Unavoidable, Yet Contestable: How Consumers Work Algorithms to Their Own Ends
- Ceyda Sinag
- 11 minutes ago
- 5 min read
Written By Ceyda Sinağ, Post-Doc at Sabancı University, Turkiye
“If you’re not paying, you’re the product” reflects the understanding that algorithms are shaping our reality. Hence, when we spend time on social media, we are influenced by the algorithm. However, this is not the whole story; it is also true that consumers are purposefully interacting with content they prefer to manipulate the algorithm.
In their latest article, "How consumer market orientations shape algorithmic appreciation and avoidance in fashion", authors Pelin Geyik and Henri Weijo from Aalto University explore how fashion consumers work with algorithmic recommendations to acquire social status. It turns out that fashion consumers engage with the algorithm in distinctive ways. But how?
One algorithm, two ways of playing the game
According to sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, consumers acquire social status by accumulating forms of capital: financial resources, specialty knowledge, social connections, and recognition. The fashion field on Instagram offers rich insights into capital gains, as consumers compete for social status to construct and express their fashion identities. Contrary to previous findings, Pelin and Henri found that highly engaged fashion consumers, engage with algorithms in distinct ways depending on their market orientations. Accordingly, the authors identified two distinct groups: mainstream consumers and indie consumers. These consumers strategically manipulate or resist algorithmic recommendations to pursue field specific capital gains; a phenomenon the authors call algorithmic field maneuvering.
Mainstream fashion consumers favor mass appeal, so they regard the algorithm as their partner and, through algorithmic optimization practices, manipulate it to discover trends that help them acquire field-specific capital. In contrast, indie consumers value uniqueness and prefer niche, designer, or vintage aesthetics. Hence, they seek to build status by distinguishing themselves from the masses. Accordingly, these consumers use algorithmic preservation practices in which they follow only trusted authorities, use other social media platforms than Instagram, and discover brands offline to protect their distinct status from mainstream consumers.
Their study suggests that algorithmic maneuvering is shaped not only by individual preferences but also by the ongoing social competition for status and consumers’ field-specific knowledge. For marketers using automated targeting, the key implication is to account for differing market orientations; for instance, overly aggressive algorithmic marketing can alienate niche audiences seeking exclusivity.
Birth of the paper and surprises along the way
Pelin tells me that she is fortunate to work on topics she truly enjoys at Aalto University. Here, she studies how emerging technological and social dynamics shape consumer experiences and marketplace interactions. Pelin's supervisor, Henri, sparked the idea of exploring how consumers interact with algorithms, and she immediately got on board, as she is interested in digital consumer culture.
She shares that both the data collection and analysis parts of the project were very fun. During the interviews, she has never mentioned the word "algorithm" to avoid guiding the informants, yet the conversation has organically come down to algorithms, which she finds fascinating. They encountered another surprise during the analysis. Although all informants were highly knowledgeable and showed great interest in fashion, Pelin and Henri did not expect them to perceive algorithmic recommendations so distinctly, which added richness to their theoretical insights.
Writing a journal article as an early-career scholar
This research is Pelin’s first journal article, so it is a special one, and I understand that it was a real learning curve for her. As a young scholar, she shares her experience of writing her first academic paper:
“I truly learned what it takes to write an academic paper only once I started doing it. Writing a journal article is not just about expressing your ideas; it requires a clear structure and constant attention to the audience. One of the biggest lessons for me was learning to communicate in a way that is both comprehensive and accessible, especially because it is a managerial journal. Framing sociological concepts for a broader readership required careful translation. Henri was an invaluable guide throughout this process and supported me as I learned how to craft the article.”
- Pelin Geyik
As a young scholar, she has found a few things helpful. According to Pelin, writing on a topic that one finds truly interesting and genuinely cares about is very important. That focus helped Pelin a lot during periods of uncertainty and stress. Also, she advises building as open and transparent a communication as possible with co-authors. Lastly, she shares that:
"When you are evaluating comments of the review team, do not lose your curiosity about the data. The review team is working with you to improve the paper. While following their guidance, stay true to the theoretical story you want to tell.”
- Pelin Geyik
This quote brings us to the authors’ experience of the review process at IJRM. Pelin learned how to stay true to the consumer story they wanted to tell while still strengthening the paper to meet the review team's expectations. The reviewers recognized the effort the authors put into the manuscript that helped push the paper forward.
Read the paper
Interested in reading “How consumer market orientations shape algorithmic appreciation and avoidance in fashion”? Access the full paper here.
Want to cite the paper?
Geyik, P., & Weijo, H. (2025). How consumer market orientations shape algorithmic appreciation and avoidance in fashion. International Journal of Research in Marketing.
Meet the Author
Pelin Geyik
Doctoral Researcher at Aalto University
How would you describe your relationship with platform algorithms? Would you characterize it more as one of appreciation or avoidance?
Before starting the project, I was already following and reading work on this topic through popular media and academic journals. But after working on the project so intensively and tracking everything that comes out of it, I have become much more vigilant toward platforms. When I’m on social media and not actively communicating with family or friends, I feel like I’m doing netnography. I find it very intriguing when I observe emergent trends or surprising interactions among other users. I catch myself thinking in terms of research and what that instance signifies.
If you would not be a marketing researcher, what would you be?
I would still find a way to do research because research is really, truly my passion. And even if it's not, maybe it wouldn't be in the marketing field, but I would still try to incorporate research into my work.
Who is the researcher from any field you would like to sit down to lunch with? What would you say to him/her?
There are a ton of names I could list here, but in this paper and in the other projects in my dissertation, I am using concepts from Pierre Bourdieu. In other projects, I also benefit greatly from the feminist interpretation of his work. I have been reading a lot about how people build on and extend Bourdieu's concepts in sociology. I would like to hear his take on both how people extend on his research and also how people critique his work.
This article was written by
Post-Doc at the Sabancı University, Turkiye
Discover more about algorithms and consumer interaction
The influence of algorithms on consumer practices and behavior has recently attracted growing attention among marketing scholars. Pelin and Henri analyze consumer–algorithm interaction through a sociological lens. By contrast, in their recent IJRM article, Vomberg, Homburg, and Sarantopoulos (2025) adopt a psychological perspective to examine how continuously adjusting algorithmic prices shape consumer responses in “Algorithmic pricing: Effects on consumer trust and price search.” These studies show that using different methodologies and approaching phenomena from different standpoints enrich research domains.
Comments