Although prior research suggests that a bonus pack is perceived as a pure gain and is thus preferred by consumers over a price discount which is perceived as a reduction in loss, the empirical evidence in the literature is mixed about whether consumers prefer price discounts or bonus packs. This research investigates how consumers' regulatory orientation influences their preferences for these two promotional tactics. The authors proposes that prevention-oriented consumers prefer a price discount over a bonus pack, but promotion-oriented consumers prefer a bonus pack over a price discount. This effect is due to the regulatory fit between the promotional tactic and consumers' regulatory orientation. A price discount aligns with a prevention orientation to minimize losses, while a bonus pack aligns with a promotion orientation to maximize gains. Furthermore, the authors propose that this regulatory fit effect on preferences is sequentially mediated by the experience of feeling right and perceived value of the promotional tactics. Four studies using different products and different operationalizations of regulatory orientation in both field and online settings provide converging and robust evidence for the proposed effect and underlying mechanism. Finally, the authors show that the proposed effect is attenuated when consumers' level of involvement increases.
Consumers choose less unhealthy food when seeing pictures of food shot in a top perspective vs. a diner’s eye perspective. These two commonly used perspectives in food pictures respectively show the food vertically downwards, or mimic the viewing point of a person sitting at a table, looking at the food in front of them on the table. Although both perspectives are frequently used in food pictures, consumers are more used to seeing their food from a diner’s eye perspective. We show that lower familiarity with seeing food in top perspective (vs. diner’s eye perspective) decreases product vividness and subsequently lowers consumers’ need for instant gratification. Hence, less unhealthy food is chosen.
Many consumers prefer to buy “perfect” produce (e.g., a shiny apple) while avoiding imperfect ones that may be dull in colour and/or odd in shape. In my thesis, I wanted to paint a portrait of this type of consumer. To do so, I looked at various demographic, psychographic and behavioural variables, and found that consumers avoid buying imperfect produce and have negative taste, health and effort perceptions. Further, this type of consumer does not connect the purchase of imperfect produce to food waste and/or environmental issues. Given the impact of food waste on environmental and societal well-being, I then examined a way to encourage consumers to purchase imperfect produce (and at more reasonable prices): more specifically, I tested whether “whimsical cuteness” might influence how much consumers are willing-to-pay for imperfect produce based on prior research showing that whimsicality results in greater usage, and consumption, of whimsical objects (Nenkov and Scott, 2014). I also tested whether this type of priming works through curiosity (Wang and Huang, 2018). Across two experiments, I found that when consumers were shown an advertisement for an oddly shaped lemon with (versus without) a characteristic related to whimsical cuteness (i.e., googly eyes), they were later willing-to-pay more for oddly shaped lemons. This effect remained even when I increased the time between purchase and consumption. The mediating role of curiosity, however, was unclear and should be re-considered in future research.
This article explores how consumers’ relative spatial location influences their preferences and choices. Drawing on the conceptual metaphor literature, the author proposes that people interpret the abstract concept of risk using a more tangible concept: their location relative to the center or edge of a space. Five main studies (and a pilot) reveal the existence of a metaphorical association between risk and spatial location and show how this association systematically affects consumer risk-taking behavior. Specifically, people positioned closer to the edges (vs. center) of space are disproportionately more likely to seek (vs. avoid) risky choices. This phenomenon is demonstrated across various decision-making scenarios in the laboratory and field, using both physical and virtual manipulations of space. This effect occurs because being located closer to the edges (vs. center) evokes concepts related to risk (vs. safety), making risky (vs. safe) products easier to process and, as a result, more desirable. Moreover, this research sheds light on the effect characteristics and boundary conditions. The author concludes with a discussion of the implications of these findings for consumers and businesses.
