Knowledge that Transforms

To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

508 results ✕ Clear filters

Search or Scroll: How Credibility versus Likability Premiums Shape Consumers’ Following Decisions

Edith Shalev; Coby Morvinski; Meyrav Shoham; Ellie J Kyung
Journal of Consumer Research 2026 53(2), 281-304
Abstract Consumers’ choices of whom to follow on digital platforms shape their informational landscape. In an era in which the credibility of informational sources is critical, this research examines two key questions: (1) When do consumers prioritize communicator credibility over likability in their decisions to follow? and (2) How do multiple credibility and likability cues interact to influence these decisions? Analyzing four large datasets from popular following-enabled platforms, we find that consumers’ orientation toward content consumption—goal directed (“search”) versus experiential (“scroll”)—is key. Communicator credibility drives following on search-driven platforms (Yelp, Goodreads), whereas likability drives following on scroll-driven ones (Twitter/X, Instagram). Aggregate communicator sentiment across multiple posts serves as a cross-platform indicator of credibility and likability, and its effect on follower count differs by platform type. On scroll-driven platforms, communicators with positive aggregate sentiment benefit from a likability premium, attracting the most followers; this preference for positivity is mitigated by the presence of alternative communicator likability cues (e.g., using sociable language). On search-driven platforms, communicators with mixed aggregate sentiment benefit from a credibility premium, attracting the most followers; this preference for mixed sentiment is mitigated in the presence of alternative credibility cues (e.g., Yelp’s “Elite” badge). Implications for consumer protection and platform design are discussed.

Extremeness Aversion and Choice Set Composition: Exposure to Multiple Extreme Options Reduces Extremeness Aversion

Marissa A Sharif; Elizabeth C Webb; Sudeep Bhatia
Journal of Consumer Research 2026 53(2), 216-232
Abstract Extremeness aversion—the tendency for consumers to prefer middling options in a choice set—is an incredibly robust and well-studied phenomenon. However, it has primarily been studied in the context of two- or three-option choice sets. In six studies (Ntotal = 9,377), we suggest that consumers’ aversion to extreme options depends on the frequency of similar options in the choice set. In particular, we find that consumers are relatively more likely to choose an option that is in an extreme relative position when they are exposed to multiple extreme options, an effect not predicted by standard theories of context-dependent choice. This occurs because consumers perceive objectively extreme (vs. intermediate) options as relatively more typical of the product category. We demonstrate that this effect is robust across different types of compositions, hypothetical and incentive-compatible studies, and in a variety of decision contexts (e.g., purchasing an item vs. choosing an activity to complete). Furthermore, we identify boundary conditions, such as the type of occasion consumers are choosing for.

Beyond Neoliberalism: The Role of Community in the Responsibilization of Citizen-Consumers During the Great Recession

Andrea Prothero; Marius Claudy; Andrew Keating
Journal of Consumer Research 2026 53(1), 70-92
Abstract Drawing on governmentality theory, we examine the formation of responsibilized citizen consumers during Ireland’s Great Recession (2008–2013). Through qualitative analysis of consumer interviews, media and political discourses, and macro consumer data, we advance understanding in governmentality and consumer responsibilization research by theorizing communal responsibilization as a distinct, culturally embedded process. We contrast neoliberal and communal moral frames in responsibilizing citizen consumers, and in this process of “shared responsibility,” we show how many citizen consumers faced ideological, economic, and structural barriers to acting as self-reliant subjects. We find that communal frames and myths were particularly effective in alleviating some of these tensions by fostering relational interdependencies and communal solidarity, thus enabling the moral internalization of responsibility among citizen consumers, both for themselves and others. We identify key mechanisms through which communities facilitated responsibilization and a recasting of citizen consumer subjectivities: social scaffolding, informal resource exchange, active citizenship, and communal entrepreneurship. Finally, we identify tensions and community disintegration as key barriers in the communal responsibilization process. Overall, our findings advance consumer research on responsibilization, consumption communities, and mythmaking.

