Sterling A. Bone, Glenn L. Christensen, Jerome D. Williams, Samantha N. N. Cross, Stephanie Dellande
Discrimination in service encounters with underrepresented ethnoracial (UER) consumers is especially challenging to identify and remediate when the behavior is microaggressive. Such subtle behaviors often cause harm, even if recipients do not perceive them. Affected individuals may become desensitized, indifferent, or even accepting of this inferior treatment. In this research, we measure and compare actual and perceived service between providers and ethnoracial (ER) consumers. In the context of banking, study 1 of three compares satisfaction ratings across ER consumers (UER and White) and examines actual behaviors of employees across video recordings of service encounters. Study 2 employs a video scenario experiment to demonstrate how ER consumer perceptions differ in evaluating the same encounter. In study 3, subjects evaluate positive and negative service encounters. Our findings show that if actual service is objectively measured, then managers and policy makers will be able to identify and address undetected instances of discrimination.
{"title":"Moving beyond Perceptions: Examining Service Disparities among Consumers","authors":"Sterling A. Bone, Glenn L. Christensen, Jerome D. Williams, Samantha N. N. Cross, Stephanie Dellande","doi":"10.1086/722689","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/722689","url":null,"abstract":"Discrimination in service encounters with underrepresented ethnoracial (UER) consumers is especially challenging to identify and remediate when the behavior is microaggressive. Such subtle behaviors often cause harm, even if recipients do not perceive them. Affected individuals may become desensitized, indifferent, or even accepting of this inferior treatment. In this research, we measure and compare actual and perceived service between providers and ethnoracial (ER) consumers. In the context of banking, study 1 of three compares satisfaction ratings across ER consumers (UER and White) and examines actual behaviors of employees across video recordings of service encounters. Study 2 employs a video scenario experiment to demonstrate how ER consumer perceptions differ in evaluating the same encounter. In study 3, subjects evaluate positive and negative service encounters. Our findings show that if actual service is objectively measured, then managers and policy makers will be able to identify and address undetected instances of discrimination.","PeriodicalId":36388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association for Consumer Research","volume":"8 1","pages":"107 - 119"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2022-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46897568","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
C. Galalae, E. Kipnis, C. Cui, Emma Johnson, T. Licsandru, Lizette Vorster, C. Demangeot, Shauna Kearney, C. Mari, Verónica Martín Ruiz, C. Pullig, Tyrha M. Lindsey-Warren
This article highlights the generative properties of context for consumer experiences of racism and discrimination. Drawing from conceptualizations of context in social anthropology and human geography, it develops a framework to systematically catalogue intersections of various micro- and macrosocial contexts that configure within and across marketplace geographies and inform racism and discrimination. The framework is applied to an integrative review of studies on marketplace racism and discrimination. The review illuminates that (1) application of intersectional perspectives varies significantly across cultural difference dimensions, (2) knowledge is clustered within specific microsocial context expressions of cultural difference dimensions, (3) studies intersecting micro- and macrosocial expressions commonly reveal underexplored discrimination instances, and (4) knowledge on macrosocial contextual forces significantly lacks non-Western perspectives. Drawing on the review findings, a list of areas of advancement for future scholarship is presented, along with recommendations for marketing practitioners acting toward identifying, understanding, and counteracting racism and discrimination.
