Disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged consumer decision processes concerning deceptive business practices

Three hundred twenty personal interviews were conducted in Shelby County, Tennessee (Memphis) on a systematic basis in randomly selected neighborhood blocks following stratification by income. A consumer was considered disadvantaged if their family income was within 125 percent of the federal guidelines for poverty. The sample yielded 125 disadvantaged and 195 non-disadvantaged consumers.

The results found the appropriate decision process for both consumer groups to contain the last four steps of the hypothesized decision sequence. Further, significant differences between consumer groups occurred as hypothesized only at the steps of Awareness of Remedial Avenues and Behavioral Response. In each case, disadvantaged consumers were significantly less aware or exhibited significantly fewer responses than did non-disadvantaged consumers.

Major recommendations were that marketing researchers should in future research recognize decisions concerning deceptive practices as a process. Such recognition would lead to more complete explanation of consumer behavior as well as provide a consistent basis for analysis among separate studies. Government consumer educators were encouraged to focus upon both making consumers more aware of remedial avenues available and encouraging consumers to complete the process by taking some action. Government educators were also encouraged to focus upon building awareness of deceptive practices. Although only tangentially related to the remainder of the decision process, consumer groups could correctly identify deceptiveness or lack thereof in only an approximate 50 percent of the situations investigated. Business strategy makers were encouraged to formulate and implement a mechanism that would successfully encourage consumers to complain to the vendor. The research showed that the majority of consumers responded to perceived deception by stopping the purchases of the product or stopping purchases at the store associated with the deception and/or telling their friends and neighbors about their plight. These responses cost businesses future sales without an opportunity to remedy or rectify the consumer's problem.