Sensory Ethnography in Consumer Research more

Doing Sensory Ethnography in Consumer Research Anu Valtonen, University of Lapland Vesa Markuksela, University of Lapland Johanna Moisander, Helsinki School of Economics Accepted for publication in the International Journal of Consumer Studies, May 2010 Contact information Valtonen Anu, Ph.D.* Professor of Marketing University of Lapland Faculty of Tourism and Business P.O. Box 122 FIN-96101 Rovaniemi, Finland anu.valtonen@ulapland.fi Markuksela Vesa, Lic.Sc. Assistant of Marketing University of Lapland Faculty of Tourism and Business P.O. Box 122 FIN-96101 Rovaniemi, Finland vesa.markuksela@ulapland.fi Moisander Johanna, Ph.D. Professor of Marketing Helsinki School of Economics Department of Marketing and Management P.O. Box 1210 FIN-00101 Helsinki, Finland johanna.moisander@hse.fi *Corresponding author 1 Doing sensory ethnography in consumer research ABSTRACT This paper is a contribution to sensory-aware cultural consumer research. It suggests that while the audiovisual domain is unquestionably a crucial ingredient of contemporary consumer culture, there is a pressing need to explore the role of the other senses as well. The study works toward a practice-based culturalist approach to sensory ethnography, a perspective that allows consumer scholars to empirically account for the cultural aspects of the senses. Through an empirical case study on sport fishing, the paper scrutinizes the challenges and opportunities related to conducting sensory ethnography. In addition, it discusses the benefits of this approach in consumer research. Keywords: sensory ethnography, practice theories, consumer culture, cultural methodologies, sport fishing 2 Introduction In recent decades, ethnography has gained increasing popularity in the field of consumer research (Arnould and Wallendorf, 1994; Fellman 1999; Peñaloza, 2001; Elliott and Jankel-Elliot, 2003; Moisander and Valtonen, 2006), and scholars have also developed specific ethnographic forms, such as netnography (Kozinets, 2002) and visual ethnography (Peñaloza, 1998). The work of this scholarship convincingly demonstrates the potential of the ethnographic approach in offering rich and detailed understandings of consumption phenomena. However, the existing inquiries tend to rely extensively, or even exclusively, on the senses of sight and sound– at the expense of taste, touch, and smell – in collecting ethnographic data and in building interpretations. This tendency reflects, and perpetuates, the audio-visual worldview that has long dominated Western thought (Firat, 1995, 108). We argue in this paper that while the audio-visual domain is a crucial ingredient of contemporary culture and society, there is a need to explore the entire sensory domain in order to gain better insights into the contemporary forms of consumer culture. In the last few decades, there has been a growing awareness of the significance of the multisensory nature of consumption (e.g. Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982; Joy and Sherry, 2003). Leaning on cognitive-psychology (Peck and Childers, 2003; Argo et al., 2006; Bosmans, 2006), environmental psychology (Kotler, 1972; Bitner 1992; Turley and Milliman, 2000), phenomenology (Joy and Sherry, 2003), or physiology (Ferdenzi et al., 2008) these studies have produced valuable insights into the individual aspects of the senses. Nevertheless, the overwhelming determination of the individualistic and mentalist research approaches tends to void the way in which the senses, and the use of the senses, are not only individually but also culturally fabricated – as evidenced by a growing number of sensory scholars across various cultural disciplines (Classen, 1993; Stroller, 1997; Howes, 2006). The work of this cultural scholarship demonstrates how all the senses – smell (Classen, 1993), touch (Stroller, 1997), hearing (Bull, 2004), sight (Banks, 2001), and taste (Lindström, 2005) – are invested with cultural values and meanings. It enables us to draw attention, for instance, to the ways in which identities and social relations are negotiated in a range of places and events from homes (Pink, 2009) to tourism encounters (Macnaghten and Urry, 2001; Crouch and Desforges, 2003), consumer artefacts and spaces are made meaningful (Bull, 2004), and products and brands are chosen (Lindstrom, 2005). Therefore, we suggest that a more explicit focus on the cultural – instead of the individual – aspects of the senses would enable consumer scholars to gain a better understanding of the many ways the senses play a part of contemporary consumer culture. This paper proposes one possible theoretical and methodological perspective that could help to achieve this goal. Drawing upon the emergent field of cultural studies on the