[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jconsa/v56y2022i3p1046-1061.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of perceived scarcity on COVID‐19 consumer stimulus spending: The roles of ontological insecurity and mutability in predicting prosocial outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • R. Bret Leary
  • Rhiannon MacDonnell Mesler
  • Bonnie Simpson
  • Matthew D. Meng
  • William Montford
Abstract
In 2021, the United States government provided a third economic impact payment (EIP) for those designated as experiencing greater need due to the COVID‐19 pandemic. With a particular focus on scarcity and ontological insecurity, we collected time‐separated data prior to, and following, the third EIP to examine how these variables shape consumer allocation of stimulus funds. We find that scarcity is positively associated with feelings of ontological insecurity, which, interestingly, correlates to a greater allocation of stimulus funds toward charitable giving. We further find evidence that mutability moderates the relationship between ontological insecurity and allocations to charitable giving. In other words, it is those who feel most insecure, but perceive that their resource situation is within their control, who allocated more to charity giving. We discuss the implications of these findings for theory, policy‐makers, and the transformative consumer research (TCR) movement.

Suggested Citation

  • R. Bret Leary & Rhiannon MacDonnell Mesler & Bonnie Simpson & Matthew D. Meng & William Montford, 2022. "Effects of perceived scarcity on COVID‐19 consumer stimulus spending: The roles of ontological insecurity and mutability in predicting prosocial outcomes," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(3), pages 1046-1061, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jconsa:v:56:y:2022:i:3:p:1046-1061
    DOI: 10.1111/joca.12452
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/joca.12452
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/joca.12452?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lan Nguyen Chaplin & Deborah Roedder John, 2007. "Growing up in a Material World: Age Differences in Materialism in Children and Adolescents," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(4), pages 480-493, June.
    2. Rebecca Hamilton & Debora Thompson & Sterling Bone & Lan Nguyen Chaplin & Vladas Griskevicius & Kelly Goldsmith & Ronald Hill & Deborah Roedder John & Chiraag Mittal & Thomas O’Guinn & Paul Piff & Car, 2019. "The effects of scarcity on consumer decision journeys," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 532-550, May.
    3. Linda L Price & Robin A Coulter & Yuliya Strizhakova & Ainslie E Schultz & Eileen FischerEditor & Sharon ShavittAssociate Editor, 2018. "The Fresh Start Mindset: Transforming Consumers’ Lives," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 45(1), pages 21-48.
    4. Stacy Wood, 2010. "The Comfort Food Fallacy: Avoiding Old Favorites in Times of Change," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 36(6), pages 950-963, April.
    5. Martin Korndörfer & Boris Egloff & Stefan C. Schmukle, 2015. "A Large Scale Test of the Effect of Social Class on Prosocial Behavior," Working Papers 1601, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    6. Margaret C Campbell & J Jeffrey Inman & Amna Kirmani & Linda L Price, 2020. "In Times of Trouble: A Framework for Understanding Consumers’ Responses to Threats," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 47(3), pages 311-326.
    7. Kelly Goldsmith & Vladas Griskevicius & Rebecca Hamilton, 2020. "Scarcity and Consumer Decision Making: Is Scarcity a Mindset, a Threat, a Reference Point, or a Journey?," Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 5(4), pages 358-364.
    8. Prediger, Sebastian & Vollan, Björn & Herrmann, Benedikt, 2014. "Resource scarcity and antisocial behavior," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 1-9.
    9. Heist, H. Daniel & Cnaan, Ram A., 2018. "Price and agency effects on charitable giving behavior," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 129-138.
    10. Richard H. Thaler & Eric J. Johnson, 1990. "Gambling with the House Money and Trying to Break Even: The Effects of Prior Outcomes on Risky Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(6), pages 643-660, June.
    11. Andreoni, James, 1989. "Giving with Impure Altruism: Applications to Charity and Ricardian Equivalence," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(6), pages 1447-1458, December.
    12. Andreoni, James, 1990. "Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(401), pages 464-477, June.
    13. Martin Korndörfer & Boris Egloff & Stefan C Schmukle, 2015. "A Large Scale Test of the Effect of Social Class on Prosocial Behavior," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-48, July.
    14. Kelly Goldsmith & Caroline Roux & Anne V. Wilson, 2020. "Can Thoughts of Having Less Ever Promote Prosocial Preferences? The Relationship between Scarcity, Construal Level, and Sustainable Product Adoption," Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 5(1), pages 70-82.
