This dissertation advocates for greater recognition and inclusion of the large and growing population of disabled people as an integral part of the marketplace and in marketing research. Three trends are converging that increase the imperative to focus more attention on disability in the marketplace: demographics, inclusion, and technology. The experience of disabled consumers in the marketplace is fundamentally different from that of able-bodied consumers and has implications for all stakeholders in marketing. To better understand the heart of this matter, Essay 1 develops a theoretical framework to explain how disabled individuals approach consumption decisions. They must choose between three coping strategies (self-initiative, social support, and assistive technology) to overcome the challenges of their disability and achieve their consumption goals. In doing so, they face an inherent and constant tradeoff of fulfilling a need for autonomy versus need for efficiency. No strategy fulfills both, rather each facilitates one while hindering the other, creating tension between competing goals. This tradeoff is typically not faced by able-bodied consumers, who are able to achieve both autonomy and efficiency on the same task. Essay 2 empirically and experimentally tests one aspect of the theoretical framework, namely how observers may perceive (or misperceive) the needs of people with physical disabilities, identifies inaccurate perceptions that may lead to suboptimal outcomes, and examines how these perceptions can be leveraged to improve outcomes. Although I advocate a fully inclusive design approach, in which people with disabilities are integral to decision making processes affecting them, the current reality is that many decisions are still made on their behalf by others. As a result, marketers, product designers, policy makers, and individuals need to understand the needs of people with disabilities to create, market, and support products that better fulfill those needs. In contrast to prior research on dehumanization, which finds that observers diminish the importance of high-order (psychological) needs of “othered” groups, I find that observers elevate the importance of high-order needs of people with physical disabilities to compensate for perceived physical challenges. Across eight studies, I identify this systematic bias and resulting consequential decisions in the realm of product design and response to marketing campaigns. I conclude by discussing implications of these findings for managers, public policy, and future research.