FN Thomson Reuters Web of Knowledge™ VR 1.0 PT J AU Chen, R Xu, XB Shen, H AF Chen, Rong Xu, Xiaobing Shen, Hao TI Go beyond just paying: Effects of payment method on level of construal SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article DE Mental construal; Payment method; Credit card; Cash ID PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; SPENDING BEHAVIOR; CREDIT; MONEY; REPRESENTATION; CONSEQUENCES; REMINDERS; EVENTS AB Does paying by credit card induce consumers to think more abstractly than paying in cash? In a series of five studies, we show that priming people with a concept of a credit card as the payment method could lead them to construe information more abstractly than priming them with a concept of cash as the payment method. We distinguish between two processes that might account for the above effect, examine the factors that moderate this effect, and demonstrate the marketing implications of our findings. (C) 2016 Society for Consumer Psychology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. C1 [Chen, Rong] Tsinghua Univ, Tianjin, Peoples R China. [Xu, Xiaobing] Nankai Univ, Nankai, Peoples R China. [Shen, Hao] Chinese Univ Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. RP Xu, XB (reprint author), Nankai Univ, Nankai, Peoples R China. EM ibingbing2008@gmail.com FU National Natural Science Foundation of China [71472104]; Tsinghua University Initiative Scientific Research Program [20151080390]; Research Grants Council, Hong Kong [GRF14502114] FX The research for this project was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 71472104), Tsinghua University Initiative Scientific Research Program (20151080390), and research grant GRF14502114 from the Research Grants Council, Hong Kong (GRF14502114). All authors contributed equally to this article. CR Aggarwal P, 2015, J MARKETING RES, V52, P120, DOI 10.1509/jmr.12.0067 Bennett B., 2014, CASH CONTINUES PLAY Chatterjee P, 2013, MARKET LETT, V24, P109, DOI 10.1007/s11002-012-9215-0 Chatterjee P, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V38, P1129, DOI 10.1086/661730 FEINBERG RA, 1986, J CONSUM RES, V13, P348, DOI 10.1086/209074 Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x Hancock D, 1997, J BANK FINANC, V21, P1573, DOI 10.1016/S0378-4266(97)00046-0 Hansen J, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V39, P1154, DOI 10.1086/667691 HIRSCHMAN EC, 1979, J CONSUM RES, V6, P58, DOI 10.1086/208748 Irmak C, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V40, P284, DOI 10.1086/670020 Kamleitner B, 2013, MARKET LETT, V24, P57, DOI 10.1007/s11002-012-9203-4 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Liviatan I, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1256, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.007 MacDonnell R, 2015, J CONSUM RES, V42, P551, DOI 10.1093/jcr/ucv042 Malkoc SA, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P411 Prelec D, 1998, MARKET SCI, V17, P4, DOI 10.1287/mksc.17.1.4 Prelec D, 2001, MARKET LETT, V12, P5, DOI 10.1023/A:1008196717017 Raghubir P, 2008, J EXP PSYCHOL-APPL, V14, P213, DOI 10.1037/1076-898X.14.3.213 Schwarz N., 1996, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, P433 Schwarz N., 2002, WISDOM FEELINGS, P144 Schwarz N., 1990, HDB MOTIVATION COGNI, V2, P527 Slepian ML, 2015, SOC PSYCHOL PERS SCI, V6, P661, DOI 10.1177/1948550615579462 Soman D, 2003, MARKET LETT, V14, P173, DOI 10.1023/A:1027444717586 Soman D, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V27, P460, DOI 10.1086/319621 Srivastava J, 2002, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V12, P253, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP1203_07 Steidle A, 2011, SOC PSYCHOL-GERMANY, V42, P174, DOI 10.1027/1864-9335/a000061 Su L, 2014, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V24, P549, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2014.04.006 Thaler RH, 1999, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V12, P183, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199909)12:3<183::AID-BDM318>3.0.CO;2-F Thomas M, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P126, DOI 10.1086/657331 TOKUNAGA H, 1993, J ECON PSYCHOL, V14, P285, DOI 10.1016/0167-4870(93)90004-5 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Vohs KD, 2006, SCIENCE, V314, P1154, DOI 10.1126/science.1132491 Wakslak CJ, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P641, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.641 Wegner D. M., 1986, HDB MOTIVATION COGNI, P550 Yan DF, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P376, DOI 10.1086/659755 Yao Q, 2014, J RETAILING, V90, P481, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2014.07.001 Zhou XY, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P700, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02353.x NR 41 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 6 U2 6 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 1057-7408 EI 1532-7663 J9 J CONSUM PSYCHOL JI J. Consum. Psychol. PD APR PY 2017 VL 27 IS 2 BP 207 EP 217 DI 10.1016/j.jcps.2016.09.003 PG 11 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA ER4GD UT WOS:000398756200006 ER PT J AU Ding, Y Wan, EW Xu, J AF Ding, Ying Wan, Echo Wen Xu, Jing TI The impact of identity breadth on consumer preference for advanced products SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article DE Identity breadth; Subjective knowledge; Self-esteem; Product domain relevance; Choice of advanced products ID SELF-ESTEEM; UNREALISTIC OPTIMISM; SUBJECTIVE KNOWLEDGE; SEARCH BEHAVIOR; SOCIAL IDENTITY; INTERGROUP BIAS; INFORMATION; PERFORMANCE; HYPOTHESIS; ILLUSION AB Prior research documents that individuals may categorize themselves along a hierarchy of social identities and that their subsequent behavior is guided by whichever identity is salient at the moment. The current research investigates how activating one's social identity at different breadth levels influences consumers' subjective knowledge and the consequences for product choice. We propose and document that consumers will perceive that they have greater knowledge and thus prefer more advanced product options when their broad identity rather than narrow identity is salient (experiment 1). We also rule out simple categorization mindset and construal level as the alternative explanations of the identity breadth effect (experiments 2A and 2B).. Moreover, our findings suggest that the effect of identity breadth on subjective knowledge will lessen for consumers with high self-esteem (experiment 3) and will reverse when the product domain is highly relevant to the narrow identity (experiment 4). Both theoretical contributions and marketing implications are discussed. (C) 2016 Society for Consumer Psychology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. C1 [Ding, Ying] Renmin Univ China, Sch Business, 59 Zhongguancun St, Beijing, Peoples R China. [Wan, Echo Wen] Univ Hong Kong, Fac Business & Econ, Pokfulam Rd, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. [Xu, Jing] Peking Univ, Guanghua Sch Management, 5 Yiheyuan Rd, Beijing, Peoples R China. RP Ding, Y (reprint author), Renmin Univ China, Sch Business, 59 Zhongguancun St, Beijing, Peoples R China. EM dingying@rbs.ruc.edu.cn; ewan@business.hku.hk; jingx@gsm.pku.edu.cn FU National Natural Science Foundation of China [71502172, 71672002]; Hong Kong SAR RGC research grant [HKU 792613] FX This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China research grant (No. 71502172) awarded to the first author, a Hong Kong SAR RGC research grant (HKU 792613) awarded to the second author, and the National Natural Science Foundation of China research grant (No. 71672002) awarded to the third author. CR Aaker JL, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P33, DOI 10.1086/321946 ALBA JW, 1987, J CONSUM RES, V13, P411, DOI 10.1086/209080 Alba JW, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V27, P123, DOI 10.1086/314317 Alter AL, 2010, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V99, P436, DOI 10.1037/a0020218 Armor D. A., 2002, HEURISTICS BIASES PS, P334, DOI DOI 10.1017/CB09780511808098.021 Berger J, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P121, DOI 10.1086/519142 BREWER MB, 1991, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V17, P475, DOI 10.1177/0146167291175001 Brockner J., 1983, REV PERSONALITY SOCI, V4, P237 BRUCKS M, 1985, J CONSUM RES, V12, P1, DOI 10.1086/209031 BURGER JM, 1988, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V14, P264, DOI 10.1177/0146167288142005 Burson KA, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P104, DOI 10.1086/513051 CAMPBELL JD, 1990, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V59, P538, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.59.3.538 Carlson JP, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P864, DOI 10.1086/593688 Cheng CY, 2008, PSYCHOL SCI, V19, P1178, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02220.x Coleman NV, 2015, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V25, P504, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2015.01.001 Cowley E, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P229, DOI 10.1086/383438 Devine PG, 1999, DUAL-PROCESS THEORIES IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, P339 Dovidio JF, 2000, ADV GROUP, V17, P1 Eckrich D. W., 2009, J MANAGEMENT MARKETI, V2, P1 Fiske S. T., 1998, HDB SOCIAL PSYCHOL, V2, P357 FOX CR, 1995, Q J ECON, V110, P585, DOI 10.2307/2946693 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 GAERTNER SL, 1994, SMALL GR RES, V25, P224, DOI 10.1177/1046496494252005 Gaertner S. L., 1993, EUROPEAN REV SOCIAL, V4, P1, DOI [10.1080/14792779343000004, DOI 10.1080/14792779343000004] Gibbons FX, 1999, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V76, P129, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.76.1.129 Goldsmith R. E., 2006, ENCY KNOWLEDGE MANAG, P311, DOI DOI 10.4018/978-1-59140-573-3.CH041 Gonzalez R, 2003, EUR J SOC PSYCHOL, V33, P195, DOI 10.1002/ejsp.140 Hadar L, 2013, J MARKETING RES, V50, P303 Harter S, 1985, DEV SELF, P55 Hayes A. F., 2012, PROCESS VERSATILE CO HEATHERTON TF, 