Interpreting Consumer Choice

The Behavioural Perspective Model

Gordon Foxall

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2009
• ISBN:
  9781135238087
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Business General
• Index: Business

Interpretive consumer research usually proceeds with a minimum of structure and preconceptions. This book presents a more structured approach than is usual, showing how a simple framework that embodies the rewards and costs associated with consumer choice can be used to interpret a wide range of consumer behaviours from everyday purchasing and saving, innovative choice, imitation, 'green' consumer behavior, to compulsive behaviors such as addictions (to shopping, to gambling, to alcohol and other drugs, etc). Foxall takes a qualitative approach to interpreting behavior, focusing on the epistemological problems that arise in such research and emphasizing the emotional as well as cognitive aspects of consumption.

The author argues that consumer behaviour can be understood with the aid of a very simple model that proposes how the consequences of consumption impact consumers' subsequent choices. The objective is to show that a basic model can be used to interpret consumer behaviour in general, not in isolation from the marketing influences that shape it, but as a course of human choice that is dynamically linked with managerial concerns.

1 Overview of the BPM

Obviously we cannot predict or control human behavior in daily life with the precision obtained in the laboratory, but we can nevertheless use results from the laboratory to interpret behavior elsewhere. Such an interpretation of human behavior in daily life has been criticized as metascience, but all the sciences resort to something much like it … [T]he principles of genetics are used to interpret the facts of evolution, as the behavior of substances under high pressures and temperatures are used to interpret geological events in the history of the earth. What is happening in interstellar space, where control is out of the question, is largely a matter of interpretation in this sense … In much the same way principles emerging from an experimental analysis of behavior have been applied in the design of education, psychotherapy, incentive systems in industry, penology, and in many other fields.

—B. F. Skinner (1974,pp. 228–229)

The impetus for a program of consumer research that takes radical behaviorism as its initial foundation lies in the prevailing success not of that paradigm but of that of the cognitive psychology that in some respects has superseded it. Consumer research in the context of contemporary marketing-oriented economies has been, since its inception in the 1960s, overwhelmingly cognitive. Since cognitivism was also the dominant framework of conceptualization and analysis in psychology at that time, many of its underlying assumptions and methodological tenets were taken for granted in the earliest stages of the development of modern consumer psychology. The governing paradigm in any subject area is scarcely subjected to criticism with the same intellectual rigor as those schools of thought that are not in the ascendant, and many of the explanatory conventions that were adopted in the new approach to consumer behavior seemed to go unquestioned even when the empirical (and, sometimes, the logical) basis for their acceptance was shaky. The need for an intellectual agenda that would seek to establish the place and role of cognitive psychology, assuming it deserved to have them, in consumer research led to the investigations that have become known as the Behavioral Perspective Model, or BPM, research program. The choice of radical behaviorism stemmed from its minimal deployment of theoretical terms, its avoidance of cognitive terminology, and its insistence on explaining behavioral responses exclusively by reference to environmental stimuli. In establishing how far one could progress with such a minimalist program, it would be possible to ascertain how far an alternative, cognitive explanation would have to be incorporated into any attempt at understanding consumer choice, and how this might be accomplished. Perhaps there would be no need for a cognitive framework; perhaps the need for such a paradigm would entirely eclipse the behaviorist approach; perhaps some kind of integration of the two would become necessary such that neither was overshadowed by the other but each functioned usefully on its own explanatory level.

The BPM research program has five conceptually distinct but overlapping and continuing phases: (i) conceptual: a period of critical analysis of the prevailing cognitive paradigm from the standpoint of an alternative, behaviorist theory (1980–1990); (ii) theoretical:the development of the BPM as a means of representing the radical behaviorist methodology in a manner appropriate for the analysis of economic behavior and its use as an interpretive device (1989–2000); (iii) empirical:the use of the model to predict consumers’ affective responses to purchase and consumption environments (1997–2009); (iv) behavioral economics: the development of matching theory and behavioral economics approaches based on the BPM variables (2000–2009); and (v) philosophical: the development of post-behaviorist models of behavioral explanation, intentional behaviorism, and super-personal cognitive psychology (2003–2009). None of these is completed; indeed each is needed in order to stimulate the progress of the others; each has antecedents that predate and projections that postdate the temporal ranges suggested here. The dates are approximate and only indicative; this book is nevertheless concerned with the second, interpretive phase. That is, with the development of a model of consumer behavior based on radical behaviorism and its use to interpret aspects of consumer behavior that had previously fallen predominantly within the domain of consumer psychology. Although this phase, like all the others, continues now, it is important I feel to maintain this account of it within the framework that gave rise to it during the years specified. Only in this way is it possible to maintain the concerns that motivated it and that emerged from it: the tentative character of the whole project is my belief that the model would remain confined to an interpretive stance, that it would not of itself be the source of empirical research in its own cause, that it would serve as a standpoint from which to critique the prevailing orthodoxy, and that radical behaviorism, though useful, was always to be the subject of a critical attitude. I think that it is necessary to preserve this atmosphere of thought and expectation if the subsequent developments within the research program are to be appreciated. I have therefore maintained by and large the text and references as they were generated at the time, updating predominantly by interpreting some of the results through the insights that existed at the time rather than by means of later additions and progressions in theory, philosophy, and empirical work.

