Place, Prosocial Activity, and Unhealthy Consumption
Brennan Davis and Cornelia Pechmann
Extended Abstract
The academic literature increasingly recognizes a relationship between retail placement and unhealthy consumption in adolescents (Lu et al. 2007; Patel et al. 2007; Powell et al. 2006; Novak et al. 2006; Weitzman et al. 2003; Scribner, Cohen and Fisher 2000). At the same time, there is an emerging literature showing that youth prosocial activity is associated with unhealthy consumption (Xue, Zimmerman and Caldwell 2007; Eitle, Turner and Eitle 2003; Elder et al. 2000; Cooley et al. 1995). Prosocial activity means involvement in group functions liked sports teams, religious groups and clubs (Duncan et al. 2002). It is surprising that these streams have not been brought into consumer research, given the wealth of studies on retail placement as a marketing strategy (Fox and Hoch 2005; Mittal, Kamakura and Govind 2004) in marketing and on prosocial behavior (Small and Simonsohn 2008; Bagozzi and Moore 1994) in consumer research. We study unhealthy consumption as a function of both place and prosocial activity.
Our study offers an empirical examination of hypotheses related to Third Place Theory (Oldenburg 1983), which says that people frequent public places outside of home and work to gather for prosocial activity. Past work on Third Place Theory has been primarily theoretical and qualitative (Rosenbaum 2006; Cheang 2002; Oldenburg 1982), leaving a gap for quantitative tests. We examine hypotheses supporting Third Place Theory on a large sample of students with varying levels of prosocial activity.
We consider rival hypotheses to the traditional ones about place and prosocial activity. The traditional hypothesis about place says that nearby fast food is associated with unhealthy consumption and obesity. The traditional hypothesis about prosocial activity says that prosocial activity is negatively related to unhealthy consumption and obesity. Third Place Theory says that people frequent public places outside home and work for the purpose of prosocial activity and consumption. They are both geographically accessible to consumers and spatially commodious for social activity.Hence, Third Place Theory describes an interaction of place and prosocial activity.
In our study, we expect fast-food restaurants around schools to serve as Third Places for students seeking social interaction with other students. Research has shown that fast-food venues are places for social gathering, leading to unhealthy consumption for those who are socializing there (Cheang 2002; Rosenbaum 2006). If fast food serves as a Third Place for youth with greater prosocial activity, then access to nearby fast food may lead to an increase in unhealthy consumption and obesity among those with greater prosocial activity. Our study offers the first empirical tests of Third Place Theory to our knowledge. Past work on Third Place Theory has been theoretical or qualitative, leaving a gap for quantitative tests(Cheang 2002; Oldenburg 1982; Rosenbaum 2006).
Specifically, we posit that prosocial activity moderates the effect of place on unhealthy consumption and obesity. We predict that students with greater prosocial activity will be affected by their exposure to fast-food placement around schools. Students with lesser prosocial activity will not be affected by nearby fast food. Because fast-food restaurants host prosocial activity, we predict that the nearby fast food will be associated with unhealthy consumption and obesity for students with greater prosocial activity.
Some may argue that prosocial activity is a moderator merely because of the activity rather than prosocial nature of prosocial activity. Activities are time consuming, increasing the need for convenient food options that nearby fast food provides. If this were true, then for students with greater participation in activities that are not prosocial, nearby fast food should also be associated with unhealthy consumption. However, in support of Third Place as the main theory behind place effects in fast food, we predict that non-social activity will fail to moderate the role of place on unhealthy consumption because fast food is acting as a third place for prosocial gathering. For increasing non-social activity, nearby fast food will not increase its association with unhealthy consumption and obesity.
Our methodological approach uses geographic information systems (GIS) data, which are site addresses linked spatially to the earth’s latitude and longitude coordinates. We linkGIS data with survey results from individual consumers. First, we collect GIS data on a student’s school and on the fast-food sites around a student’s school. Then, we link the GIS data with survey data on a student’s prosocial activity, consumption habits and body weight. Last, we compare the unhealthy consumption and obesity of students whose schools are near versus not near fast food. We make this comparison across two student segments: those with greater versus lesser prosocial activity.
We use GIS data and survey results on almost 500,000 youths from 2002-2005 with multivariate regression models to estimate associations among fast food around schools; student measures of prosocial activity; consumption of soda and fried potato foods; and youth obesity. The measures of fast-food placement around schools come from Microsoft Streets and Trips, the California Department of Education, and Technomic, a food industry consultant. The measures of prosocial activity, consumption and obesity come from the California Healthy Kids Survey. We control for individual, school, and environment variables like grade, race/ethnicity, school enrollment, county, and urbanicity.
Our results demonstrate that, for students with greater prosocial activity, those exposed to nearby fast food around their schools: 1) consume more servings of soda and fried potato foods; and 2) are more likely to be obese relative to similarly situated youths whose schools are not near fast food. However, the presence of fast food does not affect students with lesser prosocial activity.We also find that, for students with greater non-social activity, nearby fast food does not increase its association with unhealthy consumption and obesity, as hypothesized. The results provide evidence for fast food as third places that attract youths looking for prosocial activity. Our results bridge the research on place and prosocial activity, empirically test formal hypotheses about Third Place Theory, and inform public policy.
