The Forces Behind How We Buy, Engage and Belong

My research broadly looks at how people's social and cultural contacts influence how they consume, and how they interact with the marketplace. Within that domain, I'm particularly interested in how people's social relationships and the groups that they are part of influence their identities — at an individual level and their collective identity — as well as the practices that they engage in.

Across this work I've looked at multiple domains. I did a study that looked at first-time parents and what they do when their plans don't work out as intended. So the baby doesn't feed the way they want it to, or the baby doesn't sleep the way that they thought they would. And what I think became really interesting in that, is that one of the key success factors was how those consumers used the marketplace to learn.

The marketplace became an important location where they learned how to pivot and change and become more successful, not at implementing their original plan, but really surviving well, when things didn't go as intended, which is so often the case. We often enter situations where we have the best of intentions, but often that doesn't play out. In most situations it doesn't play out. So thinking about how consumers use resources and marketplace resources to pivot and change, becomes a really important domain of study.

One study that I think is a really important one for us to think about, is the work that I've done with my co-authors on social media influencers, and how this helps us to understand different kinds of authenticity. Researchers have grappled for decades about what constitutes authenticity, what constitutes authenticity in the marketplace, and there's been dozens and dozens of studies that have really tried to say, this is the definition of authenticity, or this is the definition of authenticity, and none of it encapsulates the entire experience. It's a complex domain with just a huge mess of theoretical concepts.

Now, what my work on SMIs has shown is that we're asking the wrong question. The question isn't what is authenticity? The question should be, ‘What are the different types of authenticity and under what conditions do each one of those matter?’ So I think it's really important to shift the research focus from 'What is this one view?' to the multiplicity of meanings, the multiplicity of contexts, and how that shifts and changes based on what's happening culturally.

The traditional view of authenticity is focused on being true and being genuine, being true to the self. So whether you're a brand, whether you're a person, you're putting forward this image that, this is genuine, this is true, you are not influenced by other people, you are not influenced by other expectations, you are not influenced by profit motives.

What we're seeing is a different kind of authenticity coming forward. And this is not authenticity that's grounded in someone holding a set of particular attributes that are judged to being true or genuine, it's a kind of authenticity that's really about what you're doing, not necessarily who you are. It's the process of sharing your life and sharing your struggles and sharing your vulnerabilities. And that's what's resonating with audiences. And with that view of authenticity, the monetization becomes a supportive element.

One of the insights that came out of this work with SMIs and authenticity is really understanding the importance of sharing your self story, sharing your vulnerability and putting that in an online space, and that has huge benefits. It inspires others, it helps to monetize the space for the SMIs. We document a whole host of positive impacts from that process. But future research really does need to also look at when are the benefits not positive? What are the risks of this?

But future research really does need to also look at when are the benefits not positive? What are the risks of this? We know that there are tangible risks with social media, whether that is SMIs putting themselves in vulnerable situations, whether it is having an influence on, say, young viewers that's influencing their self-esteem and their view of the world. So future research really needs to look at what are the benefits of this kind of sharing, when is it beneficial and when is it not? And thinking about the best way to protect those who might be suffering those negative harms, while not necessarily cutting back on those positive benefits that we also know are accruing.