A typology of Jordanian consumers after Covid‐19: The rational, the suspicious, and the cautious consumer

Abstract

This study presents a detailed typology of Jordanian consumers that identifies the effects of Covid‐19 on their personal, social, and purchase and consumption patterns following the pandemic. Based on a qualitative approach using a sample of Jordanian consumers (N = 71), this study identifies three main types of consumers: the rational, suspicious, and cautious. All were distinguished by cognitive, emotional, and behavioral differences: the rational consumers viewed the pandemic as a natural occurrence, were willing to vaccinate, and took the opportunity to improve their lives and consumption behavior; the suspicious consumers viewed the pandemic as a man‐made virus and refused to rationalize their behaviors and follow the social‐distancing rules or vaccinate; and the cautious consumers were generally somewhere in between, and while they improved some aspects of their consumption, social, and personal lives, other aspects either remained the same or worsened. The findings have implications for managers and governmental bodies.

1. INTRODUCTION

The Covid‐19 epidemic has had a major impact on consumers (Feng & Fay, 2020). From its very beginning, this global pandemic has defined consumers' lifestyles and demand for products and services globally (Romeo‐Arroyo et al., 2020). With scientists expecting more pandemics in the future, understanding its influence on consumers is important for businesses and government bodies alike (Baicu et al., 2020), especially given that pandemics have always brought about social change throughout history (Reeves et al., 2020).

With over two years since the start of the pandemic, most of the literature has focused on examining consumers' use of technology and engagement in panic and stockpiling behaviors (Reeves et al., 2020). Responding to the call for research on the personal, psychological, and behavioral consequences of the pandemic for consumers (Baicu et al., 2020; Cruz‐Cárdenas et al., 2021; Reeves et al., 2020), this study explores consumers' different views on the nature of the pandemic and their cognitive, emotional, social, and behavioral reactions to it. We use a qualitative approach of semi‐structured interviews to examine consumers' experiences of the pandemic in Jordan, a country that experienced its first reported case in March 2020 and alternately tightened and loosened restrictions as the pandemic progressed. Based on this analysis, we develop a framework for understanding consumers' responses to the pandemic and identify three main segments of consumers: the rational, suspicious, and cautious.

This remainder of the paper is structured as follows: The next section examines the previous literature on Covid‐19 in relation to consumer behavior, followed by the methodology and basis for data collection. The research results are then presented. Last, a discussion of the findings and their managerial implications are presented.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

Several research themes were identified from the literature on consumer behavior during the Covid‐19 era. The first main theme in the literature focused on examining the influence of certain macro‐environmental forces (i.e., technology, legal and political, economic, and socio‐cultural) on consumer behavior during the pandemic (Cruz‐Cárdenas et al., 2021). Consumers' consumption, use, and adoption of digital technologies dramatically increased because the pandemic (Baicu et al., 2020; Sheth, 2020) allowed consumers to communicate and increase their social interactions during lockdowns (Kirk & Rifkin, 2020; Pillai et al., 2020); it also increased their ability to buy and shop for products and services (Hao et al., 2020; Koch et al., 2020; Panigutti et al., 2017; Troise et al., 2020). Social distancing (including lockdowns and curfews) affected consumers (Yoo & Managi, 2020), trade (Bofinger et al., 2020; Evenett, 2020; Kuckertz et al., 2020; Michie et al., 2020; Ozili & Arun, 2020), and employment (Bell & Blanchflower, 2020; Dey & Loewenstein, 2020). For example, food and hygiene spending increased (Prentice et al., 2020; Sheridan et al., 2020), while panic buying and stockpiling was (Jeżewska‐Zychowicz et al., 2020) driven by consumers' negative feelings of stress and anxiety (Anastasiadou et al., 2020) and moderated by trust in governmental decisions (Barnes et al., 2021). Furthermore, in terms of socio‐cultural factors, media and social platforms played an important role in building awareness and improving consumers' decision‐making processes (Cruz‐Cárdenas et al., 2021; Laguna et al., 2020; Liu & Su, 2021), although some studies suggest that they may have encouraged stockpiling and panic buying (Ahmed et al., 2020; Grashuis et al., 2020; Naeem, 2021; Prentice et al., 2020).

The second main trend focused on examining the influence of marketing strategies on consumer behavior during the pandemic. The employment of digital marketing activities helped in reducing health concerns and risk and in increasing purchase intentions (Butu et al., 2020; Gao et al., 2020; Shin & Kang, 2020; Troise et al., 2020). Pricing (Lv et al., 2020) and promotional campaigns (Anastasiadou et al., 2020) were also influential in driving demand for non‐priority items. Nevertheless, misuse of personal information remained a concern among consumers when they used technology (Tran, 2021).

