From Cultural Models to Cultural Categories: a Framework For Cultural Analysis


Nitish Singh (2002) ,"From Cultural Models to Cultural Categories: a Framework For Cultural Analysis", in NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 29, eds. Susan M. Broniarczyk and Kent Nakamoto, Valdosta, GA : Association for Consumer Research, Pages: 239-240.

Advances in Consumer Research Volume 29, 2002     Pages 239-240


Nitish Singh, Saint Louis University

In an attempt to analyze the phenomenon of culture, researchers (Hall 1976; Hofstede 1980; Trompenaars 1994) have proposed cultural categories, which can in some way operationalize and measure culture. But one limitation of all these cultural categorization and cultural measurement studies is that they categorize and measure culture only on basis of dominant cultural value orientations. In fact, according to Strauss and Quinn (1997) cultural meanings are created and maintained by interaction between an extrapersonal world of objects and symbols and the intrapersonal world of individual’s mind. Thus, to understand and analyze culture in totality we need to take into account both the intrapersonal world of cultural values and cognitive structures of mind and the extrapersonal world of cultural symbols and artifacts. The main objective of this paper is to propose a conceptual framework, which derives cultural categories by analyzing culture at perceptual, behavioral, and symbolic levels of cultural formation, so as to provide a broader and more complete framework for researchers in marketing to analyze culture.

In an attempt to understand how culture is formed, shared, and interpreted, the paper compares and contrasts various schools of cultural thought, and proposes a synthetic approach to study culture. The synthetic approach proposes to study culture both at intrapersonal and extrapersonal level of cultural formation. The paper argues that knowledge is organized in the mind in form of schemas, or simplified mental structures. These schemas of the worldly knowledge cause us to react to certain situations in certain ways and perceive the world in accordance. Schemas lead to emergence of cultural forms and cultural propositions, which are basic cultural filters used by individual’s to make sense of the surrounding environment and society. When complex cultural schemas are infused with feelings, emotions, and positive and negative reinforcements, they become well established and motivate us to act or behave in certain way. Thus complex cultural schemas or models backed by emotions and feelings and powered by motivations lead to the emergence of cultural values and beliefs. Beliefs, values and norms that are intersubjectively shared, tend to be transmitted from generation to generation and acquire public meaning and stability over time. Thus to preserve, propagate, understand, and establish generational norms, beliefs, values, and ideas, private matters are given public form and portrayed as symbols, codes, texts, and traditions of the society.

In summary, the framework proposed in thi study analyzes culture at various stages of cultural formation, and categorizes culture at three distinct levels.

The Perceptual Level: According to Hutchins (1980) and Quinn and Holland (1987), propositional schemas and image schemas are two categories in which knowledge may be cast. Propositional schemas specify the basic concepts and the casual relationship between concepts (Hutchins, 1980; Quinn and Holland 1987), while image schemas account for the visual inputs and kinesthetic information (Quinn and Holland 1987). Propositional and image schemas can be operationalized in terms of 'forms’ and 'propositions’. According to Goodenough (1981), forms help individual in a society to discern directly with senses. Form categories can include color, shape, taste, and other perceptual forms. While 'Propositions’ help us to see the casual relations between the forms. According to Goodenough (1981) these 'propositions’ can be relations of inclusion, exclusion, space relations, temporal relations, semantic relations, and symbolic relations. Thus at perceptual level culture can be analyzed by studying forms and propositions of the society. Some examples of cultural variables, which can be studied at this level of analysis are Language structures, language translatability, color perceptions, color categories, ecological perceptual styles, field independence, and orthographically based perceptual differences.

The Behavioral Level: In cognitive anthropology there is a consensus that complex schemas and cultural models have the ability to instigate action (D’Andrade 1992; McClelland 1951; Quinn and Holland 1987). According to Quinn and Holland (1987), higher-level cultural models may carry motivational force, which in turn influences an individual’s behavior. Thus, when the cultural knowledge and beliefs become a part of inner sense of a being they become goal driven and acquire motivational force. These cultural beliefs and values are then reflected in a sense of responsibility in the system (Dreysus 1984), and needs or obligations to do something (D’Andrade 1984). To study cultural phenomenon at this level of "cultural models + motivational force", is to analyze the directive force of beliefs and values cherished by a particular culture. According to Pollay (1983) values determine virtually all types of behaviors, from simple purchasing to religious ideologies. Thus, at this level of schematic analysis, cultural values are proposed as an operational measure. Some cultural variables which can be studied at this level of behavioral analysis are the cultural values proposed by Hofstede (1980) and Hofstede and Bond (1988), a set of forty-two common cultural value appeals in advertising developed by Pollay (1983), Cultural Values proposed by Hall (1976), and Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck (1961).

