chain and the world in general Practices pro-environmental consumption Avoids consumption or spending that harms animalsInterbeing (Hanh, 1987): anintuitive sense that all life isinterconnected Prefers consumption categories and objects that promote relationships and connections with others Prefers consumption contexts, processes, and behaviors that promote community and connection with others Prefers consumption options and behaviors that promote a senseof connection with the natural environment and/or a sense ofspirituality372 Luchs and Mickmeans that our exposition is linear and sequentialas we elucidate the facets and their dimensions oneafter the other, which is largely universal andunavoidable for this genre of research. Yet, it is alsounnatural relative to actual lived experiences. Thatis, more than one facet or dimension is often evident through their co-occurrence and interrelatedness in specific illustrations and stories. As Bangenet al. (2013) emphasize, wisdom is a multidimensional characteristic with the whole being greaterthan the sum of its parts (p. 6), and most conceptualizations [of wisdom] involve integration (p. 5).Due to the importance and regularity of this themein wisdom research, we begin with o