Abstract Researchers are increasingly challenged by this question: On what basis can they claim their work contributes to research progress? We propose that contemporary consumer research relies on three broad strategies for warranting such claims. An establishing‐an‐effect strategy claims progress based on confidence that a focal relationship between variables X and Y reliably replicates. A theory‐of‐the‐effect strategy claims progress based on confidence that a local mechanistic account specifies when and how a particular effect occurs. A theoretical framework strategy instead claims progress based on confidence in an explanation that transcends any single effect paradigm. We (a) clarify how these strategies differ in their core logic, methodological emphases, and vulnerabilities; (b) document via a coding of recent articles in leading consumer research journals that the field relies overwhelmingly on the theory‐of‐the‐effect strategy and rarely advances theoretical frameworks; and (c) develop actionable guidance for progressing from theories of effects to frameworks. We argue that recognizing the merits and vulnerabilities of each strategy—and deliberately leveraging the strategies in combination—provides a stronger basis for claiming research progress.

Large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude are increasingly being used in aid or place of human judgment and decision making. Indeed, academic researchers are increasingly using LLMs as a research tool. In this paper, we examine whether LLMs, like academic researchers, fall prey to a particularly common human error in interpreting statistical results, namely ‘dichotomania’ that results from the dichotomization of statistical results into the categories ‘statistically significant’ and ‘statistically nonsignificant’. We find that ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude fall prey to dichotomania at the 0.05 and 0.10 thresholds commonly used to declare ‘statistical significance’. In addition, prompt engineering with principles taken from an American Statistical Association Statement on Statistical Significance and P-values intended as a corrective to human errors does not mitigate this and arguably exacerbates it. Further, more recent and larger versions of these models do not necessarily perform better. Finally, these models sometimes provide interpretations that are not only incorrect but also highly erratic.

Researchers are increasingly challenged by this question: On what basis can researchers claim confidence in making research progress? Here, we categorize studies that base their reliance on one of three different strategies to answer this question. One involves establishing an effect where progress is the extent of support that an effect will be observed in subsequent studies that follow similar or conceptually close procedures. A second strategy involves a theory of the effect where progress is the extent that the mechanism or process by which an effect occurs can be understood sufficiently to identify key conditions under which the effect will or will not occur. A third strategy entails constructing a theoretical framework, where progress is the extent that a theory explains why effects occur at a level that transcends individual effect paradigms. We discuss issues that should be explicitly considered in selecting a strategy for justifying claims of research progress. Although there is potential for synergy across studies where the strategies build on one another, each strategy represents an alternative basis for claiming confidence in a study.

Purpose This study aims to investigate how conspicuous consumption alters products’ status marker value (SMV) for owners in the post-purchase phase. The authors study how status negotiations on social media via social recognition impact owners’ product status perceptions. They specifically examine the process of conversational value and the boundary conditions of products’ closeness to self and consumers’ possession-defined success valuation. Design/methodology/approach Two online experiments were conducted to investigate consumers’ perceptions of products’ SMV. Findings Results of the two experiments demonstrate that conspicuous consumption alters consumers’ status perceptions of possessions depending on the level of social recognition and conversational value. Consumers perceive higher status for possessions when they receive high (vs low) social recognition through social media likes and comments because social recognition increases products’ conversational value. The authors further identify consumers’ possession-defined success valuation and products’ closeness to self as boundary conditions. If consumers highly value possession-defined success and products are close to their self, then social recognition leads to higher SMV through conversational value. Research limitations/implications The authors reveal the malleability of products’ status perceptions for consumers (not for observers) depending on the volume of social recognition received through social media and how these perceptions are further shaped by conversational value, products’ closeness to self and possession-defined success valuation. Practical implications Implications related to product valuation, positioning and customer engagement are discussed. Originality/value This research conceptualizes conspicuous consumption as an antecedent (not a consequence) of status attribution because status is established through social negotiations based on others’ feedback. The authors reveal the malleability of products’ status perceptions for consumers (not for observers) depending on the volume of social recognition received through social media and how these perceptions are further shaped by conversational value, products’ closeness to self and possession-defined success valuation. Implications related to product valuation, positioning and customer engagement are discussed.

Almaatouq et al. view the purpose of research is to map variable-to-variable relationships (e.g., the effect of X on Y). They also view theory as this mapping of variable-to-variable relationships rather than an explanation of why the relationships occur. However, it is theory as explanation that allows us to reconcile disparate findings and that should guide application.