    15. Martin Korndörfer & Boris Egloff & Stefan C. Schmukle, 2015. "A Large Scale Test of the Effect of Social Class on Prosocial Behavior," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 808, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    16. Aaker, Jennifer L. & Akutsu, Satoshi, 2009. "Why Do People Give? The Role of Identity in Giving," Research Papers 2027, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christian T. Elbæk & Panagiotis Mitkidis & Lene Aarøe & Tobias Otterbring, 2023. "Subjective socioeconomic status and income inequality are associated with self-reported morality across 67 countries," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, December.
    2. Ashley V Whillans & Elizabeth W Dunn, 2018. "Agentic appeals increase charitable giving in an affluent sample of donors," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-10, December.
    3. Ulf Liebe & Elias Naumann & Andreas Tutic, 2019. "Prosocial Behavior Across Professional Boundaries: Experimental Evidence From Hospitals," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(2), pages 21582440198, May.
    4. Shan Zhang & Xinlei Zang & Sainan Zhang & Feng Zhang, 2022. "Social Class Priming Effect on Prosociality: Evidence from Explicit and Implicit Measures," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-9, March.
    5. Berthold, Anne & Cologna, Viktoria & Siegrist, Michael, 2022. "The influence of scarcity perception on people's pro-environmental behavior and their readiness to accept new sustainable technologies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    6. Gereke, Johanna & Schaub, Max & Baldassarri, Delia, 2018. "Ethnic diversity, poverty and social trust in Germany: Evidence from a behavioral measure of trust," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 13(7), pages 1-15.
    7. Antonio Tintori & Giulia Ciancimino & Rossella Palomba & Cristiana Clementi & Loredana Cerbara, 2021. "The Impact of Socialisation on Children’s Prosocial Behaviour. A Study on Primary School Students," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-14, November.
    8. Rockenbach, Bettina & Tonke, Sebastian & Weiss, Arne R., 2021. "Self-serving behavior of the rich causes contagion effects among the poor," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 289-300.
    9. Fehr, Dietmar & Rau, Hannes & Trautmann, Stefan T. & Xu, Yilong, 2020. "Inequality, fairness and social capital," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    10. Johannes Diederich & Timo Goeschl, 2013. "To Give or Not to Give: The Price of Contributing and the Provision of Public Goods," NBER Working Papers 19332, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Matías Strehl Pessina, 2022. "Sectores de altos ingresos y preferencias por redistribución," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 22-15, Instituto de Economía - IECON.
    12. Johanna Gereke & Max Schaub & Delia Baldassarri, 2018. "Ethnic diversity, poverty and social trust in Germany: Evidence from a behavioral measure of trust," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-15, July.
    13. Ting Wang & Xue Wang & Tonglin Jiang & Shiyao Wang & Zhansheng Chen, 2021. "Under the Threat of an Epidemic: People with Higher Subjective Socioeconomic Status Show More Unethical Behaviors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-14, March.
    14. Felipe González-Arango & Javier Corredor & María Angélica López-Ardila & María Camila Contreras-González & Juan Herrera-Santofimio & Jhonathan Jared González, 2022. "The duality of poverty: a replication of Mani et al. (2013) in Colombia," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(1), pages 39-73, February.
    15. Koyama, Yuna & Fujiwara, Takeo & Isumi, Aya & Doi, Satomi, 2020. "Degree of influence in class modifies the association between social network diversity and well-being: Results from a large population-based study in Japan," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    16. Katarzyna Samson, 2018. "Trust as a mechanism of system justification," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-22, October.
    17. Yujie Zhao & Xinyue Zhou, 2022. "Income and geographically constrained generosity," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(2), pages 766-787, June.
    18. Daria Denti & Alessandra Faggian, 2021. "Where do angry birds tweet? Income inequality and online hate in Italy," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 14(3), pages 483-506.
    19. Elisabeth Gsottbauer & Daniel Müller & Samuel Müller & Stefan T. Trautmann & Galina Zudenkova, 2020. "Social class and (un)ethical behavior: Causal versus correlational evidence," Working Papers 2020-10, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    20. Antinyan, Armenak & Baghdasaryan, Vardan & Grigoryan, Aleksandr, 2022. "Charitable giving, social capital, and positional concerns," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 101(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jconsa:v:56:y:2022:i:3:p:1046-1061. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0022-0078 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.