Scientific Method / Science & Exploration

People pay more when celebrities leave a magical mark on memorabilia





The researchers sorted though the online auction records of some very popular public figures’ estates, including Marilyn Monroe, John F. Kennedy, and Jacqueline Onassis. First, third-party coders determined, on a scale of 1 to 9, how much contact each object likely had with its owner. For instance, clothing up for auction probably had a lot of physical contact, while art had much less. Then the researchers compared each item’s pre-auction estimated value with the winning bid to determine whether physical contact—and therefore the contagion effect—determined how much people were willing to pay.

The answer was clear: items that were perceived to have been worn, frequently touched, or otherwise in physical contact with Monroe, Kennedy, or Onassis sold for a premium compared to less personal objects. The effect held up not only for expensive items like jewelry, but also for belongings worth much less.

And this effect isn’t just due to an object's intimate association with its famous owner; there is something about actual physical contact that increases an item's value. When Newman and Bloom asked people what they would be willing to pay for their favorite celebrity's sweater, their price dropped significantly if the sweater was sterilized before being sold. Contagion, rather than simple association, seems to drive both the hypothetical and real values of memorabilia.

Furthermore, contagion works both ways. The researchers also examined winning bids at the estate auction of the much-hated swindler Bernie Madoff. In this case, greater perceived physical contact actually decreased the prices that buyers were willing to pay for his belongings. The effect wasn’t nearly as strong as it was for the popular celebrities, but contagion does seem to operate in the negative direction. The final prices for items belonging to Ruth Madoff, Bernie’s wife, were unaffected by perceived physical contact, likely because there is no strong public opinion about her, either way.

Although the study's subject matter may seem a bit frivolous, there are some significant takeaways. The study is an insight into the sometimes cryptic way that our society values items. Perhaps more importantly, these findings underscore the fact that human behavior is far from rational. There's no evidence that owning a celebrity's tooth or snotty tissue makes us more like them in either a positive or negative way. It may be hard to believe that this type of magical thinking could affect our behavior in this day and age, but—like superstitions—contagion seems to be a pervasive part of the human psyche that renders our behavior somewhat irrational at times.

Still, this is an inexact science, and it certainly doesn't explain all celebrity memorabilia prices. Elvis Presley's stained tighty-whities—which must have had some very up-close and personal contact with the King—failed to attract a buyer in a 2012 auction. However, this may have been due to the astronomical reserve price of more than $11,000. Or, perhaps buying someone else's dirty underwear is actually perceived as totally disgusting.

PNAS, 2014. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1313637111  (About DOIs).

Expand full story

You must to comment.