A crisis of confidence in research findings in consumer psychology and other academic disciplines has led to various proposals to abandon, replace, strengthen, or supplement the null hypothesis significance testing paradigm. The proliferation of such proposals, and their often- conflicting recommendations, can increase confusion among researchers. We aim to bring some clarity by proposing five simple principles for the new era of data analysis and reporting of research in consumer psychology. We avoid adding to researchers’ confusion and proposing more onerous or rigid standards. Our goal is to offer straightforward practical principles that are easy for researchers to keep in mind while analyzing their data and reporting their findings. These principles involve 1) interpreting p-values as continuous measures of the strength of evidence, 2) being aware of assumptions that determine whether one can rely on p-values, 3) using theory to establish the applicability of findings to new settings, 4) employing multiple measures of evidence and various processes to obtain them, but assigning special privilege to none, 5) reporting procedures and findings transparently and completely. We hope that these principles provide researchers with some guidance and help to strengthen the reliability of the conclusions derived from their data, analyses, and findings.

Consumers generally prefer natural to synthetic drugs, a phenomenon known as the "natural preference." Through six experiments and one archival study, the current research shows that while consumers have a general preference for natural drugs over synthetic drugs, this preference is stronger when the goal is to treat psychological rather than physical conditions. Process evidence indicates an important mechanism that explains the amplified natural preference for treating psychological conditions: Consumers are more concerned about their true selves being altered when treating psychological conditions, and they perceive natural drugs to be less likely than synthetic drugs to affect their true selves. The current research provides novel insights into the natural preference. It also offers policy and managerial implications for marketing natural remedies and pharmacological treatments for mental health conditions.

Researchers are increasingly asked this question: On what basis can one have confidence in the applicability of behavioral research findings? Two answers are typically offered. One is to draw confidence from establishing effects. Pre-registration and replication are often advocated as ways of increasing confidence in effects. Thus, the criterion for claiming confidence is reproducible effects. A second answer is to draw confidence in applicability by identifying moderators and mediators of effects. Moderator variables are typically used to distinguish the conditions when effects do or do not occur, and mediators contribute to identifying how effects occur in a given setting. Thus, the criterion for claiming confidence is the demonstration of contingent effects. A third answer entails drawing confidence by introducing additional theoretical constructs to account for variable relationships. Here the criterion for claiming confidence in applicability is explained effects. The three criteria for confidence are often considered alternative solutions in both methodological discussions and research practice. We apply the three criteria to studies of the endowment effect. We show that the first two criteria are inadequate for assessing research progress and that the explained effects criterion can build on the other two criteria to enhance confidence in research findings and applicability.

Chater & Loewenstein thoughtfully express their disillusionment with contemporary applied behavioral science, particularly as it pertains to public policy. Although they fault an overemphasis on i-frame approaches, their proposed alternatives leave doubt regarding whether behavioral science has much, if anything, useful to offer policy. We offer two critical principles to guide and motivate more relevant behavioral science.

Previous research has suggested that individuals restrict strangers from accessing their private information to maintain their privacy. Yet, our current research finds that consumers sometimes show a greater willingness to share private information with strangers than with acquaintances. We further posit that there are two fundamentally distinct types of privacy concerns: concerns over security and concerns over identity. Privacy concerns over security are predominant when consumers disclose security-sensitive personal information with strangers. In contrast, privacy concerns over identity deter individuals from sharing private identity-related information with acquaintances. Through four preregistered experiments (N = 988) and two secondary datasets (11,442 social media posts), the present research illuminates the nature of privacy concerns, underscoring that individuals have qualitatively distinct privacy concerns for different relationships.

Applied behavioural science tends to overvalue interventions that can be readily tested using experiments. This experimental validation bias drives the popularity of light interventions and nudges and unnecessarily limits the scope and ambition of the field.

Men are reluctant to seek help for depression. This is an important public health concern, and it has been largely attributed to the stigma attached to men who seek help. The present studies aim to understand the nature of such stigma. Specifically, are men who seek help for mental distress perceived to be less masculine and/or more feminine? Our findings suggest that symptomology, the diagnostic label, and targets' reaction to the symptoms jointly shape the gendered perceptions of help-seeking. In four experiments (N = 1118), participants read descriptions of targets with varying psychological or physical symptoms and provided masculinity and femininity ratings of the targets. People seeking help for internalizing symptoms (e.g., depressed moods) are perceived to be less masculine and more feminine than those seeking help for physical symptoms, yet the reverse pattern was found for people seeking help for externalizing symptoms (e.g., angry outbursts). In addition, the knowledge of a depression diagnosis decreased masculinity ratings and increased femininity ratings of male targets with physical symptoms (but not those with psychological symptoms), suggesting the power of labeling in shaping perceptions. Importantly, seeking help affects how men are perceived above and beyond symptomology: Men who downplay physical symptoms are perceived to be more masculine; whereas those who seek help for psychological symptoms are perceived to be more feminine. The association between help-seeking and masculinity ideologies shapes person perception, particularly because help-seeking violates norms of masculinity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Changes in the way customers shop, accompanied by an explosion of customer touchpoints and fast-changing competitive and technological dynamics, have led to an increased emphasis on agile marketing. The objective of this article is to conceptualize and investigate the emerging concept of marketing agility. The authors synthesize the literature from marketing and allied disciplines and insights from in-depth interviews with 22 senior managers. Marketing agility is defined as the extent to which an entity rapidly iterates between making sense of the market and executing marketing decisions to adapt to the market. It is conceptualized as occurring across different organizational levels and shown to be distinct from related concepts in marketing and allied fields. The authors highlight the firm challenges in executing marketing agility, including ensuring brand consistency, scaling agility across the marketing ecosystem, managing data privacy concerns, pursuing marketing agility as a fad, and hiring marketing leaders. The authors identify the antecedents of marketing agility at the organizational, team, marketing leadership, and employee levels and provide a roadmap for future research. The authors caution that marketing agility may not be well-suited for all firms and all marketing activities.