senses – also referred to as the “sensorial turn” – and upon practice literature (Reckwitz, 2002; Schatzki, 2002; Warde, 2005) we set out to work toward a practicebased culturalist approach to the study of the sensory aspects of consumption and consumer culture. Such an approach enables us to direct detailed attention to the ways in which the senses are embedded in, and constitutive of, consumers’ actions. The approach we have developed is a culturalist one in the sense that social life is thought to be based upon collective, socio-historically developing structures of knowledge, meanings, and understandings. Importantly, in this approach the “cultural” aspect is not 3 located in the mind, interactions, or discourses, but in “practices” that are, hence, considered to form the basic unit of a cultural analysis (Reckwitz, 2002). The specific aim of this paper is to scrutinize the possibilities afforded by such a theoretical approach to an ethnographic exploration of the senses. Drawing upon existing ethnographic consumer research (Arnould and Wallendorf, 1994; Peñaloza, 1998, 2001; Moisander and Valtonen, 2006) and upon the work of pioneer sensory ethnographers (Stroller, 1997; Classen et al., 1993; Pink, 2009; Howes, 2006), we work toward a methodological approach called sensory ethnography that allows scholars to empirically explore the sensory aspects of consumer culture. To illustrate this approach, we offer an empirical example of sensory ethnography in the context of sport fishing conducted by one of the authors, in Finnish Lapland. Sport fishing, troll-fishing being the specific form of the fishing under study, offers a rich case for the study of consumption, since sport fishers typically invest considerable sums of money in the range of material artifacts, technical equipment, and services needed for the activity (see statistics of Finnish Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry 2002). Moreover, they actively employ a range of online and offline media to form social links and to build hobby-related communities. Most importantly, sport fishing offers a fertile ground for theorizing the ways in which the senses have a fundamental role in the enactment of consumption. Namely, the given activity is largely based on the very idea of appropriating, orchestrating, and using the senses in a competent manner, and the outdoor environment represents a distinctive sensory world in itself (cf. Arnould et al., 1998). Through this case we will discuss the advantages and challenges related to the fieldwork of sensory ethnography. To close, we also discuss the consumer research potential of this approach. Practice-based culturalist approach to sensory ethnography In this paper, we present a form of sensory ethnography that is based on the culturalist, practice-based perspective on consumer research. This perspective enables one to empirically investigate the senses in action in the immediate settings within which the activity propagates. Let us first introduce our setting: troll-fishing tournaments representing one form of sport fishing whose participators are committed hobbyists (Markuksela, 2009). Trollfishing is a method of fishing in which a bait of some type is drawn on a line through the water from a moving vessel with from two to four crew members in it. Tournament fishing, in turn, refers to “organized events in which a group of anglers fish for inducements – awards, prizes, or public recognition – in addition to experiencing the satisfaction of catching fish” (Schramm et al., 1991, 4). Here, the focus is on Lapland Cup tournaments. During summers 2007–2009 the researcher took part in a series of head-to-head competitions, as an angler among other club members of the Rovaniemi Troll-fishing Club, the biggest Lappish association specialized in troll fishing. The researcher participated in 22 competitions that lasted from eight to 24 hours and took place in different bodies of water (lakes, artificial lakes, rivers, estuaries), each featuring specific sensory environments. The fieldwork was informed by practice thought. 