1991, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V60, P895, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.60.6.895 Higgins E.T., 1996, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, P133 Hogg M. A., 2002, SOCIAL PSYCHOL Hong YY, 2004, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V30, P1035, DOI 10.1177/0146167204264791 Huo YJ, 1996, PSYCHOL SCI, V7, P40, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1996.tb00664.x JOHNSON EJ, 1984, J CONSUM RES, V11, P542, DOI 10.1086/208990 Keiichi O., 2010, SOCIAL COGNITIVE AFF, V5, P385 Kleine Robert E., 1993, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V2, P209, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(08)80015-0 LEARY MR, 1995, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V68, P518, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.68.3.518 Leary M. R., 1995, EFFICACY AGENCY SELF Mandel N, 2003, J CONSUM RES, V30, P30, DOI 10.1086/374700 McGregor I, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1395, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.06.001 Moorman C, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P673, DOI 10.1086/425102 Moorman C., 2001, ADV CONSUM RES, P47 PARK CW, 1994, J CONSUM RES, V21, P71, DOI 10.1086/209383 PARK CW, 1981, J CONSUM RES, V8, P223, DOI 10.1086/208859 PERLOFF LS, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V50, P502, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.50.3.502 PUNJ GN, 1983, J CONSUM RES, V9, P366, DOI 10.1086/208931 Raju P.S., 1995, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V4, P153, DOI DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP0402_04 RAO AR, 1992, J CONSUM RES, V19, P256, DOI 10.1086/209300 Riketta M, 2003, EUR J SOC PSYCHOL, V33, P679, DOI 10.1002/ejsp.179 SCHACTER DL, 1983, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V9, P39, DOI 10.1037//0278-7393.9.1.39 Schell TL, 1996, PSYCHOL SCI, V7, P170, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1996.tb00351.x Shepperd JA, 1996, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V70, P844, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.70.4.844 Shih M, 1999, PSYCHOL SCI, V10, P80, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00111 SNODGRASS SE, 1985, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V49, P146, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.49.1.146 Spencer S. J., 1994, SELF ESTEEM FU UNPUB Tajfel H., 1986, PSYCHOL INTERGROUP R, P7, DOI DOI 10.1089/CPB.2008.0150 Tanner RJ, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P810, DOI 10.1086/593690 TAYLOR SE, 1988, PSYCHOL BULL, V103, P193, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.103.2.193 Turner J., 1987, REDISCOVERING SOCIAL TURNER JC, 1986, BRIT J SOC PSYCHOL, V25, P237 Ulkumen G, 2010, J MARKETING RES, V47, P659 Ward MK, 2014, J CONSUM RES, V41, P590, DOI 10.1086/676980 WEINSTEIN ND, 1980, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P806, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.39.5.806 White K, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P525, DOI 10.1086/520077 Yan DF, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V39, P931, DOI 10.1086/666596 NR 67 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 2 U2 2 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 1057-7408 EI 1532-7663 J9 J CONSUM PSYCHOL JI J. Consum. Psychol. PD APR PY 2017 VL 27 IS 2 BP 231 EP 244 DI 10.1016/j.jcps.2016.11.001 PG 14 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA ER4GD UT WOS:000398756200008 ER PT J AU Ng, S Batra, R AF Ng, Sharon Batra, Rajeev TI Regulatory goals in a globalized world SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article DE Globalization; Self-identity; Regulatory goals; Construal level ID PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; CONSUMER ATTITUDES; DECISION-MAKING; LOCAL PRODUCTS; FOCUS; SELF; PERCEPTION; PREVENTION; PROMOTION; CONSEQUENCES AB This research examines the impact of a salient global (or local) identity on individual's regulatory goals. Specifically, we show that when people's identity as a global citizen is salient, they are more likely to focus on promotion goals; whereas when their identity as a local citizen is salient, they are more likely to focus on prevention goals. We further show that this arises because people are likely to adopt a more abstract or higher level (vs. concrete or lower level) construal when their global (local) identity is salient. Evidence from three studies supports this central proposition. (C) 2016 Society for Consumer Psychology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. C1 [Ng, Sharon] Nanyang Technol Univ, Nanyang Business Sch, Singapore, Singapore. [Ng, Sharon] Inst Asian Consumer Insight, Singapore, Singapore. [Batra, Rajeev] Univ Michigan, Ross Sch Business, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA. RP Ng, S (reprint author), Nanyang Technol Univ, Nanyang Business Sch, Singapore, Singapore. EM angsl@ntu.edu.sg; rajeevba@umich.edu FU Nanyang Technological University FX The authors are indebted to the participants of a seminar at the Chinese University of Hong Kong for valuable comments on the project, and Nanyang Technological University for financial support. CR Aaker JL, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P33, DOI 10.1086/321946 Alden DL, 2006, INT J RES MARK, V23, P227, DOI 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2006.01.010 Appadurai A., 1990, GLOBAL CULTURE NATL, P295 Arnett JJ, 2002, AM PSYCHOL, V57, P774, DOI 10.1037//0003-066X.57.10.774 BREWER MB, 1991, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V17, P475, DOI 10.1177/0146167291175001 Cesario J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P388, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.3.388 Chiu CY, 2011, J SOC ISSUES, V67, P663, DOI 10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01721.x Crowe E, 1997, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V69, P117, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1996.2675 Elliot AJ, 2001, PSYCHOL SCI, V12, P505, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00393 Eyal T, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P781, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781 Forster J, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P631, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01586.x Forster J, 2012, CURR DIR PSYCHOL SCI, V21, P15, DOI 10.1177/0963721411429454 Hannerz U., 1990, GLOBAL CULTURE NATL, P295 Higgins ET, 1997, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V72, P515, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.72.3.515 Higgins ET, 1997, AM PSYCHOL, V52, P1280, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280 Higgins ET, 2001, EUR J SOC PSYCHOL, V31, P3, DOI 10.1002/ejsp.27 Holton R, 2000, ANN AM ACAD POLIT SS, V570, P140, DOI 10.1177/0002716200570001011 Hong YY, 2000, AM PSYCHOL, V55, P709, DOI 10.1037//0003-066X.55.7.709 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Leung K. Y., 2012, HDB MULTICULTURAL ID Liberman N, 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V97, P203, DOI 10.1037/a0015671 Lockwood P, 2002, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V83, P854, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.83.4.854 Oyserman D, 2009, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V19, P250, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2009.05.008 Pennington GL, 2003, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P563, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00058-1 Polman E, 2012, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V102, P980, DOI 10.1037/a0026966 Riefler P, 2012, J INT BUS STUD, V43, P285, DOI 10.1057/jibs.2011.51 Roese NJ, 1999, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V77, P1109, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1109 SCHWARTZ SH, 1992, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V25, P1, DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6 Seibt B., 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P37 Semin GR, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P36, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.1.36 SHIMP TA, 1987, J MARKETING RES, V24, P280, DOI 10.2307/3151638 SRULL TK, 1980, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P841, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.38.6.841 Steenkamp JBEM, 2010, J MARKETING, V74, P18 Steenkamp JBEM, 2003, J INT BUS STUD, V34, P53, DOI 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400002 Strizhakova Y, 2013, INT J RES MARK, V30, P69, DOI 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2012.08.003 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Vohs K., 2012, SELF IDENTITY Werth L, 2007, EUR J SOC PSYCHOL, V37, P33, DOI 10.1002/ejsp.343 Yang DYJ, 2011, J SOC ISSUES, V67, P677, DOI 10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01722.x Zhang YL, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P524, DOI 10.1086/598794 NR 40 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 1 U2 1 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 1057-7408 EI 1532-7663 J9 J CONSUM PSYCHOL JI J. Consum. Psychol. PD APR PY 2017 VL 27 IS 2 BP 270 EP 277 DI 10.1016/j.jcps.2016.08.003 PG 8 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA ER4GD UT WOS:000398756200012 ER PT J AU Lee, H Fujita, K Deng, XY Unnava, HR AF Lee, Hyojin Fujita, Kentaro Deng, Xiaoyan Unnava, H. Rao TI The Role of Temporal Distance on the Color of Future-Directed Imagery: A Construal-Level Perspective SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE future-directed thought; prospection; construal level; black and white; color; visualization ID PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; CONSUMPTION VISIONS; SELF; PERSUASION; ATTITUDES; BEHAVIOR; REPRESENTATION; RECOGNITION; ABSTRACTION; INVOLVEMENT AB This research investigates the effect of temporal distance on how consumers "see" the future through their mind's eye. Drawing from construal-level and visual perception theories, we propose that shape (vs. color) is a high-level (vs. low-level) visual feature. Because