The third main theme examined the influence of psychological and personal traits on consumer behavior during the pandemic. Demographic factors such as gender and age (Dammeyer, 2020; Lins & Aquino, 2020; Wang, An, et al., 2020; Wang, Xu, et al., 2020), emotional and psychological reactions such as self‐isolation, stress, and anxiety (Laato et al., 2020; Song, Jin, et al., 2020), and personality traits such as conscientiousness or extraversion were all found to influence hoarding and stockpiling behavior (Laato et al., 2020; Lamb et al., 2020; Song, Yao, & Wen, 2020). Nevertheless, some traits played a role in minimizing consumers' engagement in stockpiling, such as neuroticism (Dammeyer, 2020), agreeableness, and sympathetic traits (Lamb et al., 2020). Consumers were generally described as either impulsive (Ahmed et al., 2020), rational (Islam et al., 2020), or alarmed in their decision‐making processes (Prentice et al., 2020; Wang & Hao, 2020). Moreover, attitudes were found to positively influence the adoption of green and pro‐health behavior (Cvirik, 2020; Ellison et al., 2021; Jian et al., 2020).

The final theme within this literature focused on consumers' purchase behaviors and their methods. Specifically, this research trend highlighted the shift toward online purchases (Butu et al., 2020; Madnani et al., 2020; Zwanka & Buff, 2020). A trend toward buying from small and less‐crowded retailers was also identified (Li et al., 2020; Principato et al., 2020). Regarding actual purchase and consumption behaviors, evidence suggests that purchasing frequency decreased (Coibion et al., 2020; Laguna et al., 2020; Li et al., 2020). Nevertheless, an increase in stockpiling behaviors due to risk (Wang, Xu, et al., 2020), fear appeals (Addo et al., 2020), and social media (Naeem, 2021) was evident. Purchases of online entertainment, food, medicine and hygiene, and cleaning products also increased (Anastasiadou et al., 2020; Antonides & van Leeuwen, 2020; Hassen et al., 2020; Li et al., 2020; Wang, An, et al., 2020). However, a decline was witnessed in travel consumption and tourism products (Ellison et al., 2021; Skare et al., 2021). Increased food wastage (Amicarelli & Bux, 2021; Jribi et al., 2020) and reliance on healthier food and local products (Hassen et al., 2020; Li et al., 2020) were also observed.

Consequently, the present study builds on prior research in several ways. First, prior research has focused primarily on the impact of the pandemic, personality, and demographic traits on consumer behavior (e.g., technology use and stockpiling). We extend this work by examining how consumers' cognitive views of the pandemic influence their emotional and behavioral responses. Second, prior research has tended to emphasize negative emotions (e.g., stress and anxiety) and their impact on negative behaviors (e.g., panic buying and stockpiling). We extend this work to examine additional emotional responses (e.g., calmness, positivity, indifference, and a sense of responsibility) and a broader set of personal and consumption behaviors, including positive behaviors (e.g., rationalization, better communications, and improved hygiene). Third, prior research has examined social media consumption during the pandemic; however, it has not yet examined how the pandemic affected consumers' interactions within their socio‐cultural circles and its impact on their consumption behavior. Finally, prior research has largely been conducted in Western and more developed economies, whereas the present study focuses on an emerging market in a Middle Eastern country. Accordingly, by adopting a more exploratory and holistic approach rather than the dominant descriptive and quantitative approach used in this literature, this study contributes to the literature on consumer behavior during the Covid‐19 era by providing a cognitive, emotional, and behavioral framework of the different consumer responses to the Covid‐19 pandemic.

3. METHODOLOGY

To achieve the purpose of this study, a qualitative, exploratory research method was preferred (Saunders et al., 2007). Generally, exploratory methods are required when not much is known about a certain problem and the researcher intends to discover “what is happening; to seek new insights; to ask questions and to assess phenomena in a new light” (Robson, 2002, p, 59). Moreover, using semi‐structured online interviews on a purposive sample of (N = 71) Jordanian consumers, we provided the respondents with an explanation of the objectives of the research and assured them that all their answers would be used solely for the purposes of scientific research. Authorization to record the interviews was obtained, while each interview lasted for 40–55 min, as recommended by Matthews and Ross (2010). The interview protocols comprised open‐ended and structured questions regarding the following: (1) the participants' opinions on, and how their consumption and purchase patterns changed during and after the pandemic; (2) their opinions on how their lifestyles and hobbies were affected; (3) how the pandemic affected their social lives; (4) how the pandemic affected their health and mental states; and (5) their demographic information and consumption levels. The data‐collection process continued for over two months, whereafter the first author coded the transcriptions of the interviews, identifying the key themes in the findings. Regarding the analysis of the data, three main stages commonly used with the grounded‐theory approach were employed (Pratt et al., 2006), as seen in Table A1 in Appendix A. Overall, during the data‐examination procedure, the interview transcripts were coded, whereafter the main themes emerging from the respondents' replies were identified. However, to ensure the reliability and validity of the results, two independent scholars were requested to code the interview transcripts according to the prescribed procedures. Consequently, a concordance rate of 100% was achieved after two rounds of discussions.