The Symbolic level: The extrapersonal world of objects, events, and structures acquire meaning in a cultural context because they serve as a conduit of cultural information from one generation to another. Furthermore, according to Hutchins (1995), when people are faced with tasks, problems, and challenges, they invent culturally shared solutions called "mediating structure." Such mediating structures can be preserved in the form of artifacts, symbols, routines and systems of social interaction. Thus at the symbolic level of cultural analysis the cultural phenomenon is represented in form of signs and symbols of the society. Some symbolic variables that can be studied at this level of cultural analysis include, codes of the society, metonyms, myths, color symbolism and other socio-culturally determined symbols, mores, taboos, rules, rituals, ceremonies, and different forms of semiotic structures.

In conclusion, an attempt was made in this paper to provide a holistic framework for cultural analysis so that future researchers in marketing and advertising would not be restricted to a few standardized cultural value orientations to study culture, but also might take into account the perceptual, behavioral, and symbolic dimensions of culture.


Barthes, Roland (1977), Image-Music-Text, London: Fontana.

Bourdieu, Pierre (1977), Outline of Theory of Practice, Trans R.Nice. Cambidge University Press.

Butler, Judith (1990), Gender Trouble: Feminism and Subversion of Identity, NewYork: Roultedge

Casson, Roland (1983), Schemata in Cognitive anthropology," Annual Review of Anthropology, 12, 429-462.

Clifford, James (1986), "Introduction: Partial Truths," in Writing Culture, eds. Clifford James and George Marcus, Berkeley: University of California Press.

D’Andrade, Roy G. (1984), "Cultural Meaning Systems," in Culture Theory: Essay on Mind, Self, and Emotion, eds. R.A Shweder and R.A Le Vine, Cambridge University Press, 88-119.

D’Andrade, Roy G.(1987), "A folk Model of The Mind," in Cultural Models in Language and Thought, eds. D. Holland and N. Quinn, London: Cambridge University Press, 112-48.

D’Andrade, Roy G. (1992), "Schemas and Motivation," In Human Motives and Cultural Models, Cambridge University Press.

Detweiler, R.A (1978), "Culture, Category Width, and Attributions," Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 9(3), 259-284

Dreyfus, Huber L. (1984), "What Expert Systems Can’t Do," Ravitan, 3(4), 22-36.

Fiske, John(1990), Introduction to Communication Studies, New York: Routledge

Fiske, John and Hartley, J. (1978), Reading Television, London: Methuen.

Geertz, Clifford (1973), The Interpretation of Cultures, New York: Basic Books.

Goodenough, Ward H. (1981), Culture, Language, and Society, Mento Park, CA: Benjamin/Cummings Publishing

Hall, Edward T.(1976), Beyond Culture, Garden City, New York: Doubleday.

Hall, Edward T. and Mildred Reed Hall (1990), Understanding Cultural Differences, Maine: Intercultural Press, Inc.

Hannerz, Ulf (1992), Cultural Complexity: Studies in the Social Organization of Meaning, NewYork: Columbia University Press.

Hofstede, Geert(1980), Culture’s Consequences. International Differences in Work Related Values, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Hofstede, Geert and M.H Bond (1988), "The Confucius Connection: From Cultural Roots to Economic Growth," Organizational Dynamics, 16(4), 5-21.

Hoosain, Rumjahn (1987), "Perceptual Process of the Chinese," in The Psychology of the Chinese People, eds. Michael H. Bond, Hong Kong: Oxford University Press

Hudson, L.A and O’Zanne, J.L (1988), "Alternative Ways of Selling Knowledge in Consumer Research," Journal Of Consumer Research, 14, 508-521.

Hutchins, Edwin(1980), Culture and Inference: A Trobriand Case Study, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

Hutchins, Edwin (1995), Cognition in the Wild, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

Kaplan, R.B (1966), "Cultural Thought and Patterns in Inter-Cultural Education," Language Learning, 16, 1-20.

