The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Semiotic Structure and the Legitimation of Consumption Practices: The Case of Casino Gambling
Abstract
How do changes in public discourse and regulatory structure affect the acceptance of a consumption practice? Previous research on legitimacy in consumer behavior has focused on the consumer reception of legitimizing discourse rather than on the historical process of legitimation itself. This study examines the influence of changes in the institutional environment over time on the meaning structures that influence consumer perception and practice. To study legitimation as a historical process, a discourse analysis of newspaper articles about casino gambling from 1980–2007 was conducted. Results show that the regulatory approval of gambling is accompanied by a shift in the semantic categories used to discuss casinos and that journalists play a role in shaping these categories. Further, journalists shape the meaning of a consumption practice in three ways: through selection, validation, and realization. Interpreted through the lens of institutional theory, these findings suggest that studies of legitimation should consider changes in public discourse and legal regulation in addition to consumer perceptions of legitimacy.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1968) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014 · Cited by 39,449
The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017) · Aldine (Routledge reprint) · doi:10.4324/9780203793206 · Cited by 25,789
Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches
Suchman, M. C. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258788 · Cited by 19,903
Consumers and Their Brands: Developing Relationship Theory in Consumer Research
Fournier, S. (1998) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209515 · Cited by 7,542
The Problem of Informant Accuracy: The Validity of Retrospective Data
Bernard, H. R., Killworth, P., Kronenfeld, D., & Sailer, L. (1984) · Annual Review of Anthropology · doi:10.1146/annurev.an.13.100184.002431 · Cited by 896
Media bias in presidential elections: a meta-analysis
D'Alessio, D., & Allen, M. (2000) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02866.x · Cited by 510
Zhao, X., & Belk, R. W. (2008) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/588747 · Cited by 194
Cited by
Consumers and artificial intelligence: An experiential perspective
Puntoni, S., Reczek, R. W., Giesler, M., & Botti, S. (2021) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/0022242920953847 · Cited by 1,547
Uniting the Tribes: Using Text for Marketing Insight
Berger, J., Humphreys, A., Ludwig, S., Moe, W. W., Netzer, O., & Schweidel, D. A. (2020) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/0022242919873106 · Cited by 742
Self-citationAutomated Text Analysis for Consumer Research
Humphreys, A., & Wang, R. J.-H. (2018) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1093/jcr/ucx104 · Cited by 636
Self-citationCreating the Responsible Consumer: Moralistic Governance Regimes and Consumer Subjectivity
Giesler, M., & Veresiu, E. (2014) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/677842 · Cited by 613
Arsel, Z., & Thompson, C. J. (2011) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/656389 · Cited by 350
Metadata
- Authors
- Humphreys, A.
- Venue
- Journal of Consumer Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2010-10
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 490-510
- ISSN
- 0093-5301 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5277
- OpenAlex
- W2152354174
- Cited by
- 326
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 15.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