{"title":"A Multicontextual Lens on Racism and Discrimination in the Multicultural Marketplace","authors":"C. Galalae, E. Kipnis, C. Cui, Emma Johnson, T. Licsandru, Lizette Vorster, C. Demangeot, Shauna Kearney, C. Mari, Verónica Martín Ruiz, C. Pullig, Tyrha M. Lindsey-Warren","doi":"10.1086/722704","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/722704","url":null,"abstract":"This article highlights the generative properties of context for consumer experiences of racism and discrimination. Drawing from conceptualizations of context in social anthropology and human geography, it develops a framework to systematically catalogue intersections of various micro- and macrosocial contexts that configure within and across marketplace geographies and inform racism and discrimination. The framework is applied to an integrative review of studies on marketplace racism and discrimination. The review illuminates that (1) application of intersectional perspectives varies significantly across cultural difference dimensions, (2) knowledge is clustered within specific microsocial context expressions of cultural difference dimensions, (3) studies intersecting micro- and macrosocial expressions commonly reveal underexplored discrimination instances, and (4) knowledge on macrosocial contextual forces significantly lacks non-Western perspectives. Drawing on the review findings, a list of areas of advancement for future scholarship is presented, along with recommendations for marketing practitioners acting toward identifying, understanding, and counteracting racism and discrimination.","PeriodicalId":36388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association for Consumer Research","volume":"1123 ","pages":"95 - 106"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2022-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41275083","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sharing economy platforms, such as Airbnb, often requires (or strongly encourages) hosts to share personal information, such as names and profile photos. Previous research suggests that consumers rely on this information to discriminate against hosts from racial minorities. If there is a preference for White hosts, then they should be able to charge higher prices for qualitatively similar rentals. We test this hypothesis using data from Airbnb. An analysis of 96,150 listings across 24 cities and 14 countries showed that non-White hosts charge approximately 2.5%–3% lower prices for qualitatively similar listings (study 1). A preregistered analysis of 12,648 listings across 14 cities in the United States showed that Black hosts charge approximately 5%–7% lower prices and Asian hosts charge approximately 4%–6% lower prices for similar listings (study 2). These findings support the hypothesis that consumers show a preference for White hosts, which allows White hosts to charge higher prices.
{"title":"Racial Disparities in the Sharing Economy: Evidence from More Than 100,000 Airbnb Hosts across 14 Countries","authors":"Bastian Jaeger, Willem W. A. Sleegers","doi":"10.1086/722700","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/722700","url":null,"abstract":"Sharing economy platforms, such as Airbnb, often requires (or strongly encourages) hosts to share personal information, such as names and profile photos. Previous research suggests that consumers rely on this information to discriminate against hosts from racial minorities. If there is a preference for White hosts, then they should be able to charge higher prices for qualitatively similar rentals. We test this hypothesis using data from Airbnb. An analysis of 96,150 listings across 24 cities and 14 countries showed that non-White hosts charge approximately 2.5%–3% lower prices for qualitatively similar listings (study 1). A preregistered analysis of 12,648 listings across 14 cities in the United States showed that Black hosts charge approximately 5%–7% lower prices and Asian hosts charge approximately 4%–6% lower prices for similar listings (study 2). These findings support the hypothesis that consumers show a preference for White hosts, which allows White hosts to charge higher prices.","PeriodicalId":36388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association for Consumer Research","volume":"8 1","pages":"33 - 46"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2022-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48809310","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Despite the increased focus on racial justice in markets and society, the delegitimization of racialized brands employing racial stereotypes to enliven themselves remains unexplored. This study draws on media data and discursive (de)legitimization to compare the initial maintenance and eventual removal of a mainstream racialized brand name through public discourses in the popular press. Specifically, it unpacks how brands’ spokespeople and other professionals legitimized Gypsy Sauce in the German marketplace in 2013 only to delegitimize the controversial brand name in 2020. “Gypsy” is a racially charged and derogatory term for the self-designated Roma ethno-race. The critical discourse analysis reveals two commonly used delegitimizing discourses (antiracism and social tolerating) as direct responses to two dominant legitimizing discourses (romanticizing and market dynamicizing) for the racialized brand. This article concludes with consumer implications, branding recommendations, and future research directions on delegitimizing culturally insensitive brands.