construal of the distant (vs. near) future generally focuses on high-level (vs. low-level) features, when consumers visualize the distant (vs. near) future, they should engage in processing that captures shape (vs. color): namely, imagery that is relatively more black and white (vs. colorful). Experiment 1 establishes that shape is a constant focus of visualization regardless of the temporal distance of future events, whereas the focus on color decreases as temporal distance increases. Using image matching, image reconstruction, and behavioral response time measures, respectively, experiments 2A, 2B, 2C, 3, and 4 test and find that participants' visualization of the distant (vs. near) future is increasingly less colorful (i.e., more black and white). Experiment 5 establishes the underlying mechanism, showing that experimentally directing attention to high-level (vs. low-level) features directly promotes visualization that is less colorful (i.e., more black and white). Experiments 6A and 6B apply these findings to visual communications, suggesting that marketing messages about distant (vs. near) future events lead to greater willingness to pay when presented alongside black-and-white (vs. color) images. C1 [Lee, Hyojin] San Jose State Univ, Lucas Coll, Mkt, One Washington Sq, San Jose, CA 95192 USA. [Lee, Hyojin] San Jose State Univ, Grad Sch Business, One Washington Sq, San Jose, CA 95192 USA. [Fujita, Kentaro] Ohio State Univ, Dept Psychol, 1827 Neil Ave, Columbus, OH 43210 USA. [Deng, Xiaoyan] Ohio State Univ, Fisher Coll Business, Mkt, 2100 Neil Ave, Columbus, OH 43210 USA. [Unnava, H. Rao] Univ Calif Davis, Grad Sch Management, One Shields Ave, Davis, CA 95616 USA. RP Lee, H (reprint author), San Jose State Univ, Lucas Coll, Mkt, One Washington Sq, San Jose, CA 95192 USA.; Lee, H (reprint author), San Jose State Univ, Grad Sch Business, One Washington Sq, San Jose, CA 95192 USA. EM hyojin.lee@sjsu.edu; fujita.5@o-su.edu; deng.84@osu.edu; runnava@ucdavis.edu FU John Templeton Foundation's Philosophy and Science of Self-Control Project FX Hyojin Lee (hyojin.lee@sjsu.edu) is assistant professor of marketing at Lucas College and Graduate School of Business, San Jose State University, One Washington Square, San Jose, CA 95192. Kentaro Fujita (fujita.5@osu.edu) is associate professor in the Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University, 1827 Neil Avenue, Columbus, OH, 43210. Xiaoyan Deng (deng.84@osu.edu) is assistant professor of marketing at Fisher College of Business, The Ohio State University, 2100 Neil Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210. H. Rao Unnava (runnava@ucdavis.edu) is dean and professor at Graduate School of Management, University of California, Davis, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616. This article is based on the second essay of the first author's doctoral dissertation. This work was funded in part by a grant to Kentaro Fujita from The John Templeton Foundation's Philosophy and Science of Self-Control Project. An appendix about data analysis is included in the online-only version of this article. The authors thank the editor, associate editor, and reviewers for their helpful input. CR Arnheim R, 1954, ART VISUAL PERCEPTIO Atance CM, 2001, TRENDS COGN SCI, V5, P533, DOI 10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01804-0 Babin LA, 1997, J ADVERTISING, V26, P33 BIEDERMAN I, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P115, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.2.115 BIEDERMAN I, 1988, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V20, P38, DOI 10.1016/0010-0285(88)90024-2 Brockmann R. J., 1991, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communications, V34, P153, DOI 10.1109/47.84109 Burgoon EM, 2013, PERSPECT PSYCHOL SCI, V8, P501, DOI 10.1177/1745691613497964 CARROLL JS, 1978, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V14, P88, DOI 10.1016/0022-1031(78)90062-8 Cesario J., 2008, SOCIAL PERSONALITY P, V2, P444, DOI [10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00055.x, DOI 10.1111/J.1751-9004.2007.00055.X] D'Argembeau A, 2004, CONSCIOUS COGN, V13, P844, DOI 10.1016/j.concog.2004.07.007 Dahl DW, 2004, J PROD INNOVAT MANAG, V21, P259, DOI 10.1111/j.0737-6782.2004.00077.x DOOLEY RP, 1970, PERCEPT MOTOR SKILL, V31, P851 Epley N, 2008, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V34, P1159, DOI 10.1177/0146167208318601 Fazio R. H., 1990, REV PERSONALITY SOCI, V11, P74 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Fujita K, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P562, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2007.10.005 Gegenfurtner K. R., 2001, COLOR VISION GENES P Gilbert DT, 2007, SCIENCE, V317, P1351, DOI 10.1126/science.1144161 Greenwald AG, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V85, P197, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.197 GREGORY WL, 1982, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P89, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.43.1.89 Hanna A, 1996, MEM COGNITION, V24, P322, DOI 10.3758/BF03213296 Hershfield HE, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, pS23 Higgins ET, 2000, AM PSYCHOL, V55, P1217, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.55.11.1217 Judd CM, 2012, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V103, P54, DOI 10.1037/a0028347 KATZ D, 1960, PUBLIC OPIN QUART, V24, P163, DOI 10.1086/266945 Kim HY, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P877, DOI 10.1086/593700 Kreuter MW, 2003, AM J HEALTH BEHAV, V27, pS227 Lafer-Sousa R, 2013, NAT NEUROSCI, V16, P1870, DOI 10.1038/nn.3555 Ledgerwood A, 2010, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P257, DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(10)43006-3 Lee H, 2014, J CONSUM RES, V41, P1015, DOI 10.1086/678392 Liberman N, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P1201, DOI 10.1126/science.1161958 Liberman N, 2014, TRENDS COGN SCI, V18, P364, DOI 10.1016/j.tics.2014.03.001 Lowe D., 1984, PERCEPTUAL ORG VISUA Mapelli D, 1997, NEUROCASE, V3, P237 Noar SM, 2007, PSYCHOL BULL, V133, P673, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.673 Oeser OA, 1932, B J PSYCHOL-GEN SECT, V22, P287 Petrova PK, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P442, DOI 10.1086/497556 PETTY RE, 1984, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P69, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.46.1.69 PETTY RE, 1981, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V41, P847, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.41.5.847 Petty RE, 1998, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V24, P227, DOI 10.1177/0146167298243001 Phillips DM, 1996, ADV CONSUM RES, V23, P70 Phillips DM, 1995, ADV CONSUM RES, V22, P280 Rossiter John R., 1982, ADV CONSUM RES, V9, P396 SNYDER M, 1985, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V49, P586, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.49.3.586 Steidle A, 2011, SOC PSYCHOL-GERMANY, V42, P174, DOI 10.1027/1864-9335/a000061 Suddendorf T, 2007, BEHAV BRAIN SCI, V30, P299, DOI 10.1017/S0140525X07001975 Thompson DV, 2006, J CONSUM RES, V32, P530, DOI 10.1086/500483 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Tsai CI, 2011, PSYCHOL SCI, V22, P348, DOI 10.1177/0956797611398494 TSAL Y, 1988, PERCEPT PSYCHOPHYS, V44, P15, DOI 10.3758/BF03207469 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Van Boven L, 2010, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V98, P872, DOI 10.1037/a0019262 Vernon PE, 1933, BRIT J MED PSYCHOL, V13, P89 Wheeler SC, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V31, P787, DOI 10.1086/426613 Zell E, 2012, PLOS ONE, V7, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0036742 Zhao M, 2014, J CONSUM RES, V41, P1137, DOI 10.1086/678485 NR 59 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 6 U2 6 PU OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC PI CARY PA JOURNALS DEPT, 2001 EVANS RD, CARY, NC 27513 USA SN 0093-5301 EI 1537-5277 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD FEB PY 2017 VL 43 IS 5 BP 707 EP 725 DI 10.1093/jcr/ucw051 PG 19 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA EP2OJ UT WOS:000397222500003 ER PT J AU Power, N Beattie, G McGuire, L AF Power, Nicola Beattie, Geoffrey McGuire, Laura TI Mapping our underlying cognitions and emotions about good environmental behavior: Why we fail to act despite the best of intentions SO SEMIOTICA LA English DT Article DE climate change; sustainability; value-action gap; environmental behavior; cognition; emotions ID CONSTRUAL-LEVEL THEORY; PLANNED BEHAVIOR; IMPLICIT ATTITUDES; ANTICIPATED GUILT; CONSUMERS; MODEL; ORIENTATION; INFORMATION; PERSPECTIVE; FRAMEWORK AB Despite the widespread recognition of climate change as the single biggest global threat, the willingness of people to change their behavior to mitigate its effects is limited. Past research, often focusing on specific categories of behavior, has highlighted a very significant gap between people's intentions to behave more sustainably and their actual behavior. This paper presents a new approach to this issue, by using more open-ended questions to map a much broader range of cognitions and emotions about good environmental behavior. Two key findings emerged. Firstly, participants were aware of the contradiction between their level of concern about the environment and their willingness to act in more sustainable ways. The qualitative analysis further revealed that this discrepancy often hinged on a lack of knowledge about how to act more sustainably; the analysis also revealed a desire for more information about genuinely green behavior. Secondly, pro-environmental behavior was often conceptualized by participants in essentially " social" terms; anticipated emotions relating to sustainable/ non-sustainable behavior were as closely tied to the behavior of one's peers as to one's own behavior. This finding suggests that we must highlight the social dimension in any interventions to increase sustainable behaviors amongst the public. C1 [Beattie, Geoffrey; McGuire, Laura] Edge Hill