Suchergebnisse

Abstract
It is widely believed that increasing the equality of material possessions or income in a social group should lead people at the bottom of the distribution to consume less and save more. However, this prediction and its causal mechanism have never been studied experimentally. Five studies show that greater equality increases the satisfaction of those in the lowest tier of the distribution because it reduces the possession gap between what they have and what others have. However, greater equality also increases the position gains derived from status-enhancing consumption, since it allows low-tier consumers to get ahead of the higher proportion of consumers clustered in the middle tiers. As a result, greater equality reduces consumption when consumers focus on the narrower possession gap, but it increases consumption when they focus on the greater position gains (i.e., when consumption is conspicuous, social competition goals are primed, and the environment is competitive).

Abstract
Given that the central objective of consumption in many contexts is to derive enjoyment or utility, it is reasonable to assume that how much people consume a product will primarily be driven by how much they like it. Yet the current research finds that, although consumers indeed predict that they will consume a greater amount of options they like more, their actual consumption can be surprisingly insensitive to their preferences. Across six experiments, we find that consumers systematically overestimate the extent to which their consumption amount is determined by their preferences. We propose that how much people actually consume is determined by a variety of factors, including transient motivational states (e.g., hunger or boredom), consumption opportunities, and habits. Compared to these factors, however, people's liking of a product tends to be more salient, better known, and perceived as a more normatively appropriate driver of consumption—leading consumers to focus overly on their preferences when predicting their consumption. We further propose that this prediction error has important implications for consumer welfare, as it can lead to suboptimal inventory decisions (e.g., over-purchasing of favorite products) as well as ineffective self-control strategies (e.g., restricting oneself to mediocre options in order to reduce consumption).

Abstract
Why, how, and when can logos with a blue positive space communicate competence versus sadness? Why, how, and when might logos with a red positive space evoke impressions of liveliness versus aggressiveness? As the current research establishes, a black background strengthens the negative meanings associated with the hue of a logo's positive space and weakens its positive meanings. Conversely, a white background strengthens its positive meanings and weakens its negative meanings. These automatic effects occur because the hue of the positive space interacts with the color of the negative space to determine whether logos communicate positive or negative brand impressions more vividly. These effects are broadly applicable to both well-known and unknown brands, yet they are attenuated for meaningful logos and filled-frame logos. With these novel findings, this article identifies specific factors that can alter the meanings of logo hues, provides a theoretical lens for understanding the interplay of the background color and the hue of the positive space, and offers guidelines for crafting effective logos. This article also reveals which brands can benefit most from conveying negative impressions through their logos: logos with a black (white) background enhance evaluations of brands that possess negatively (positively) valenced personality traits.

Abstract
As consumers' political opinions become more divided and more central to their identities, it is important to understand how political ideology shapes consumers' attempts to differentiate from others in the marketplace. Seven studies demonstrate that political ideology systematically influences consumers' preferences for differentiation. Conservative ideology leads consumers to differentiate from others vertically in the social hierarchy through products that signal that they are better than others, and liberal ideology leads consumers to differentiate from others horizontally in the social hierarchy through products that signal that they are unique from others. This happens because conservatism endorses, and liberalism opposes, the belief that the dominance-based hierarchical social structure is a legitimate mechanism to distinguish individual qualities. The effect is robust across measured and manipulated ideology, hypothetical and real product choices, and online searches in conservative and liberal US states. Manipulating consumers' differentiation goals and perceptions of hierarchy legitimacy mitigates the effect. The findings advance existing research on political ideology, social hierarchy, and consumer divergence, and they contribute to marketing practice.

Abstract
The current research examines how the knowledge that a product is made using a traditional method influences perceptions of its quality. We propose that consumers believe that a brand using traditional methods is beneficial for society because it is concerned about cultural preservation and this belief has a positive effect on perceived quality. Six experimental studies show that consumers evaluate products produced with a method described as traditional to be higher in quality than similar products that are not described as traditionally made and this effect is mediated by the belief that the brand is beneficial for society. Consistent with this theory, the positive effect of traditional production on perceived quality is attenuated when consumers view the brand to be unconcerned about cultural preservation, such as when the use of a traditional method is framed as a follower strategy (i.e., it imitates the actions of other brands) or when the brand is a multinational company. By showing that the mere mention of a traditional method can be another subtle way to position a brand as a moral actor, these findings contribute to the understanding of the link between perceived social responsibility and product evaluations.

