IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/v47y2020i3p454-471..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumers Prefer “Natural” More for Preventatives Than for Curatives

Author

Listed:
  • Sydney E Scott
  • Paul Rozin
  • Deborah A Small
  • Vicki G Morwitz
  • Linda L Price
  • Lisa E Bolton

Abstract

We demonstrate that natural products are more strongly preferred when used to prevent a problem than when used to cure a problem (the prevent/cure effect). This organizing principle explains variation in the preference for natural across distinct product categories (e.g., food vs. medicine), within product categories (e.g., between different types of medicines), and for the same product depending on how it is used (to prevent or to cure ailments). The prevent/cure effect is driven by two factors: lay beliefs about product attributes and importance of product attributes. Specifically, (a) consumers hold lay beliefs that natural products are safer and less potent and (b) consumers care more about safety and less about potency when preventing as compared to when curing, which leads to a stronger preference for natural when preventing. Consistent with this explanation, when natural products are described as more risky and more potent, reversing the standard inferences about naturalness, then natural products become more preferred for curing than for preventing. This research sheds light on when the marketing of “natural” is most appealing to consumers.

Suggested Citation

  • Sydney E Scott & Paul Rozin & Deborah A Small & Vicki G Morwitz & Linda L Price & Lisa E Bolton, 2020. "Consumers Prefer “Natural” More for Preventatives Than for Curatives," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 47(3), pages 454-471.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:47:y:2020:i:3:p:454-471.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jcr/ucaa034
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:oup:jconrs:v:47:y:2020:i:3:p:454-471.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcr .

    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.