Buy Experiences instead of Possessions to Build Social Connection

Shared experiences, more than material things, bring people together

By Amit Kumar

The human being is a “social animal,” as Aristotle suggested. We have a fundamental need to belong. Yet we are living in a time when the U.S. Surgeon General has warned about an epidemic of loneliness and isolation. A lack of social connection can have negative consequences for both our mental and physical health. How, then, might we encourage the feelings of connectedness that are so integral to our well-being?

Over the past several years, my colleagues and I have conducted scientific studies suggesting that experiential purchases (such as travel, meals at restaurants, outdoor activities and recreation) tend to bring people more happiness than material ones (for instance, clothing, furniture and electronic goods). In recent research, psychologists Thomas Gilovich of Cornell University, Thomas C. Mann then of Harvard University and I investigated another downstream consequence of spending on experiences rather than things: it can promote a greater sense of social connection.

We conducted a series of 13 experiments involving 1,980 participants. Although the specific approach in each study varied, in several of these experiments, we asked people to think about either experiential or material purchases they had made and then rate their thoughts and feelings about those purchases on nine-point scales. In some of our studies, people reported feeling more kinship with someone who had made the same experiential purchase than someone who had made the same material purchase. Owning the same T-shirt or sneakers as someone else is an interesting coincidence, but hiking the same trail or seeing the same performance makes people feel more connected, our experiments suggest. This reflects the fact that experiential purchases are more central to an individual’s identity: our data show that people feel more similar to and more kinship with someone who purchases the same experience as them because they believe this kind of consumption tends to represent more of one’s true, essential sense of self.

On supporting science journalism

If you’re enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Moreover, these findings apply even when people think about how their experiences differ. We asked participants to consider a situation in which they met someone who had made a similar experiential or material purchase, but the other person’s purchase was superior or “upgraded” in some way. (For example, if the material possession was a necklace, participants considered someone who bought a fancier necklace than they had. For experiences, this might mean someone had a better seat at a concert that a participant had attended). Even in these cases, experiences were more likely to foster connection between people than material items were.

Knowing that another person has a better version of what you have can create a sense of social distance. What we observe, however, is that this distance feels less wide when it comes to experiential purchases compared with material ones. Although unpleasant social comparisons and materialistic arms races can be commonplace in the realm of possessions, it may be easier for people to find common ground and connect with someone else over their similar experiences.

We also discovered that experiential consumption fosters a sense of social connectedness more broadly, not just to those who have made a similar purchase. People who reflected on experiences they had acquired—rather than material goods—reported a broader sense of connection to humanity. For example, they were less likely to agree with statements such as “I feel so distant from people” and “I feel disconnected from the world around me” when they considered their experiences compared with when they considered their material possessions.

Finally, we found that after people think about a gratifying experience, they express a greater desire to engage in social activities than they do after they reflect on an important possession. Participants who were asked to recall an experiential purchase were more likely to select social over solitary activities when they were asked how they would prefer to spend their free time than people who were prompted to think about material purchases.

Experiences connect us with others, and they provide memories of such connection that people can revisit. These memories, in turn, can encourage engagement in even more sociality. After the money has been spent and the experience has been consumed, experiential purchases endure in the social relationships they help to cultivate.

One clear takeaway from this research—like the many studies on experiential spending and happiness done to date—is that people would likely be wise to tilt their spending toward “doing” rather than “having.” But our work points to another implication as well. Communities could benefit in many ways from encouraging experiential pursuits. Policymakers can support access to public parks, beaches and museums, for example. Improved funding for the arts and performance spaces can be a way for communities to ensure that shared experiences continue to bring people together, as the National Endowment for the Arts has highlighted. Our work hints that such investments could kick off a virtuous cycle. Directing resources toward more community engagement might spur improvements in societal well-being.

Are you a scientist who specializes in neuroscience, cognitive science or psychology? And have you read a recent peer-reviewed paper that you would like to write about for Mind Matters? Please send suggestions to Scientific American’s Mind Matters editor Daisy Yuhas at dyuhas@sciam.com.

This is an opinion and analysis article, and the views expressed by the author or authors are not necessarily those of Scientific American.