{"title":"Delegitimizing Racialized Brands","authors":"Ela Veresiu","doi":"10.1086/722694","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/722694","url":null,"abstract":"Despite the increased focus on racial justice in markets and society, the delegitimization of racialized brands employing racial stereotypes to enliven themselves remains unexplored. This study draws on media data and discursive (de)legitimization to compare the initial maintenance and eventual removal of a mainstream racialized brand name through public discourses in the popular press. Specifically, it unpacks how brands’ spokespeople and other professionals legitimized Gypsy Sauce in the German marketplace in 2013 only to delegitimize the controversial brand name in 2020. “Gypsy” is a racially charged and derogatory term for the self-designated Roma ethno-race. The critical discourse analysis reveals two commonly used delegitimizing discourses (antiracism and social tolerating) as direct responses to two dominant legitimizing discourses (romanticizing and market dynamicizing) for the racialized brand. This article concludes with consumer implications, branding recommendations, and future research directions on delegitimizing culturally insensitive brands.","PeriodicalId":36388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association for Consumer Research","volume":"8 1","pages":"59 - 71"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2022-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44691783","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Following the murder of George Floyd in May 2020, many brands tried to convey their support of #BLM (Black Lives Matter) on social media (Blackout Tuesday). Some brands engaged in performative allyship (expressing allyship in words only), whereas other brands expressed support through words and deeds (true allyship). This research tests whether true versus performative brand allyship matters to consumers. We show that for the period following Blackout Tuesday, true ally brands performed better than performative ally brands and neutral brands (staying silent). Two experiments show that true ally brands are evaluated more positively than performative ally brands and that this effect is mediated by self-esteem and self-brand connection but moderated by race (greater effect of true allyship for Black consumers than White consumers). These findings suggest that brands have little to gain from acting as performative allies, and even less so toward the communities most affected by social injustice.
{"title":"Brands and Social Justice Movements: The Effects of True versus Performative Allyship on Brand Evaluation","authors":"Nathalie Spielmann, S. Dobscha, L. Shrum","doi":"10.1086/722697","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/722697","url":null,"abstract":"Following the murder of George Floyd in May 2020, many brands tried to convey their support of #BLM (Black Lives Matter) on social media (Blackout Tuesday). Some brands engaged in performative allyship (expressing allyship in words only), whereas other brands expressed support through words and deeds (true allyship). This research tests whether true versus performative brand allyship matters to consumers. We show that for the period following Blackout Tuesday, true ally brands performed better than performative ally brands and neutral brands (staying silent). Two experiments show that true ally brands are evaluated more positively than performative ally brands and that this effect is mediated by self-esteem and self-brand connection but moderated by race (greater effect of true allyship for Black consumers than White consumers). These findings suggest that brands have little to gain from acting as performative allies, and even less so toward the communities most affected by social injustice.","PeriodicalId":36388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association for Consumer Research","volume":"8 1","pages":"83 - 94"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2022-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45729145","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This research leverages important concepts from the multidimensional model of racial identity (Sellers et al. 1998) to advance knowledge of intragroup differences in Black consumers’ responses to stigmatized-identity cues. The authors propose that the discrepancy between private and public racial regard moderates the impact of stigmatized-identity cues on Black consumers’ reactions to the cue source. Private regard reflects how individuals feel about their Black racial identity, whereas public regard captures individuals’ beliefs about how others perceive Black people. Findings from three experiments suggest that a favorable discrepancy between private and public racial regard magnifies the impact of stigmatized-identity cues on Black consumers’ perceptions and intentions with respect to the cue source. Feeling respected mediates this relationship.
{"title":"Racial Regard and Black Consumers’ Responses to Stigmatized-Identity Cues","authors":"Tracy Rank‐Christman, David B. Wooten","doi":"10.1086/722702","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/722702","url":null,"abstract":"This research leverages important concepts from the multidimensional model of racial identity (Sellers et al. 1998) to advance knowledge of intragroup differences in Black consumers’ responses to stigmatized-identity cues. The authors propose that the discrepancy between private and public racial regard moderates the impact of stigmatized-identity cues on Black consumers’ reactions to the cue source. Private regard reflects how individuals feel about their Black racial identity, whereas public regard captures individuals’ beliefs about how others perceive Black people. Findings from three experiments suggest that a favorable discrepancy between private and public racial regard magnifies the impact of stigmatized-identity cues on Black consumers’ perceptions and intentions with respect to the cue source. Feeling respected mediates this relationship.","PeriodicalId":36388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association for Consumer Research","volume":"8 1","pages":"21 - 32"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2022-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49073675","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
From “Chick Beer” to “Dryer Sheets for Men” to shampoo for “African Americans,” identity-based labeling is frequently deployed by marketers to appeal to specific target markets. Yet such identity appeals can backfire, alienating the very consumers that they aim to attract. We theorize and empirically demonstrate that identity appeals lead to consumer avoidance when they evoke a stereotype about a marginalized identity: females in studies 1–3a and racial minorities in studies 3b–5. We identify categorization threat—the feeling of being unwillingly categorized as (and reduced to) a single identity—as a critical driver underlying consumer reactions to identity appeals. The negative impact of identity appeals is mitigated in situations in which categorization threat is less likely to be activated: (a) when multiple identities are evoked, preventing consumers from feeling reduced to a single identity, and (b) when targeting by identity is seen as necessary for differentiating product offerings.