REFERENCES
Bagozzi, Richard P, and David Moore (1994), “Public Service Advertisements: Emotions and Empathy Guide Prosocial Behavior,” Journal of Marketing, 58 (January), 56-71.
Cheang, Michael (2002), “Older Adults' Frequent Visits to a Fast-Food Restaurant - Nonobligatory Social Interaction and the Significance of Play in a ‘Third Place',” Journal of Aging Studies, 16 (August), 303-321.
Cooley, Van E., L.W. Henderson, C. Van Nelson and Jay C. Thompson, Jr. (1995), “A Study to Determine the Effect of Extracurricular Participation on Student Alcohol and Drug Use in Secondary Schools,” Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education, 40 (Winter), 71-87.
Duncan, Susan C., Terry E. Duncan, Lisa A. Strycker, and Nigel R. Chaumeton (2002), “Relations between Youth Antisocial and Prosocial Activities,” Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 25 (March), 425-438.
Eitle, David, R. Jay Turner, and Tamela McNutty Eitle (2003), “The Detterence Hypothesis Reexamined: Sports Participation and Substance Use among Young Adults,” Journal of Drug Issues, 33 (January), 193-222.
Elder, Craig, Deirdre Leaver-Dunn, Min Qi Wang, Steven Nagy, and Lee Green (2000), “Organized Group Activity as a Protective Factor against Adolescent Substance Use,” American Journal of Health Behavior, 24 (March/April), 108-114.
Fox, Edward J. and Stephen J. Hoch (2005), “Cherry-Picking,” Journal of Marketing, 69 (January), 46-62.
Lu, Yao, Minal Patel, William J. McCarthy, and Ritesh Mistry (2007), “Teen Student Smoking and School-adjacent Tobacco Retailer Density in California: A GIS Analysis,” working paper, University of California Los Angeles.
Mittal, Vikas, Wagner Kamakura, and Rahul Govind (2004), “Geographic Patterns in Customer Service and Satisfaction: An Empirical Investigation,” Journal of Marketing, 68 (July) 48-62.
Patel, Minal, William J. McCarthy, Ritesh Mistry, Yao Lu, Stanislav Parfenov, and David Cowling (2007), “Tobacco Retailer Proximity to Schools & Teen Smoking: A Geospatial Analysis,” working paper, University of California Los Angeles.
Powell, Lisa, M. Christopher Auld, Frank J. Chaloupka, Patrick J. O’Malley, and Lloyd D. Johnston (2006). “Access to Fast Food and Food Prices: Relationship with Fruit and Vegetable Consumption and Overweight among Adolescents,” in Advances in Health Economics and Health Services Research.
Novak, Scott P., Sean F. Reardon, Stephen W. Raudenbush, and Stephen L. Buka (2006), “Retail Tobacco Outlet Density and Youth Cigarette Smoking: A Propensity-Modeling Approach,” American Journal of Public Health, 96 (April), 670-676.
Oldenburg, Ray and Dennis Brisset (1983), “The Third Place,” Qualitative Sociology, 5(Autumn), 265-284.
Rosenbaum, Mark S. (2006), “Exploring the Social Supportive Role of Third Places in Consumers' Lives,” Journal of Service Research, 9 (August), 59-72.
Scribner, Richard, Deborah Cohen, and William Fisher (2000), “Evidence of a Structural Effect for Alcohol Outlet Density: A Multilevel Analysis,” Alchoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 24 (February), 188 - 195.
Small, Deboreh A., and Uri Simonsohn (2008), “Friend of Victims: Personal Experience and Prosocial Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, 35(October), 532-542.
Weitzman, Elissa, Alison Folkman, Kerry Lemieux Folkman, and Henry Wechsler (2003), “The Relationship of Alcohol Outlet Density to Heavy and Frequent Drinking and Drinking-Related Problems among College Students at Eight Universities,” Health and Place, 9 (March), 1-6.
Xue, Zimmerman and Caldwell (2007), “Neighborhood Residence and Cigarette Smoking among Urban Youths: The Protective Role of Prosocial Activities,” American Journal of Public Health, 97 (October), 1865-1872.
Davis is Assistant Professor of Marketing at the Hankamer Business School at Baylor University. Address: One Bear Place #98007, Waco, TX 76798. Phone: (254) 710-6430. Fax: (254) 710-1068. . Pechmann is Professor of Marketing at The Paul Merage School of Business at the University of California, Irvine. Address: SB 331, The PaulMerageSchool of Business, Irvine, CA92697-3125. Phone: (949) 824-4058. Fax: (949) 824-2840. . We thank Brian Wansink and Ellen Reibling for helpful comments and suggestions. We are grateful to The Paul Merage School of Business for financial support to purchase data.