Knowledge that Transforms

This research introduces tournaments of destruction, defined as staged and ritualized social performances involving entertainment and competitive rivalry in which consumers destroy valued material objects before a focused gathering. The conceptualization of tournaments of destruction is borne from a qualitative, phenomenological-based case study of low-income, low-power Black African male youth, who as members of the Izikhothane subculture in Soweto, South Africa, battle powerless anonymity by engaging in conspicuous consumption and the counterintuitive conspicuous destruction of high-end Italian apparel brands. Alexander’s theory of social performance provides an enabling lens to explore tournaments of destruction within a system of meanings, and findings provide insights about motivation to participate in a destructive subculture, the social performance of tournaments of destruction, and the agency and navigation of visibility within their hyper-local community. Emergent themes of spatiotemporal visibility, intentionality of destruction, focused gatherings and collective effervescence, and sociomoral condemnation contribute to understanding tournaments of destruction and other destructive enactments by social collectives both in pre-market and contemporary societies. This research extends Alexander’s theory of social performance and provides grounding for future work on destruction and visibility within contemporary consumer culture.

This research examines how the movements an interface requires of a consumer—that is, its “kinesthetic properties”—can alter what a consumer attends to when responding and in turn change the response itself. We compare the kinesthetic properties of two ubiquitous scale formats: slider and radio-button scales. Six studies (plus four in the web appendix) show dragging a slider (vs. clicking a radio button) elicits responses that are closer to the scale starting point. This effect occurs because the slider allows participants to engage with the scale as they consider their options. When dragging past each response option, attention is directed to that option, increasing its chance of being selected. Supporting this account, sliders only result in responses closer to the starting point when participants physically drag the cursor across options to their desired response, not when they directly click on it. Furthermore, participants dragging a slider interact with the scale earlier in the judgment process and exhibit a greater visual focus on left-side (vs. right-side) options on the scale compared to participants clicking a radio button. These findings suggest that marketers, graphic designers, and researchers should consider how the kinesthetic properties of digital interfaces may shape consumer judgment.

Given the emergence of new technologies (e.g., online payment systems) and new service contexts (e.g., app-based services), the use of tip recommendations is becoming increasingly prevalent. Based on one large secondary dataset analysis (176,237 food delivery orders) and nine experiments, this research identifies an effective and easily implementable tip recommendation design—materially referenced tip recommendations (i.e., referencing a product that financially equates to the suggested tip amount) to increase tips. The effect of materially referenced tip recommendations is sequentially driven by the vivid mental imagery of how the requested tips could be used by the recipient (i.e., the consequences of tipping for the recipient) and the heightened perception that tipping serves as a meaningful expression of gratitude to the recipient. This effect is attenuated when the referenced product is perceived as inappropriate for expressing gratitude to the tip recipient.

Consumer transgressions against firms involve moral violations in which consumers take advantage of loopholes in companies’ return and satisfaction-guaranteed policies or the lack of strict enforcement against password sharing, piracy, shoplifting, wardrobing, coupon stacking, promotion abuse, and fraud. Drawing on the timeless tale of Robin Hood, the legendary outlaw who stands up against injustice, the authors demonstrate that consumers use a Robin Hood justification to legitimize their transgressions against firms. Building on moral foundations theory, this research demonstrates that political ideology impacts consumers’ transgression behavior and the perceived morality of these practices. Six studies show that under certain conditions in which the moral virtues of fairness and care are cued, liberals are more likely to engage in transgressions than conservatives. The studies further test factors that can intensify or mitigate consumer transgressions against firms. Findings from this research can help marketers better understand how consumers justify transgressions and how to effectively reduce these costly and pervasive behaviors.