Univ, Ormskirk, Lancs, England. [Power, Nicola] Univ Lancaster, Dept Psychol, Lancaster, Lancs, England. RP Beattie, G (reprint author), Edge Hill Univ, Ormskirk, Lancs, England. EM n.power@lancaster.ac.uk; beattieg@edgehill.ac.uk; mcguirel@edgehill.ac.uk FU Edge Hill University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences FX Edge Hill University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, (Grant / Award Number: 'Research Support Fund'). CR AJZEN I, 1991, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V50, P179, DOI 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T Ajzen I, 2002, CONSTRUCTING THEORY Allport G. W., 1935, HDB SOCIAL PSYCHOL, P798 Arcury Thomas A., 1993, J ENVIRON EDUC, V25, P19, DOI DOI 10.1080/00958964.1993.9941940 Armitage CJ, 2001, BRIT J SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P471, DOI 10.1348/014466601164939 Auger P, 2007, J BUS ETHICS, V76, P361, DOI 10.1007/s10551-006-9287-y Bamberg S, 2003, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V23, P21, DOI 10.1016/S0272-4944(02)00078-6 Barthes R., 1957, MYTHOLOGIES Beattie Geoffrey, 2010, INT J ENV CULTURAL E, V6, P47 Beattie Geoffrey, 2010, WHY ARENT WE SAVING Beattie Geoffrey, 2012, OUR RACIST HEART EXP Beattie Geoffrey, 2009, INT J ENV CULTURAL E, V5, P191 Beattie Geoffrey, 2011, INT J ENV CULTURAL E, V7, P211 Beattie G, 2015, SEMIOTICA, V204, P253, DOI 10.1515/sem-2014-0079 Beattie G, 2013, SEMIOTICA, V197, P171, DOI 10.1515/sem-2013-0087 Beattie G, 2012, SEMIOTICA, V192, P315, DOI 10.1515/sem-2012-0066 Beattie G, 2012, NAT CLIM CHANGE, V2, P214 Beattie G, 2011, SEMIOTICA, V187, P105, DOI 10.1515/semi.2011.066 Beattie G, 2011, NAT CLIM CHANGE, V1, P372 Braun V., 2006, QUALITATIVE RES PSYC, V3, P77, DOI DOI 10.1191/1478088706QP063OA Campbell-Arvai V, 2014, ENVIRON BEHAV, V46, P453, DOI 10.1177/0013916512469099 Carrington MJ, 2010, J BUS ETHICS, V97, P139, DOI 10.1007/s10551-010-0501-6 Carrus G, 2008, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V28, P51, DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2007.09.003 Chen MF, 2010, ENVIRON BEHAV, V42, P824, DOI 10.1177/0013916509352833 Claudy MC, 2014, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V33, P173 Donald IJ, 2014, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V40, P39, DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.03.003 Elgaaied L, 2012, J CONSUM MARK, V29, P369 Elliot AJ, 2006, MOTIV EMOTION, V30, P111, DOI 10.1007/s11031-006-9028-7 FAZIO RH, 1990, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V23, P75, DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60318-4 Fransson Niklas, 1994, ENV CONCERN CONCEPTU Greenwald AG, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V74, P1464, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.74.6.1464 Greenwald Anthony G., 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V1, P17 Hahnel UJJ, 2014, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V40, P306, DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.08.002 Hardisty DJ, 2009, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V138, P329, DOI 10.1037/a0016433 Harth NS, 2013, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V34, P18, DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2012.12.005 Hegarty John, 2011, HEGARTY ADVERTISING Hinds J, 2008, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V28, P109, DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2007.11.001 HM Government, 2015, UK GREENH GAS EM STA IPCC, 2015, CLIMATE CHANGE 2014 Kaiser FG, 2008, EUR PSYCHOL, V13, P288, DOI 10.1027/1016-9040.13.4.288 Koenig-Lewis N, 2014, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V37, P94, DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.11.009 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Lutchyn Y, 2011, J HEALTH COMMUN, V16, P595, DOI 10.1080/10810730.2011.551991 Mancha RM, 2015, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V43, P145, DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.06.005 Milfont TL, 2012, INT J PSYCHOL, V47, P325, DOI 10.1080/00207594.2011.647029 Oatley K., 2006, UNDERSTANDING EMOTIO Peattie K., 2001, BUSINESS STRATEGY EN, V10, P187, DOI DOI 10.1002/BSE.292 Perugini M, 2004, EUR J SOC PSYCHOL, V34, P69, DOI 10.1002/ejsp.186 Perugini M, 2001, BRIT J SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P79, DOI 10.1348/014466601164704 Pinto DC, 2011, INT J CONSUM STUD, V35, P122, DOI 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2010.00962.x Polonsky MJ, 2014, INT J CONSUM STUD, V38, P612, DOI 10.1111/ijcs.12131 Pooley JA, 2000, ENVIRON BEHAV, V32, P711, DOI 10.1177/0013916500325007 Richard R, 1996, BASIC APPL SOC PSYCH, V18, P111, DOI 10.1207/s15324834basp1802_1 Ryan G. W., 2000, HDB QUALITATIVE RES, P769 Sharp A., 2013, AUSTRALAS MARK J, V21, P240 SITA, 2013, SUST REP STRATHMAN A, 1994, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V66, P742, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.66.4.742 Street Nicola, 2015, WHAT HAVE FRACTALS G Szmigin I, 2009, INT J CONSUM STUD, V33, P224, DOI 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2009.00750.x Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 TVERSKY A, 1974, SCIENCE, V185, P1124, DOI 10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 Unilever, 2013, UN SUST PLAN Walker Gabrielle, 2008, HOT TOPIC TACKLE GLO Wall R, 2007, ENVIRON BEHAV, V39, P731, DOI 10.1177/0013916506294594 Wright SD, 2003, INT J AGING HUM DEV, V57, P151, DOI 10.2190/Y73Y-0RK9-RP0J-E7HH NR 65 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 5 U2 5 PU WALTER DE GRUYTER GMBH PI BERLIN PA GENTHINER STRASSE 13, D-10785 BERLIN, GERMANY SN 0037-1998 EI 1613-3692 J9 SEMIOTICA JI Semiotica PD FEB PY 2017 IS 215 BP 193 EP 234 DI 10.1515/sem-2016-0035 PG 42 WC Humanities, Multidisciplinary; Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary SC Arts & Humanities - Other Topics; Social Sciences - Other Topics GA EP0MM UT WOS:000397081400007 ER PT J AU Lee, SH Brandt, A Groff, Y Lopez, A Neavin, T AF Lee, Seung Hwan (Mark) Brandt, Alan, Jr. Groff, Yuni Lopez, Alyssa Neavin, Tyler TI I'll laugh, but I won't share The role of darkness on evaluation and sharing of humorous online taboo ads SO JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN INTERACTIVE MARKETING LA English DT Article DE Online advertising; Consumer psychology; Advertising ID WORD-OF-MOUTH; CONSTRUAL-LEVEL; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; SOCIAL-PERCEPTION; SELF-CONSTRUALS; AGGRESSION; COMMUNICATION; CONSTRAINTS; EMBODIMENT; ATTITUDES AB Purpose - This paper aims to investigate the experience of darkness on people's evaluation of humorous taboo-themed ads and their willingness to share these ads digitally with others. Design/methodology/approach - Multiple studies are conducted to demonstrate the connection between darkness and humor. Another experiment was conducted to investigate people's willingness to share taboo-themed ads. Findings - The results demonstrate that people in dark settings (vs light) found controversial, taboo-themed ads to be more humorous. Three studies demonstrate that people in the dark (vs light) condition found taboo-themed ads to be more humorous. More importantly, despite finding taboo-themed ads to be more humorous, people in dark settings (vs light) were less inclined to share these ads on social media platforms. Practical implications - When using humorous taboo-themed ads, advertisers are encouraged to show these ads in dark settings. If the physical environment is uncontrollable, marketers may still benefit by cueing consumers about darkness (e.g. through their products) or reminding them of nightly activities which may also yield similar effects. However, the cautionary tale is that, although people in the dark may enjoy these ads, they may not be willing to share it with others. Originality/value - Marketers utilize taboo-themed ads to increase consumer interest. Despite its controversial content, darkness enhances people's evaluation toward these taboo-themed ads. However, if one of the goals of advertisers is to create an ad that is amenable to sharing, developing a humorous taboo-themed ad may not be the most rewarding strategy. C1 [Lee, Seung Hwan (Mark)] Ryerson Univ, Ted Rogers Sch Retail Management, Toronto, ON, Canada. [Brandt, Alan, Jr.; Groff, Yuni; Lopez, Alyssa; Neavin, Tyler] Colorado State Univ, Coll Business, Ft Collins, CO 80523 USA. RP Lee, SH (reprint author), Ryerson Univ, Ted Rogers Sch Retail Management, Toronto, ON, Canada. EM lee.mark@ryerson.ca CR Asch S. E., 1961, DOCUMENTS GESTALT PS, P324 Bargh JA, 2000, PSYCHOL BULL, V126, P925, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.126.6.925 BARON RA, 1992, MOTIV EMOTION, V16, P1, DOI 10.1007/BF00996485 Barrett L. F., 2010, MIND CONTEXT, P1 Barsalou LW, 2008, ANNU REV PSYCHOL, V59, P617, DOI 10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639 Campo S., 2013, SOCIAL MARKETING Q, V19, P84, DOI DOI 10.1177/1524500413483456 Cross SE, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V78, P791, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.78.4.791 Custers PJM, 2010, LIGHTING RES TECHNOL, V42, P331, DOI 10.1177/1477153510377836 Dahl DW, 2003, J ADVERTISING RES, V43, P268, DOI 10.1017/S0021849903030332 De Angelis M, 2012, J MARKETING RES, V49, P551 Dobele A., 2007, BUS HORIZONS, V50, P291, DOI DOI 10.1016/J.BUSHOR.2007.01.004 Eliade M., 1996, PATTERNS COMP RELIG FRANK MG, 1988, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V54, P74, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.54.1.74 GERGEN KJ, 1973, PSYCHOL TODAY, V7, P129 Gervais M, 2005, Q REV BIOL, V80, P395, DOI 10.1086/498281 GOODWIN R, 1990, J SOC PSYCHOL, V130, P691 Greatbatch D, 2003, HUM RELAT, V56, P1515, DOI 10.1177/00187267035612004 Grewal D., 1994, INT J RES MARK, V11, P107, DOI 10.1016/0167-8116(94)90022-1 Gulas C. S., 2006, HUMOR ADVERTISING CO Hadley CB, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V32, P79, DOI 10.1037/0278-7393.32.1.79 HAIDT J, 1993, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V65, P613, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.65.4.613 Hanselmann M, 2008, JUDGM DECIS