View - K-REx - Kansas State University

Dimensionality (Categorical vs. Structural Dimension Approach)
Identifying the underlying dimensions/categories of a specific construct is essential for
the development of a reliable and valid scale and for comprehending the nature of the construct.
Many researchers have investigated the underlying dimensions/categories of various emotional
reactions in numerous fields, recognizing the multidimensional nature of consumption emotions
(e.g., Holbrook & Batra, 1987; Larsen & Diener, 1985; Mano, 1990; Meharian & Russell, 1974;
Oliver, 1992; Westbrook, 1987). Identified dimensions/categories in these studies are quite
varied. Typically, there are two types of approaches when discovering the dimensionality of
consumption emotions, namely the categorical dimension approach and the structural dimension
approach (Oh, 2005). Researchers in examining emotional aspects of consumer behaviors take
one of these two approaches to illustrate the structure of emotional experiences.
In the categorical dimension approach, several independent mono-polar categories of
emotional responses exist (Oh, 2005). Using this approach, researchers have categorized the
wide variety of individuals’ emotional states into a small set (e.g., Izard, 1977; Mano, 1990;
Oliver, 1992; Plutchik, 1984; Westbrook, 1987). For example, Izard’s (1977) 10 basic emotion
categories and Plutchik’s (1984) eight primary emotion categories were treated as a separate
dimension although they still coexist. The relevance of these fundamental emotion categories in
consumption situations have been supported in numerous consumer behavior studies (Holbrook
& Westbrook, 1990; Mano, 1990; Westbrook, 1987). Generally, categories/dimensions of
emotions are established by a factor analysis of a set of emotional variables in these studies
(Westbrook & Oliver, 1991).
The structural dimension approach assumes that emotional states are related to one
another in a systematic manner rather than independent of one another (Oh, 2005). The
structural dimension approach is mostly characterized by a bipolar structure of measures (e.g.,
Holbrook & Batra, 1987; Larsen & Diener, 1985; Meharian & Russell, 1974). For instance,
three dimensions of PAD paradigm involve the bipolar continuum of pleasure (e.g., pleasedannoyed),
arousal (e.g., aroused-unaroused), and dominance (e.g., dominant-submissive). A
two-dimensional approach that includes pleasantness and arousal dimensions was also proposed
by Larsen and Diener (1985). Overall, based on the extensive review of the literature on related
emotions, Oh (2005) and Plutchik (2003) concluded that the number of underlying categorical
dimensions and structural dimensions differs study by study.
20