The conceptual phase and the earliest part of the theoretical phase are described in Consumer Psychology in Behavioral Perspective (Foxall, 1990) and Consumers in Context: The BPM Research Program (Foxall, 1996). The initial empirical phase is described in several papers and developed conceptually and theoretically in Understanding Consumer Choice (Foxall, 2005), while the behavior economic phase is described and developed in The Behavioral Economics of Consumer Brand Choice (Foxall, James, Oliveira-Castro,and Schrezenmaier, 2007), as well as in later papers. The emerging field of consumer behavior analysis is comprehensively mapped out in the three-volume set, Consumer Behavior Analysis: Critical Perspectives in Business and Management (Foxall, 2002) The philosophical phase is described in Context and Cognition: Interpreting Complex Behavior (Foxall, 2004) and applied to the findings of the empirical programs in Explaining Consumer Choice (Foxall, 2007). Two further monographs are in course of preparation: Reward, Emotion, and Choice: From Neuroeconomics to Neurophilosophy deals with the role of neuroeconomics in the analysis of consumer choice, while The Marketing Firm applies and extends this thinking to the analysis of organizational behavior. In order that the full import of these anticipated works can be appreciated, it is necessary now to reiterate the results of the theoretical/interpretative phase of the research program.

The program has progressed well beyond the phase represented here, but that does not mean that the interpretive approach has been superseded. The philosophical phase has shown that a perspective that includes intentional and cognitive explanation is indeed invaluable to the explanation of consumer behavior, but that the insights and methods gained from the study of economic choice in the context of radical behaviorism are equally integral to this intellectual task. I do not anticipate its findings in this chapter, the purpose of which is to celebrate the significance of the interpretive phase. All inquiry rests upon interpretation; comprehension and appreciation of the results of the most rigorous quantitative study depend on the accuracy of the underlying interpretation that is made of them, their relation to theory, and the ways in which the techniques which led to their generation influenced their production. Some of the tentative suggestions made in this book to the effect that the BPM might amount to no more than an interpretive device have proved overcautious. Nevertheless, without a fundamental qualitative interpretational understanding of what one’s model—one’s ultimate theoretical position—is all about, it is impossible to make sense of the significance of the testing and appraisal of the model and theory. Moreover, the interpretation fulfills its own part in the quest to understand consumer behavior: it represents a level of analysis that is complete in its own right, whatever wider contribution it may make to the understanding of theoretical and empirical developments. That is what this book is about.

OUTLINE OF THE BEHAVIORAL PERSPECTIVE MODEL

The BPM is derived and justified in later chapters, but before we get to that point there is a lot of necessary description and evaluation of the philosophical basis whose capacity to interpret consumer choice is being appraised in this study. Some preliminary idea of what the model is all about may therefore be useful at this stage. This is not a full exposition: it is an outline of the model that is intended to serve as a reference point during the early exposition.

Some Basics

Purchasing is approach behavior with both reinforcing and punishing consequences—outcomes, that is, that are likely to increase the probability of its being repeated and others that have an inhibiting effect. Buying a wellknown brand is reinforced by acquiring the attributes of the product class and the resulting consumption possibilities. It is simultaneously punished by the surrender of money, depriving the buyer of opportunities to acquire other reinforcers, possibly inviting censure or generating dissonance. The sequence comprises the following behavioral contingencies:

S^D→ R → S^R and S^A

where S^D is a discriminative stimulus, an element of the setting in the presence of which the individual emits response, R, the consequences of which are a reinforcing stimulus, S^R, and an aversive or punishing stimulus, S^A. The same S^R and S^A are involved in the control of the corresponding escape behavior, non-purchase (which may result in short- or long-term saving and/or the purchase of an alternative brand or product). The contingencies controlling such escape are

S^D→ R^E→ S^R and S^A

where R^E is the escape behavior, S^R the avoidance of/escape from the aversive consequences of purchasing the target brand, and S^A the loss of reinforcers contingent on purchasing. The probability of each of these alternative responses—the approach represented by purchase, and the escape/avoidance represented by non-purchase—is a function of the consumer’s history of reinforcement. The strength of approach depends on reinforcer effectiveness, the reinforcement schedule in operation, and the quantity and quality of available reinforcers. That of escape is a function of the amount of money purchasing would require the consumer to surrender, his/her access to alternative reinforcers, and the loss of the exchange value represented by money. The probability of purchasing a specific brand can be depicted as the equilibrium point at the interaction of two functions representing the strengths of approach and escape behaviors.

In the context of animal experiments, the basic elements of the three-term contingency—the paradigm’s fundamental explanatory mode, consisting of antecedent stimulus, behavior, and consequences—can be readily identified, and the effects of their interrelationships, prescribed by the reinforcement schedule imposed, can be objectively observed. But within the complex situations in which much human social behavior takes place, it is often impossible to isolate the elements and their linkages so unambiguously. However, areas of human behavior that lie beyond the rigorous analysis made possible in laboratory experimentation are open to an interpretation founded on the extension of scientific laws derived from the analysis of the simpler behavior.

