Knowledge that Transforms

Abstract The present research examines how hedonic and utilitarian purchase motivations influence consumers’ perceptions of their product preferences and the resulting number of options they wish to consider when making a purchase. Across six studies, consumers choose to review larger assortments when their purchase motivation is hedonic rather than when their purchase motivation is utilitarian. This effect occurs because consumers with hedonic purchase motivations perceive their product preferences as highly unique compared to consumers with utilitarian purchase motivations. Higher perceived preference uniqueness increases the difficulty consumers anticipate in finding a preference-matching product, resulting in an expansion of the number of product alternatives to review. Further supporting the perceived preference uniqueness account, the documented effect is attenuated when product assortments are customized based on consumers’ personal preferences and when a social similarity priming task is employed. These findings provide additional evidence on the distinction between hedonic and utilitarian purchase motivations, their impact on perceived preference uniqueness, and their implications for consumer decision making via assortment size choice.

Abstract As in other social sciences, published findings in consumer research tend to overestimate the size of the effect being investigated, due to both file drawer effects and abuse of researcher degrees of freedom, including opportunistic analysis decisions. Given that most effect sizes are substantially smaller than would be apparent from published research, there has been a widespread call to increase power by increasing sample size. We propose that, aside from increasing sample size, researchers can also increase power by boosting the effect size. If done correctly, removing participants, using covariates, and optimizing experimental designs, stimuli, and measures can boost effect size without inflating researcher degrees of freedom. In fact, careful planning of studies and analyses to maximize effect size is essential to be able to study many psychologically interesting phenomena when massive sample sizes are not feasible.

AbstractThe consumer Internet of Things (IoT) has the potential to revolutionize consumer experience. Because consumers can actively interact with smart objects, the traditional, human-centric conceptualization of consumer experience as consumers’ internal subjective responses to branded objects may not be sufficient to conceptualize consumer experience in the IoT. Smart objects possess their own unique capacities and their own kinds of experiences in interaction with the consumer and each other. A conceptual framework based on assemblage theory and object-oriented ontology details how consumer experience and object experience emerge in the IoT. This conceptualization is anchored in the context of consumer-object assemblages, and defines consumer experience by its emergent properties, capacities, and agentic and communal roles expressed in interaction. Four specific consumer experience assemblages emerge: enabling experiences, comprising agentic self-extension and communal self-expansion, and constraining experiences, comprising agentic self-restriction and communal self-reduction. A parallel conceptualization of the construct of object experience argues that it can be accessed by consumers through object-oriented anthropomorphism, a nonhuman-centric approach to evaluating the expressive roles objects play in interaction. Directions for future research are derived, and consumer researchers are invited to join a dialogue about the important themes underlying our framework.

Abstract Across six studies, a female mannequin is demonstrated to have negative implications for both male and female consumers low in appearance self-esteem. In particular, consumers who are lower in appearance self-esteem evaluate a product displayed by a mannequin more negatively as compared with consumers higher in appearance self-esteem. As mannequins signal the normative standard of beauty and consumers with low self-esteem in regard to their appearance believe they fail to meet this standard, these consumers become threatened by the beauty standard when exposed to a mannequin and in response denigrate the product the mannequin is displaying. We provide evidence for the underlying process in three ways: 1) through the finding that the effect for male and female consumers with low appearance self-esteem arises only when the mannequin is displaying an appearance-related product, 2) through mediation analysis demonstrating that the mannequin conveys society’s standard of beauty and that this negatively impacts product evaluations, and 3) through mitigation of the effect by removing the presence of threat via a self-affirmation task or decreasing the mannequin’s beauty (e.g., marking its face, removing its hair, or removing its head). Multiple avenues for future research are forwarded.

Abstract Mental accounting research suggests that consumers prefer borrowing for longer-lasting purchases in order to receive benefits from the purchases as they pay for them. In contrast, two sets of archival data and five lab studies show that consumers are more willing to borrow for experiential versus material purchases, even though experiential purchases tend to have a shorter physical duration. Further, framing the same purchase as more experiential than material increases willingness to borrow. This effect occurs because purchase timing is more important for experiential purchases—a function of consumers’ aversion to missing out on planned consumption. Thus, we moderate the proposed effect by varying whether the borrowing decision impacts planned consumption. Other differences between material and experiential purchases, such as scarcity or expected happiness, cannot similarly explain our results. Moreover, our conceptualization allows us to reconcile the apparent contradiction between the previous and current research by examining the relative impact of purchase-timing importance and payment-benefit duration matching in different contexts (i.e., “purchasing” and “source-of-funding” decisions).