4. FINDINGS

The sample for the study comprised both single and married males and females, ranging in age from 30 years to over 60 years. Most lived in the capital, Amman, and were full time employees (see Appendix A). Moreover, after an extensive examination of the data, a typology of three main types of consumers was identified based on their cognitive views and emotional, social, and behavioral responses (i.e., the rational, suspicious, and cautious). As seen in Figure 1, Jordanian consumers in each category adopted different views, emotions, and behaviors. The rational adopted positive views on the pandemic and experienced positive emotions and social interactions and behaviors. The suspicious were largely alarmed and skeptical, and adopted irrational behaviors, while the cautious consumers fell somewhere in between these two categories in terms of cognitive views and emotional, social, and behavioral responses, and were neither overly rational nor overly engaged in negative aspects of consumption and purchase behaviors.

FIGURE 1.

Interplay of consumers' cognitive, emotional, and behavioral patterns.

4.1. Cognitive views of the pandemic

Regarding Jordanian consumers' cognitive views on the pandemic, our first category was labeled the “Rational and responsible consumers.” These consumers kept a positive attitude and mindset during the pandemic and considered it as an opportunity to change their consumption and purchase patterns, their social lives, and their personal and psychological states, and were positive in their views and responsiveness to the government's decisions. Generally, the rational and responsible consumers constituted 20% of the sample, appeared to be more trusting of the organic nature of this pandemic and used it as an opportunity to improve their lives. Thus, they also seemed to have a high level of trust in the Jordanian government's decisions during the pandemic. This rendered them more willing to vaccinate once they could. Moreover, most of the rational consumers cited the World Health Organization's (WHO's) guidelines and the government as their main source of reference when following any health protocol in response to the pandemic. Furthermore, the respondents in this category all lived in the capital, Amman, and were at least educated to a bachelor's degree level. In addition, most had an income level above JD 1000, which suggests a middle‐ to upper‐class income level.

“I do not believe in all of these conspiracy theories; history has always shown us that virus outbreaks are common; thus, I will take the vaccine once its available. Generally, I think there are positives from any bad situation; I am spending more time with my family, saving more money, and am more aware of my health now.”

The second main category in our typology comprises the “Suspicious and stressed consumers,” who are the suspicious Jordanian consumers who viewed the Covid‐19 pandemic as nothing more than a hoax and did not change any of their behaviors in terms of consumption, personal habits, and social life, and were pessimistic in their responsiveness to the government's guidelines. Furthermore, this group constituted almost 30% of the sample, appeared to be very skeptical of the pandemic and viewed it as a part of a global conspiracy. Additionally, this group seemed to believe that danger of the effects of the virus were exaggerated and viewed it as nothing more than a flu‐like disease. We found that these consumers did not have any trust in the government's decisions and the WHO's guidelines during the pandemic. Consequently, these consumers were not willing to vaccinate. Furthermore, the analysis revealed that most of these consumers lived outside of the capital, Amman, in rural areas, or in the eastern part of Amman, which is often characterized by lower income levels. In addition, most in this group were below the age of 40 years and held a diploma and a high school certificate, with few holding a bachelor's. Moreover, we also observed that many of them were unemployed.

“Honestly, this whole thing seems ambiguous; it all seems to be some kind of biological war between America and China, and the world is certainly the casualty; some of my friends had it and described it as merely a flu‐like disease; they were tired for a few days and then were fine. I also do not believe the number of deaths caused by Covid. There was a considerable amount of confusion and many stories about hospitals paying people and families of dead people to say that the cause was Covid‐19, when in fact it was not. Therefore, I do not really understand the huge publicity given to this topic. Now, when the vaccine was released, they created this new mutation of the virus to sell more vaccines—I guess to prolong our suffering for God knows what purpose.”

The final group of consumers in this typology was referred to as the “Cautious but inconsistent consumers.” These inconsistent but patient consumers were largely undecided on the nature of the pandemic and were cautious in their openness to vaccinate. Additionally, the results showed that they wavered in their trust in the government's decisions and WHO's guidelines. Moreover, while they changed some aspects of their lives after the pandemic, other aspects remained the same. Additionally, they constituted 50% of the sample, and while they seemed skeptical of the pandemic and vaccine situation, they were willing to vaccinate once many people had done without any serious consequences. Moreover, it was observed that most in this group were under the age of 40 years and mostly educated.

“I am not totally sure how this whole virus thing started; sometimes I feel it is a natural thing and sometimes I feel it is man‐made; thus, I think I will vaccinate once it becomes safe and when people who have taken it show no signs of any illness or side effects.”