Purpose This study aims to examine how loneliness, romantic relationship status (single/non-single) and romantic attachment factors (sociosexual orientation index (SOI), satisfaction with current relationship) interactively affect conspicuous consumption. Design/methodology/approach Five quasi-experimental studies were conducted with different measures of conspicuous consumption across a variety of samples (N = 1189). Findings Study 1 shows that loneliness increased singles' but not non-singles' conspicuous consumption. Study 2A further shows the mediating role of the mating motive amongst singles. Study 2B compared conspicuous and inconspicuous consumption and showed no interaction effect between loneliness and romantic relationship status in the domain of inconspicuous consumption. Studies 3 and 4 tested whether the effects of loneliness on non-singles' conspicuous consumption were moderated by SOI and satisfaction with current relationship, respectively. Specifically, lonely non-singles with high SOI or low satisfaction with current relationship sought conspicuous consumption, but those with low SOI or high satisfaction with the current relationship avoided conspicuous consumption. Research limitations/implications This study did not specifically consider different roots of loneliness (lack of romantic love, friendship or family attachment) between singles and non-singles, which future research should explore. Practical implications The findings have implications for both marketers and policymakers regarding marketing campaigns for conspicuous products, support programmes satisfying the specific social attachment needs of different lonely people, etc. Originality/value This study identifies a specific social attachment desire of the lonely, namely, romantic motive, by which loneliness influences singles' and non-singles' conspicuous consumption in different ways. The findings suggest the value of distinguishing types of loneliness.
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.
Digital ads often display video content in which immobile products are presented as if they are moving spontaneously. Six studies demonstrate a speed-based scaling effect, such that consumers estimate the size of an immobile product to be smaller when it is animated to move faster in videos, due to the inverse size–speed association they have learned from the domain of animate agents (e.g., animals, humans). Supporting a cross-domain knowledge transfer model of learned size–speed association, this speed-based scaling effect is (1) reduced when consumers perceive a product’s movement pattern as less similar to animate agents’ movement patterns, (2) reversed when a positive size–speed association in the base domain of animate agents is made accessible, (3) attenuated for consumers who have more knowledge about the target product domain, and (4) mitigated when explicit product size information is highlighted. Furthermore, by decreasing assessed product size, fast animated movement speed can either positively or negatively influence willingness to pay, depending on consumers’ size preferences.
People who engage in indulgent consumption often are viewed as having poor self-control. In this research, however, eight studies provide converging support that indulgent consumption can have a positive effect: signaling interpersonal warmth. Specifically, consumers who post indulgent (vs. healthy) consumption content on social media are perceived as warmer (Study 1). The effect occurs because consumers believe that indulgent consumption is what people genuinely prefer, so indulgent (vs. healthy) consumption seems more authentic, and authenticity mediates the effect of indulgent consumption on perceived warmth (Studies 2a and 2b). Providing additional support for the authenticity mechanism, the authors show that the positive effect of indulgent (vs. healthy) consumption on perceived warmth is attenuated when the indulgent content is sponsored, which casts doubt on its authenticity (Study 3). Further, sharing sharing indulgent consumption can increase the appeal of a service provider among consumers who are seeking a warm service provider, but this occurs only when the content is not sponsored (Studies 4a and 4b). Finally, the effect of sharing indulgent (vs. healthy) consumption has downstream consequences for audience engagement on Instagram (Studies 5a and 5b). This research sheds light on how to cultivate interpersonal warmth in marketing communication and personal branding.