Abstract
In real-world marketplaces, one may encounter an alternative that is inferior to another one in the assortment. While the presence of such seemingly irrelevant inferior alternatives should ostensibly have no influence on consumers' decisions, an extensive literature using stylized lab experiments has found that, surprisingly, their presence matters. Specifically, the dominance effect suggests that the presence of an inferior alternative shifts consumer's preferences toward the alternative made to be superior. However, null results in some recent lab studies and a lack of real-world evidence call into question whether, when, and how the effect exists. In this work, we find clear evidence that dominance matters in the wild. We also identify an important moderator for the dominance effect—preference uncertainty—and test it in both a real-world marketplace for digital freelance services and a lab experiment. Further, we find evidence for additional moderators that help explain how the effect works, including the count of dominated alternatives and the magnitude of dominance, consistent with a perceptual mechanism. This work is the first to use consequential field data to shed light on when and why the dominance effects occur, with implications for marketers, choice architects, user interface designers, and policymakers.

This article examines the effect of political identity on customers' satisfaction with the products and services they consume. Recent work suggests that conservatives are less likely to complain than liberals. Building on that work, the present research examines how political identity shapes customer satisfaction, which has broad implications for customers and firms. Nine studies combine different methodologies, primary and secondary data, real and hypothetical behavior, different product categories, and diverse participant populations to show that conservatives (vs. liberals) are more satisfied with the products and services they consume. This happens because conservatives (vs. liberals) are more likely to believe in free will (i.e., that people have agency over their decisions) and, therefore, to trust their own decisions. The authors document the broad and tangible downstream consequences of this effect for customers' repurchase and recommendation intentions and firms' sales. The association of political identity and customer satisfaction is attenuated when belief in free will is externally weakened, choice is limited, or the consumption experience is overwhelmingly positive. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Abstract
With the growing prevalence of digital platforms for online shopping, advertising, and marketing activities in general, it is imperative to better understand how designs of virtual elements on digital interfaces influence click behavior. Websites and online advertisements contain virtual elements such as call-to-action buttons, images, and logos. This research examines how curved versus sharp angled shapes of virtual elements in online ads and on websites influence click-through rates (CTRs). The findings of a series of studies, including three field experiments and an eye tracking study, show that website and online ad elements in curved (vs. sharp angled) shapes generate higher CTRs. Process evidence suggests that curved (vs. sharp angled) digital elements enhance visual appeal, leading to approach motivation and greater CTR. In terms of practical implications, the findings of this research have strong relevance for designing online ads and website interfaces and for digital marketing strategies. Specifically, digital marketers desiring higher click rates would benefit from having more curved (than sharp angled) virtual elements on websites and in online ads.

Abstract
How do consumers combine multiple risk items when forming overall risk judgments? Drawing on the fuzzy trace theory and categorical averaging, this research finds that adding a low-risk item to a high-risk item reduces the overall risk perception because people reason categorically about risk. They impose categorical distinctions on quantitative risk information, and when combining categorical information, they tend to average across categories instead of adding. Eight studies in the context of medical and health product decisions (N = 5,152) provide convergent evidence showing that when items in different risk tiers are considered together, they are consistently evaluated in a subtractive manner, leading to a higher likelihood of taking the objectively riskier medication (studies 1A, 1B, 1C, and 2). This effect is eliminated when the probability of one side effect is exceedingly high (study 3) or when the task requires reliance on verbatim representation of probabilities (study 4). The effect also disappears when risk information is presented graphically in a way that emphasizes the additive property of multiple risks (studies 5A and 5B). The findings have important implications for the fields of risk perception, risk communication, and consumer health and medical decision-making.

AbstractWhile existing consumer research on political ideology often focuses on ideological differences in preferences for high-status, typically observably superior products, little is known about how political ideology may shape preferences for observably inferior products in non-status-signaling domains. Observably inferior products are product options that are dominated by alternatives along observable dimensions. We propose that, in non-status-signaling domains, conservatives are more interested in observably inferior products than liberals. This happens because conservatives (vs. liberals) have a stronger belief that things, including products, are in balance, whereby positives offset negatives. As a result, when presented with observably inferior products, conservatives (vs. liberals) are more likely to engage in compensatory reasoning and attribute positive qualities to these products, boosting their appeal. Activating belief in balance and preventing compensatory reasoning through cognitive load attenuate this effect. Salience of status-signaling motives serves as a boundary condition. Five studies and four follow-ups provide converging evidence using data collected in the laboratory and in the field, hypothetical and actual product choices, a variety of product categories and participant populations. These findings contribute to research on political ideology, compensatory inferences, and inferior products and provide insights with respect to managing product manufacturing, inventory, and waste.