4 Recently, practice thought has gained an increasing interest in social and cultural research (Schatzki et al., 2001), and it has been vividly employed in consumer research as well (Schau et al., 2009; Shove and Pantzar 2005; Warde 2005). Practice thought represents a type of cultural theory founded upon a specific way of explaining and understanding social action and social order (Reckwitz 2002; Schatzki 2002). By and large, it minimizes the analytic importance of individuality and turns the attention to practices that organize and shape individual action. Practice might be conceived as “routinized type of behavior consisting of several elements interconnected to one other: forms of bodily activities, forms of mental activities, ‘things’ and their use, background knowledge in the form of understanding, know-how, states of emotion, and motivational knowledge” (Reckwitz, 2002, 249). Consumption is thus viewed as part of organized constellations of activity in social life, as something that occurs within and is part of the field of practices, and as a constitutive element of different everyday tasks and projects (Schatzki, 2002; Warde, 2005). Of particular interest here are integrative practices: complex forms of practices such as education, cooking, and shopping that entail a mesh of social and material arrangements, sequences of actions, skills, and shared understandings (Schatzki et al.,, 2001, 88). We treat sport fishing as a practice of this kind: it represents recognizable and organized nexuses of action pervaded by collective structures of knowledge enabling fishermen to act, interact, and use equipment intelligibly. Integrative practices consist of a bundle of bodily doings and sayings. Hence, a fishing activity, such as plying and landing a fish is something fishermen do as part of the practice, with their sensing and moving bodies (Howes, 2006). Sayings, in turn, are doings that communicate something either through language or through kinaesthetic means; waving the hand, for instance, is a means to communicate something. Doings and sayings are organized into four phenomena: practical understanding, rules, teleoaffective structures, and general understandings. Practical understanding refers to certain abilities and skills that pertain to actions, such as handling a fish. Rules refer to explicit practice-specific instructions, guidelines, and requirements that direct people to perform specific actions. For example, in a fishing competition there are explicit rules concerning the handling of fish. A teleoaffective structure, in turn, refers to an array of ends, projects, and emotions that are acceptable or prescribed for participants in a practice. The fourth component of the practice organization is general understandings, that is, understandings that are not unique to the practice of question, for example the sense of community in this case. Hence, “a practice is a temporally evolving, openended set of doings and sayings linked by practical understandings, rules, teleoaffective structure, and general understandings” (Schatzki et al.,2001, 87). To exemplify, the teleoaffective structure of sport fishing – including such ends as winning, gaining prestige among other fishermen, and a variety of skilful tasks pursued to these ends – is linked to the historically constructed notion of ‘game’ or ‘competition’. The very idea of a competition is that it is a contest over something, somewhere, for something’s sake, and against someone (Huizinga, 1984). According to Caillois (2001, 17), competition, agôn, finds its perfect form in legitimately competitive games and sports, those involving feats of prowess (e.g. hunting and fishing). In them, champions are involved in a ceaseless and diffuse competition, deploying resources, skills, muscles, and intelligence without directly confronting each other. Importantly, the elements of chance and cheating are characteristic features of all competitions. A 5 fishing competition is hence a good example of agôn: it is a rule-governed game of skill intertwined with the elements of chance, uncertainty, and tension about failure and cheating (in the form of tall stories in particular). This cultural logic of recreational competition organizes the ends, tasks, and projects of fishing, guiding also the acceptability of actions and the expression of emotions. Furthermore, the practice of sport fishing requires an understanding of the way practices are collectively executed by competent agents oriented to each other (Barnes, 2001). Fishing is not understood as the mere routine enactment of a practice, but as its knowledgeable, informed, and goal-directed enactment that involves different manifestations and combinations of skills and competences requiring practice-specific training (Warde, 2005). Attention is also directed to the skilful manners through which fishermen orchestrate and modify their doings and sayings in order to remain in coordination with each other in the ever-changing conditions and circumstances of fishing. We hence analyze sport fishing as an integrative practice that organizes the way in which fishing is performed. That is, we treat it as a coherent pattern of activity that is organized around an inherent logic and a shared background understanding of what is appropriate, understandable, and desired. The practice-based perspective therefore offers conceptual tools that enable us to investigate the senses in action and the way this action is structured and