Deciding which customer segment(s) to serve, or targeting, is a cornerstone of marketing strategy. Although companies commonly target based on demographic characteristics, recent cultural movements (e.g., #MeToo, Black Lives Matter) have heightened sensitivity to the differential treatment of certain demographic groups. Yet, research to date has not examined whether demographic targeting itself seems fair or appropriate. Fourteen experiments (N = 9,399), 13 supplemental studies (N = 7,065), and 2 Facebook A/B tests (N = 513,151) reveal that when consumers learn or infer that they or others have been targeted based on demographic characteristics, fairness perceptions and brand support suffer (relative to broad advertising). To explain why, we propose a conceptual model based on the extent to which consumers view demographic targeting as discriminatory (i.e., differential treatment based on attributes that are irrelevant and/or uncontrollable) and whether the discrimination is perceived as intentional (i.e., knowingly or willingly bringing about an avoidable outcome). Consequently, factors that (a) improve relevance (i.e., whether belonging to the targeted segment is diagnostic of preferences), (b) increase controllability (i.e., whether consumers themselves determine their membership in the targeted segment), or (c) reduce perceived intentionality (e.g., firm size, industry norms) attenuate perceptions of unfairness.

Consumers’ responses to seller’s prices, including perceptions of price fairness (PPF) and unfairness, are a crucial aspect of the marketplace. Although past literature has uncovered a variety of factors that influence PPF, the lack of an overarching conceptual framework has constrained understanding of when and why consumers are more likely to perceive prices as fair or unfair. The authors develop a conceptual model of PPF as moral judgments and propose that these moral PPF arise from consumer inferences of potential harm from a price. The conceptualization suggests that inferred harm—and thereby, PPF—is influenced by consumer vulnerability, product welfare impact and firm price strategy (e.g., costs and prices, differential pricing, and price promotions). The authors also propose that consumer political orientation and inferred firm self-defense motives moderate the relationship between inferred harm and PPF and that inferred firm motives for prices influence PPF. Eight studies test this conceptualization. The results support the moral harm model and provide novel insights, showing when unchanged prices, price increases, and price decreases are likely to be perceived as more unfair and when differential prices (including paying more than others) are likely to be perceived as fairer than equal prices.

The fast fashion business model has three defining characteristics: high trendiness, high disposability, and unsustainable practices. These characteristics collectively suggest that consumers of fast fashion brands have a short-term focus, which evokes the perception that they lack self-control. A ChatGPT study and six experiments (five preregistered) provide convergent evidence for the effect of fast fashion consumption on perceived self-control (hypothesis 1). This effect is mediated by the belief that fast fashion consumers maintain a short-term focus (hypothesis 2). Additionally, fast fashion consumers are viewed as having lower self-control compared to consumers of luxury, mid-luxury, and supermarket fashion (hypothesis 3). Serious consumers of fast fashion are perceived to have lower self-control than casual consumers (hypothesis 4). Furthermore, this effect disappears when cues (e.g., sustainability) imply a long-term focus among consumers (hypothesis 5). Finally, the authors reveal the downstream consequences of this effect, offering important insights for consumers and marketers. For instance, fast fashion consumers and influencers are seen as less compatible with products, services, jobs, and activities associated with self-control and long-term benefits (hypothesis 6). Overall, this research enhances understanding of fast fashion consumption and contributes to broader discussions on self-control, consumption-based inference-making, and interpersonal perception.

News outlets commonly highlight the most popular content using different labels (e.g., “most read” and “most shared”). As prior research has found that people primarily consume news for information or entertainment, it is important to understand what these popularity labels convey about the information value and entertainment value of articles and how they shape consumers’ news preferences and decisions. Nine lab and field studies, including two in the web appendix, demonstrate that labels reflecting less social behavior (e.g., “most read”) signal higher information (vs. entertainment) value, while labels reflecting more social behavior (e.g., “most shared”) signal higher entertainment (vs. information) value. Thus, consumers with information motives prefer less social popularity labels, a stronger signal of information value. Conversely, consumers with entertainment motives prefer more social labels, a stronger signal of entertainment value. Notably, an analysis of 120 major media outlets revealed that many use labels that are misaligned with readers’ dominant motives or use no label at all, indicating considerable room for improvement. Reassuringly, this work finds that strategically using popularity labels can increase clicks by over 20%. This has implications for media outlets aiming to spur engagement as well as researchers and organizations concerned with information dissemination.