New research published in marketing journal This provides evidence that a person’s political ideology shapes their response to addictive products. This finding suggests that political conservatism is associated with more favorable attitudes and behaviors toward items such as alcohol, tobacco, and gambling due to increased perceptions of personal control.
Monash University marketing professor Jasmina Ilicic and University of Sydney marketing professor Stacey Brennan designed the study to understand how deeply held political beliefs can influence harmful consumer behavior.
Past research has demonstrated that political ideology influences proactive consumer behaviors such as charitable giving and recycling. Less is known about how these political beliefs influence choices that involve significant health and economic risks. Addictive products are unique because they are manufactured to cause physiological and psychological dependence.
The authors point out that “addictive products such as gambling, alcohol, tobacco, gaming, fast food, and illicit drugs cause serious public health and social harm.” “However, people differ in how dangerous they think these products are and how favorably they react to them. Most previous research has focused on how ideology shapes positive rather than potentially harmful consumer behavior, so we wanted to understand whether political ideology could help explain these differences.”
To explain these differences, the authors focused on a psychological concept known as sense of agency. This concept refers to the subjective feeling of having complete control over one’s own actions and perceiving oneself as the sole initiator of those actions. Conservative ideology tends to prioritize individual responsibility and core values over collective outcomes. Because of its emphasis on personal responsibility, conservatism is often associated with a stronger sense of agency.
The researchers proposed that this heightened sense of control may lead conservatives to underestimate the dangers inherent in addictive products. If individuals believe that they are always responsible for their actions, they may perceive addictive substances as less of a threat. This reduced perception of risk may lead to more favorable attitudes and increased consumption.
This prediction contradicted some expectations based on previous psychological profiling. “Previous research often suggests that conservatives are more sensitive to risks and threats, so one might expect conservatives to view addictive products more negatively,” the authors explained. “Rather, we found the opposite. In this context, conservatives’ stronger sense of agency appears to have lowered their perception of the dangers of addictive products.”
“Our main finding is that political ideology can shape people’s responses to addictive products,” the authors said. “Across 10 studies, we found that compared to liberals, conservatives tended to have more favorable attitudes, intentions, and behaviors towards addictive products. This was because conservatives reported a greater sense of control over their own behavior, which made these products seem less dangerous.”
Before delving into specific studies, the authors emphasized the robustness of their data. “This effect is substantively meaningful, as we found the same pattern across different types of evidence, including a large-scale public opinion YouGov dataset, real-world Yelp reviews, and online experiments,” they noted. “We have also tested its effectiveness in a variety of countries including the UK, US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.”
“The fact that we observed similar results across these environments suggests that this relationship is not specific to a single country or political system. We also found a pattern across several addictive products, including alcohol, tobacco, gambling, fast food, gaming, and drugs.”
To test this framework, the researchers began with a large-scale analysis of secondary data. The first study analyzed a five-year archival dataset from the polling agency YouGov. The sample included 454,737 UK adults. Researchers examined consumer favorability ratings for four addictive product categories, including alcohol, gambling, tobacco, and fast food. They found that individuals who identified as conservative reported consistently higher favorability towards these addictive products compared to their liberal counterparts.
In the second study, researchers analyzed 124,976 customer reviews from the Yelp platform. They mapped these reviews to county-level voting data from the 2020 U.S. presidential election to estimate local political ideology. They compared reviews of addictive businesses such as casinos and cigar bars with non-addictive leisure businesses such as cafes and movie theaters. The results showed that companies selling addictive products were rated higher in more conservative counties.
A supplementary study of 357 US participants mirrors these real-world findings. Using self-report measures, conservatives expressed more positive attitudes toward addictive materials such as illegal drugs and online games. However, no ideological differences were found when it came to non-addictive products such as bottled water and antacids.
The researchers then moved on to an experimental design to see if activating specific political ideas led to changes in behavior. In the third study, 277 participants from Australia and New Zealand completed a writing task designed to induce either conservative or liberal thinking. They were then given the opportunity to use their study rewards to purchase real lottery tickets. Participants in the conservative mindset condition purchased significantly more lottery tickets than participants in the liberal mindset condition.
A similar thinking manipulation was used in a supplementary experiment with 249 participants in the United Kingdom. In this case, researchers asked about repurchase intentions for alcohol. The study found that participants who were guided by a conservative mindset reported increased intentions to repurchase alcoholic beverages purchased in the past year.
To understand the psychological mechanisms at play, the authors conducted a fourth study with 737 participants in the UK. The survey measured gambling severity, sense of agency, perceived product risk, and various other psychological characteristics. The results revealed a specific set of processes. Conservatism positively predicted gambling severity, and this relationship was explained by conservatives reporting a stronger sense of agency.
A supplementary experiment with 374 Canadian participants directly manipulated sense of agency. Participants wrote about shopping experiences in which they felt they were in complete control, or shopping experiences in general. When a sense of agency was artificially induced, liberals also had more favorable attitudes toward smoking and vaping. This response is consistent with typical conservative levels and provides evidence that a sense of agency is the driving force.
The researchers also investigated whether targeted messages could reduce these favorable reactions among conservatives. In the fifth study, 446 Canadian participants viewed anti-smoking ads. They were randomly assigned to see no threat, a general threat, or a personalized threat using pronouns such as “you” or “your.” The results showed that threat appeals effectively reduced favorable attitudes toward smoking and e-cigarettes among conservatives.
Two final supplementary experiments confirmed the power of personalized threats. One study involved 452 participants in the United States and focused on the economic threat posed by gambling. They found that personalized messages most effectively reduced conservatives’ sense of agency and gambling attitudes. In the final study, 426 participants in the United States were exposed to mental health alerts related to gaming, alcohol, and drugs.
Regarding these messaging strategies, the authors emphasized practical implications. “One important point is that small changes in the wording of a message can be significant,” they explained. “Conservatives perceive addictive products as more dangerous and respond less favorably when messages are directed to individuals. This suggests that public health campaigns may be more effective when they take into account how different audiences think about control, responsibility, and risk.”
However, this finding may be misleading. “These findings do not imply that all conservatives will respond more favorably to addictive products or that all liberals will respond less favorably,” the authors clarified. “The results show an average pattern across groups.”
This data suggests that an ideological emphasis on personal control may inadvertently reduce a person’s psychological vigilance toward products designed to circumvent self-regulation. A limitation of this study is that experimental manipulations of political attitudes may only temporarily activate certain beliefs rather than reflecting lasting behavioral changes.
Future research could investigate whether this ideological pattern applies to non-addictive but physically dangerous products. For example, a scientist might study consumer reactions to items such as firearms or motorcycles.
Researchers may also examine the long-term societal effects of these consumer reactions. An emphasis on personal responsibility may influence public support for structured addiction recovery services. Exploring these avenues could help public health officials design more effective communication strategies for diverse audiences.
The study, “Political ideology shapes consumer responses to addictive products,” was authored by Jasmina Ilicic and Stacey Brennan.
