The application of benefit segmentation to public policy formation is addressed by examining its use in understanding differences in voter behavior on a container law referendum. Using evaluations of the potential benefits, costs, and incentives of container laws—“bottle bills”—six clusters were identified which differed on both attitudinal and behavioral dimensions. The results indicate that benefit-based cluster solutions can provide important strategic implications for understanding and influencing voting behavior.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AjzenIcek, and FishbeinMartin (1980), Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
2.
ArnoldSteven J. (1979), “A Test for Clusters,”Journal of Marketing Research, 16(November), 545–551.
3.
BagozziRichard P. (1990), “Structural Equation Models in Marketing Research,” unpublished working paper, School of Business Administration, University of Michigan.
4.
BarlasStephen (1989a), “Hatfield to Reintroduce Bottle Bill…Again,”Beverage World, (January), 76.
5.
BarlasStephen (1989b), “Recycling Bill Starts to Move,”Beverage World, (August), 84.
6.
BurnkrantRobert E., and PageThomas J.Jr. (1988), “The Structure and Antecedents of the Normative and Attitudinal Components of Fishbein's Theory of Reasoned Action,”Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,”24, 66–87.
7.
CalantoneRoger J, and SawyerAlan G. (1978), “The Stability of Benefit Segments,”Journal of Marketing Research, 15(August), 395–404.
8.
CohenJacob (1960), “A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales,”Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37–46.
9.
DownsPhillip E., and FreidenJon B. (1983), “Investigating Potential Market Segments for Energy Conservation Strategies,”Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 2, 136–152.
10.
DurandRichard M, KlemmackDavid L., and RoffLucinda Lee (1982), “Citizen Preferences for the Allocation of Federal Tax Dollars: A Segmentation Approach,”Journal of Marketing and Public Policy, 1, 169–180.
11.
HaleyRussell I. (1968), “Benefit Segmentation: A Decision-oriented Research Tool,”Journal of Marketing, 32(July), 30–35.
12.
HarveyJames W. (1990), “Benefit Segmentation for Fund Raisers,”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 18(1), 77–86.
13.
KamerudDana B. (1988), “Benefits and Costs of the 55 mph Speed Limit: New Estimates and Their Implications,”Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 7(2), 341–352.
14.
KinnearThomas C., and TaylorJames R. (1973), “The Effect of Ecological Concern on Brand Perception,”Journal of Marketing Research, 10(May), 191–197.
15.
KotlerPhillip (1988), Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, Implementation, and Control, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
16.
LastovickaJohn L., and GardnerDavid M. (1979), “Components of Involvement,” in Attitude Research Plays for High Stakes, MaloneyJohn C., and SilvermanBernard, ed. Chicago: American Marketing Association,53–73.
17.
LutzRichard J. (1975), “Changing Brand Attitudes Through Modification of Cognitive Structure,”Journal of Consumer Research, 1, 49–59.
18.
LutzRichard J. (1981), “The Role of Attitude Theory in Marketing,” in Perspectives in Consumer Behavior, 3d ed., KassarjianHarold H., and RobertsonThomas S., eds. Glenview, Ill.: Scott Foresman,233–250.
19.
MaloneyMichael P., WardMichael P., and Nicholas BrauchtG. (1975), “A Revised Scale for the Measurement of Ecological Attitudes and Knowledge,”American Psychologist, (July), 787–790.
20.
MayerRobert N. (1976), “The Socially Conscious Consumer—Another Look at the Data,”Journal of Consumer Research, 3(September), 113–115.
21.
MazisMichael B., and StaelinRichard (1982), “Using Information-Processing Principles in Public Policymaking,”Journal of Marketing and Public Policy, 1, 3–14.
22.
McIntyreR. M., and BlashfieldR. K. (1980), “A Nearest-Centroid Technique for Evaluating the Minimum-Variance Clustering Procedure,”Multivariate Behavior Research, 15, 225–238.
23.
MooreW. Kent, and ScottDavid L. (1983), “Beverage Container Deposit Laws: A Survey of the Issues and Results,”The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 17(1), 57–80.
24.
MurphyPat (1974), “A Cost/Benefit Analysis of the Oregon “Bottle Bill,” in New Marketing for Social and Economic Progress and Marketing's Contributions to the Firm and to the Society, CurhanRonald C., ed. Combined Proceedings, American Marketing Association, 36, 347–352.
25.
PunjGirish, and StewartDavid W. (1983), “Cluster Analysis in Marketing Research: Review and Suggestions for Application,”Journal of Marketing Research, 20(May), 134–148.
26.
RobinDonald P. (1987), “The Need for a New Class of Information to Aid Public Policy Decision-Makers,”Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 6, 58–75.
27.
RyanMichael J., and EtzelMichael J. (1976), “The Nature of Salient Outcomes and Referents in the Extended Model,” in Advances in Consumer Research, AndersonB.B., ed. Cincinnati, Ohio: Association for Consumer Research,3, 485–490.
28.
SjolanderRichard, and ChenHenry C. K. (1989), “The Macromarketing Effects of Beverage Container Legislation,”Journal of Macromarketing, 9(1), 24–34.
29.
SjolanderRichard, and KakelaPeter (1988), “Michigan's Mandatory Beverage-Container-Deposit Law: Economic Effects of a Public Policy on Industry Sales,”Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 7, 166–184.
30.
TrombettaWilliam L., and MorganFred W. (1982), “Market Segmentation and Product Liability,”Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 1, 15–24.
31.
Van LiereKent D., and DunlapRiley E. (1982), “Environmental Concern: Does It Make a Difference How It's Measured?”Environment and Behavior, 14, 72–83.
32.
WellsWilliam D. (1975), “Psychographics: A Critical Review,”Journal of Marketing Research, 12, 196–213.
33.
WindYoram (1978), “Issues and Advances in Segmentation Research,”Journal of Marketing Research, 15(August), 317–337.