从“Chick Beer”到“Dryer Sheets for Men”，再到“African Americans”的洗发水，营销人员经常使用基于身份的标签来吸引特定的目标市场。然而，这种身份诉求可能会适得其反，疏远他们想要吸引的消费者。我们从理论上和实证上证明，当身份诉求唤起对边缘化身份的刻板印象时，会导致消费者回避：研究1-3a中的女性和研究3b-5中的少数种族。我们将分类威胁——不情愿地被归类为（并被简化为）单一身份的感觉——确定为消费者对身份诉求反应的关键驱动因素。在分类威胁不太可能被激活的情况下，身份诉求的负面影响会得到缓解：（a）当唤起多个身份时，防止消费者感觉被简化为单一身份，以及（b）当按身份定位被视为区分产品所必需时。
{"title":"Calculators for Women: When Identity-Based Appeals Alienate Consumers","authors":"Tami Kim, Kate Barasz, M. Norton, L. John","doi":"10.1086/722691","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/722691","url":null,"abstract":"From “Chick Beer” to “Dryer Sheets for Men” to shampoo for “African Americans,” identity-based labeling is frequently deployed by marketers to appeal to specific target markets. Yet such identity appeals can backfire, alienating the very consumers that they aim to attract. We theorize and empirically demonstrate that identity appeals lead to consumer avoidance when they evoke a stereotype about a marginalized identity: females in studies 1–3a and racial minorities in studies 3b–5. We identify categorization threat—the feeling of being unwillingly categorized as (and reduced to) a single identity—as a critical driver underlying consumer reactions to identity appeals. The negative impact of identity appeals is mitigated in situations in which categorization threat is less likely to be activated: (a) when multiple identities are evoked, preventing consumers from feeling reduced to a single identity, and (b) when targeting by identity is seen as necessary for differentiating product offerings.","PeriodicalId":36388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association for Consumer Research","volume":"8 1","pages":"72 - 82"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2022-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45618316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nicole Davis, Nils Olsen, V. G. Perry, Marcus M. Stewart, T. White
This research examines whether consumers ascribe racial stereotypes to artificially intelligent (AI; nonhuman) agents and whether these stereotypes impact ratings of satisfaction, perceptions of competence and humanness, and outcomes of negotiated transactions. Drawing on the stereotype content model, expectation violation theory, and the humanness-value-loyalty framework, we investigate how consumers apply racial stereotype judgments in interactions with artificially intelligent agents in a controlled negotiation experiment. Results reveal that although Black people, in general, are more likely to be stereotyped as less competent than Asian or White people, the opposite is true for Black AI bots. Furthermore, perceptions of competence and humanness of Black AI bots supersede those of Asian and White AI bots, leading to increased ratings of overall satisfaction, and some evidence of more favorable negotiation behaviors. Implications for AI applications in marketing are discussed.
