Suchergebnisse

AbstractA wealth of consumer research has proposed an experiential advantage: consumers yield greater happiness from purchasing experiences compared to material possessions. While this research stream has undoubtedly influenced consumer research, few have questioned its limitations, explored moderators, or investigated filedrawer effects. This has left marketing managers, consumers, and researchers questioning the relevance of the experiential advantage. To address these questions, the authors develop a model of consumer happiness and well-being based on psychological needs (i.e., autonomy, relatedness, self-esteem, and meaningfulness), and conduct an experiential advantage meta-analysis to test this model. Collecting 360 effect sizes from 141 studies, the meta-analysis supports the experiential advantage (d = 0.383, 95% CI [0.336, 0.430]), of which approximately a third of the effect may be attributable to publication bias. The analysis finds differential effects depending on the type of dependent measure, suggesting that the experiential advantage may be more tied to relatedness than to happiness and willingness to pay. The experiential advantage is reduced for negative experiences, for solitary experiences, for lower socioeconomic status consumers, and when experiences provide a similar level of utilitarian benefits relative to material goods. Finally, results suggest future studies in this literature should use larger sample sizes than current practice.

AbstractWith the rise of machine learning and "big data," many large yet spurious relationships between variables are discovered, leveraged by marketing communications, and publicized in the media. Thus, consumers are increasingly exposed to many large-magnitude relationships between variables that do not signal causal effects. This exposure may carry a substantial cost. Seven studies demonstrate that the magnitudes of relationships between variables can distort consumers' judgments about whether those relationships reflect causal effects. Specifically, consumers often use a magnitude heuristic: consumers infer that relationships with larger perceived magnitudes are more likely to reflect causal effects, even when this is not true (and even when relationships' correlations are held constant). In many situations, relying on the magnitude heuristic will distort causality judgments, such as when large-magnitude relationships between variables are spurious, or when normatively extraneous factors (e.g., reference points) distort perceptions of magnitudes. Moreover, magnitude-distorted (mis)perceptions of causality, in turn, distort consumers' purchase and consumption decisions. Since consumers often encounter spurious relationships with large magnitudes in the health domain and in other consequential domains, the magnitude heuristic is likely to lead to biases in some of consumers' most important decisions.

Abstract
Payment frequency is a fundamental yet underexplored feature of consumers' finances. As higher payment frequencies are becoming more prevalent, consumers are receiving more frequent yet smaller paychecks. An analysis of income and expenditure data of over 30,000 consumers from a financial services provider demonstrates a naturally occurring relationship between higher payment frequencies and increased spending. A series of lab studies support this finding, providing causal evidence that higher (vs. lower) payment frequencies increase spending. The effect of payment frequency on spending is driven by changes in consumers' subjective wealth perceptions. Specifically, higher payment frequencies reduce consumers' uncertainty in predicting whether they will have enough resources throughout a period, increasing their subjective wealth perceptions. As such, situational factors that reduce prediction uncertainty for those paid less frequently (e.g., the timing of consumers' expenses, income levels) moderate the impact of payment frequency. The effects of payment frequency on subjective wealth and spending can occur even when objective wealth favors those with lower payment frequencies. More broadly, the current work underscores a need to understand how timing variations in consumers' income impact their perceptions, behaviors, and general well-being.

Abstract
Marketers often use images to promote their products. For example, an advertisement for kitchen tools might display the tools alongside various ingredients, or an advertisement for a bookstore might showcase pictures of the store's interior. One underlying visual characteristic of such images is the degree of "entropy"—or disorder—in their content. Motivated by a fundamental principle from physics—namely, that entropy can only increase over time—the present research examines how entropy influences consumers' judgments and decisions. Across two pilot studies and five experiments, we find that while high-entropy images shift consumers' temporal focus to the past, low-entropy images shift their temporal focus to the future. These entropy-induced shifts in temporal focus influence consumers' decisions. Specifically, consistent with the notion of "fit fluency," we find that consumers evaluate past-related (e.g., vintage) products more favorably when they are accompanied by high-entropy images and future-related (e.g., futuristic) products more favorably when they are accompanied by low-entropy images. We discuss the theoretical and managerial implications of our findings.

AbstractWhen a consumer realizes that information relevant to a consumption decision is missing, such uncertainty can be attributed to ignorance (i.e., the information has never been observed and is unknown) or to memory failure (i.e., the information has been observed and is forgotten). Although research has examined inferences about unknown attributes, no prior work has examined inferences about forgotten attributes. Across six experiments in the lab and in the field, we find that when uncertainty is attributed to ignorance, consumers often make inferences about unknown attributes based on existing correlational evidence (e.g., a brand comparison sheet that could indicate a positive or negative correlation between the unknown attribute and observable attributes). However, when uncertainty is attributed to memory failure, consumers tend to ignore such existing correlational evidence and instead make inferences about forgotten attributes that tend to be positively correlated with known attributes. This process occurs partly because when consumers believe that an attribute was forgotten, they falsely retrieve an impression about the attribute that tends to be consistent with their overall product evaluation. Overall, believing that an attribute is forgotten and believing that it is unknown can lead to opposite inferences and choices.

Abstract
Licensing is a well-documented form of justifying individual indulgent choices, but less is known about how licensing affects food decision-making patterns over time. Accordingly, we examine whether consumers incorporate licensing strategically and deliberately in their long-term consumption patterns and identify reward programs as a context in which strategic licensing is likely to occur. We propose that members with lower-calorie consumption patterns strategically indulge more on reward purchase occasions and that forethought is required for such an effect to occur. A longitudinal study analyzing 272,677 real food purchases made by 7,828 consumers over a 14-month period provides striking evidence of our key proposition. An exploration of the interpurchase time-related aspect of purchase acceleration suggests that forethought on behalf of consumers is necessary for strategic licensing to occur. A subsequent experimental study (N = 605) comprising five consecutive choice occasions provides additional evidence of forethought by demonstrating that strategic licensing occurs only when expected (but not windfall) reward occasions are involved, and by showing that anticipated negative affect for not indulging is the driving mechanism. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of our results for consumers, managers, and public policymakers.

Abstract
Many studies document the benefits of presenting smaller quantities of products, particularly when differences in quantity relate to availability or popularity. However, we know less about the effects of quantity differences in contexts unrelated to scarcity, such as when products are depicted in ads, special displays, or online retailing settings. The present research builds on extant literature by investigating a previously unexplored question: How do product perceptions differ depending on whether consumers view a single unit in isolation, versus as one unit among identical product replicates? Five experiments demonstrate that presenting multiple product replicates as a group (vs. presenting a single item) increases product efficacy perceptions because it leads consumers to perceive products as more homogeneous and unified around a shared goal. That is, consumers perceive greater product entitativity when viewing a group of product replicates. As a result, the perceived and actual ability of products to deliver that function (i.e., product efficacy) increases.

Abstract
Advertisers often depict their products being consumed in a social setting, but they also depict people secretly consuming their products. Will consumers like a product more if they are prompted to consume it in secret? We report eight studies, where women consumed and evaluated products such as cookies, chocolate, and apple chips. Women in secret consumption conditions were instructed to imagine eating the food in secret, instructed to hide the food from others while consuming it, or shown an advertisement encouraging eating the food in secret. These secret consumption prompts resulted in more positive product evaluations and increased product choice, compared to evaluations in non-secret conditions. We identify preoccupation and attitude polarization as the primary drivers for these outcomes. When women consume a product in secret, they become preoccupied with the product, as thoughts about the product continually pop into mind. Increased thinking leads to attitude polarization, where evaluations for products they like become even more positive. Finally, we also identify moderators of these secrecy effects.