Abstract
Previous research has found that for men, activating a mating motive increases luxury consumption as a way to attract a romantic partner. However, little is known about the role of luxury consumption in women's romantic endeavors. The present research conceptualizes a mate screening motive, which explains how women use luxury consumption to romantically signal to men. Six studies and two follow-ups conducted in controlled and field settings show that the mate screening motive boosts women's consumption of luxury goods as a way to signal their mating standards to men and thereby deter undesirable pursuers. The effect is diminished when mate screening is less necessary such as when external screening tools are available (e.g., screening filters on dating websites), the quality of potential mates is high, and the focus is on selecting a desirable partner rather than deterring undesirable pursuers. The findings have important implications for understanding how consumers use products and brands in romantic relationships and for designing marketing strategies and communication for luxury brands, commercial dating services, and dating apps. Our findings also provide insights for consumers on how to use brands and products as effective communication devices in romantic endeavors.

AbstractPrior research has established that status threat leads consumers to display status-related products such as luxury brands. While compensatory consumption within the domain of the status threat (e.g., products associated with financial and professional success) is the most straightforward way to cope with comparisons to high-status individuals, we examine when, why, and how consumers cope with status threat by choosing to "pivot" and display success and achievements in alternative domains. Using a mixed-method approach combining field and lab experiments, incentive-compatible designs, netnographic analysis, observational study, and qualitative interviews, we show that consumers cope with status threat by signaling their status and success in alternative domains. We conceptualize this behavior as "status pivoting" and show that it occurs because experiencing status threat motivates consumers to adopt beliefs about tradeoffs across domains; that is, to believe that status acquisition requires tradeoffs and hence others' success in one domain comes at the cost of success in another domain. We compare the prevalence and appeal of status pivoting to restoring status within the domain of the threat. We further examine when consumers are likely to engage in status pivoting and show that this effect is attenuated when high status within the domain of the threat is attainable.

Abstract
Websites commonly use visual formats to display numerical product ratings. Highlighting the overlooked notion of the "aesthetics" of product ratings, the current research examines how the shape of basic visual rating units (rectangular vs. non-rectangular) influences product preference. Seven experiments (and 23 supplementary experiments; N = 17,994) demonstrate a visual rounding effect. Specifically, compared to the rectangular rating format (e.g., bar ratings), the non-rectangular rating format (e.g., star ratings) increases product preference when product ratings (e.g., 3.7, 3.8, 3.9) are below the nearest integer. In contrast, the non-rectangular rating format decreases product preference when product ratings (e.g., 4.1, 4.2, 4.3) are above the nearest integer. Occurring for both the overall rating and by-attribute ratings of a product, the visual rounding effect results from a visual completeness restoration process, wherein consumers perceive non-rectangular rating units to be incomplete after vertical cutting. This research contributes to the product rating and visual marketing literatures and provides actionable implications by demonstrating what visual rating format should be adopted based on rating distribution, how the visual rounding effect can be prevented if needed, and who are even more susceptible to the visual rounding effect.

Abstract
The present research proposes that luxury consumption can be a double-edged sword: while luxury consumption yields status benefits, it can also make consumers feel inauthentic, producing what we call the impostor syndrome from luxury consumption. As a result, paradoxically, luxury consumption may backfire and lead consumers to behave less confidently due to their undermined feelings of self-authenticity. Feelings of inauthenticity from luxury consumption may arise because consumers perceive luxury as an undue privilege. These feelings are less pronounced among consumers with high levels of chronic psychological entitlement, and they are reduced when consumers' sense of entitlement is temporarily boosted. The effects are robust across studies conducted in the lab and in field settings such as the Metropolitan Opera, Martha's Vineyard, a luxury shopping center, and the Upper East Side in New York, featuring relevant participant populations including luxury target segments and consumption contexts including consumers' reflections on their actual past luxury purchases.