{"title":"I’m Only Human? The Role of Racial Stereotypes, Humanness, and Satisfaction in Transactions with Anthropomorphic Sales Bots","authors":"Nicole Davis, Nils Olsen, V. G. Perry, Marcus M. Stewart, T. White","doi":"10.1086/722703","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/722703","url":null,"abstract":"This research examines whether consumers ascribe racial stereotypes to artificially intelligent (AI; nonhuman) agents and whether these stereotypes impact ratings of satisfaction, perceptions of competence and humanness, and outcomes of negotiated transactions. Drawing on the stereotype content model, expectation violation theory, and the humanness-value-loyalty framework, we investigate how consumers apply racial stereotype judgments in interactions with artificially intelligent agents in a controlled negotiation experiment. Results reveal that although Black people, in general, are more likely to be stereotyped as less competent than Asian or White people, the opposite is true for Black AI bots. Furthermore, perceptions of competence and humanness of Black AI bots supersede those of Asian and White AI bots, leading to increased ratings of overall satisfaction, and some evidence of more favorable negotiation behaviors. Implications for AI applications in marketing are discussed.","PeriodicalId":36388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association for Consumer Research","volume":"8 1","pages":"47 - 58"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2022-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45064032","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
ealthy eating is highly relevant to multiple stakeholders, from consumers to marketers to policy makers. Every consumer makes food decisions daily; food is a $2.5 trillion industry worldwide (Fortune Business Insights 2022), and promoting healthier eating is a major public policy issue given rising obesity rates in most countries. Interest in understanding, more generally, the role of food decision making in consumers’ lives has increased in conjunction with these societal trends. We believe that consumer research has an important role to play in understanding and shaping food decision making to produce positive outcomes for as many constituents as possible, because of its unique ability to straddle the line between consumer welfare and implications for the producers and marketers of food products. This special issue of JACR seeks to add new insights to our understanding of interventions to increase healthy eating by (1) reflecting on what healthy eating means through the lens of consumers’ perceptions of what they should do to eat healthy, (2) increasing our understanding of the methods used to test healthy eating interventions, and (3) examining whether and when various healthy eating interventions are actually effective at leading to healthier eating. Understanding what healthy eating means to consumers is important as consumers use their own interpretations of “healthy” when making daily decisions about food consumption (Ronteltap et al. 2012). Accordingly, we begin with a discussion of how healthy eating is understood, expressed, and operationalized, introducing a framework of key paths to healthy eating and presenting insights from a survey of consumers. We then consider the evidence about which interventions actually work (or do not work) at leading to healthier eating. We present key findings from the special issue articles, which are organized into four
健康饮食与从消费者到营销人员到政策制定者等多个利益攸关方高度相关。每个消费者每天都要做出食物选择;食品行业在全球是一个价值2.5万亿美元的产业(财富商业洞察2022)，鉴于大多数国家的肥胖率不断上升，促进更健康的饮食是一项重大的公共政策问题。更广泛地说，随着这些社会趋势，人们对食品决策在消费者生活中所起作用的理解兴趣也在增加。我们相信，消费者研究在理解和塑造食品决策方面发挥着重要作用，为尽可能多的成分产生积极的结果，因为它具有独特的能力，可以跨越消费者福利和对食品生产商和销售商的影响之间的界限。本期《JACR》特刊旨在通过以下方式为我们对促进健康饮食的干预措施的理解增添新的见解:(1)通过消费者对健康饮食的看法来反思健康饮食意味着什么，(2)增加我们对用于测试健康饮食干预措施的方法的理解，以及(3)检查各种健康饮食干预措施是否以及何时能真正有效地促进健康饮食。了解健康饮食对消费者意味着什么很重要，因为消费者在做出日常食品消费决定时，会使用他们自己对“健康”的解释(Ronteltap et al. 2012)。因此，我们首先讨论如何理解、表达和实施健康饮食，介绍健康饮食的关键途径框架，并从消费者调查中提出见解。然后，我们考虑哪些干预措施在导致更健康的饮食方面实际上有效(或无效)的证据。我们从特刊文章中提出了主要发现，这些文章分为四个部分
{"title":"Paths to Healthier Eating: Perceptions and Interventions for Success","authors":"Pierre Chandon, Kelly L. Haws, Peggy J. Liu","doi":"10.1086/721842","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/721842","url":null,"abstract":"ealthy eating is highly relevant to multiple stakeholders, from consumers to marketers to policy makers. Every consumer makes food decisions daily; food is a $2.5 trillion industry worldwide (Fortune Business Insights 2022), and promoting healthier eating is a major public policy issue given rising obesity rates in most countries. Interest in understanding, more generally, the role of food decision making in consumers’ lives has increased in conjunction with these societal trends. We believe that consumer research has an important role to play in understanding and shaping food decision making to produce positive outcomes for as many constituents as possible, because of its unique ability to straddle the line between consumer welfare and implications for the producers and marketers of food products. This special issue of JACR seeks to add new insights to our understanding of interventions to increase healthy eating by (1) reflecting on what healthy eating means through the lens of consumers’ perceptions of what they should do to eat healthy, (2) increasing our understanding of the methods used to test healthy eating interventions, and (3) examining