Journal of Public Policy & Marketing

Despite growing evidence showing that people are denied access to market resources for reasons other than individual or market constraints, little research has explored the effect of such denial on the individual consumer. Building from learned helplessness, attribution theory of motivation, and consumer power theory, the current research addresses this issue by showing the impact of repeated access denial on perceptions of power and market engagement. Across five repeated-choice experiments utilizing a financial loan context, the authors show that market access and consumer power exist in a feedback loop, with lack of access leading to lower perceptions of power and, consequently, reduced market engagement or detrimental choice in the market. The authors present a norm-based intervention to encourage market engagement among those who have experienced denial by working through beliefs of market success, but demonstrate the detrimental effect of this intervention on those who have experienced repeated access prior to denial. In response, the authors present an education intervention to encourage smarter choices once consumers have entered the market. They conclude with implications for market access policy.

Food insecurity and poor nutrition negatively affect consumer health and well-being. Trait hope is conceptualized as a powerful thought process that can facilitate change. However, it is unclear how trait hope, the sense that one can successfully plan and put forth energy to meet goals, influences food insecurity among impoverished consumers. The authors conducted an evaluative study using in-home surveys (n = 498) in seven distressed census tracts of a midsized southeastern U.S. city to understand how financial capability and trait hope, a cognitive process, interact to influence perceived access to fresh food among Black and Hispanic consumers that disproportionately face food insecurity. Trait hope positively moderated the relationship between financial capability and perceived access, which was related to lower food insecurity. The results, which indicated important differences related to race/ethnicity, suggest that interventions that improve financial capability and increase trait hope may improve efficacy of food and nutrition assistance programs.

Recent regulation in the European Union (i.e., the General Data Protection Regulation) affects websites’ information privacy practices. This regulation addresses two dimensions: websites must (1) provide visible notice regarding private information they collect through cookies and (2) give consumers the choice to disagree to such tracking. Policy makers must understand their regulation’s degree of implementation, as well as its effect on consumers. The authors develop a typology of website cookie notices along the dimensions of notice visibility and choice. A field study shows that most websites only offer low notice visibility and limited choice over private information collection. In addition, four experimental studies in the EU and United States explore the effects of information privacy practices. They find that offering choice over whether or which data are collected increases consumer power, whereas visibility of the notice (vs. no notice) only affects risk perceptions. The authors establish the novel suggestion that perceived risk is mitigated if consumers have more choice over their data (indirectly through greater power). Power and risk influence consumers’ affect and purchase intent.

Service captivity occurs when consumers engage in services that significantly constrain their choice, voice, and power—and yet, despite these restrictions, consumers are limited in their option to exit the exchange. The authors conceptualize and develop an empirically grounded framework of service captivity, contextualize service captivity within two settings to further support the framework and expose negative service delivery, and then highlight its pervasiveness through a typology of captivity archetypes. Service captivity is more pervasive than current marketing literature would suggest, and consumers experience constraints that can lead to felt vulnerability, which then contributes to a negative spiral of service. Findings from this research extend the broader marketing conversation by revealing consumers’ common market experiences and highlighting the importance of understanding service captivity for consumer and policy researchers. The authors discuss the potential for policy makers and consumer advocates to interrupt the negative service spiral and alleviate consumer vulnerability through policy and market actions connected to service captivity.

The authors examine consumer activism as a form of power used by individuals when they experience a perceived failure with organizational service performance. Consumer citizens demonstrate the power of their voices through digital vigilantism consisting of injurious and constructive digital content sharing. The authors use agency theory and power concepts to study an instance in which a public service provider breached consumer performance expectations. They study digital responses to the 2017 Charlottesville Unite the Right rally because an independent review found the public service providers culpable. Tweets (n = 73,649) were analyzed utilizing qualitative thematic coding, cluster analysis, and sentiment analysis. Consumer conversations (tweets) during and after the rally yielded five types of digital vigilantism characterized by the following consumer voice clusters: “Shame on them!”, “Hear ye, hear ye…”, “Can you believe this?”, “Let’s get ‘em!”, and “Do the right thing.” The authors also present a new facet of digital vigilantism represented by the pessimistic and optimistic power of consumer voice. Several proactive and reactive responses are presented for policy and practice when responding to digital vigilantism.

Research has inadequately examined how increasing a consumer’s sense of power may positively influence healthy choices. With the global obesity epidemic worsening each year, now is an essential time for marketers and policy makers to identify ways to encourage healthy choices. Thus, the current research addresses this need and the accompanying gap in the literature. Through five studies (including a field study) involving both corporate advertising and public service announcements, results show that priming a high (vs. low) sense of power leads consumers to make healthier food purchase decisions and that this effect occurs because a higher sense of power results in a more salient health goal. Most relevant for policy makers, the findings show that priming a high sense of power through simple changes in marketing communications (e.g., using the headline “You are powerful”) is an effective way to increase healthy choice, particularly for lower-socioeconomic-status consumers.

At present, very little is known about what might encourage children and teens to limit access to their private information online and to restrict what they share on social media and video sites. Federal and state agencies face challenges encouraging companies to help children, teens, and parents protect their information online. The authors extend previous cognitive defense research by examining (1) effects beyond advertising as applied to information privacy online; (2) not only children’s/teens’ beliefs and knowledge, but also their online privacy decisions; (3) multiple age categories; (4) multiple cognitive defense strategies (educational video, quiz with feedback, or absence of a strategy); and (5) children’s/teens’ motivation to restrict what they share online. Key results indicate significant effects of the quiz and educational video over the absence of a strategy in enhancing favorable online safety beliefs and in restricting online sharing. Findings also demonstrate the role of perceived parental influence and for agencies to offer privacy education campaigns to help empower children to protect their privacy. Implications for policy and privacy research are discussed.

Many Americans living in poverty rely on a constellation of social services to meet their consumption needs. This article explores the conditions under which social service programs enhance or detract from holistic well-being, from recipients’ perspectives. Depth interviews with 45 rural and urban recipients reveal, through a power–justice–access model, that holistic well-being extends beyond access to social service programs to include power to choose and control resource outcomes and justice (respect) in recipients’ experiences with elements of the social service ecosystem (design, practices, actors, resources). Theoretically, focusing on the social service ecosystem allows a broader understanding of holistic well-being than is possible through a resource-based or dyadic perspective. In terms of policy, the findings suggest the need to include subjective, versus solely objective, approaches in assessing the performance of the social service ecosystem in meeting consumption needs. Finally, the authors offer a practical principle termed “sensitized standardization,” whereby, at the local level, needs are addressed in relation to the context of recipients’ daily lives and the macro structure of the social service ecosystem.

Access to health services affects the well-being of millions of consumers. Although the topic of health-related access is regularly featured in popular and academic conversations, these conversations primarily concentrate on objective or situational access factors. This research focuses instead on consumers’ subjective perception of access to better appreciate how personally experienced service availability and ease of access jointly determine consumers’ access perceptions. The authors find that perceived access to health services (PAHS) offers insight into the relationships between access, perceived health vulnerability, and overall health. Through scale development and a series of three theory-testing studies, this work demonstrates the close link between PAHS and perceived vulnerability (Study 1), connects this relationship to overall health (Studies 1–3), and establishes behavioral changes associated with access-vulnerability concerns (Study 2). Moreover, Study 3 finds evidence for a “muting” effect of health system distrust on the relationship between PAHS and perceived vulnerability as well as an “amplifying” effect of health motivation on the relationship between perceived vulnerability and overall health. Together, these studies illustrate PAHS’s relevance for explaining consumer vulnerability and overall health.