MAK, V3, P51 Hennig-Thurau T, 2004, J INTERACT MARK, V18, P38, DOI 10.1002/dir.10073 Ho JYC, 2010, J BUS RES, V63, P1000, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.08.010 Humahnn B. A., 2008, J MARK COMMUN, V14, P293 Kamstra MJ, 2003, AM ECON REV, V93, P324, DOI 10.1257/000282803321455322 Karnes E. B., 1960, AM CITY MAGAZINE, V75, P104 KIM MS, 1994, INT J INTERCULT REL, V18, P117, DOI 10.1016/0147-1767(94)90008-6 King CM, 2000, J COMMUN, V50, P5, DOI 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02831.x Krishna A, 2012, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V22, P332, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2011.08.003 Lyons Barbara, 2005, J CONSUM BEHAV, V4, P319, DOI DOI 10.1002/CB.22 Manceau D, 2006, INT J ADVERT, V25, P9 Mandler G., 1982, AFFECT COGNITION, P3 McGraw AP, 2010, PSYCHOL SCI, V21, P1141, DOI 10.1177/0956797610376073 Meier BP, 2004, PSYCHOL SCI, V15, P82, DOI 10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.01502002.x Meyer JC, 2000, COMMUN THEOR, V10, P310, DOI 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2000.tb00194.x Miwa Y, 2006, ENVIRON BEHAV, V38, P484, DOI 10.1177/0013916505280084 Mussweiler T, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P507, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.79.4.507 Niedenthal PM, 2005, PERS SOC PSYCHOL REV, V9, P184, DOI 10.1207/s15327957pspr0903_1 PAGE RA, 1976, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V6, P126, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1976.tb01318.x Pope NKL, 2004, J ADVERTISING, V33, P69 Potter WJ, 1998, J COMMUN, V48, P40, DOI 10.1093/joc/48.2.40 Sabri Ouidade, 2012, J MARKETING THEORY P, V20, P407 Sabri O, 2012, J BUS RES, V65, P869, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.01.009 Scharrer E, 2006, J BROADCAST ELECTRON, V50, P615, DOI 10.1207/s15506878jobem5004_3 Schielke T, 2015, LIGHTING RES TECHNOL, V47, P672, DOI 10.1177/1477153514541831 Sherman GD, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P1019, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02403.x SINGELIS TM, 1994, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V20, P580, DOI 10.1177/0146167294205014 Stapel DA, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V80, P766, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.80.5.766 Steidle A, 2014, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V39, P40, DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.12.007 Steidle A, 2013, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V35, P67, DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.05.003 Steidle A, 2013, SOC COGNITION, V31, P275 Steidle A, 2011, SOC PSYCHOL-GERMANY, V42, P174, DOI 10.1027/1864-9335/a000061 Taylor D. G., 2012, J INTERACTIVE ADVERT, V12, P13, DOI DOI 10.1080/15252019.2012.10722193 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 UNGER LS, 1995, J ADVERTISING RES, V35, P66 Ventis WL, 2001, J GEN PSYCHOL, V128, P241 Waller DS, 1999, J CONSUM MARK, V16, P288, DOI 10.1108/07363769910271513 WALTER T, 1991, SOCIOLOGY, V25, P293, DOI 10.1177/0038038591025002009 Warren C., 2015, P NATL ACAD SCI USA, V112, P293 WEINBERGER MG, 1995, J ADVERTISING RES, V35, P44 Xu AJ, 2014, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V24, P207, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2013.12.007 Zhong CB, 2006, SCIENCE, V313, P1451, DOI 10.1126/science.1130726 Zhong CB, 2010, PSYCHOL SCI, V21, P311, DOI 10.1177/0956797609360754 NR 64 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 0 U2 0 PU EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD PI BINGLEY PA HOWARD HOUSE, WAGON LANE, BINGLEY BD16 1WA, W YORKSHIRE, ENGLAND SN 2040-7122 EI 2040-7130 J9 J RES INTERACT MARK JI J. Res. Interact. Mark. PY 2017 VL 11 IS 1 BP 75 EP 90 DI 10.1108/JRIM-05-2016-0037 PG 16 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA ER5SX UT WOS:000398864000005 ER PT J AU Hartley, N Green, T AF Hartley, Nicole Green, Teegan TI Consumer construal of separation in virtual services SO JOURNAL OF SERVICE THEORY AND PRACTICE LA English DT Article DE Temporal separation; Construal-level theory; Service separation; Spatial separation; Technology-mediated services; Virtual services ID PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; CUSTOMER SATISFACTION; LEVEL THEORY; TEMPORAL DISTANCE; SPATIAL DISTANCE; SOCIAL DISTANCE; TECHNOLOGIES; BEHAVIOR; PERCEPTIONS; ENCOUNTERS AB Purpose - Service encounters are becoming increasingly virtual through the infusion of computer-mediated technologies. Virtual services separate consumers and service providers both spatially and temporally. With the advent of virtual services is the need to theoretically explain how service separability is psychologically perceived by consumers across the spectrum of computer-mediated technologies. Drawing on construal-level theory, the purpose of this paper is to conceptualize a theoretical framework depicting consumer's construal of spatial and temporal separation across a continuum of technology-mediated service virtuality. Design/methodology/approach - The authors conducted two studies: first, to investigate consumers' levels of mental construal associated with varying degrees of service separation across a spectrum of technology-mediated services; second, to empirically examine consumer evaluations of service quality in response to varying degrees of spatial and temporal service separation. These relationships were tested across two service industries: education and tourism. Findings - Consumers mentally construe psychological distance in response to service separation and these observations vary across the spectrum of service offerings ranging from face-to-face (no psychological distance) through to virtual (spatially and temporally separated - high psychological distance) services. Further, spatial separation negatively affects consumers' service evaluations; such that as service separation increases, consumers' service evaluations decrease. No such significant findings support the similar effect of temporal separation on customer service evaluations. Moreover, specific service industry-based distances exist such that consumers responded differentially for a credence (education) vs an experiential (tourism) service. Originality/value - Recent studies in services marketing have challenged the inseparability assumption inherent for services. This paper builds on this knowledge and is the first to integrate literature on construal-level theory, service separability, and virtual services into a holistic conceptual framework which explains variance in consumer evaluations of separated service encounters. This is important due to the increasingly virtual nature of service provider-customer interactions across a diverse range of service industries (i.e. banking and finance, tourism, education, and health care). Service providers must be cognisant of the psychological barriers which are imposed by increased technology infusion in virtual services. C1 [Hartley, Nicole; Green, Teegan] Univ Queensland, Sch Business, Brisbane, Qld, Australia. RP Hartley, N (reprint author), Univ Queensland, Sch Business, Brisbane, Qld, Australia. EM n.hartley@business.uq.edu.au CR Betancourt R, 2001, ADV APP M-E, V10, P155, DOI 10.1016/S0278-0984(01)10008-8 Bitner MJ, 2000, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V28, P138, DOI 10.1177/0092070300281013 Brady MK, 2001, J MARKETING, V65, P34, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.65.3.34.18334 Curran J. M., 2005, J SERV MARK, V19, P103, DOI DOI 10.1108/08876040510591411 Eyal T., 2012, SOCIAL PSYCHOL MORAL, P185 FISK RP, 1993, J RETAILING, V69, P61, DOI 10.1016/S0022-4359(05)80004-1 Froehle CA, 2004, J OPER MANAG, V22, P1, DOI 10.1016/j.jom.2003.12.004 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x Fujita K, 2010, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P1049, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.05.013 Giacomantonio M, 2010, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P824, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.05.001 Gilbert DT, 2007, SCIENCE, V317, P1351, DOI 10.1126/science.1144161 GILOVICH T, 1993, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V64, P552, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.64.4.552 GRONROOS C, 1978, EUR J MARKETING, V12, P588, DOI 10.1108/EUM0000000004985 Henderson MD, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V91, P845, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.91.5.845 Henderson MD, 2013, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V49, P676, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2013.03.001 Ho CKY, 2015, INFORM MANAGE-AMSTER, V52, P160, DOI 10.1016/j.im.2014.07.003 Hong JW, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P456, DOI 10.1086/653492 Kanten AB, 2011, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P1037, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.04.005 Keh HT, 2010, J MARKETING, V74, P55 Kim K, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P706, DOI 10.1086/592131 Kim YJ, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P634, DOI 10.1086/599765 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Liberman N., 2011, HDB THEORIES SOCIAL, V1-2, P118 Liberman N, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P1201, DOI 10.1126/science.1161958 Liberman N, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P143, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.12.009 Liviatan I, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1256, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.007 Lovelock C, 2004, J SERV RES-US, V7, P20, DOI 10.1177/1094670504266131 McCrea SM, 2012, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V102, P51, DOI 10.1037/a0026108 Meuter ML, 2005, J MARKETING, V69, P61, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.69.2.61.60759 Meuter ML, 2003, J BUS RES, V56, P899, DOI 10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00276-4 Meuter ML, 2000, J MARKETING, V64, P50, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.64.3.50.18024 Mogilner C, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P670, DOI 