Keesing, Roger M. (1987), "Models,’Folks and 'Cultural’ Paradigms Regained?" in Cultural Models in Language and Thought, eds. D.Holland and N.Quinn, London: Cambridge University Press, 369-393.

Kluckhohn, F.R and Strodtbeck, F.Z (1961), Variations in Value Orientations, WestPort, CT: Greenwood Press.

Leach, Edmund (1976), Culture and Communication. The Logic by Which Symbols are Connected, New York: Cambridge University Press.

Levi-Strauss,C (1963), Structural Anthropology, Trans- C.Jacobson and B.G Schoepf, New York: Basic Books.

Levy, Sidney (1959), "Symbols for Sale," Harvard Business Review, 37 (July/August), 117- 125.

McCracken, Grant (1986), "Culture and Consumption: A Theoretical Account of the Structure and Movement of the Cultural meaning of Consumer Goods," Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (June), 71-84.

McCort, Daniel J. and Naresh K. Malhotra (1993), "Culture and Consumer Behavior: Towards an Understanding of Cross-Cultural Consumer Behavior in International Marketing," Journal of International Marketing, 6(2), 91-127.

Mick David G. (1986), "Consumer Research and Semiotics: Exploring the Morphology of Signs, Symbols, and Significance," Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (Sept), 196-213.

Monaco, James (1977), How to Read a Film, NewYork: Oxford University Press.

Pollay. W. Richard (1983), "Measuring the Cultural Values Manifest in Advertising," In Current Issues and Research in Advertising, eds. James H. Leigh and Claude R. Martin Jr., Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Graduate School of Business Division of Research.

Quinn, Naomi and Dorothy Holland (1987), "Culture and Cognition," in Cultural Models in Language and Thought, eds. D. Holland and N.Quinn, London: Cambridge University Press, 3- 40.

Ringberg, Torsten(1999), "A Critique of the Communicative Assumptions within Consumer Behavior Research," Advances In Consumer Research, 26, 320-324.

Ringberg, Torsten (2001), "Cultural Models as Meaning Makers: An Empirical Exploration of Consumer Interpretations of Marketing Communications," Advances in Consumer Research, 28, 48.

Rumelhart, David E., Geoffrey E. Hinton, and James L. McClelland (1986), "A General Framework for Parallel Distributed Processing. In Parallel Distributed Processing, Vol 1, Rumelhart et al., Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 45-76.

Segal, Marshal H., Donald T. Campbell and Melville J. Herskovits (1966), Influence of Culture on Visual Perception, Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Company Inc.

Steinfatt, Thomas M. (1989), "Linguistic Relativity: Toward Broader View," in Language Communications and Culture, eds. Stella Ting-Toomey and Felipe Korzenny, Sage Publications.

Strauss, Claudia and Naomi Quinn (1997), A Cognitive Theory of Cultural Meaning, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Trompennars, Fons (1994), Riding the Waves of Culture. Understanding Diversity in Global Business, NewYork: Professional Publishing.

Tse, David K., John K. Wang and Chin Tiong Tan (1988), "Towards Some Standardized Cross-Cultural Consumption Values," Advances in Consumer Research, 15, 387-395.

Turnage, T.W and Mc Ginnies, E. (1979), "A Cross-Cultural Comparison of the effects of Presentation Mode and Meaningfulness on Short-term Recall," American Journal of Psychology, 86(2), 369-381.



Nitish Singh, Saint Louis University


NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 29 | 2002

Share Proceeding

Featured papers

See More


The Effect of Fertility on Women’s Word-of-Mouth Behavior

Sevincgul Ulu, Rutgers University, USA
Kristina Durante, Rutgers University, USA
Jonah Berger, University of Pennsylvania, USA
Aekyoung Kim, Rutgers University, USA

Read More


The Pleasure of Being Right (Even When the World Is Bad)

Carey K. Morewedge, Boston University, USA
Janna Russmann, University of Cologne
Danica Mijovic-Prelec, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA
Drazen Prelec, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA

Read More


The Positivity Problem: Using Mass-Scale Emotionality to Predict Marketplace Success

Matthew D Rocklage, Northwestern University, USA
Derek Rucker, Northwestern University, USA
Loran F Nordgren, Northwestern University, USA

Read More

Engage with Us

Becoming an Association for Consumer Research member is simple. Membership in ACR is relatively inexpensive, but brings significant benefits to its members.