4.2. Emotional reactions to the pandemic

In terms of emotional reactions to the pandemic, the rational, suspicious, and cautious consumers appeared to have different emotional responses due to their different cognitive and attitudinal views on the pandemic. For example, the rational consumers cited feeling a greater sense of responsibility, calmness, and positivity after the pandemic, as explained by one of the respondents:

“I have to say that this crisis has indeed changed my life in some positive ways as I get to spend much more time with my family now. I feel more responsible about my health and my life in general, and my spending has decreased dramatically because there is nowhere to go now.”

Meanwhile, the suspicious consumers revealed that they had more heated and tense relationships with their families due to their increased levels of mental stress, anger, and frustration at not being able to go out as before. They also showed skepticism and distrust of the government's announcements and decisions. This was reflected in their engaging in panic buying and breaking social‐distancing protocols.

“There are no positives from this situation. What I can say is that being in lockdown is not a nice thing; I am buying more for fear of everything closing again, eating increasingly more and, as a result, my family and I both need to get some space because this situation is very stressful.”

Last, in terms of emotional reactions for the generally indifferent cautious consumers, these consumers were highly pragmatic in their responses to the pandemic by downplaying their negative emotions to a state of indifference to minimize its threats. Generally, they appeared to change their perception of the pandemic as the time passed and the number of cases increased/decreased. Nevertheless, the data revealed that these consumers still felt three main emotional reactions after the pandemic: feeling more health cautious for themselves and their loved ones, more patience, and cognitively worrying more about the future.

“Obviously, the main change that I have witnessed is the increased awareness I now have of my personal health and that of my family.”

4.3. Social influences

The social aspects of the three consumer categories were also influenced by their cognitive and emotional reactions. The rational consumers were compliant to social‐distancing guidelines from their social circles and the government's guidelines. Generally, they followed the social‐distancing guidelines and admitted to having stopped kissing and shaking hands with people, and always wore masks and gloves. In relation to their social circles, they admitted that they now called their relatives and friends almost daily if not weekly, due to the lack of time they could spend together. Regarding their neighbors, they appeared to check up on them more frequently than before the pandemic. Moreover, due to their sense of calm, most in this group revealed that they related better with their spouses and other family members than previously. Additionally, they admitted that their conversations with other family members were much calmer and more peaceful than before. Generally, they revealed that their close social circles followed similar guidelines and behaviors, which seemed to have influenced their behaviors during and after the lockdowns. They appeared to be highly influenced by the norms of their social circles as these improved social aspects appeared to also influence the rational consumers' personal habits, as explained by some of the participants:

“Due to the inability to see my friends and relatives and the uncertain situations created by this pandemic, I am checking up more frequently on my relatives and friends than before; in my family, our conversations have also improved dramatically compared to before, maybe because we are stuck together.”

“I think my social circle did influence my personal habits to a degree, as most of my friends and family were committed to maintaining social distance and staying at home during the quarantine and even after. I think this, to a degree, caused me to spend much more time at home taking care of myself, although I was still in contact with my friends almost daily.”

Regarding the suspicious consumers, their emotional outputs appeared to influence their social aspects, as most in this group acknowledged that their conversations with their spouses and other family members were much more aggressive due to the greater time spent together and their general feelings of stress. Despite this, these consumers admitted that they called their friends, but not their families, daily. They appeared to have no interest in any sort of communication with their neighbors. Furthermore, as with the rational consumers, this group's members seemed to be highly influenced by situationism, as their social circles, especially their friends, appeared to influence their personal habits and behaviors, albeit negatively. More importantly, the data analysis also revealed that these consumers did not follow the social‐distancing guidelines regarding kissing and shaking hands with people, and participated in weddings, funerals, and social gatherings despite the government's guidelines.

“I think it is very difficult, when you are accustomed to a certain pattern in life, to suddenly change it. When the first and longest lockdown started, from March until May, it was very difficult to deal with my family for 24 h daily, because we were all stressed, our conversations were a bit aggressive, and it was all just venting out our frustration at each other.”

“What else are you going to do when every month or so they change the curfew times and social gatherings? Wedding and funerals are part of the Jordanian culture; thus, Covid‐19 or not, I am not going to stop participating in them, because many people will be upset with me if I do not offer my condolences on a death, for example.”

“Most of my friends do not believe in this nonsense, so why should I? They broke the curfew several times and nothing happened. Personally, I do not think it is a big deal; where I live, everyone does this; we do not have a strong police presence here, and therefore people continued with their normal lives.”

For the cautious consumers, their indifferent state appeared to influence their social circles and their personal behaviors. While they followed social‐distancing protocols, this happened when they were in public, not when they were with their friends and family members. These consumers also participated in kissing and shaking hands with friends and family members and participated in their gatherings, weddings, and funerals, despite the government's guidelines. Additionally, they always wore masks and gloves, although not when their friends and family were around due to the trust among them. Moreover, regarding their social changes during and after the pandemic, most revealed that their communications with their family and friends were somewhat improved. However, they revealed that due to the number of lockdowns and curfew hours, it was very difficult to maintain contact with some of their friends and family members.