The Robustness of Mental Accounting Across 21 Countries

Giulia Priolo; Federica Stablum; Martina Vacondio; Simone D’Ambrogio; Marta Caserotti; Beatrice Conte; Prisca De Roni; Hilda Du Plooy; Vivian D Grillo; Libera Y Mastromatteo; Elisa Tedaldi; Filippo Toscano; Jesús Aguilar-Armijo; Parisa Ahmadi Ghomroudi; Lucian Alexa; Mathias H Andersen; Per A Andersson; Karine Aoun Barakat; Carolina Barros; Ruggero Basanisi; Tara Beilner; Sergiu Burlacu; Thai Cao; Alessandra Carella; Arianna Chiappi; Zafer Çiftçi; Claudia Civai; Alana Daly; Valdonė Darškuvienė; Marta De Pedis; Earle J Du Plooy; Mohammed El-Mir; Christian T Elbæk; Sondos Elkot; Valeria Fanghella; Eman Farahat; Amy G Fehl; Ama P Fenny; Paul A G Forbes; Gemma Garbi; André Gonçalves; Sevias Guvuriro; Ali Hajian; Steve Heinke; Austin W Howard; Sudharsana Jagatheesh Jayanand; Peiran Jiao; Gabriela M Jiga-Boy; Alejandra Jordano De Castro; Tobias Kalenscher; Austėja Kažemekaitytė; Afreen S Khalid; Kiana Kothe; Philip Krüger; Ngan Le Thi Kieu; Gintarė Leckė; Yanina Ledovaya; Mengyu Lim; Luca M Lüpken; Huong Mai Thi Xuan; Laura Mangold; Alfarisi Maulana; Maya Maze; Hajdi Moche; Zahra Moradi; Adel Moumin; Valeria Nava; Michelle J Y Neoh; Leonardo Nicolao; Hamza O K El HallaouiOueld; Sebastian Olschewski; Adobea Y Owusu; Ahmet F Ozates; Sofia Pelica; Sonja Perkovic; Ananda W M Puteri; Hagai Rabinovitch; Guilherme A Ramos; Nicole Robitaille; Caroline Roux; Benjamin Scheibehenne; Martin Schoemann; Mohammad Seidisarouei; Sanjay Singh; Mustafa Z Söyük; Liza Steiner; Amira TarekAl Rai; Berto Usman; Hannah Van Alebeek; Mohammad H Vazirian; Evgeniya Vedernikova; Janet L Wijaya; Xinxin Zhu; Jichuan Zong; Leaf Van Boven; Stephan Dickert; Lorella Lotto; David J. Hardisty; Justin Pomerance; Beatriz Pereira; Kai Ruggeri; Enrico Rubaltelli
Journal of Consumer Research 2026
Abstract First introduced four decades ago, the influential concept of mental accounting—how people mentally organize, evaluate, and track financial activities—posits that consumers often defy traditional economic rationality, treating money as non-fungible across discrete mental accounts. In this research, we present the first large-scale test of the replicability and generalizability of mental accounting effects, using a sample of 5,589 participants from 21 countries. Our results demonstrate that mental accounting effects are replicable, robust, and generalizable. Hierarchical Bayesian meta-analyses revealed a 100% replication rate for all tested scenarios, while unpooled analyses showed a 90.5% replication rate (133/147 effects). Further analysis found that effects observed in higher-income countries may be weaker in lower-income countries. Multidimensional scaling suggested that mental accounting effects vary along three interpretable dimensions that reflect social context (individual vs interactive decisions), decision perspective (deciding for self vs other), and role in price determination (setting vs evaluating prices). Across a diverse population and controlling for multiple factors, we show that consumers make decisions based on mentally-formed accounts that consistently diverge from their objective financial value.

The Asymmetry of Gender-Fluid Trends

Maren Hoff; Silvia Bellezza
Journal of Consumer Research 2026 53(2), 233-258
Abstract Marketers and consumers are rapidly embracing gender-fluid products that fundamentally challenge the conventional associations of masculinity and femininity. In theory, manifestations of gender fluidity in the marketplace respond to shifting gender norms toward more inclusivity. Accordingly, consumers believe that the representation of traditionally male and female styles in these trends should be even. In contrast with these balanced views, this research demonstrates that gender-fluid trends to date skew toward traditionally male styles and that the corresponding adoption of gender-fluid products is driven relatively more by female and nonbinary consumers. Using a multimethod approach (including trend analyses of over 100,000 baby names, deep learning on a dataset of 200,000 products, and a series of experiments), this research defines gender fluidity in marketing; distinguishes it from related constructs such as gender-bending, unisex, and androgyny; and reveals a skewness in gender-fluid trends to date. It further demonstrates that women’s and nonbinary individuals’ heightened awareness of male advantages in society and lower fear of negative evaluation drive their greater adoption of gender-fluid styles.

Invisible Rankings: When Do Consumers Assume Best-to-Worst Ordinality When Choosing from an Unnumbered List?

