An Aversion to Intervention: How the Protestant Work Ethic Influences Preferences for Natural Healthcare

IF 5.7 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Consumer Research Pub Date : 2024-05-22 DOI:10.1093/jcr/ucae033
Yimin Cheng, Anirban Mukhopadhyay
{"title":"An Aversion to Intervention: How the Protestant Work Ethic Influences Preferences for Natural Healthcare","authors":"Yimin Cheng, Anirban Mukhopadhyay","doi":"10.1093/jcr/ucae033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The term “natural” is ubiquitous in advertising and branding, but limited research has investigated how consumers respond and relate to naturalness. Some researchers have documented preferences for natural products, specifically food, but there has been scant investigation of the psychological antecedents of such preferences, especially in the critical, multi-trillion dollar domain of healthcare. Using publicly available country-level data from 41 countries and individual-level experimental and survey data from the lab and online panels, we find converging evidence that consumers do indeed differ in their preferences for relatively natural versus artificial healthcare options. These differences are influenced by the extent to which they subscribe to the Protestant Work Ethic (PWE)—a belief system that influences judgments and behaviors across diverse domains—such that people who subscribe strongly (vs. weakly) to the PWE are more likely to prefer natural healthcare options, because they are more averse to external intervention in general. Further, belief in the PWE makes consumers more sensitive to the intrusiveness of an intervention than to its extent. Theoretical and substantive implications are discussed.","PeriodicalId":15555,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Consumer Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Consumer Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucae033","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The term “natural” is ubiquitous in advertising and branding, but limited research has investigated how consumers respond and relate to naturalness. Some researchers have documented preferences for natural products, specifically food, but there has been scant investigation of the psychological antecedents of such preferences, especially in the critical, multi-trillion dollar domain of healthcare. Using publicly available country-level data from 41 countries and individual-level experimental and survey data from the lab and online panels, we find converging evidence that consumers do indeed differ in their preferences for relatively natural versus artificial healthcare options. These differences are influenced by the extent to which they subscribe to the Protestant Work Ethic (PWE)—a belief system that influences judgments and behaviors across diverse domains—such that people who subscribe strongly (vs. weakly) to the PWE are more likely to prefer natural healthcare options, because they are more averse to external intervention in general. Further, belief in the PWE makes consumers more sensitive to the intrusiveness of an intervention than to its extent. Theoretical and substantive implications are discussed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
厌恶干预:新教工作伦理如何影响自然医疗偏好
在广告和品牌推广中,"天然 "一词无处不在,但对消费者如何回应天然性以及与天然性之间关系的研究却十分有限。一些研究人员记录了消费者对天然产品(尤其是食品)的偏好,但对这种偏好的心理前因的调查却很少,尤其是在价值数万亿美元的医疗保健这一关键领域。通过使用来自 41 个国家的国家级公开数据,以及来自实验室和在线小组的个人级实验和调查数据,我们发现了趋同的证据,即消费者在相对天然和人工的医疗保健选择上确实存在偏好差异。这些差异受到新教工作伦理(PWE)认同程度的影响--PWE 是一种影响不同领域的判断和行为的信仰体系--因此,对新教工作伦理认同程度高(相对于认同程度低)的人更有可能偏好自然的医疗保健选择,因为他们一般更厌恶外部干预。此外,与干预程度相比,对公共工程的信念会让消费者对干预的侵入性更加敏感。本文讨论了理论和实质意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.00
自引率
9.70%
发文量
53
期刊介绍: Journal of Consumer Research, established in 1974, is a reputable journal that publishes high-quality empirical, theoretical, and methodological papers on a wide range of consumer research topics. The primary objective of JCR is to contribute to the advancement of understanding consumer behavior and the practice of consumer research. To be considered for publication in JCR, a paper must make a significant contribution to the existing body of knowledge in consumer research. It should aim to build upon, deepen, or challenge previous studies in the field of consumption, while providing both conceptual and empirical evidence to support its findings. JCR prioritizes multidisciplinary perspectives, encouraging contributions from various disciplines, methodological approaches, theoretical frameworks, and substantive problem areas. The journal aims to cater to a diverse readership base by welcoming articles derived from different orientations and paradigms. Overall, JCR is a valuable platform for scholars and researchers to share their work and contribute to the advancement of consumer research.
期刊最新文献
How Numerical Cognition Explains Ambiguity Aversion Relational Gifting: Conceptual Frameworks and an Agenda for a New Generation of Research Why and How Consumers Perform Online Reviewing Differently How Do Consumers React to Ads That Meddle in Out-Party Primaries? Digital Therapy for Negative Consumption Experiences: The Impact of Emotional and Rational Reviews on Review Writers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1