New research from 91ɫ’s reveals that designing marketplaces for an “average” consumer is a flawed approach that can lead to predictable and avoidable harm.
Marketers and policymakers often assume people sense, think, feel and relate in broadly similar, stable ways. However, new research argues that consumer experiences are shaped by a range of internal and external factors. Stress, sleep loss, aging and illness can all influence how people processes information and navigate marketplaces, leading to hard-to-read fine print, overwhelming store and app experiences and rushed decisions made under pressure.
The argument is set out in “" published in the Journal of Public Policy & Marketing. The study was co-authored by Raisa T. Zaman, a PhD candidate at Schulich, together with an international team of scholars from Canada, the U.S., the U.K. and Europe.
Drawing on research from psychiatry, neuroscience and neurodiversity studies, the authors argue that variation in how people process the world is universal and constantly shifting, not limited to the one-in-five people who identify as neurodivergent.
“Marketers and policymakers often design for one 'average' mind,” says Zaman, who is conducting her PhD studies under the supervision of Professors Ela Veresui and Russell Belk. “When a store, an app or an ad overwhelms us, we tend to blame ourselves. Our research shows that this is a design error and one that can be avoided.”
To address this, the researchers introduce the STAR (sense, think, affect and relate) framework, which helps practitioners and policymakers identify where marketplace design assumes everyone processes information the same way. They also propose neuropluralist design, a set of eight principles for building more flexible and accessible consumer experiences, including tactics such as adjustable sensory input, multiple ways to engage and self-paced interaction.
The team illustrates the framework using influencer marketing, a global industry valued at more than U.S. $40 billion and one where consumer safeguards can be limited. For example, a sponsorship disclosure can meet legal requirements and still go unnoticed by consumers who are scrolling quickly, multitasking or experiencing fatigue.
The researchers argue that regulators ask not only whether disclosures exist, but whether people can actually notice, understand and act on them.
“We believe the era of designing for the mythical 'average' consumer has reached its limits,” concludes Zaman. “When systems are designed for variability, they become more inclusive, resilient and effective for everyone.”