organized through practices. In other words, it becomes possible to draw detailed attention to how the senses are immersed in the doings and sayings of fishermen, how embodied sensory know-how is employed in the different episodes of the fishing practice, how artefacts and material arrangements are used to extend the senses, and how the senses play a role in coordinating activities. Sensory ethnography Sensory ethnography is a form of ethnography that has emerged by and large as a critique against the audiovisual hegemony that characterizes much of contemporary ethnographic research (Stroller, 1997; Pink, 2009; Howes, 2006). Basically, sensory ethnography follows traditional ethnographic principles and procedures: it is grounded in sustained fieldwork that enables the researcher to study the activities of people in their everyday settings and to offer detailed ethnographic accounts (Arnould and Wallendorf, 1994; Moisander and Valtonen, 2006). It also applies the traditional ethnographic methods of fieldwork, such as observation, interviews, and visual methods. A specific feature of sensory ethnography – in the form that we discuss it here – is that it directs epistemic attention to practices instead of individual experiences. Hence, it directs epistemic attention to the ways in which the senses play a part in the performance and coordination of practices and in the subsequent interaction with the social and material world. The fieldwork process In sensory ethnography, as in “regular” ethnography, the fieldwork process takes on different forms depending on whether the researcher is familiar with or a stranger to the field under study (Atkinson et al., 2001). Here, the researcher is an active hobbyist angler. The challenge of the fieldwork was hence not to get accustomed to the ways in 6 which the senses are engaged in other people’s fishing practices; rather, the issue was to gradually cultivate a distance to “the others” and to turn them into “data” worth observing. How to study – or even identify – routinized and embodied doings and sayings, especially when the researcher himself is a competent performer? During the three-year, multi-site fieldwork entailing simultaneous reading of theoretical literature, a sensory awareness gradually evolved and an in-depth understanding of the integral role of the senses in the practice of sport fishing was developed. The researcher began to realize the essential role of olfaction and tactile play in fishing activity and the way in which fishermen may define a space more likely through smell than sight. The fieldwork also offered insights into the fact that unpleasant body odours resulting from fishing were not masked; on the contrary, the aroma of fish was interpreted as a sign of success and helped develop a sense of communion – the smell is tolerable for those who are accustomed to it. The fishermen also habitually sniffed the air before deciding what sorts of lures to use; they even added fragrances to the lures to increase their appeal. The researcher also found out that the symbolic power of hands is evident in this practice as well; the touch of other fishermen or the fish might be a sign of communal friendship, or contamination. Actually, it became evident that the very idea of fishing lies on the appropriate use of the senses: an angler tries to interpret the “sensorial cues” of nature and attach them to an existing body of sensory knowledge. This implies, for instance, interpreting the colour of the water, weather conditions, wind direction, waves, clouds, air odour, and temperature as well as observing the doings and sayings of other anglers. The aim of all these activities is to enable the angler to find a lure with the colours, movement, or odours that might best appeal to the senses of the fish. In other words, the angler aims to emulate the senses of the fish. Picture 1. Troll-fishers in the Lappi Cup fishing tournament 7 Data and method Participating in and recording of the social settings in which people under a study live is a defining characteristic of ethnography. Another characteristic involves incorporating multiple sources of data so as to generate varying perspectives on the context of interest. Also in this study, various types of data were systematically gathered using different methods: observations (written down in the form of field notes and field diaries), interviews/conversations, visual materials (photographs, visual essays, videotapes), and autobiographical narratives. The goal was to obtain rich data that would allow us to analyze the culturally specific ways in which the senses are engaged in the practice of fishing. To achieve this goal, we shall next scrutinize the potentials and challenges of varied forms of data. . The historically constructed