“To an extent, I take more care of myself in terms of hygiene and I follow the social‐distancing rules; however, I do not do that with my friends and family because I know that they follow them too and thus I feel there is no need.”

“My relationship with my family and friends has certainly improved because we spend much more time together. However, I did lose contact with some friends because there was not much time to see or call them then.”

4.4. Consumption and personal behaviors during the pandemic

Due to the different attitudinal views and emotional outputs, the three consumer groups also showed some differences in terms of consumption and purchase patterns. For example, the rational consumers bought only what they needed and only once a week. Commonly, this group of consumers took advantage of the pandemic and lockdowns to rationalize their consumption behaviors. The rational consumers admitted that their consumption of red and white meat, vegetables, and fruits had been reduced by at least 20%. Moreover, their eating menu comprised only one meal in addition to salad. The rational consumers also improved their personal hygiene as they washed their hands almost hourly and took daily showers if they left the house due to their desire not to harm other people. Furthermore, due to their improved time management, they participated more frequently in their family chores than before. Consequently, they also now actively participated in cooking and gardening more than before the pandemic, as explained by one of the participants:

“Before the pandemic, my family and I used to go shopping more than two or three times a week; however now, to minimize contact with others, we only go shopping once a week, buying only what we need. Our eating patterns have also changed because everyone now eats at the same time and we only have one type of food per meal. Our water and electricity usage has also been reduced”.

“My personal life has indeed changed dramatically compared to before. For example, I always keep a social distance with others, always wear a mask, am more health conscious now than before, and I am more alert to personal hygiene. Spending that much more time with my family has also increased my participation in the house chores.”

In contrast to the rational consumers, the suspicious consumers increased their consumption in anticipation of lockdowns and engaged in panic and stockpiling behaviors. The suspicious consumers also did not use a prepared list when shopping and if they had one, they did not adhere to it. Consequently, they reported a 15% increase in their consumption of meat, vegetables, and fruit. They also reported problems with time management due to the curfew and lockdowns, and did not appear to adjust their hygiene or mask‐wearing unless they were required to do it. Finally, they also did not improve their participation in family chores.

“Not really, my shopping and purchases actually increased. I do not normally prepare a list before shopping and that has not changed. I bought increasingly more of everything. It was not just me; everyone bought increasingly more products for fear of other lockdowns and, to some extent, I wanted to minimize contact with others. Because I was stuck at home and everyone else was too, my family prepared more than one meal to try to please everyone, and there was pretty much nothing else to do.”

The cautious consumers' consumption and purchase patterns were rationalized for widely available products. However, they increased their consumption of high‐involvement products such as cigarettes, bread, and red and white meat. The cautious consumers also engaged in some compulsive shopping despite having a prepared shopping list. Additionally, their daily eating menu consistently oscillated between one meal and sides, and more than one meal and sides. They also improved their time management in work but not in their social lives, while their personal hygiene was somewhat improved as they occasionally washed their hands and showered more than before the pandemic. These consumers sometimes, but not always, participated in family chores and broke social‐distancing rules with their close circles, but not in public.

“While our expenses were reduced in some respects, they increased in others; I think we were fearful of not being able to buy if another lockdown was imposed because at the start of the first lockdown cigarettes, gas, and bread were a little difficult to obtain”.

5. DISCUSSION

The repercussions of the Covid‐19 pandemic for consumers' cognitive, emotional, and purchase and consumption behaviors will still be felt and studied in years to come (Minton, 2022). This study provides a framework for consumers' attitudinal responses to the pandemic based on the interplay among their cognitive, emotional, social, and behavioral aspects, using a qualitative approach and a sample of Jordanian consumers (N = 71). Overall, the findings of this study present, for the first time, a holistic typology of three types of consumers following the pandemic (i.e., the rational, suspicious, and cautious). The data analysis revealed that the rational consumers were a group of positive‐thinking consumers who found positives in the pandemic and used it as an opportunity to rationalize their consumption behavior; while they experienced positive, emotional reactions, they positively changed their social and personal lives and believed that the pandemic was a natural disease. In contrast, the suspicious consumers believed that it was a man‐made virus, had negative emotional outcomes, and subsequently engaged in more family feuds and panic purchases. While the cautious consumers positively changed some of their consumption and personal behaviors, other aspects of their consumption and personal behavior worsened due to their state of indifference.