Purpose - Compared to typical brand extension research focusing on functional and symbolic attributes, this paper aims to examine brand extensions based on a brand's primary sensory attributes. Specifically, this paper investigates the interplay between brand equity and primary sensory attributes in shaping consumers' evaluations of brand extensions. Design/methodology/approach - This study investigates the impact of primary or central sensory attributes on brand extension evaluations for brands with differing brand equities. The authors conducted two experiments preceded by seven pretests to develop and validate the stimulus materials. The authors aim to contribute to understanding how sensory and brand-related factors influence consumers' evaluations of brand extensions. Findings - In these experiments, the authors find that a parent brand's central/dominant sensory attribute allows the parent brand to successfully extend into functionally unrelated categories. For example, Dove's central attribute of touch allows it to extend successfully into categories such as towels and shaving razor. However, it does not perform as well as Irish Spring (known for smell) in categories such as cologne and scented fabric softener, where Irish Spring's central attribute of smell is more relevant. Interestingly, Irish Spring, a lower equity brand, outperforms Dove in smell-related extensions, indicating that sensory attributes can counter the impact of lower brand equity if the sensory attribute is relevant to the extension category. Originality/value - This study investigates brand extensions based on sensory attributes such as smell and touch instead of typical brand extensions based on functional and symbolic attributes. In particular, the authors examine whether the perceived fit between the parent brand's dominant sensory attribute and the extended category (i.e. sensory fit) is more important than the parent brand's equity in the evaluation of brand extensions.
While ranked lists are ubiquitous, research on how consumers interpret changes in the rank of an entity is limited. Across seven studies (including a study with web data and a Google AdWords field experiment), this investigation shows that consumers reward a rise in rank and penalize a decline in rank, and that psychological momentum associated with the rank change information underlies these effects. Further, rewarding a rise and penalizing a fall are moderated by consumers’ perception of the reason for the rank change, the nature of the entity, and the nature of the ranked list. The impact of changing rank is attenuated when the rank change is attributed to other entities on the list, when entities are considered nonmalleable, or when the list is updated more frequently. The investigation also identifies a specific case in which consumers do not extrapolate the direction of a change in rank into the future. In addition to contributing to theory, this research provides actionable insights and demonstrates practical ways in which managers can communicate dynamic ranks to enhance the benefit of an improvement in rank or attenuate the penalty from a decline.
The rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into negotiations has catalyzed a transformative change in the retail industry. This study analyzes consumer responses to AI negotiators—a scenario becoming more common as retailers employ sophisticated algorithms in negotiation practices. Through five studies spanning B2C, B2B, and C2C negotiations, the findings reveal that consumers tend to make fewer adjustments to their counteroffers when bargaining with algorithms, persuaded of algorithms’ decision-making precision and comprehensive market intelligence. Notably, this confidence in algorithmic accuracy has a disproportionate effect on individuals from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, which can be mitigated by casting doubt on AI's infallibility. These insights do not merely provide retailers with a tactical advantage in utilizing AI for negotiations but also highlight the necessity for a more profound and ethical interaction with technology. Understanding the dynamics of human‒algorithm interaction in negotiation contexts allows retailers and brands to navigate this new terrain with greater efficacy and mindfulness.
Past research offers conflicting findings on whether sadness-evoking charity appeals help solicit a donation. To reconcile these findings, we introduce prospective donors' regulatory focus as a moderator for understanding when and why sadness appeals motivate or demotivate giving. Specifically, we propose that the sense of helplessness or loss of control associated with sadness appeals increases donors' sensitivity to advertiser's manipulative persuasion tactics, as those tactics can threaten donors' control over their donation decision. As a result, sadness appeals are more likely to activate persuasion knowledge among prevention- (vs. promotion-) oriented donors who tend to be vigilant against manipulative persuasion attempts. Across six main studies and two supplementary studies, we find that a prevention (vs. promotion) focus discourages charitable giving when it is solicited using a sadness appeal, whereas regulatory focus does not affect the giving when other emotion appeals (e.g., happiness appeal or guilt appeal) are used. We find that a prevention (vs. promotion) focus demotivates donation solicited by a sadness appeal because it activates persuasion knowledge that evaluates solicitor's motive behind the sadness appeal, resulting in increased skepticism, dampened feelings of sympathy, and consequently, reduced charitable giving. However, when persuasion knowledge is deactivated (e.g., when donors' cognitive capacity is constrained or the soliciting charity has a reliable reputation), regulatory focus no longer affects donor skepticism, sympathy, and charitable giving, even when a sadness appeal is used to call for donation.