10.1086/521901 MORGAN RM, 1994, J MARKETING, V58, P20, DOI 10.2307/1252308 Morris B., 1987, INT J OPER PROD MAN, V7, P13, DOI DOI 10.1108/EB054796 Nussbaum S, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P485, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.485 Paas L.J., 2008, MARKING LETT, V47, P157 Paluch S, 2013, J SERV RES-US, V16, P415, DOI 10.1177/1094670513475870 PARASURAMAN A, 1988, J RETAILING, V64, P12 Pizzi G, 2015, J SERV RES-US, V18, P484, DOI 10.1177/1094670515584752 Porr C, 2011, INT J QUAL METH, V10, P30 Rim S, 2009, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V45, P1088, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.06.015 Schumann JH, 2012, TECHNOVATION, V32, P133, DOI 10.1016/j.technovation.2011.10.002 Shani Y, 2009, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V110, P36, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.05.005 SHOSTACK GL, 1977, J MARKETING, V41, P73, DOI 10.2307/1250637 Smith PK, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P578, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.578 Soderberg CK, 2015, PSYCHOL BULL, V141, P525, DOI 10.1037/bul0000005 Stephan E, 2011, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P397, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.11.001 Todorov A, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P473, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.002 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 TROPE Y, 1986, PSYCHOL REV, V93, P239, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.93.3.239 TROPE Y, 1989, SOC COGNITION, V7, P296, DOI 10.1521/soco.1989.7.3.296 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Vargo SL, 2004, J MARKETING, V68, P1, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.68.1.1.24036 Vess M, 2011, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P861, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.02.014 Walslak C.J., 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL, V135, P641 Williams LE, 2008, PSYCHOL SCI, V19, P302, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02084.x Williams LE, 2014, J CONSUM RES, V40, P1123, DOI 10.1086/674212 Wilson J, 2013, ORGAN SCI, V24, P629, DOI 10.1287/orsc.1120.0750 Wunderlich NV, 2013, J SERV RES-US, V16, P3, DOI 10.1177/1094670512448413 ZEITHAML VA, 1985, J MARKETING, V49, P33, DOI 10.2307/1251563 Zhao M, 2014, J CONSUM RES, V41, P1137, DOI 10.1086/678485 NR 65 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 2 U2 2 PU EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD PI BINGLEY PA HOWARD HOUSE, WAGON LANE, BINGLEY BD16 1WA, W YORKSHIRE, ENGLAND SN 2055-6225 J9 J SERV THEOR PRACT JI J. Serv. Theory Pract. PY 2017 VL 27 IS 2 BP 358 EP 383 DI 10.1108/JSTP-05-2015-0118 PG 26 WC Business; Management SC Business & Economics GA EP2PB UT WOS:000397224400004 ER PT J AU Huang, YH Jia, YL Wyer, RS AF Huang, Yunhui Jia, Yanli Wyer, Robert S., Jr. TI The Effects of Physical Distance from a Brand Extension on the Impact of Brand-Extension Fit SO PSYCHOLOGY & MARKETING LA English DT Article ID CONSUMER EVALUATIONS; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; PERCEPTUAL FLUENCY; TEMPORAL DISTANCE; CONSTRUAL-LEVEL; PERSUASION; TIME; CUES; SIMILARITY; PICTURES AB Three experiments show that if a brand extension provides a close fit to the parent brand, consumers evaluate it more favorably when they perceive themselves to be close to a picture of the extension than when they do not. If the extension is a poor fit to the parent, however, the reverse is true. These effects are driven by a match between consumers' feelings of closeness to the extension information and the extension's closeness to the parent. This match leads them to process the extension information more fluently and consequently to generate a more favorable evaluation of the extension. (C) 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. C1 [Huang, Yunhui] Nanjing Univ, Nanjing, Jiangsu, Peoples R China. [Jia, Yanli] Xiamen Univ, Xiamen, Peoples R China. [Wyer, Robert S., Jr.] Chinese Univ Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. RP Jia, YL (reprint author), Xiamen Univ, Sch Management, Dept Mkt, Xiamen, Fujian Province, Peoples R China. EM yanlijia@xmu.edu.cn FU National Nature Science Foundation of China [71102037, 71472084]; Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities; Research Grants Council, Hong Kong [GRF 452813] FX This research was supported by National Nature Science Foundation of China (71102037 and 71472084), by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, and by GRF 452813 from the Research Grants Council, Hong Kong. The authors thank the editor and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments. CR AAKER DA, 1990, J MARKETING, V54, P27, DOI 10.2307/1252171 Ahluwalia R, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V27, P371, DOI 10.1086/317591 Albrecht CM, 2013, PSYCHOL MARKET, V30, P647, DOI 10.1002/mar.20635 Amit E, 2009, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V138, P400, DOI 10.1037/a0015835 Bambauer-Sachse S, 2011, PSYCHOL MARKET, V28, P205, DOI 10.1002/mar.20387 Barone MJ, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V26, P386, DOI 10.1086/209570 Barsalou LW, 2008, ANNU REV PSYCHOL, V59, P617, DOI 10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639 Barsalou LW, 1999, BEHAV BRAIN SCI, V22, P637, DOI 10.1017/S0140525X99532147 Boroditsky L, 2000, COGNITION, V75, P1, DOI 10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00073-6 BOUSH DM, 1991, J MARKETING RES, V28, P16, DOI 10.2307/3172723 BRONIARCZYK SM, 1994, J MARKETING RES, V31, P214, DOI 10.2307/3152195 Cesario J, 2008, PSYCHOL SCI, V19, P415, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02102.x Chae BY, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V40, P317, DOI 10.1086/670393 Coulter KS, 2009, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V19, P144, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2009.02.008 Eyal T, 2009, SOCIAL PSYCHOL CONSU, P61 Hayes A. F., 2013, INTRO MEDIATION MODE KELLER KL, 1992, J MARKETING RES, V29, P35, DOI 10.2307/3172491 Kim BK, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V39, P867, DOI 10.1086/666464 Kim H, 2008, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V18, P116, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2008.01.006 Kim HY, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P877, DOI 10.1086/593700 Labroo AA, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P374, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.3.374 Labroo AA, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P143, DOI 10.1086/649908 LAKOFF G, 1980, COGNITIVE SCI, V4, P195, DOI 10.1207/s15516709cog0402_4 Lakoff G., 1990, Cognitive Linguistics, V1, P39, DOI 10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.39 Lakoff G., 1999, PHILOS FLESH EMBODIE Lane VR, 2000, J MARKETING, V64, P80, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.64.2.80.17996 Lau KC, 2007, PSYCHOL MARKET, V24, P421, DOI 10.1002/mar.20167 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Lee AY, 2004, J MARKETING RES, V41, P151, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.41.2.151.28665 Lee AY, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P205, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.205 Lee A. Y., 2009, SOCIAL PSYCHOL CONSU, P319 Lee S. W. S., 2012, METAPHORICAL THOUGHT Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Meyvis T, 2012, J MARKETING RES, V49, P206 Monga AB, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V33, P529, DOI 10.1086/510227 Monga AB, 2010, J MARKETING, V74, P80 Novemsky N, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P347, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.347 PARK CW, 1991, J CONSUM RES, V18, P185, DOI 10.1086/209251 Reber R, 1999, CONSCIOUS COGN, V8, P338, DOI 10.1006/ccog.1999.0386 Schwarz N, 2004, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V14, P332, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1404_2 Schwarz N, 2012, HDB THEORIES SOCIAL, P289, DOI DOI 10.4135/9781446249215.N15 Schwarz N., 1996, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, V2, P385 Shen H, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P876, DOI 10.1086/612425 Shen YC, 2011, PSYCHOL MARKET, V28, P91, DOI 10.1002/mar.20382 Thomas M, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V39, P324, DOI 10.1086/663772 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Williams LE, 2008, PSYCHOL SCI, V19, P302, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02084.x Winkielman P, 2003, PSYCHOLOGY OF EVALUATION, P189 Xu J, 2012, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V22, P418, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2011.06.006 Yeung CWM, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P495, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.2005.42.4.495 Zhang M, 2009, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V19, P497, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2009.05.001 Zhang S, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V29, P129, DOI 10.1086/338207 Zhao M, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P486 NR 53 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 5 U2 5 PU WILEY-BLACKWELL PI HOBOKEN PA 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA SN 0742-6046 EI 1520-6793 J9 PSYCHOL MARKET JI Psychol. Mark. PD JAN PY 2017 VL 34 IS 1 BP 59 EP 69 DI 10.1002/mar.20973 PG 11 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA EK1AE UT WOS:000393657400004 ER PT J AU Yan, DF Sengupta, J Hong, JW AF Yan, Dengfeng Sengupta, Jaideep Hong, Jiewen TI Why Does Psychological Distance Influence Construal Level? The Role of Processing Mode SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE psychological distance; construal level; processing mode ID SPATIAL DISTANCE; INFORMATION; REPRESENTATION; IMAGERY; PROBABILITY; TIME; COMPREHENSION; DESIRABILITY; PREFERENCES; PERCEPTION AB The influence of psychological distance on construal level has been extensively documented in both social psychology and consumer research, with proximal (distal) events