Conservatives view addictive products more favorably than liberals, study finds

New research published in the Journal of Marketing provides evidence that a person’s political ideology shapes their responses to addictive products. The findings suggest that political conservatism is associated with more favorable attitudes and behaviors toward items like alcohol, tobacco, and gambling, due to a heightened perception of personal control.

Jasmina Ilicic, a professor of marketing at Monash University, and Stacey Brennan, a professor of marketing at the University of Sydney, designed this research to understand how deeply held political beliefs might influence harmful consumer behaviors.

Past studies have established that political ideology affects positive consumer actions, like charitable giving and recycling. Less is known about how these political beliefs affect choices that carry significant health and financial risks. Addictive products are unique because they are manufactured to create physiological and psychological dependencies.

“Addictive products, such as gambling, alcohol, tobacco, gaming, fast food, and illicit drugs, create serious public health and social harms,” the authors noted. “Yet people differ in how dangerous they think these products are and how favorably they respond to them. We wanted to understand whether political ideology helps explain these differences, as most prior research has focused on how ideology shapes positive consumer behaviors, rather than potentially harmful ones.”

To explain these differences, the authors focused on a psychological concept known as the sense of agency. This concept refers to the subjective feeling of being in full control of one’s own actions and recognizing oneself as the sole initiator of those actions. Conservative ideologies tend to prioritize individual responsibility and intrinsic values over collective outcomes. Because of this focus on personal accountability, conservatism is often linked to a stronger sense of agency.

The researchers proposed that this heightened feeling of control might lead conservatives to underestimate the inherent dangers of addictive products. If individuals believe they are always in charge of their actions, they might perceive addictive substances as less threatening. This reduced perception of danger could then result in more favorable attitudes and increased consumption.

This prediction ran counter to some expectations based on previous psychological profiling. “Prior research often suggests that conservatives are more sensitive to risk and threat, so one might expect them to view addictive products more negatively,” the authors explained. “Instead, we found the opposite. In this context, conservatives’ stronger sense of agency seemed to reduce their perception of addictive product danger.”

“Our main finding is that political ideology can shape how people respond to addictive products,” the authors said. “Across ten studies, we found that conservatives, compared with liberals, tended to have more favorable attitudes, intentions, and behaviors toward addictive products. This happened because conservatives reported a stronger sense of personal control over their actions, which made these products seem less dangerous.”

Before detailing the specific studies, the authors highlighted the robustness of their data. “The effects are practically meaningful because we found the same pattern across different types of evidence: a large public opinion YouGov dataset, real-world Yelp reviews, and online experiments,” they noted. “We also tested the effect across different countries, including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.”

“The fact that we observed similar results across these settings suggests that the relationship is not unique to a single country or political system. We also found the 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. In their first study, they analyzed an archival dataset from the polling organization YouGov spanning a five-year period. The sample included exactly 454,737 adults from the United Kingdom. The researchers examined consumer favorability ratings for four addictive product categories, which included alcohol, gambling, tobacco, and fast food. They found that individuals identifying as conservative consistently reported higher favorability toward these addictive products compared to their liberal counterparts.

In a second study, the researchers analyzed 124,976 customer reviews from the Yelp platform. They mapped these reviews to county-level voting data from the 2020 United States presidential election to estimate local political ideology. They compared reviews for addictive businesses, like casinos and cigar bars, with non-addictive leisure businesses, like cafes and cinemas. The results indicated that businesses selling addictive products received higher ratings in more conservative counties.

A supplementary survey of 357 United States participants mirrored these real-world findings. Using self-reported measures, conservatives expressed more positive attitudes toward addictive items like illicit drugs and online gaming. Meanwhile, no ideological differences emerged for non-addictive items like bottled water or antacids.

The researchers then moved to experimental designs to see if activating a specific political mindset could cause changes in behavior. In a third study, 277 participants from Australia and New Zealand completed a writing task designed to induce either a conservative or a liberal mindset. They were then given a chance to use their study compensation to purchase real lottery tickets. Participants in the conservative mindset condition purchased significantly more lottery tickets than those in the liberal mindset condition.

A supplementary experiment with 249 United Kingdom participants used a similar mindset manipulation. In this case, the researchers asked about alcohol repurchase intentions. The study found that participants induced into a conservative mindset reported greater intentions to repurchase an alcoholic beverage they had bought in the past year.

To understand the psychological mechanisms at play, the authors conducted a fourth study with 737 United Kingdom participants. The survey measured gambling severity, sense of agency, perceived product danger, and a variety of other psychological traits. The findings revealed a specific sequential process. 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 manipulated the sense of agency directly. Participants wrote about a shopping experience where they felt full control or a generic shopping experience. When a sense of agency was artificially induced, liberals also showed more favorable attitudes toward smoking and vaping. This response matched typical conservative levels, providing evidence that a sense of agency is the driving factor.

The researchers also investigated whether targeted messaging could reduce these favorable responses among conservatives. In a fifth study, 446 Canadian participants viewed an anti-smoking advertisement. They were randomly assigned to see no threat, a general threat, or a personally directed threat that used pronouns like “you” and “your”. The results showed that threat appeals effectively reduced favorable attitudes toward smoking and vaping among conservatives.

Two final supplementary experiments confirmed the power of personally directed threats. One study involved 452 United States participants and focused on the financial threats of gambling. It found that personally directed messages most effectively reduced conservatives’ sense of agency and gambling attitudes. The final study exposed 426 United States participants to mental health warnings related to gaming, alcohol, or drugs.

Regarding these messaging strategies, the authors emphasized the practical implications. “One important point is that small changes in message wording can matter,” they explained. “When messages are personally directed, conservatives perceive addictive products as more dangerous and respond less favorably to them. This suggests that public health campaigns may be more effective when they consider how different audiences think about control, responsibility, and danger.”

But the findings are subject to some potential misinterpretations. “These findings do not mean that every conservative responds more favorably to addictive products, or that every liberal responds less favorably,” the authors clarified. “The results show average patterns across groups.”

The data suggests that an ideological emphasis on personal control can inadvertently lower a person’s psychological guard against products engineered to bypass self-regulation. A limitation of the research is that experimental manipulations of political mindset might only temporarily activate certain beliefs rather than reflect permanent behavioral shifts.

Future research could explore whether this ideological pattern applies to non-addictive but physically dangerous products. For example, scientists might look at consumer responses to items like firearms or motorcycles.

Researchers might also investigate the long-term societal impacts of these consumer responses. A heavy focus on personal responsibility might affect public support for systemic 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.