Such an interpretation must nevertheless take account of the most recent improvements in understanding human economic behavior in relation to the environment in which it occurs. The BPM therefore recognizes two broad deviations from orthodox behavior theory in positing as its independent variables (i) a continuum of relatively open/relatively closed behavior settings, and (ii) the bifurcation of reinforcement into utilitarian and instrumental consequences of behavior. The following account discusses the nature of these variables after briefly describing the model’s dependent variable.

Dependent Variable: Rate of Consumer Response

A response is behavior which can be related to the environmental contingencies that control its rate of occurrence. The BPM account of purchase and consumption conceptualizes behavior at a more molar level than that of the individual response: for instance, by considering the whole sequence of pre-purchase, purchase, and post-purchase activity as a single unit and by noting the generalization of purchase responses from one retail setting to another or the extension of purchasing in one setting from one to many items. A model of consumer behavior based on operant principles must be able to relate the strengthening or elimination of responses consistently to the environmental consequences which reinforce or punish them. In the case of human behavior in the relatively unrestrained environments characteristic of economic purchase and consumption, the schedules of reinforcement can be no more than inferred from the behavior and its consequences. It is a test of the validity of the model that this process of interpretation can be carried out systematically and consistently with the predictions of a behavioral analysis.

Antecedent Variable: The Behavior Setting

Consumer behavior settings are the physical and social surroundings in which purchase decisions are made and acts of purchase and consumption are performed. They comprise the antecedent stimuli that prefigure or signal the reinforcing and punishing consequences of behaving in a particular way. Relatively closed settings are those in which the contingencies that shape and maintain consumer behavior can be closely and unambiguously specified and controlled by marketers or researchers. The closure of purchase or consumption settings increases as the number of available reinforcers declines, and as the control of marketers over deprivation and reinforcement expands: for instance, obtaining the services provided by a postal system that is a public monopoly takes place in such a setting. Relatively open settings are, by contrast, those from which such control is (largely) absent or where the contingencies that control behavior cannot be unambiguously specified by the researcher; in a supermarket, for instance, although some sources of environmental control (such as the physical deployment of point-of-sale advertising and the prominent placing of leading brands at eye level) are evident, it may be impossible to specify completely and with finality why a consumer chose a given brand by reference to behavioral criteria alone. It is possible, however, to provide an interpretation of the behavior in these terms, as cognitive psychology would provide another based on the analogy of computer-based information processing. In sum, the distinction between closed and open behavior settings is based—as far as experimental analysis is concerned—on the relative ease with which behavior can be brought under contingency control and—in the case of an interpretive analysis—on the extent to which the rate of response can be accurately and objectively attributed to environmental influences. Hence in the interpretive account ofconsumer behavior provided by the BPM, the criteria for the positioning of a given behavior setting on the open-closed continuum are (a) availability of and access to reinforcement, which encompasses three considerations: (i) the number of reinforcers available, (ii) the number of means of obtaining the reinforcers, and (iii) the necessity of performing specific tasks on which the reinforcers are contingent; and (b) the external control of the consumer situation, which rests on three more considerations: (i) whether the marketer or other provider of the product/service controls access to the reinforcers, (ii) whether the contingencies are imposed by agents not themselves subject to them, and (iii) whether there are readily accessible alternatives to being in the situation (cf. Schwartz and Lacey, 1988).

Independent Variable: Utilitarian and Informational Reinforcement

The reinforcement of human operant behavior plays a broader role than is the case for animals. Reinforcers for human behavior may act informationally as well as by utilitarian means to strengthen behavior. Utilitarian or functional reinforcement refers to the strengthening of purchase and consumption behaviors through the generation of fantasies, feelings, fun, amusement, arousal, sensory stimulation, and enjoyment. Utilitarian reinforcers are consequences of behavior that are internal to the individual, feelings of pleasure and satisfaction, positive affect, and other internal states which are produced by and reward overt actions. They correspond to the affective phenomenology ascribed by some authors to the playful aspects of consumption and may be related to intrinsic motivation.

However, human operant experiments indicate that the reinforcers employed may be informational rather than utilitarian: they signal to subjects the accuracy of their performance or that it has been otherwise satisfactory. It is improbable that the points earned by these subjects and the negligible sums of money for which they are typically exchanged act as reinforcers in the way that food pellets strengthen animal behavior. Such rewards possess little if any intrinsic capacity to reinforce affluent well-fed humans. Moreover, the operant performance of adult human subjects is disorderly and variable in the absence of performance-related information. Once adequate information (scores or graphs showing relative achievement) is made available, performances become orderly and behavioral change is sensitive to the schedule in operation and is more rapid. The points or money are not in themselves a motivatin...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• List of Figures
• List of Tables
• List of Boxes
• 1 Overview of the BPM
• 2 The Story So Far
• 3 Ways of Wondering
• 4 The Meaning of Consumer Behavior
• 5 A Model of Interpretation
• 6 Interpreting Consumer Choice
• 7 The Nature of the Interpretation
• Afterword
• Bibliography