Diderot Effect

The Diderot effect is a term used to describe the impact of acquiring a good so superior in quality and style to one that is currently owned by a consumer that this good immediately renders the current item, along with all others used in the same context as the item, unacceptable. The term has its roots in an essay written by the French Enlightenment scholar Denis Diderot in 1769 and first published in 1772. In this essay, which Diderot never shared during his lifetime, the author ruminates on the fact that a new scarlet dressing gown has spurred him to completely transform his shabbily furnished study into a room with objects that are more congruent in taste and style with this luxurious new gift. In this essay, Diderot anthropomorphizes, or attributes human qualities to, the robe, a technique Susan Fournier observes consumers often use when they describe their relationships with goods or services. For example, Diderot describes the new gown as a “scarlet intruder” (1956, 311) and bemoans how he was “master of my old dressing gown, but… slave to my new one” (310).

Diderot identifies several immediate outcomes associated with acquiring this gown besides removing other shabby items because they do not meet the luxurious standards of the new robe. For example, Diderot recounts how he disguises or covers up some of the other goods he chooses to retain to downplay their shabby appearance. Diderot also describes his deliberate decision to leave a well-worn braided carpet on the floor of his study, even though its condition is in stark contrast to all of his other, newer, higher-quality items. Of this combination of [Page 450]new opulence and more careworn items, Diderot laments, “Now the harmony is destroyed. Now there is no more consistency, no more unity, and no more beauty” (311). He describes how this choice is motivated by his desire to not fall privy to the seductions of a luxury-laden lifestyle and to remain grounded to his original sense of self. Furthermore, Diderot also specifically mentions “consumption emotions” that emerge as he considers the acquisition of this new robe—including regret, guilt, disgust, and desire. Related to these emotions, Diderot warns the reader to not develop a “fatal taste for luxury” (312), to not neglect other aspects of one's life (such as family obligations) in the pursuit of a lavish lifestyle, and to avoid being trapped by the pride and entitlement that may result from owning fine things.

In his seminal book on culture and consumption, Grant McCracken discusses the Diderot effect in detail. McCracken asserts that it can impact the behavior of a consumer in essentially three different ways. First, as Diderot himself demonstrated, the effect can spur a consumer's desire to replace other goods that coexist with the new item—or those in the “consumption constellation” in which that good is embedded—to restore harmony and balance across the dimensions of taste, style, and opulence within the set. However, McCracken notes, the more common outcome of the Diderot effect is that consumers typically reject any good that would upset an existing constellation of items. This action reflects a consumer's awareness that adding this new item to a set will destabilize the coherence that currently exists within a constellation of goods. Furthermore, as these goods reflect the consumer's lifestyle, a consumer's identity is also impacted by the imbalance that might occur from acquiring a good that is “above” the others in a mosaic of possession. Thus, McCracken asserts, the consumer anticipates the lack of coherence (and possible chaos) that can result when accepting an item that is not “in line” with others in terms of cultural capital. McCracken observes that if Diderot himself had “been ruled by the conventional operation [of the effect]… he would never have worn the new dressing gown” (1988, 123).

...