Mathew S Isaac; Milica Mormann; Shailendra Pratap Jain
Journal of Consumer Research 2026
Abstract Consumers frequently use lists that were created by marketers, experts, or media platforms, such as a list of favorite restaurants. The authors refer to such lists as curated lists because they include items that appear to be endorsed or recommended by the list maker. Although these lists are typically ranked and numbered, marketers sometimes create lists that are not numbered, making it unclear whether the items have been ranked. Twelve studies (N = 5,530) reveal that when presented with an unnumbered curated list, consumers regularly assume that a fundamental characteristic of numbered lists—best-to-worst ordinality—applies. Specifically, the authors find that when a list contains an endorsement cue (e.g., superlative adjectives, markers of exclusivity, list qualification criteria), consumers rely on the conversational norm of best-to-worst ordinality. This inferential process leads consumers to prefer and choose items that are located vertically higher on the list. However, consumers are less likely to assume best-to-worst ordinality when an unnumbered list does not resemble a typical list: when endorsement cues are absent or conversational norms governing lists are weakened in other ways. This research advances knowledge of how consumers process curated lists in everyday consumption contexts, while also providing actionable recommendations for list makers.

The Effect of Online Cart Composition on Cart Abandonment

Liat Hadar; Yael Steinhart; Gil Appel; Yaniv Shani
Journal of Consumer Research 2026
Abstract Online shopping cart abandonment is widespread, causing major losses in potential revenues for e-commerce companies. We expand efforts to mitigate cart abandonment by investigating how the cart’s product composition affects abandonment and testing easy-to-implement interventions. We hypothesize that consumers are more likely to abandon carts containing a higher proportion of hedonic relative to utilitarian products. This cart composition effect arises because carts containing higher hedonic-to-utilitarian product ratios are perceived as more hedonic overall, increasing consumer guilt regarding cart purchase and the likelihood of cart abandonment. Analyses of two large-scale field datasets and four controlled experiments provide converging evidence for the cart composition effect (studies 1A to 3) and the mediating role of perceived hedonism and consumer guilt (studies 2, 4A and 4B). Substantively, we offer empirical support for a practical and easily implemented intervention: using e-commerce recommendation systems to reduce cart abandonment by suggesting utilitarian items (studies 4A and 4B). Our findings suggest that recommendation systems may serve as an effective tool for reducing cart abandonment and underscore the importance of incorporating hedonic value considerations into recommendation algorithms. We conclude by discussing the practical implications of our findings for the development of more effective marketing strategies and improving online conversion rates.

To Profit or to Assist? How the Interplay Between Product Recommendations and Relative Prices Impacts Consumers’ Inferences and Choice

KyuRee Kim; Rom Y Schrift
Journal of Consumer Research 2026
Abstract This article explores the interplay between company-based product recommendation and the product’s relative price. Eight studies demonstrate that consumers are sensitive to the relative price of the recommended option and are more likely to follow the recommendation as its relative price in the choice set decreases. We show that this occurs because consumers use the relative price of the recommended option as a cue for the company’s underlying motives. That is, because consumers generally believe that companies profit more from selling expensive products, they infer that when a company recommends a higher-priced product, its main motivation for doing so is to maximize its profit. Such skepticism about the company’s true motive reduces the likelihood that consumers follow the recommendation. The effect is observed across different types of product categories (hedonic or utilitarian), platforms (offline or online), and recommendations (human- or algorithm-based). Consistent with the proposed account, the effect attenuates when the recommendation comes from an independent and reliable source, when the price-profit link is weakened (i.e., when consumers learn the dissociation between price and profit), when the recommendation is believed to be a signal for popularity, and when consumers have a low innate tendency to question the company’s motivation.

Brand Faith: How Spiritual Relationships Develop Between Consumers and Brands

Kyungin Ryu; Elizabeth G Miller; D Matthew Godfrey
Journal of Consumer Research 2026 53(2), 347-368
Abstract Consumers increasingly seek spiritual satisfaction and existential meaning through brands. However, despite the rising prominence of secular forms of spirituality, consumer–brand relationship research largely overlooks the processes by which consumers initiate, develop, and maintain spiritual connections to brands. Using the concept of faith as a theoretical lens, this article explores how consumer–brand relationships take on spiritual dimensions. Drawing on an interpretive biographic analysis of in-depth interviews and netnographic data, the authors examine spiritual relationship development processes as they unfold between consumers and brands over time. Findings identify five phases of brand faith development (intuition, association, reflection, affirmation, and universalization), which progress from initial attraction to deep conviction. Consumers cultivate faith in brands across these phases through a process of believing in, valuing, and committing to a brand as a sacred entity that acts as a center of spiritual meaning. These findings offer a more nuanced understanding of spiritual relationships between consumers and secular brands than current literature provides. The analysis also examines factors that facilitate or inhibit brand faith development, contributing a contextual understanding of brand faith that accounts for influences arising from an interplay between personal, brand, and marketplace factors that affect consumer spirituality.