Mehdi Hossain is an assistant professor of marketing at the University of Rhode Island. He obtained a $135,825 grant from the National Science Foundation to research the phenomenon of panic buying and stockpiling amid the COVID-19 pandemic in order to get to the psychological core of excessive stockpiling.
Hossain spoke with Providence Business News about his study and what it hopes to reveal.
PBN: What are you hoping your research into excessive stockpiling will reveal?
HOSSAIN: There are two aims of this research. First, I want to understand the psychological underpinnings of excessive stockpiling. That is, which psychological factors motivate people to stockpile necessities to an excessive amount in pandemic-like emergency situations? Based on this finding, I wish to develop communication materials relevant to the current pandemic, and study how various framing of the communication influences people’s propensity to excessive stockpiling.
I am hoping that when a particular framing of communication is effective in diffusing the psychological trigger of excessive stockpiling, it will contribute in reducing people’s proneness to this marketplace behavior. When this knowledge is created, I plan to disseminate it as widely as possible so that any entity who communicates with the public in emergency situations like the current one can use this knowledge to determine the nature and frequency of their communication.
PBN: In addition to fear about the pandemic, what else do you feel is triggering impulse buying in some people?
HOSSAIN: I am studying the possible influence of multiple factors in addition to fear about the pandemic. One such factor is people’s sense of personal control. Different individuals desire control over their current circumstances to various degrees, although at the baseline we all want to be in control of our situations.
Research shows that when such control is threatened, people tend to engage in certain activities to compensate for the lost control. In the case of the current situation, the pandemic has likely affected people’s sense of control of their surroundings, and some individuals, I am expecting those who have a higher sense of personal control than others, are engaging in compensatory control behavior to an excessive amount, resulting in excessive stockpiling.
PBN: Hoarding is a significant psychological issue for some individuals. Do you feel the pandemic could make the situations for some people that much worse?
HOSSAIN: Compulsive hoarding is sort of a disorder related to not being able to get rid of excessive stocks of items even though such stocks at home create clutter and distress. It is possible that the felt anxiety due to the current pandemic is making it worse for individuals affected by compulsive hoarding.
It is also possible that, for these individuals, excessive stockpiling is their typical behavior in the marketplace, and the current uncertainties may not have affected them above and beyond what they already have been experiencing.
PBN: You said that you have studied in the past “consumer donation behavior.” What were your findings from that research and how will they apply to this new study?
HOSSAIN: In the past, I have studied how framing of charitable communication influenced a donor’s propensity to choose certain causes over others. For example, I was curious in understanding why some individuals don’t feel the urge to donate to environmental causes, or almost always prioritize donating to humanitarian causes over environmental ones. My research shows that when charitable communication is framed to induce a holistic versus analytic mindset, people tend to discriminate less between these cause types. Which means that charities with pro-environmental programs will benefit by framing their communication in a “holistic” way.
I also have studied how “rational” versus “emotional” appeals in communication influence people’s propensity to support victims who are spatially far from donors. We find that when soliciting donations from donors who are spatially far from victims, rational appeals – appeal to the head – are more effective in persuasion compared to emotional appeals – appeal to the heart. These experiences will be helpful when I design communication materials targeting the psychological underpinnings of excessive stockpiling.
PBN: While buying essential goods is necessary during the pandemic, what should people do so that purchasing such goods doesn’t get out of control?
HOSSAIN: When a potentially uncertain situation emerges, it is rational to create some stocks of necessity items. Stockpiling becomes problematic when some individuals do it in an excessive amount. When such a pandemic-like situation emerges, people should look into their typical volume of purchase of necessity items, and create stocks not more than an amount that is considered “little higher” than typical. No one should engage in purchasing necessities to a “significantly high” volume compared to their typical purchases.
The meaning of “little higher than typical” and “significantly higher than typical” may vary from person to person, but this broader sense might help. I just completed collecting data for the first study, and I am yet to analyze the data, but preliminary eyeballing is telling me that most consumers have behaved responsively in the current situation. About 25-30% of the consumers may have stockpiled in excessive amounts, creating issues for the supply chain, other individuals in the society who need these supplies the most, and for themselves.
While analyzing the data, I’ll see how responsible shoppers have behaved, and their level of stockpiling, and compare it with marketplace behaviors of consumers who panicked more. This will provide a better idea of what can be determined as “excessive stockpiling” or “panic buying.” Stay tuned for the results.
James Bessette is the PBN special projects editor, and also covers the nonprofit and education sectors. You may reach him at Bessette@PBN.com. You may also follow him on Twitter at @James_Bessette.
