道德和审美的升华与更高地位的消费者口味:“好”食品革命

IF 2 2区 社会学 0 LITERATURE
Shyon Baumann , Emily Huddart Kennedy , Josée Johnston
{"title":"道德和审美的升华与更高地位的消费者口味:“好”食品革命","authors":"Shyon Baumann ,&nbsp;Emily Huddart Kennedy ,&nbsp;Josée Johnston","doi":"10.1016/j.poetic.2022.101654","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Research on the tastes of higher status groups has long prioritized analysis of aesthetic preferences. However, recent work has brought more attention to the moral dimensions of tastes. In this paper, we investigate the intersection of morality and aesthetics in tastes. Drawing on survey data and focus groups, we investigate how aesthetic and moral concerns operate in the domain of food, and meat specifically. A latent class analysis identifies four orientations to food that differ in their emphasis on aesthetic versus moral concerns. We identify classes that we label pragmatism, aestheticism, moralism, and moral aestheticism . These orientations toward moral and aesthetic concerns in food are associated with economic capital, cultural capital, age, political ideology, race, and gender. Respondents with higher social status are most likely to hold the moral aestheticism orientation, which simultaneously upholds moral and aesthetic concerns. Analysis of focus group data brings the nature of each of these four orientations into sharper focus. Further survey analyses show these four orientations predict high status aesthetic preferences and moral orientations beyond food, and they also predict the holding of symbolic and social boundaries related to moral judgments in food. We argue that research on high status cultural consumption must conceptualize and measure moral consecration alongside aesthetic consecration in order to better understand the social stratification of tastes.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47900,"journal":{"name":"Poetics","volume":"92 ","pages":"Article 101654"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304422X22000110/pdfft?md5=6671324e0b082e2e3ed00283d5836d54&pid=1-s2.0-S0304422X22000110-main.pdf","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Moral and aesthetic consecration and higher status consumers’ tastes: The “good” food revolution\",\"authors\":\"Shyon Baumann ,&nbsp;Emily Huddart Kennedy ,&nbsp;Josée Johnston\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.poetic.2022.101654\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Research on the tastes of higher status groups has long prioritized analysis of aesthetic preferences. However, recent work has brought more attention to the moral dimensions of tastes. In this paper, we investigate the intersection of morality and aesthetics in tastes. Drawing on survey data and focus groups, we investigate how aesthetic and moral concerns operate in the domain of food, and meat specifically. A latent class analysis identifies four orientations to food that differ in their emphasis on aesthetic versus moral concerns. We identify classes that we label pragmatism, aestheticism, moralism, and moral aestheticism . These orientations toward moral and aesthetic concerns in food are associated with economic capital, cultural capital, age, political ideology, race, and gender. Respondents with higher social status are most likely to hold the moral aestheticism orientation, which simultaneously upholds moral and aesthetic concerns. Analysis of focus group data brings the nature of each of these four orientations into sharper focus. Further survey analyses show these four orientations predict high status aesthetic preferences and moral orientations beyond food, and they also predict the holding of symbolic and social boundaries related to moral judgments in food. We argue that research on high status cultural consumption must conceptualize and measure moral consecration alongside aesthetic consecration in order to better understand the social stratification of tastes.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47900,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Poetics\",\"volume\":\"92 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101654\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304422X22000110/pdfft?md5=6671324e0b082e2e3ed00283d5836d54&pid=1-s2.0-S0304422X22000110-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Poetics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304422X22000110\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERATURE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Poetics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304422X22000110","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

长期以来,对社会地位较高群体的品味研究一直优先考虑对审美偏好的分析。然而,最近的研究更多地关注了品味的道德维度。在本文中,我们探讨道德与审美在品味中的交集。根据调查数据和焦点小组,我们调查美学和道德问题如何在食品领域运作,特别是肉类。一种潜在的阶级分析确定了四种不同的食物取向,它们强调的是审美和道德问题。我们将其分为实用主义、唯美主义、道德主义和道德唯美主义。这些对食物的道德和审美关注的取向与经济资本、文化资本、年龄、政治意识形态、种族和性别有关。社会地位越高的被调查者最有可能持有道德审美取向,即道德与审美并重。对焦点小组数据的分析使这四个方向的性质变得更加清晰。进一步的调查分析表明,这四种取向预测了高地位的审美偏好和超越食物的道德取向,它们还预测了与食物道德判断相关的象征和社会界限的持有。我们认为,对高地位文化消费的研究必须概念化和衡量道德奉献与审美奉献,以便更好地理解品味的社会分层。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Moral and aesthetic consecration and higher status consumers’ tastes: The “good” food revolution

Research on the tastes of higher status groups has long prioritized analysis of aesthetic preferences. However, recent work has brought more attention to the moral dimensions of tastes. In this paper, we investigate the intersection of morality and aesthetics in tastes. Drawing on survey data and focus groups, we investigate how aesthetic and moral concerns operate in the domain of food, and meat specifically. A latent class analysis identifies four orientations to food that differ in their emphasis on aesthetic versus moral concerns. We identify classes that we label pragmatism, aestheticism, moralism, and moral aestheticism . These orientations toward moral and aesthetic concerns in food are associated with economic capital, cultural capital, age, political ideology, race, and gender. Respondents with higher social status are most likely to hold the moral aestheticism orientation, which simultaneously upholds moral and aesthetic concerns. Analysis of focus group data brings the nature of each of these four orientations into sharper focus. Further survey analyses show these four orientations predict high status aesthetic preferences and moral orientations beyond food, and they also predict the holding of symbolic and social boundaries related to moral judgments in food. We argue that research on high status cultural consumption must conceptualize and measure moral consecration alongside aesthetic consecration in order to better understand the social stratification of tastes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Poetics
Poetics Multiple-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
16.00%
发文量
77
期刊介绍: Poetics is an interdisciplinary journal of theoretical and empirical research on culture, the media and the arts. Particularly welcome are papers that make an original contribution to the major disciplines - sociology, psychology, media and communication studies, and economics - within which promising lines of research on culture, media and the arts have been developed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信