nature of the senses poses challenges to their empirical investigation. The Western hierarchy of the senses offers a basic frame of intelligibility within which we, as members of culture and as researchers, face the world. The dominant audiovisual orientation may inhibit a researcher from noticing the role of the other senses in a setting under study. The prevalent ethnographic practices and fieldwork training also sustain this orientation. Namely, the key ethnographic method, observation, implies an emphasis on vision, and ethnographic scholars are also commonly trained to write down “what they see and hear” (e.g. Emerson et al., 1995, xiii). The nature of technical devices used in data collection – only sounds and sights can be currently recorded – further sustains the reliance on “either the eye or the ear” (Howes, 2006, 7). Yet, the task of a sensory ethnographer is to observe and register all sense-related aspects, including the scents, savours, temperatures, and textures involved in a context. Multi-sensory observation requires, actually, a new kind of analytic orientation that brings to the fore the sensory aspects that commonly go unnoticed. This means, for instance, that a researcher pays attention to the aromas that surround people, although the people may not be consciously aware of the cultural significance of odours. Moreover, the role of the body is vital in delineating the way in which the senses are observed and registered in the field. It is, after all, the body that enters into a specific sensory, semiotic, and social environment and is the medium through which practices are performed. Consider, for instance, cold hands touching slimy fish, aching buttocks after sitting in a boat in a windy weather, the touch of a warm wind on the skin, or splashes of cold water on the face. Furthermore, the sport in question is based on motion and activity: the vessel is in constant motion through the water and the crew is active in carrying out specific practices – they are handling the fishing gear, manoeuvring the boat, keeping a close watch on the changing environment, constantly controlling and adjusting their body movements in rough water, and receiving and sending kinaesthetic messages to other bodies. The mastery and orchestration of particular body techniques and the orchestration of the senses are prerequisites to the collective accomplishment of fishing practices. Therefore, the bodies of the researcher and the researched were accorded a primary role in the observational work. During the fieldwork process, it became apparent that it is rather challenging to try to focus on all the senses simultaneously during an entire fishing event. Therefore, a decision was made to focus on one sense at a time, yet paying attention to the ways in which the other senses relate to it. The choice of the focal sense was based on the 8 rapidly changing and often unanticipated conditions of the fishing event. For instance, a very strong wind emphasizes the significance of bodily balance, whereas the sense of smell or sound may appear significant when anticipating changes in weather conditions. This strategy allows the researcher to document the ways in which the significance of the different senses varies during the course of an activity and the ways in which the senses are interrelated (Pink, 2009). An equally challenging task is to transform these sensory observations into written or visual field notes. As Emerson and his colleagues argue (1995), what is actually written down in field notes is a critical stage in an ethnographic inquiry. In the present study, the researcher first made mental “headnotes”, which were then jotted down into key words and phrases straight after each fishing competition. Figure 1 offers an excerpt of jottings concerning one episode of the fishing practice, the handling of the fish, from the perspective of the sense of touch. In this case, the rules of the fishing competition prescribe that the competitors strand the fish during a designated time period and that the received catch be handled properly according to the guidelines. ____________________________ ......It is hard to keep balance in the wavelets. Have to be on my knees. I can’t see when the next wave hits. “Feel and hear the boat”. Long break, feeling rusty. Hard to keep balance and gut at same time. Knife; Mr R. “Lad, be careful” after I cut myself “I told you to be careful”.... ___________________________ Figure 1. Excerpt from jottings on a fish handling episode Afterwards, more elaborate field notes, field diaries, and autoethnographical narratives were written. Due to long and often exhausting fieldwork sessions, the actual writing – based on jottings – usually took place on the following day. Writing out jottings is not a straightforward