To encourage people to behave in a more socially responsible or healthy way, many public service announcements (PSAs) dramatically illustrate the dire consequences of undesirable social or health behaviors. However, although informative, such negatively-framed PSAs can generate unintended consequences (e.g., a bad mood, low message acceptance). In this research, we investigated two approaches to improve the effectiveness of negatively-framed PSAs: (1) mood elevation and (2) self-affirmation. Using three studies with large samples of consumers, we found that adding mood-elevating or self-affirming elements to a negative PSA can be an effective way to enhance message acceptance. This is especially the case for recipients currently engaging (vs. not engaging) in the undesirable behaviors. Additionally, we designed mood elevation methods that can be implemented in PSAs in practice.

Changes in the way customers shop accompanied by an explosion of customer touchpoints and fast-changing competitive and technological dynamics, have led to an increased emphasis on agile marketing. The objective of this paper is to conceptualize and investigate the emerging practice of marketing agility. Toward this end, the authors synthesize the literature from marketing and allied disciplines and insights from in-depth interviews with 22 senior managers. Marketing agility is defined as the extent to which an entity rapidly iterates between making sense of the market and executing marketing decisions to adapt to the market. It is conceptualized as occurring across different levels in organizations and shown to be distinctive from related concepts in marketing and allied fields. The authors highlight the firm challenges in executing marketing agility, including ensuring brand consistency, scaling agility across the marketing ecosystem, managing data privacy concerns, pursuing marketing agility as a fad, and hiring marketing leaders. The authors identify the antecedents of marketing agility at the organizational, team, marketing leadership and employee levels and provide a roadmap for future research. The authors caution that marketing agility may not be well-suited for all firms and all marketing activities.

AbstractRecent technology advances (e.g., tracking and “AI”) have led to claims and concerns regarding the ability of marketers to anticipate and predict consumer preferences with great accuracy. Here, we consider the capabilities of both traditional techniques (e.g., conjoint analysis) and more recent tools (e.g., advanced machine learning methods) for predicting consumer choices. Our main conclusion is that for most of the more interesting consumer decisions, those that are “new” and non‐habitual, prediction remains hard. In fact, in many cases, prediction has become harder due to the increasing influence of just‐in‐time information (user reviews, online recommendations, new options, etc.) at the point of decision that can neither be measured nor anticipated ex ante. Sophisticated methods and “big data” can in certain contexts improve predictions, but usually only slightly, and prediction remains very imprecise—so much so that it is often a waste of effort. We suggest marketers focus less on trying to predict consumer choices with great accuracy and more on how the information environment affects the choice of their products. We also discuss implications for consumers and policymakers.

How do people respond to risk in important life decisions? For example, when presented with the opportunity to leave one's job to start a business-a risky proposition for most-or to stay put-often a safer course of action-what do people choose? The current work explores the idea that important life decisions offer people the opportunity to display a highly valued psychological characteristic: courage. Specifically, important life decisions often combine the critical preconditions for a risky choice to be viewed as courageous-fear, purpose, agency, and the availability of risky options with an appropriate risk/reward tradeoff. Because of this combination of features, to the extent people desire to be courageous, they are motivated to choose risky options in important life decisions. The present perspective offers a counterpoint to prior work on decision making that assumes individuals are generally risk averse. Seven primary and 2 supplemental studies provide evidence in support of this perspective. Implications for understanding decision making in important decisions, the value of courage, and the motivated pursuit of risk are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

The endowment effect has had a profound influence on decision-making research, most notably as the lynchpin phenomenological evidence for loss aversion. However, both loss aversion and the interpretation of the endowment effect in terms of loss aversion have recently been called into question. Instead, recent research has argued that many instances in which the endowment effect has been attributed to loss aversion can be better explained by a tendency to favor omission over commission. This interpretation has implications for promoting change at the level of the individual and of the institution; in particular, it suggests that change can be promoted through framing omissions as acts of commission and through the use of sunset provisions.