In the literature that focused on the influence of personality and demographic traits on consumers' panic buying and use of technology, the first contribution of this study relates to the first stage in our proposed sequence, which addresses consumers' main cognitive and attitudinal views toward the pandemic. Data analysis shows that the Jordanian consumers had three main attitudinal responses to the pandemic (i.e., positive, negative, and neutral responses), which subsequently influenced their emotional and behavioral responses. While some evidence broadly characterized consumer actions during the pandemic as either rational (Ahmed et al., 2020) or alarmed and impulsive (Islam et al., 2020), little attention was given to exploring the causes of these actions. Thus, by shifting from this dominant focus, this study identifies three main attitudinal responses to the pandemic, which results in three different emotional and behavioral paths. Regarding the first attitudinal response, the rational consumers can be characterized as positive‐attitude consumers. Normally, people with positive attitudes keep a positive mindset regardless of the situation and often think of the greater good, which reflects positively on their behaviors (Ajzen et al., 1982). Consequently, the rational consumers were positivists and had a trusting outlook on the nature of the pandemic, which reflected positively on their emotions and responses (Brendl et al., 2005). Additionally, in terms of the virus and vaccine responsiveness, in addition to following the social‐distancing rules, these consumers were similar to the innovators in Rogers's (1962) diffusion of innovation theory in terms of their trusting response to the virus and their willingness to vaccinate (Rogers, 2003). By contrast, the suspicious consumers are similar to negative‐attitude people, who are often characterized in the literature as having a negative mindset and being highly distrusting, traits that often reflect on their emotions and behaviors (Ajzen, 1982). In addition, these consumers were similar to the laggards in Rogers's theory because they were very skeptical of this new situation as well as of the news and media and were very slow in changing their behavioral patterns or vaccinating (Rogers, 2003). The cautious consumers' attitudinal views are similar to those of neutral‐attitude consumers (Ajzen et al., 1982), who are characterized by a neutral mindset and tend to wait for others to take the initiative (Brendl et al., 2005; Tran & Shcherbakov, 2016). Without a distinctive view on the pandemic, these consumers were similar to Rogers's (2003) early/late majority classification as they were willing to take the vaccine once it had been used by several people and proven safe. Generally, the pandemic and vaccine development were met with conflicting views from people globally (Akarsu et al., 2021). Overall, this result suggests that differences in demographic backgrounds and attitudinal views may have been vital in affecting how consumers have responded to the pandemic.

Regarding the second stage in our proposed framework and the second contribution of this study, previous research has highlighted that customers' responses to the pandemic were mainly fear, stress, and anxiety, which led to their engaging in negative consumption behaviors (Cruz‐Cárdenas et al., 2021). Consequently, this study identified additional emotional responses that consumers experienced during the pandemic (i.e., calmness, positivity, indifference, and a sense of responsibility). Overall, the rational, suspicious, and cautious consumers all had different emotional outputs. Unsurprisingly, people with positive attitudes normally have positive emotional outcomes and are often confident, optimistic, willing to adapt, have a greater sense of responsibility, and are highly reliable and trusting (Brendl et al., 2005; Reeves, 2006; Tran & Shcherbakov, 2016). In addition, people with negative attitudes are often found to be angry, pessimistic, frustrated, and highly skeptical and doubtful (Brendl et al., 2005). In contrast, people with neutral attitudes often have an indifferent emotional response (Ortega & Bernabé‐Moreno, 2021), they are neither skeptical nor hopeful and are often detached (Brendl et al., 2005; Ortega & Bernabé‐Moreno, 2021; Tran & Shcherbakov, 2016). Consequently, these findings highlight how these consumers' cognitive evaluations influenced their emotional outputs, thus demonstrating the positivist nature of the rational consumers' cognitive evaluations, the suspicious consumers' negative and pessimistic nature, and the cautious consumers' indifferent and cautious nature (Laato et al., 2020; Lamb et al., 2020; Song, Yao, & Wen, 2020).

In terms of consumption and shopping behaviors, instead of focusing on negative consumption behaviors such as panic and stockpiling behaviors as did most of the literature (Cruz‐Cárdenas et al., 2021), the results of this study showed that depending on their attitudinal viewpoint and emotional responses, consumers could also engage in full and mixed rationalization of consumption depending on the type of product desired. The rational consumers' rationalization of consumption could be explained by these consumers' positive attitude toward and mindset about the pandemic and their trust in public announcements, which subsequently led them to focus on the positives and rationalize their behaviors. Additionally, their desire to minimize contact with others and to maintain social distancing could also have played a role in their rationalization of consumption. Generally, evidence shows that a positive mindset often leads to positive behavioral actions (Ajzen et al., 1982). This positive mindset was also reflected in their improved time management, personal hygiene, and participation in household shores, as well as in their cooking and eating at home. This could also be due to the increased use of online shopping and curfews imposed (Sheth, 2020). In contrast, the suspicious and stressed consumers' increased spending and consumption as well as their panic buying could be explained by their negative mindset and fear and distrust of the government's announcements (Amicarelli & Bux, 2021; Wang, Xu, et al., 2020). Their disbelief in the severity of the virus was also reflected in their not improving personal hygiene (Yousuf et al., 2020), and in their breaking of social‐distancing guidelines (Briscese et al., 2020). For the cautious consumers, the pragmatic and flexible nature of neutral‐attitude people appeared to have helped them in adjusting their behaviors as the pandemic progressed. This was evident in their engagement in panic buying and stockpiling for certain products that were in short supply during the first lockdowns due to fear of any potential lockdowns and their rationalization of purchasing regularly available products. Thus, they increased their purchases of high‐involvement products and rationalized their purchases of products of which they believed there would be no shortage. This was also reflected in their somewhat improved personal hygiene and their mixed responses regarding participation in family chores and following social‐distancing protocols (Amicarelli & Bux, 2021; Zwanka & Buff, 2020).