process of remembering and filling in the gaps; rather, it is an active process of constructing coherent sequences of action and evocations of the scene. The fieldworker is, actually, already engaged in a preliminary analysis by arranging practices in a specific order and by deciding what to include and what to leave out, as Emerson and his colleagues (1995, 31-32) point out. In this particular case, the process raised problems related to conducting sensory ethnography. How to decipher the senses when a sophisticated vocabulary on the senses is missing? The following excerpt (Figure 2) exemplifies a more elaborate field diary written in a narrative form. It is based on a series of jottings and inspired by the theoretical understanding of the sense of touch that mainly consists of tactile elements as well as inner bodily elements such as pain, bodily balance, and kinaesthetic movements that are all involved in the coordinated actions taking place when a fish is caught. …Mr. R’s body moves mostly side-to-side whereas my body swings forwards and backwards, like a swing. Also our heads bobble in these directions. He says: “Lad, be careful” and hands out the fillet knife to me, handle forward. I open the hatch of the vessel’s in-built live fish tank, which is filled with cold water form the lake. Fumbling, I try to get a grip of one of the pikes residing there. My skin turns into goose bumps because of the coldness. There, I get a grip. I lift the fish, holding it, gently but firmly, upside-down – it will struggle less. It is difficult due to the 9 slipperiness of the protective slime on the pike. A tangy smell fills the cabin. I stun the fish with the blow of a cudgel. It is time to cut the gills and bleed the fish. Suddenly, a big wave hits, a roller coaster, turning the boat sidewise. In consequence of this unexpected movement, the blade of the knife hits my forefinger, not the fish. Forgot to pay attention to the waves. Deep cut, hurts like hell. “I told you to be careful”... Figure 2. Excerpt from a field narrative on a fish handling episode. The researcher’s skills in documenting sensory realities were sharpened by placing explicit, self-conscious attention to the process of transforming sensory observations into texts and by critically re-reading the field notes so as to reveal potential perceptual gazes. The notes and diaries worked hence as a catalyst for self-reflexivity that fostered the development of more sensory-oriented observation practices. The observation process was twofold in the sense that the researcher both experienced and observed his and other people’s co-participation in the ethnographic scene (Tedlock, 2003, 180). Hence, the researcher recorded direct observations of the fellow anglers’ doings and sayings, and, as an angler, made observations of his own doings and sayings. For example, the researcher kept a sensory diary in order to immerse himself into the sensory particularities of the practice and to collect field material for reflexive purposes (Pink, 2009). Having produced a primary understanding by relying on his own senses, he sought to elicit the general ways in which the senses operate in the practice under study. This kind of participant observation that incorporates reflexivity does not regard the researcher as the primary focus of research. Instead, participant observation focuses on the workings of a practice carried out by various agents, be they researchers or fellow participants. This approach connects the autoethnographic impulse with the ethnographic impulse (Wallendorf and Bruck, 1993). Visual methods can also be fruitfully used for directing attention to the multi-sensorial manifestations of consumption (see e.g. Peñaloza, 1998; Pink, 2009), and they were used in the present case as well. Still and moving visuals fix the moments of naturally occurring doings and sayings, thereby enabling the researcher to reflect on them later. Here, they turned out to be valuable materials for gaining an understanding of the embodied nature of doings in fishing practices; they helped eliciting different postures, kinaesthetic expressions, and bodily co-ordinations. The culturally significant moments of the practice can also be captured with the help of pictures: pictures related to the distribution of prizes or the memorable moments of posing with the catch encode meanings and emotions that are considered valuable by the practitioners (Arnould and Wallendorf, 1994). Therefore, they allow the researcher to gain insights into the ends and affective elements structuring the practice (e.g. the expression of joy and the sense of community). The visual materials were also combined with interviews and conversations (Moisander and Valtonen, 2006; Moisander, Valtonen and Hirsto 2009). The autodriving