Children's influence on consumption-related decisions in single-mother families: A review and research agenda
Philosophical Explorations (forthcoming)
AbstractAlthough social scientists have identified diverse behavioral patterns among children from dissimilarly structured families, marketing scholars have progressed little in relating family structure to consumption-related decisions. In particular, the roles played by members of single-mother families—which may include live-in grandparents, mother’s unmarried partner, and step-father with or without step-sibling(s)—may affect children’s influence on consumption-related decisions. For example, to offset a parental authority dynamic introduced by a new stepfather, the work-related constraints imposed on a breadwinning mother, or the imposition of adult-level household responsibilities on children, single-mother families may attend more to their children’s product preferences. Without a profile that includes socio-economic, behavioral, and psychological aspects, efficient and socially responsible marketing to single-mother households is compromised. Relative to dual-parent families, single-mother families tend to have fewer resources and less buying power, children who consume more materialistic and compulsively, and children who more strongly influence decision making for both own-use and family-use products. Timely research would ensure that these and other tendencies now differentiate single-mother from dual-parent families in ways that marketers should address. Hence, our threefold goal is (1) to consolidate and highlight gaps in existing theory applied to studying children’s influence on consumption-related decision making in single-mother families, and (2) to propose a hybrid framework that merges two theories conducive to such research, and (3) to identify promising research propositions for future research.
Similar books and articles
Parent–Child Roles in Decision Making About Medical Research.Victoria A. Miller, William W. Reynolds & Robert M. Nelson - 2008 - Ethics and Behavior 18 (2-3):161 – 181.
Anti-consumption: An overview and research agenda.M. S. W. Lee, K. V. Fernandez & M. R. Hyman - 2009 - Journal of Business Research 62 (2):145--147.
Ethical Consumers Among the Millennials: A Cross-National Study. [REVIEW]Tania Bucic, Jennifer Harris & Denni Arli - 2012 - Journal of Business Ethics 110 (1):113-131.
How Friendly are Family Friendly Policies?Gloria H. Albrecht - 2003 - Business Ethics Quarterly 13 (2):177-192.
Children's Human Rights to Natural Biological Origins and Family Structure.Margaret Somerville - 2011 - Bioethics Research Notes 23 (1):1.
Should we presume moral turpitude in our children? – Small children and consent to medical research.John Harris & Søren Holm - 2003 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 24 (2):121-129.
Permanency planning for children with disabilities: Enforcing the right of all children to live with a family.Arlene S. Kanter - unknown
The Best Interest of Children and the Basis of Family Policy: The Issue of Reproductive Caring Units.Christian Munthe & Thomas Hartvigsson - 2012 - In Daniela Cutas & Sarah Chan (eds.), Families: Beyond the Nuclear Ideal. Bloomsbury Academic.
Acceptance, avoidance, and ambiguity: Conflicting social values about childhood disability.Carol Levine - 2005 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 15 (4):371-383.
For Giving.Stephen David Ross - 2009 - International Studies in Philosophy Monograph Series:469-504.
Social research in the advancement of children's rights.Sonja Grover - 2003 - Journal of Academic Ethics 1 (1):119-130.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
No citations found.
References found in this work
Doing the right thing?: Single mothers by choice and the struggle for legitimacy.Jane D. Bock - 2000 - Gender and Society 14 (1):62-86.