Browse by author
Lookup NU author(s): Dr Jane BrownORCiD, David Brown
Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.
INTRODUCTION During the COVID-19 pandemic measures to manage excessive and unnecessary stockpiling of essential products, including rationing, prioritising vulnerable consumers, and messages against overbuying (BBC, 2020; Hobbs, 2020). Nevertheless, the effectiveness of these measures has been questioned, since excessive purchasing reportedly continued months after the measures were implemented (Galanakis, 2020; Hobbs, 2020). This caused several changes in essential product availability and accessibility (Hall et al., 2020; Pantano et al., 2020). The limited effectiveness of implemented strategies to mitigate the so called ‘panic buying phenomenon’, offers an interesting research topic. In this study we adopt a deviant behaviour lens to explore the drivers and motivations behind increased purchasing during crisis, to inform the development of more effective deterring strategies and policies. LITERATURE REVIEW Panic buying does not only oppose business policies, and public advice from organizations and governments, but it also goes against social norms, by ignoring the wellbeing of others in the community (Hobbs, 2020; Pantano et al., 2020). Existing literature classifies such selfish, opportunistic and anti-social behaviours, as ‘deviant behaviours’ (Apostolidis & Haeussler, 2018; Fullerton & Punj, 2004). From a marketing perspective, deviant behaviours are differentiated to other types of consumer behaviour, as they refer to consumer actions that violate regulations and/or social norms, and thus they are discouraged and held in disrepute by businesses and (most) consumers (Fullerton & Punj, 2004; Dootson et al., 2017). This creates an interesting research topic, as deviant behaviours contravene the traditional perspective that consumers are functional and good-willed participants in an exchange interaction and therefore they can be challenging to understand and develop effective strategies to discourage them (Apostolidis & Haeussler, 2018; Dootson et al., 2017). Particularly in the context of panic buying, scholars have called for further research that will enable the development of more effective deterring strategies (e.g., Prentice et al., 2020). Researchers have used various theories, such as the Deterrence Theory (Grasmick et al., 1983), Social Learning Theory (Akers et al., 1989) and Durhheim’s (1984) theory of anomie, to explore deviance as an outcome of rational, emotional and social factors. In our study we adopt a laddering approach, to combine deviance theories with Schwartz’s (1992) values framework, to explore how deviant behaviours during a crisis may be motivated by a range of (internal and external) factors and underlying values. As such, we aim to contribute both to crisis marketing and deviant consumer behaviour literature, and to inform business and government practices. METHODOLOGY An online qualitative survey was used (n=406) to collect timely and in-depth information on UK consumer experiences of grocery shopping during the initial nationwide lockdown and social distancing period (March – May 2020). A hard laddering technique has been employed to identify any changes in grocery shopping patterns (e.g., quantities, frequency) and explore the motivations and drivers behind these changes (Veludo‐de‐Oliveira et al., 2006). FINDINGS Our findings indicate that lack of trust and weak community spirit can result in people attributing product scarcity and increased purchasing of others to ‘deviant’ panic buying, even without witnessing this behaviour first-hand. We name this phenomenon ‘deviance pareidolia’, as weak social bonds in a community may lead to misinterpretation of facts and misperceptions of deviance. Moreover, although many participants acknowledge that they increased the size of their grocery shopping during the lockdown, only a small number argue the increase was driven by scarcity fear. Based on the results of our laddering analysis regarding consumer motivations and values behind their purchasing behaviours, we suggest that the term Buying A Little Extra (B.A.L.E) better captures consumers’ perceptions regarding their increased purchases. Followingly, we identify three common types of B.A.L.E. behaviours in the marketplace. Our findings also highlight that the majority of respondents rationalize their behaviours and neutralize negative feelings and (self-)blame using a number of neutralization techniques. This rationalization and neutralization of blame has a detrimental impact on the effectiveness of the developed strategies. Interestingly, deviance pareidolia plays an important role in this process, and can amplify deviance in the marketplace, as it can trigger and subsequently sustain deviant behaviours, by providing a basis for neutralization and justification. As such it further affects the effectiveness of any countering measures. Our research offers a number of contributions. Firstly, by using the pandemic context, it contributes to the deviant behaviour literature, as it identifies the concept of deviance pareidolia and the substantial impact it has on deviance amplification, blame neutralization and the development of deterring strategies. From a practitioner’s perspective, by using a laddering technique, our study explores indepth the drivers and motivations behind increased purchasing during times of crisis, and uses this indepth information to identify the neutralisation techniques used to justify different types of increased purchasing. This may assist in the development of effective strategies to counter excessive purchasing in the future. REFERENCES Akers, R.L., La Greca, A.J., Cochran, J. and Sellers, C. (1989), “Social learning theory and alcohol behavior among the elderly”, Sociological Quarterly, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp.625-638. Apostolidis, C. and Haeussler, S. (2018), “Sea, sand and shadow economy–consumer acceptance of shadow hospitality in Greece, Hospitality & Society, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp.205-227. BBC (2020), “No need for panic-buying and children left at risk of abuse”, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk51755085 (Accessed 7 February 2022) Dootson, P., Lings, I., Beatson, A. and Johnston, K.A. (2017), “Deterring deviant consumer behaviour: when ‘it’s wrong, don’t do it’doesn’t work”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 33 No. 15-16, pp.1355-1383. Durkheim, E. and Giddens, A. (1986), Durkheim on Politics and the State. Stanford University Press. Fullerton, R. and Punj, G. (2004), “Repercussions of promoting an ideology of consumption: consumer misbehavior”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 57 No. 11, pp.1239-1249. Galanakis, C.M. (2020), “The food systems in the era of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic crisis”, Foods, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp.523. Grasmick, H.G., Jacobs, D. and McCollom, C.B. (1983), “Social class and social control: An application of deterrence theory”, Social forces, Vol. 62 No. 2, pp.359-374. Hall, M., Prayag, G., Fieger, P., & Dyason, D. (2020), “Beyond panic buying: consumption displacement and COVID-19”, Journal of Service Management, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 113-128. Hobbs, J.E. (2020), “Food supply chains during the COVID‐19 pandemic”, Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 68 No. 2, pp.171-176. Pantano, E., Pizzi, G., Scarpi, D. and Dennis, C. (2020), “Competing during a pandemic? Retailers’ ups and downs during the COVID-19 outbreak”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 116 No. 1, pp.209-213. Prentice, C., Chen, J. and Stantic, B. (2020), “Timed intervention in COVID-19 and panic buying”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 57, p.102203. Schwartz, S.H. (1992), “Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries”, Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 25, pp. 1-65. Veludo‐de‐Oliveira, T.M., Ikeda, A.A. and Campomar, M.C. (2006), “Laddering in the practice of marketing research: barriers and solutions”, Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 297-306
Author(s): Apostolidis A, Brown J, Dey B, Brown DM
Editor(s): Vrontis D; Weber Y; Tsoukatos E;
Publication type: Conference Proceedings (inc. Abstract)
Publication status: Published
Conference Name: 15th Annual Conference of the EuroMed Academy of Business
Year of Conference: 2022
Pages: 1071-1073
Print publication date: 24/10/2022
Online publication date: 01/10/2022
Acceptance date: 14/03/2022
ISSN: 2547-8516
Publisher: EuroMed Press
URL: https://emrbi.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/euromed2022-book-of-proceedings-2022-10-02-FINAL.pdf
Library holdings: Search Newcastle University Library for this item
ISBN: 9789963711963