technique (Heisley and Levy, 1991) was used to animate talk on the senses. Accordingly, photographs taken by participants during the practice of fishing were used to produce cultural talk that offers access to the way participants categorize, rationalize, and use expressions of the senses (Pink, 2009) as part of their practice-specific sayings. This 10 technique proved to be useful in the present case because fishermen may find it difficult or embarrassing to draw attention to and explicate the senses in the masculine context of fishing – the “lower senses” such as smell and touch are often considered to be primitive and/or associated with exotics, animalism, or sexuality (Howes, 2006). However, their own pictures offered a way to talk about the senses in an acceptable manner, for instance, to say that a bright, fresh spring day has a particular smell to it and that different fishing sites have their own scents. All in all, these sorts of data enables us to identify the mesh of doings and sayings within the fishing practice and the way in which the senses are immersed in them. It also allows us to identify and elaborate the collective background understanding or knowledge scheme that ties all these activities together and underpins the inherent logic of the practice – thus making the activity understandable and appropriate for the social context. Conclusion In this paper, we have set out to work toward a practice-based culturalist approach to sensory ethnography so as to account more fully for the sensory aspects of consumption and consumer culture. By way of using sport fishing as an empirical illustrative case, we have scrutinized the challenges and opportunities brought about by such an approach. To close, we discuss its potential benefits for the study of consumption. The case of sport fishing illustrates, in particular, how the sensory ethnographic approach draws attention to aspects that are not fully acknowledged in existing accounts that aim at understanding the ways in which consumers act in different environments. It helps, in other words, to develop the notions of servicescape (Bitner, 1992) and wilderness servicescapes (Arnould et al., 1998) by adding the cultural dimension of the senses to these conceptualizations. As such, sensory ethnography contributes to the growing corpus of qualitative and cultural methodologies in consumer research (Moisander and Valtonen, 2006). The specific form we propose here also contributes to sensory ethnographic research (Pink, 2009) in the sense that it offers a non-individualistic account of the senses and that it is explicitly concerned with consumption phenomena. In terms of future research, we encourage scholars to further investigate the multiple forms consumer sensuousness may take in the diverse settings of consumer culture and to develop methods for their adequate exploration. Moreover, we encourage scholars to critically explore the ways in which the unwarranted assumptions of Western audiovisual thought are embedded in and perpetuate the present knowledge-generation practices within the discipline. 11 REFERENCES Argo, J., Dahl, D. W., & Morales, A. C. (2006) Consumer Contamination: How Consumers React to Products Touched by Others. Journal of Marketing, 70 (April), 81-94. Arnould, E. J., & Wallendorf, M. (1994) Market-Oriented Ethnography: Interpretation Building and Marketing Strategy Formulation. Journal of Marketing Research, 31 (November), 484-504. Arnould, E. J., Price, L., & Tierny, P. (1998) Communicative Staging of the Wilderness Servicescape. The Service Industries Journal, 18 (July), 90-115. Atkinson, P., Coffey, A., Delamont, S., Lofland, S. & Lofland, L. (2001) Handbook of Ethnography. Sage, London. Banks, M. (2001) Visual Methods in Social research. Sage, London. Barnes, B. (2001) Practice as Collective Action, in Schatzki, T., Knorr Cetina K. & von Savigny E. (eds.) The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory. Routledge, London and New York, 25-36. Bitner, M. J. (1992) Servicescapes: The Impact of Physical Surroundings on Customers and Employees. Journal of Marketing, 56 (2), 57-71. Bosmans, A. (2006) Scents and Sensibility: When Do (In)Congruent Ambient Scents Influence Product Evaluation. Journal of Marketing, 70 (July), 32-43. Bull, M. (2004) Automobility and the Power of Sound. Theory, Culture & Society, 21 (4/5), 243-259. Caillois, R. (2001) Man, Play and Games. University of Illinois Press,Urbana and Chicago. Classen, C. (1993) Worlds of Sense: Exploring the Sense in History and Across Cultures. Routledge, London. Crouch, D. & Desforges, L. (2003) The Sensuous in the Tourist Encounter. Tourist Studies, 3 (1), 5-22. Elliott, R. & Jankel-Elliott, N. (2003) Using Ethnography in Strategic Consumer Research. