Knowledge that Transforms

AbstractSadness influences consumption, leading individuals to pay more to acquire new goods and to eat more unhealthy food than they would otherwise. These undesirable consumption effects of sadness can occur without awareness, thus representing more than just conscious attempts at “retail therapy.” In an experiment with real food consumption, the present paper examines the hypothesis that sadness' impact on consumption could be attenuated if the choice context counteracted appraisals of helplessness and enhanced a sense of individual control. Results revealed that: (1) sadness elevates self‐reports of helplessness in response to the emotion‐inducing situation, (2) helplessness mediates the sadness–consumption effect, and (3) inducing a sense of control (via choice) attenuates sadness' effect.

AbstractThe present paper proposes a customer–brand relationships model and empirically tests the following: (1) brand–self distance and brand prominence as representing customers' attachment–aversion relationships (AA Relationships) with a brand, (2) key distinguishing differences between the AA Relationships measure and other alternative relationship measures (i.e., brand attachment, emotional valence and brand attitude strength) based on a set of dependent variables, (3) three key determinants of the AA Relationships and the underlying process between the AA Relationships and behavioral intentions and actual brand behaviors, and (4) customer age as moderating the customer–brand relationships specified in the nomological model of the AA Relationships. The results offer strong support for the unique and important contribution of the AA Relationships model as representing consumers' relationship valence with a brand and its salience.

AbstractWe examine the theoretical basis for the evolutionary narrative common to the target papers by Saad (this issue) and by Griskevicius and Kenrick (this issue) and identify areas of controversy that have sparked debate about evolutionary psychology [EP] among biologists and behavioral ecologists. The two main areas of disagreement are over (1) the role of genetic adaptations resulting from natural selection in ancient times compared to other forces leading to current behavior; and (2) the likelihood that evolution resulted in a set of highly specialized mental modules or information‐processing circuits thought to be instrumental in determining present‐day behavior. We review the EP research discussed by the authors of the target papers as a means of evaluating the evidence in support of the theory and of suggesting future directions of research.

AbstractWe examine the influence of appeal scales on the likelihood and magnitude of donation in a large field experiment. We argue and show that the leftmost anchor on the appeal scale most strongly influences the likelihood of donating; the lower the anchor, the higher the donation likelihood. Furthermore, our findings indicate that increasing the steepness of the amounts on the appeal scale increases the magnitude of donations. Both effects are stronger for infrequent than for frequent donors. Our results demonstrate that by using what a charity knows about past donor behavior, it can alter appeal scales to change donation behavior.

AbstractThe digital era has permitted rapid transfer of peer knowledge regarding products and services. In the present research, we explore the value of specific types of word‐of‐mouth information (numeric ratings and text commentary) for improving forecasts of consumption enjoyment. We present an anchoring‐and‐adjustment model in which the relative forecasting error associated with ratings and commentary depends on the extent to which consumer and reviewer have similar product‐level preferences. To test our model, we present four experiments using a range of hedonic stimuli. Implications for the provision of consumer WOM are discussed.

AbstractThirty years ago, Hirschman and Holbrook (1982) advocated greater attention to hedonic consumption and the myriad ways in which consumers seek pleasure and enjoyment. A thorough review finds that the topic has much appeal and that consumer research has made significant progress toward understanding some of its parameters. However, many questions remain unanswered, particularly with regard to understanding the sources of pleasure, the manner in which consumers seek it, and the ways in which consumers might alter their hedonic consumption decisions to maximize pleasure and happiness. We assess three decades of research on hedonic consumption, emphasizing areas of greatest potential for future exploration.

AbstractPrevious research has shown that individuals value objects more highly if they own them, a finding commonly known as the endowment effect. In fact, simply touching an object can create a perception of ownership that produces the endowment effect. In this paper, we extend this line of research in several ways. First, we show that haptic imagery, or imagining touching an object, can have the same effect on perceived ownership as physical touch. We then demonstrate that haptic imagery can lead to perceptions of physical control, which in turn increase feelings of ownership. Moreover, the more vivid the haptic imagery, the greater the perception of control and the feeling of ownership. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

AbstractWe present a framework based on psycholinguistic theory to explain how individuals spell auditorily‐presented information. We use the framework to predict and test how spelling‐related characteristics of brand names and factors related to the context in which brand names are presented (e.g., spelling primes) will make the brands more or less memorable. Further, we reveal the process through which spelling‐related linguistic variables influence brand recall: the dual‐code (both written and auditory) that results from spelling a brand correctly leads to greater ability to later recall the brand. Our framework identifies two routes that interact when individuals have to transcribe a brand: the lexical (top‐down) route and the sublexical (bottom‐up) route.