whether and when various healthy eating interventions are actually effective at leading to healthier eating. Understanding what healthy eating means to consumers is important as consumers use their own interpretations of “healthy” when making daily decisions about food consumption (Ronteltap et al. 2012). Accordingly, we begin with a discussion of how healthy eating is understood, expressed, and operationalized, introducing a framework of key paths to healthy eating and presenting insights from a survey of consumers. We then consider the evidence about which interventions actually work (or do not work) at leading to healthier eating. We present key findings from the special issue articles, which are organized into four","PeriodicalId":36388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association for Consumer Research","volume":"7 1","pages":"383 - 392"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2022-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47724993","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
T he influence of political ideology on individuals’ behavior and their endorsement of social policies is pervasive, and its impact on their economic and social well-being is incontrovertible. The influence of political ideology is evident not only in how recent social events have been interpreted (e.g., the storming of the Capitol on January 6, the murder of George Floyd, etc.) but also in people’s everyday nonpolitical behavior (e.g., their choice and purchases of consumer goods and other consumption-related activity). The research reported in this special issue documents the effects of political ideology on reactions to various consumption-related experiences. Although no single theory of political ideology can easily account for the diversity of the phenomena reported in this special issue, an understanding of the different perspectives from which political ideology has been studied is helpful to understand these effects. Much of the research on political ideology identifies people with different beliefs along on a liberalism-conservatism dimension. Although these end points are closely aligned with Democratic and Republican political parties, party identity is not always consistent with people’s beliefs on specific issues (Wyer et al. 1991; Huddy, Mason, and Aaroe 2015). Yet the current disposition of federal legislators to vote along party lines and the polarized attitudes of those who belong to these parties suggest that the schism emerges partly from deep-seated differences in ideological beliefs and thinking styles. Differences in conservative-liberal beliefs have been attributed to personality, evolution and genetics, all of which presumably affect the cognitive andphysiological reactions of individuals to a variety of issues. In the following section, we provide a background of research that has been conducted from different perspectives. We then review the research reported in this volume in relation to these perspectives.
{"title":"Political Ideology and Consumption: Perspectives and Effects","authors":"Rashmi Adaval, R. Wyer","doi":"10.1086/720513","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/720513","url":null,"abstract":"T he influence of political ideology on individuals’ behavior and their endorsement of social policies is pervasive, and its impact on their economic and social well-being is incontrovertible. The influence of political ideology is evident not only in how recent social events have been interpreted (e.g., the storming of the Capitol on January 6, the murder of George Floyd, etc.) but also in people’s everyday nonpolitical behavior (e.g., their choice and purchases of consumer goods and other consumption-related activity). The research reported in this special issue documents the effects of political ideology on reactions to various consumption-related experiences. Although no single theory of political ideology can easily account for the diversity of the phenomena reported in this special issue, an understanding of the different perspectives from which political ideology has been studied is helpful to understand these effects. Much of the research on political ideology identifies people with different beliefs along on a liberalism-conservatism dimension. Although these end points are closely aligned with Democratic and Republican political parties, party identity is not always consistent with people’s beliefs on specific issues (Wyer et al. 1991; Huddy, Mason, and Aaroe 2015). Yet the current disposition of federal legislators to vote along party lines and the polarized attitudes of those who belong to these parties suggest that the schism emerges partly from deep-seated differences in ideological beliefs and thinking styles. Differences in conservative-liberal beliefs have been attributed to personality, evolution and genetics, all of which presumably affect the cognitive andphysiological reactions of individuals to a variety of issues. In the following section, we provide a background of research that has been conducted from different perspectives. We then review the research reported in this volume in relation to these perspectives.","PeriodicalId":36388,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Association for Consumer Research","volume":"7 1","pages":"247 - 254"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2022-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42769428","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：