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 6 (4), 215-223. Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995) Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London. Fellman, M. W. (1999) Breaking Traditions. Marketing Research, Fall, 21-24. Ferdenzi C, Mustonen S, Tuorila H, & Schaal B. (2008) Children’s awareness and uses of odour cues in everyday life: a Finland-France comparison. Chemosensory Perception, 1,190-198. Finnish Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry 2002. Virkistyskalastus Suomessa nyt ja tulevaisuudessa. Maa- ja metsätalousministeriön julkaisuja 58/2002: kala- ja riistaosasto. Firat, A. F. (1995) ‘Consumer Culture or Culture Consumed?’ In: Marketing in a Multicultural World. Ethnicity, Nationalism, and Cultural Identity (ed. by Costa, J. and G. Bamossy), pp. 105-25, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Heisley, D. & Levy, S. (1991) Autodriving: A Photoelicitation Technique. Journal of Consumer Research 18 (Dec.), 257-72. Holbrook, M & Hirschman, E. (1982) The Experiental Aspects of Consumption: Consumer Fantasies, Feelings and Fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (September), 132-40. Howes, D. (2006) Sensual Relations. Engaging the Senses in Culture and Social Theory. The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor. Huizinga, J. (1950) Homo Ludens: A study of the play-element in culture. Boston, The Beacon Press. 12 Joy, A., & Sherry, J. F. Jr. (2003) Speaking of Arts as Embodied Imagination: A Multisensory Approach to Understanding Aesthetic Experience. Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (Sept.), 259-282. Kotler, P. (1973) Athmospherics as a Marketing Tool. Journal of Retailing, 49 (4): 48-64. Kozinets, R. (2002) The Field Behind the Screen: Using Nethnography for Marketing Research in Online Communities. Journal of Marketing Research, 39 (1), 61-72. Lindstrom, M. (2005) Brand Sense. Build Powerful Brands through Touch, Taste, Smell, Sight, and Sound. Free Press, New York. Magnagthen, P. & Urry, J. (2001) Bodies of Nature. Sage, London. Markuksela, V. (2009) Committed recreational fishers as hobbyists and tourists. Licentiate Thesis. University of Oulu, Acta Universitatis Ouluensis. Moisander, J., Valtonen, A. & Hirsto, H. (2009) Personal Interviews in Cultural Consumer Research- poststructuralist challenges. Consumption, Markets & Culture, 12 (4), 329-348. Moisander, J. & Valtonen, A. (2006) Qualitative Marketing Research: A Cultural Approach. Sage, London. Peck, J., & Childers, T. L. (2003) Individual Differences in Haptic Information Processing: The “Need for Touch” Scale. Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (December), 430-442. Peñaloza, L. (2001) Consuming the American West: Animating Cultural Meaning and Memory at a Stock Show and Rodeo. Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (Dec.), 369398. Peñaloza, L. (1998) Just Doing It: A Visual Ethnographic Study of Spectacular Consumption Behavior at Nike Town. Consumption, Markets & Culture, 2 (4), 337400.Pink, S. (2009) Doing Sensory Ethnography. Sage, London. Reckwitz, A. (2002) Toward a Theory of Social Practice: A Development in Culturalist Theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5 (2), 243-263. Schatzki, T. R. (2002) The Site of the Social: a philosophical account of the constitution of social life and change. The Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, PA. Schatzki, T. R., Cetina, K. K. & Savigny, E. v. (Eds.) (2001) The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory, London and New York, Routledge. Schramm, H. L., Jr., M. L. Armstrong, N. A. Funicelli, D. M. Green, D. P. Lee, R. E. Manns, Jr., B. D. Taubert & S. J. Waters (1991) The Status of Competitive Fishing in North America. Fisheries, 16 (3), 4-12. Schau, H., Muñiz A., & Arnould, E. (2009) How Brand Community Practices Create Value, Journal of Marketing, 73 (5): 30-51 Shove, E. & Pantzar, M. (2005) Consumers, Producers and Practices: Understanding the invention and reinvention of Nordic walking. Journal of Consumer Culture, 5, 43-64. Stroller, P. (1997) Sensuous Scholarship. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia. Tedlock, B. (2003) Ethnography and Ethnographic Representation. In: Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry (ed. by N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln), pp. 165-213. Sage, London. Turley, L. W. & Milliman, R. E. (2000) Atmospheric Effects on Shopping Behavior: A Review of the Experimental Evidence. Journal of Business Research, 49, 193-211. Wallendorf, M. & Bruck, M. (1993) Introspection in Consumer Research: Implementation and Implications. Journal of Consumer Research, 20 (December), 339-359. Warde, A. (2005) Consumption and Theories of Practice. Journal of Consumer Culture, 5, 131-153. 13