IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rsocec/v82y2024i1p98-125.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The social ambiguity of money: empirical evidence on the multiple usability of money in social life

Author

Listed:
  • Klaus Kraemer
  • Luka Jakelja
  • Florian Brugger
  • Sebastian Nessel

Abstract

In regard to the purpose of money use, economic theory provides a functionalist answer, while a dominant sociological view focuses on culture. However, Simmel noted the paradoxical nature of money in this respect. Money brings together both quantity and quality; therefore, it simultaneously has different potentialities for its usage. We conducted an exploratory factor analysis by using a representative sample (n = 2000) of the population in Austria to explore the potentialities of money usage. We found seven factors: freedom, community, status, institutional control, conflict, work-related control and household control. A discussion of the factors reveals the simultaneous, ambiguous existence of the qualitative and quantitative potentialities of the usage of money. We conclude that the ambiguity of money can only be described in all its contradictoriness by distinguishing between the concrete earmarking money for specific social purposes (Zelizer) and the potentially unspecific, open usability for alternative concrete or fictional purposes (Simmel).

Suggested Citation

  • Klaus Kraemer & Luka Jakelja & Florian Brugger & Sebastian Nessel, 2024. "The social ambiguity of money: empirical evidence on the multiple usability of money in social life," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 82(1), pages 98-125, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rsocec:v:82:y:2024:i:1:p:98-125
    DOI: 10.1080/00346764.2022.2076150
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00346764.2022.2076150
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00346764.2022.2076150?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rsocec:v:82:y:2024:i:1:p:98-125. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RRSE20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.