citations strengths/ weaknesses

Question 1

McCracken (1986)

Answer 1

Foundational theory in consumer culture; clearly structured.

Limited empirical data; Western-centric.

Question 2

Hall (1976); Hornikx & le Pair (2017)

Answer 2

Practical application to global advertising strategies.

Simplifies complex cultural distinction

Question 3

Pollay (1983)

Answer 3

Clear empirical categories of cultural values.

Dated; assumes static cultural values.

Question 4

Leo et al. (2005)

Answer 4

Solid empirical comparison of cultural dimensions.

Limited cultural diversity in sample.

Question 5

Chen et al. (2016)

Answer 5

Excellent real-world cultural branding case.

Specific to Korea; limits broader application.

Question 6

Belk et al. (1989)

Answer 6

Seminal work on symbolic meaning and rituals.

Largely conceptual; less empirical testing.

Question 7

Barthes (1972); Baudrillard (1997)

Answer 7

Rich theoretical base for understanding consumer meaning.

Abstract; difficult to apply empirically.

Question 8

Campbell (1949)

Answer 8

Highly influential across marketing and storytelling.

Overused and criticised for lack of diversity.

Question 9

Fournier & Alvarez (2019)

Answer 9

Strong consumer-brand focus; applicable to practice.

Western brand focus.

Question 10

Ashman et al. (2023)

Answer 10

Feminist lens; modern take on myth in branding.

Specific to Barbie; not generalisable.

Question 11

Rook (1985)

Answer 11

Groundbreaking ritual framework.

Western ritual focus.

Question 12

Azzari et al. (2022)

Answer 12

Contemporary and media-relevant examples.

Focused on high-end markets.

Question 13

Featherstone (1982)

Answer 13

Foundational work in body studies.

Limited empirical backing.

Question 14

Giddens (1991)

Answer 14

Influential theory in identity research.

Abstract and theoretical.

Question 15

Shilling (2012)

Answer 15

Comprehensive; useful for body/market links.

Broad scope can dilute marketing specificity.

Question 16

Thompson & Hirschman (1995)

Answer 16

Poststructuralist depth in consumer studies.

Difficult to apply without background.

Question 17

Scott et al. (2017)

Answer 17

Engages with emotions, pain, and ritual.

Western-centric; fitness-focused.

Question 18

Thompson & Isisag (2022)

Answer 18

Empirical reflexive modernity case.

Specific activity focus.

Question 19

Scaraboto & Fischer (2013)

Answer 19

Inclusive, socially progressive.

Context-specific.

Question 20

Joy & Sherry (2003)

Answer 20

Rich qualitative depth.

Not widely generalisable.

Question 21

Pine & Gilmore (1998)

Answer 21

Iconic framework for experiential marketing.

Assumes all experiences are pleasurable.

Question 22

Celsi et al. (1993)

Answer 22

In-depth narrative method.

Niche activity focus.

Question 23

Tumbat & Belk (2011)

Answer 23

Critical alternative to idealised views.

Small sample size.

Question 24

Orazi & van Laer (2023)

Answer 24

Temporal insight into experience.

Early-stage concept.

Question 25

Kozinets (2002)

Answer 25

Emancipatory marketing lens. Extreme example.

Question 26

Stevens et al. (2019)

Answer 26

Embodied approach to branding. Brand-limited.

Question 27

Hill et al. (2022)

Answer 27

Socially dynamic framework. Focuses on collective, not individual.