shown to induce low-level (high-level) construals. However, the extant literature takes a black box approach, as it were, to this effect by viewing it in terms of a direct association between distance and construal level, without specifying any intervening variables. The current research seeks to unpack this black box and provide more detailed process insights by identifying such an intervening variable: processing mode. We argue that people tend to rely more on visual processing when construing proximal events while engaging in a greater degree of verbal processing with regard to distal targets; in turn, visual processing is more likely to yield concrete (low-level) representations, whereas verbal processing facilitates abstract (high-level) representations. This unpacked formulation not only provides additional theoretical insight into a classic effect but also yields implications that are novel to the literature. In particular, emphasizing the role of processing mode (1) enables an identification of boundary conditions for the distanceconstrual effect, and (2) indicates when and why well-established consequences of psychological distance on consumer preferences can be reversed. Results from five studies provide convergent support for our key proposition and its corollaries. C1 [Yan, Dengfeng] Univ Texas San Antonio, Coll Business, Mkt, 1 UTSA Circle, San Antonio, TX 78249 USA. [Sengupta, Jaideep] Hong Kong Univ Sci & Technol, Business, Kowloon, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. [Hong, Jiewen] Hong Kong Univ Sci & Technol, Mkt, Kowloon, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. RP Yan, DF (reprint author), Univ Texas San Antonio, Coll Business, Mkt, 1 UTSA Circle, San Antonio, TX 78249 USA. EM dengfeng.yan@utsa.edu; mkjaisen@ust.hk; mkjiewe-n@ust.hk FU Hong Kong Research Grants Council [HKUST: 16500914] FX This article is based on part of the first author's dissertation under the supervision of the second author. The authors thank the editors, associate editor, reviewers, Kentaro Fujita, and Manoj Thomas for their valuable comments. This research was supported by the General Research Fund from the Hong Kong Research Grants Council (HKUST: 16500914). CR Aggarwal P, 2015, J MARKETING RES, V52, P120, DOI 10.1509/jmr.12.0067 Agrawal N, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P448, DOI 10.1086/597331 Amit E, 2009, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V138, P400, DOI 10.1037/a0015835 Anderson J., 1973, HUMAN ASS MEMORY Bar-Anan Y, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P609, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.609 Bayuk JB, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P570, DOI 10.1086/654892 Bornemann T, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P490, DOI 10.1086/659874 Bransford J. D., 1973, VISUAL INFORMATION P, P383 CHILDERS TL, 1985, J CONSUM RES, V12, P125, DOI 10.1086/208501 Dahl DW, 1999, J MARKETING RES, V36, P18, DOI 10.2307/3151912 Escalas JE, 2004, J ADVERTISING, V33, P37 Fedorikhin A, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P698, DOI 10.1086/655665 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x Gollwitzer PM, 1999, AM PSYCHOL, V54, P493, DOI 10.1037//0003-066X.54.7.493 Hayes A. F., 2013, INTRO MEDIATION MODE Henderson MD, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V91, P845, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.91.5.845 Henderson MD, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V91, P712, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.712 Hong JW, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P456, DOI 10.1086/653492 Irmak C, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V40, P284, DOI 10.1086/670020 Jiang Yuwei, 2008, ROLE VISUAL SE UNPUB Keller Punam Anand, 1994, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V3, P29, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(08)80027-7 Kim HY, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P877, DOI 10.1086/593700 Kim YJ, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P634, DOI 10.1086/599765 KISIELIUS J, 1986, J CONSUM RES, V12, P418, DOI 10.1086/208527 KOSSLYN SM, 1975, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V7, P341, DOI 10.1016/0010-0285(75)90015-8 KOSSLYN SM, 1976, MEM COGNITION, V4, P291, DOI 10.3758/BF03213178 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Liberman N, 2009, COGNITIVE SCI, V33, P1330, DOI 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01061.x Liberman N, 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V97, P203, DOI 10.1037/a0015671 Liu W, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P640, DOI 10.1086/592126 Liviatan I, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1256, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.007 MACINNIS DJ, 1987, J CONSUM RES, V13, P473, DOI 10.1086/209082 MCGILL AL, 1989, J CONSUM RES, V16, P188, DOI 10.1086/209207 Paivio A, 1985, Can J Appl Sport Sci, V10, p22S Paivio A., 1971, IMAGERY VERBAL PROCE Petrova PK, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P442, DOI 10.1086/497556 RICHARDSON A, 1967, RES QUART, V38, P95 Sagristano MD, 2002, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V131, P364, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.131.3.364 Shutts K, 2007, PSYCHOL SCI, V18, P763, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01975.x Slovic P, 2000, LAW HUMAN BEHAV, V24, P271, DOI 10.1023/A:1005595519944 Todorov A, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P473, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.002 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Tsai CI, 2011, PSYCHOL SCI, V22, P348, DOI 10.1177/0956797611398494 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Wakslak CJ, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P641, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.641 Wileman Ralph E, 1993, VISUAL COMMUNICATING Wyer RS, 2008, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V18, P244, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2008.09.002 Wyer RS, 1999, PSYCHOL REV, V106, P89, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.106.1.89 Wyer Jr R. S., 2004, SOCIAL COMPREHENSION Yan DF, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P376, DOI 10.1086/659755 Yuille John C., 1977, J MENTAL IMAGERY, V1, P171 NR 54 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 8 U2 8 PU OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC PI CARY PA JOURNALS DEPT, 2001 EVANS RD, CARY, NC 27513 USA SN 0093-5301 EI 1537-5277 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD DEC PY 2016 VL 43 IS 4 BP 598 EP 613 DI 10.1093/jcr/ucw045 PG 16 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA EQ3AK UT WOS:000397943100007 ER PT J AU Han, D Duhachek, A Agrawal, N AF Han, Dahee Duhachek, Adam Agrawal, Nidhi TI Coping and Construal Level Matching Drives Health Message Effectiveness via Response Efficacy or Self-Efficacy Enhancement SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE coping; construal level; self-efficacy; response efficacy; persuasion ID PROTECTION MOTIVATION THEORY; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; ATTITUDE FUNCTIONS; REGULATORY FOCUS; FEAR APPEALS; WEIGHT-LOSS; BEHAVIOR; STRATEGIES; STRESS; INFORMATION AB Five experiments examine the nature of different coping strategies and their subsequent effects on the effectiveness of health messages. We theorize that the two strategies of problem-focused versus emotion-focused coping are systematically associated with distinct construal levels (lower vs. higher), and thus messages cast at different levels of construal are differentially effective when a particular coping strategy is being activated. Specifically, we demonstrate that consumers primed with problem-focused strategies are more persuaded by messages presented at lower levels of construal, whereas consumers primed with emotionfocused strategies are more persuaded by messages presented at higher levels of construal. In addition, we posit that matching with each different type of coping strategy (problem-focused vs. emotion-focused coping) is driven by distinct types of efficacy processes. In particular, we demonstrate that the effects of a match with problem-focused coping are driven by self-efficacy, and the effects of a match with emotion-focused coping are driven by response efficacy. These findings make a significant contribution by building bridges between three theoretical traditions: coping, construal level, and efficacy in the context of health messaging. C1 [Han, Dahee] McGill Univ, Mkt, 1001 Sherbrooke St West, Montreal, PQ H3A 1G5, Canada. [Han, Dahee] McGill Univ, Mkt, Desautels Fac Management, 1001 Sherbrooke St West, Montreal, PQ H3A 1G5, Canada. [Duhachek, Adam] Indiana Univ, Mkt, Kelley Sch Business, 1309 E 10th St, Bloomington, IN 47405 USA. [Duhachek, Adam] Univ Sydney, Mkt, H70 Abercrombie Bldg, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia. [Agrawal, Nidhi] Univ Washington, Foster Sch Business, Mkt & Int Business, Box 353226, Seattle, WA 98195 USA. RP Han, D (reprint author), McGill Univ, Mkt, 1001 Sherbrooke St West, Montreal, PQ H3A 1G5, Canada.; Han, D (reprint author), McGill Univ, Mkt, Desautels Fac Management, 1001 Sherbrooke St West, Montreal, PQ H3A 1G5, Canada. EM dahee.han@mcgill.ca; aduhache@indiana.edu; nid-hia@uw.edu FU Kelley School of Business, Indiana University; Desautels Faculty of Management, McGill University FX DaHee Han (dahee.han@mcgill.ca) is an assistant professor of marketing, an assistant professor of marketing at the Desautels Faculty of Management, McGill University, 1001 Sherbrooke Street West, Montreal, QC H3A 1G5, Canada. Adam Duhachek (aduhache@indiana.edu) is the Nestle-Hustad Professor of Marketing at the Kelley School of Business, Indiana University, 1309 E. 10th Street, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA, and Honorary professor of marketing, University of Sydney, H70 - Abercrombie Building, Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia. Nidhi Agrawal (nidhia@uw.edu) is the Michael G. Foster Professor of marketing and international business at the Foster