Regarding the third stage in our proposed framework and the third contribution, prior research has not yet examined how the pandemic affected consumers' interactions within their socio‐cultural circles. Consequently, the findings of this study demonstrate that depending on their attitudinal views, consumers could also have positive, negative, and mixed interactions within their social circles, and not only negative ones (Cruz‐Cárdenas et al., 2021). Most of the literature on consumers' behavior and Covid‐19 was conducted in Western countries and cultures. Therefore, in contrast to individualistic cultures that promote self‐interest above others, Jordanian consumers' collectivist nature (Obeidat et al., 2018) was evident in the differences found among the three consumer groups. As the rational and optimistic consumers as well as those in the other two groups were highly influenced by their social circles and surroundings, they often adopted behaviors that were similar to those of their social circles. In social psychology, people often use their social environments as a reference for how to behave and obtain their information (Fiske et al., 2010). As evidenced by the findings here, when people are faced with a new situation such as the pandemic and are uncertain about how to act, they often resort to social cues for appropriate responses (Ross & Nisbett, 1991).

Last, the Jordanian population is generally considered to be a collectivist culture (Triandis et al., 1985). Consumers in collectivist cultures are normally characterized by a “we” mentality that promotes the interests of the group (Triandis & Suh, 2002). Moreover, evidence suggests that consumers in collectivist cultures are also social and have a high‐context communication style (Taylor & Okazaki, 2006). In addition, they normally display positive emotions and are more in control of their negative ones (Cross et al., 2000). This contrasts with individualistic cultures that promote self‐achievement, low‐context social communications, and social distance, while the consumers are less in control of their negative emotions (Triandis & Suh, 2002). Consequently, in contrast to the previous literature, which was mainly conducted in Western and individualistic cultures, this study also contributes to the literature by conducting this study in Jordan. As evidenced by previous results, the individualistic traits in the country can somewhat be reflected in the behaviors examined (e.g., hoarding and stockpiling, an increase in domestic violence, worsened hygiene, and increased food wastage) (Cruz‐Cárdenas et al., 2021). Consequently, the findings of this study highlight several different behaviors that promote the welfare of society (e.g., rationalization in consumption, better communications, improved hygiene, positive emotional outputs, and maintaining social‐distancing guidelines). Overall, the findings in this study demonstrate the possibility that consumers in each country and culture can adopt different cognitive, emotional, and behavioral paths (Triandis & Suh, 2002).

6. IMPLICATIONS, LIMITATIONS, AND FUTURE RESEARCH

This study offers several practical implications. First, to change and minimize consumers' negative consumption behaviors, the WHO as well as governmental bodies and NGOs should initially attempt to understand and measure consumers' basic attitudinal views on the pandemic. Thus, these bodies should be able to anticipate future behavioral patterns among consumers globally. Second, these institutions should provide transparent reports that highlight the nature and origin of the virus to minimize misinformation and conspiracy views among consumers and thus their subsequent negative behaviors. Overall, it is also necessary for the WHO's and government's decisions to be consistent and transparent because this will increase the confidence of all the segments in their decisions and could reduce consumers' engagement in stockpiling and panic buying behaviors due to fear and a lack of trust in their announcements. Third, governmental bodies should adopt several measures to minimize the proportion of suspicious consumers and increase that of rational consumers. For example, promotional and awareness campaigns should be increased to highlight the severity of this disease and importance of the vaccine, as recent statistics show that five million out of ten million Jordanian people have been vaccinated since the start of the vaccination process in January 2021. On the other hand, incentives for consumers in the rational group should be given to encourage more favorable behaviors from the other two groups as well. For example, at the beginning of the vaccination campaign in Jordan, shorter curfew times and special cards allowing the holder to travel and go out during lockdowns were given to those vaccinated. This encouraged many skeptic people to get vaccinated to avoid curfews. Overall, these opinion leaders' roles should be highlighted in awareness campaigns to encourage more consumers to follow in their steps. Finally, as suggested by Nath et al. (2022), social‐support programs should also be developed to manage the psychological stress and negative emotional states among the cautious and suspicious groups.

This typology provides a perspective that offers a fuller explanation of the different responses in consumer behavior following the pandemic. Consequently, it can be used by governmental bodies as well as marketing managers to cluster different consumer segments and design response and awareness strategies for the rational, suspicious, and cautious groups. While it is difficult to establish causality and generalize the present findings due to the exploratory nature of the study, evidence suggests that this pandemic has caused similar consumers' behavioral patterns globally (Cruz‐Cárdenas et al., 2021). In addition, globalization and consumers' international travel increase the probability of consumers' learning and adopting similar behavioral patterns (Amaral et al., 2021). Furthermore, to generalize the findings, future research could duplicate this study in different contexts and cultures. Additionally, future work could also employ a quantitative approach to examine the distribution of these types of consumers in different countries and cultures and further examine the role of education, income levels, and media in shaping consumers' responses to this pandemic. Future studies could consider the different socio‐economic factors that influenced each consumer group in this study. As evident in the present findings, educational and income levels play a role in building consumers' attitudes toward the pandemic and thus their subsequent behaviors. In addition, future research could examine the antecedents of each group's behavior identified in this study as well as use longitudinal designs to evaluate changes in each consumer group.

APPENDIX A.

A.1. DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURE AND SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

1. First: Generating provisional groupings. The Data investigation started by employing open coding to recognize statements about the respondent's stories regarding the Covid‐19 and its influences (Pratt et al., 2006). Subsequently, we used parallel declarations to produce provisional groups and first‐order codes. After generating the categories, the researchers revisited the transcripts to confirm that the information fitted each group. After the codes and categories were created and titled, another evaluation was completed to guarantee their fitness for their individual categories.

2. Second, the integration of first‐order codes and producing theoretical groups started with the codes from each theme being linked for each category. Precisely, the contact forms assembled from all the composed data were summed up to reflect a number of the main trends (e.g., Social changes, behavioral changes, psychological changes, responsiveness to governmental decisions). This allowed the variances between the groups to be compared, and the developing differences in the Jordanian consumers changes due to Covid‐19 to be determined. Consequently, after merging the groups, we moved on to the axial coding to look for relationships between the groups if any. The third and final stages consisted of defining theory by accumulating theoretical dimensions.

After generating the theoretical groups, we used selective coding to more polish the groups and develop a grounded theory as suggested by Sekaran and Bougie (2003). At this phase, we meant to recognize how the different clusters fitted together in a full picture. As a result, we observed other conceptual models that might help define how these themes related to each other. After recognizing a conceivable background, we went back to the data's fit (or lack of fit) with our developing theoretical understanding (e.g., Pratt et al., 2006). Table A1 reviews the procedure followed, which demonstrates the first order codes and the theoretical categories and aggregate dimensions. Precisely, the collective theoretical dimensions highlighted in this table were the ones that are best suited to explain the cognitive, emotional, personal, social, and behavioral processes for Jordanian consumers. Finally, to test the reliability and validity of the results, we consulted another academic who had no previous information of the topic to code the interview transcripts. Nevertheless, the researchers' findings attained a concordance rate of 100% after two rounds of discussions.

Regarding the sample of the study: 52.1% of the population were from females and 47.9% were males. 24% of respondents belonged to a family with three kids, followed by singles with 23%, a family with two children with 17%, one kid with 13%, a family with four children with 9%, a family with five children with 7% and newly married with 7%. Moreover, 70.5% were living in the capital Amman, 61% had an income level below 1000 jd per month, and 50% held a bachelor degree. Furthermore, 36.6% were between the ages of 30–40, 29.6% were between 40–50, 14% were between 50–60 and 11.2% were above 60 years old. Finally, 69% held a full‐time job either in the public or private sector, 14.1% were retired, 8.5% had a private business, and the rest were unemployed at the moment.

TABLE A1.

Data structure

First order codes	Theoretical categories	Aggregate theoretical dimensions	Label
Statements about the consumers views on Covid‐19 (e.g., its not natural, it's a natural disease, conspiracy, I will/won't take the vaccine)	Cognitive process (trusting/open minded/close minded/skeptic/indifferent)	Positive/negative/neutral attitudes	Consumer type
Statements about the consumer emotional reactions to Covid‐19 (e.g., feeling more responsibility; Fear; stress; anxiety; positivity)	Emotional process (at peace, positivity/negativity/stress/anxiety/fear/neutral/indifferent)
Statements about the consumer purchase and consumption reactions to Covid‐19 (e.g., consumers describing their purchase and consumption patterns during the pandemic)	Purchase process (rationalization/panic buying/increased consumption/mixed)
Statements about the consumer social reactions to Covid‐19 (e.g., consumers describing their social interactions and patterns during the pandemic)	Social process (situationism/increased/decreased communications)
Statements about the consumer personal reactions to Covid‐19 (e.g., consumers describing their personal habits during the pandemic)	Personal process (hygiene routines/participation/non participation in chores)

Obeidat, Z. , & Obeidat, M. I. (2022). A typology of Jordanian consumers after Covid‐19: The rational, the suspicious, and the cautious consumer. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 1–19. 10.1111/joca.12493