School of Business, University of Washington, Box 353226, Seattle, WA 98195, USA. This article is based on the second essay of the first author's doctoral dissertation. She appreciates the valuable comments from her dissertation committee members: Scott MacKenzie, Ashok Lalwani, and Edward Hirt. The authors acknowledge the helpful input of the editor, associate editor, and three reviewers. The authors are grateful to Juliano Laran and seminar participants at the University of Cincinnati, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and University of Sydney for their helpful feedback on earlier versions of this research. Support from the Kelley School of Business, Indiana University, and from the Desautels Faculty of Management, McGill University, are gratefully acknowledged. All correspondence should be directed to DaHee Han (dahee.han@mcgill.ca). Supplemental materials will be included as an attachment in the online-only version of the article. CR Agrawal N, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P448, DOI 10.1086/597331 BANDURA A, 1982, AM PSYCHOL, V37, P122, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.37.2.122 Matheson Kimberly, 2004, J EXPT SOCIAL PSYCHO, V40, P777 Brug J, 1999, PATIENT EDUC COUNS, V36, P145, DOI 10.1016/S0738-3991(98)00131-1 Caldwell K, 2010, J AM COLL HEALTH, V58, P433, DOI 10.1080/07448480903540481 Carmody TP, 2007, J PSYCHOACTIVE DRUGS, V39, P499 Casey M. K., 2009, SO COMMUNICATION J, V74, P57, DOI DOI 10.1080/10417940802335953 CHAMBLISS CA, 1979, COGNITIVE THER RES, V3, P349, DOI 10.1007/BF01184448 Chandran S, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P375, DOI 10.1086/422116 Choi HJ, 2013, HEALTH COMMUN, V28, P40, DOI 10.1080/10410236.2012.720245 Cui G, 2009, J CONSUM MARK, V26, P110, DOI 10.1108/07363760910940474 De Ridder D, 2007, PSYCHOL HEALTH, V22, P677, DOI 10.1080/14768320601020238 DEATON AV, 1986, REHABIL PSYCHOL, V31, P231, DOI 10.1037//0090-5550.31.4.231 Dickerson SS, 2004, PSYCHOL BULL, V130, P355, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.130.3.355 Duhachek A, 2005, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V15, P52, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1501_8 Duhachek Adam, 2008, HDB CONSUMER PSYCHOL, P1057 Duhachek A, 2012, J MARKETING RES, V49, P928 Ehrich KR, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P266, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.2005.42.3.266 Folkman S, 2000, AM PSYCHOL, V55, P647, DOI 10.1037//0003-066X.55.6.647 FORSYTHE CJ, 1987, COGNITIVE THER RES, V11, P473, DOI 10.1007/BF01175357 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index, 2010, OBESITY LINKED LOWER Gollwitzer PM, 1997, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V73, P186, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.73.1.186 Hayes A. F., 2013, INTRO MEDIATION MODE Higgins ET, 2000, AM PSYCHOL, V55, P1217, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.55.11.1217 HOLMES DS, 1974, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V29, P212, DOI 10.1037/h0035912 Keller PA, 2006, J CONSUM RES, V33, P109, DOI 10.1086/504141 Khalfa S, 2003, ANN NY ACAD SCI, V999, P374, DOI 10.1196/annals.1284.045 Kreuter MW, 1999, HEALTH PSYCHOL, V18, P487, DOI 10.1037/0278-6133.18.5.487 Labroo AA, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P800, DOI 10.1086/593683 Lazarus RS, 1999, SOC RES, V66, P653 Lazarus Richard S., 1983, DENIAL STRESS, P1 Lazarus R. S., 1984, STRESS APPRAISAL COP Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Lee Angela Y, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V6, P205 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Loewenstein G, 1996, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V65, P272, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1996.0028 Luce MF, 1999, J MARKETING RES, V36, P143, DOI 10.2307/3152089 Luce MF, 1999, J CONSUM RES, V26, P242, DOI 10.1086/209561 Mayer ND, 2010, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V36, P443, DOI 10.1177/0146167210362981 Mick DG, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V25, P123, DOI 10.1086/209531 Miller EG, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P635, DOI 10.1086/521899 Nicolson N. A., 2008, HDB PHYSL RES METHOD, P37, DOI DOI 10.4135/9781412976244.N3 Petty RE, 1998, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V24, P227, DOI 10.1177/0146167298243001 Preacher KJ, 2007, MULTIVAR BEHAV RES, V42, P185, DOI 10.1080/00273170701341316 Folkman Susan, 1980, J HLTH SOCIAL BEHAV, V21, P219 ROGERS RW, 1975, J PSYCHOL, V91, P93, DOI 10.1080/00223980.1975.9915803 Rogers R. W., 1983, SOCIAL PSYCHOPHYSIOL, P153, DOI DOI 10.1002/9780470479216.CORPSY0897 Rothman AJ, 1997, PSYCHOL BULL, V121, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.121.1.3 Sagristano MD, 2002, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V131, P364, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.131.3.364 Schwarzer R, 2000, HEALTH PSYCHOL, V19, P487, DOI 10.1037/0278-6133.19.5.487 SHAVITT S, 1990, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V26, P124, DOI 10.1016/0022-1031(90)90072-T Skinner CS, 1999, ANN BEHAV MED, V21, P290, DOI 10.1007/BF02895960 Spassova G, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V40, P159, DOI 10.1086/669145 Spencer SJ, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P845, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.845 STANLEY MA, 1986, BASIC APPL SOC PSYCH, V7, P101, DOI 10.1207/s15324834basp0702_2 Sujan Mita, 1999, EUROPEAN ADV CONSUME, V4, P182 Todorov A, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P473, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.002 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Updegraff JA, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P249, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.01.007 Uskul AK, 2009, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V45, P535, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.12.005 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 WELLER DJ, 1977, SOC WORK HEALTH CARE, V3, P7 Wheeler SC, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V31, P787, DOI 10.1086/426613 White K, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P472 WITTE K, 1992, COMMUN MONOGR, V59, P329 worth Owns, 2005, NEUROPSYCHOANALYSIS, V7, P83 WURTELE SK, 1987, HEALTH PSYCHOL, V6, P453, DOI 10.1037/0278-6133.6.5.453 NR 71 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 1 U2 1 PU OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC PI CARY PA JOURNALS DEPT, 2001 EVANS RD, CARY, NC 27513 USA SN 0093-5301 EI 1537-5277 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD OCT PY 2016 VL 43 IS 3 BP 429 EP 447 DI 10.1093/jcr/ucw036 PG 19 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA EQ2ZK UT WOS:000397940400005 ER PT J AU Skippon, SM Kinnear, N Lloyd, L Stannard, J AF Skippon, Stephen M. Kinnear, Neale Lloyd, Louise Stannard, Jenny TI How experience of use influences mass-market drivers' willingness to consider a battery electric vehicle: A randomised controlled trial SO TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PART A-POLICY AND PRACTICE LA English DT Article DE Electric vehicle; Consumer; Adoption; Randomised controlled trial; Symbolic; Performance ID PLUG-IN HYBRID; DISCRETE-CHOICE ANALYSIS; CHARGING BEHAVIOR; CAR USE; PREFERENCES; ATTITUDES; PURCHASE; UK; INVENTORY; RESPONSES AB Uptake of electric vehicles (EVs) by consumers could reduce CO2 emissions from light duty road transport, but little is known about how mass-market consumer drivers will respond to them. Self-Congruity theory proposes that products are preferred whose symbolic meanings are congruent with personal identity. Further, Construal Level theory suggests that only those who are psychologically close to a new product category through direct experience with it can make concrete construals related to their lifestyles; most drivers lack this for EVs. For instance, potential performance benefits of EVs might offset range limitations for consumers who have such direct experience. The effect of direct experience was tested in a randomised controlled trial with 393 mass-market consumer drivers. An experimental group were given direct experience of a modern battery electric vehicle (BEV), and a control group an equivalent conventional car. Despite rating the performance of the BEV more highly than that of the conventional car, willingness to consider a BEV declined after experience, particularly if the range of the BEV considered was short. The participants willing to consider a short-range BEV were those high in self-congruity, for whom the BEV could act as a strong sytnbol of personal identity. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. C1 [Skippon, Stephen M.; Kinnear, Neale; Lloyd, Louise; Stannard, Jenny] TRL, Crowthorne House,Nine Mile Ride, Wokingham RG40 3GA, Berks, England. RP Skippon, SM (reprint author), TRL, Crowthorne House,Nine Mile Ride, Wokingham RG40 3GA, Berks, England. EM sskippon@trl.co.uk; nkinnear@trl.co.uk; lklloyd@trl.co.uk; jstannard@trl.co.uk FU Shell International Petroleum Company FX This research was funded by Shell International Petroleum Company. CR Agresti A., 2002, CATEGORICAL DATA ANA Ajovalasit M., 2007, International Journal of Vehicle Noise and Vibration, V3, DOI 10.1504/IJVNV.2007.014905 Axsen J, 2012, ENVIRON PLANN A, V44, P1057 Axsen J, 2013, ECOL ECON, V95, P96, DOI 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.08.009 Axsen J, 2013, ENERG POLICY, V61, P532, DOI 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.122 Borg G, 1998, BORGS PERCEIVED EXER Bunce L, 2014, TRANSPORT RES A-POL, V59, P278, DOI 10.1016/j.tra.2013.12.001 Burgess M, 2013, TRANSPORT RES F-TRAF, V17, P33, DOI 10.1016/j.trf.2012.09.003 Caperello N, 2013, TRANSPORT RES A-POL, V54, P155, DOI 10.1016/j.tra.2013.07.016 Carley S, 2013, TRANSPORT RES D-TR E, V18, P39, DOI 10.1016/j.trd.2012.09.007 Christensen C, 2013, INNOVATORS DILEMMA Cocron P, 2011, IET INTELL TRANSP SY, V5, P127, DOI 10.1049/iet-its.2010.0126 COSTA PT, 1995, J PERS ASSESS, V64, P21, DOI 10.1207/s15327752jpa6401_2 Delang CO, 2012, TRANSPORT RES D-TR E, V17, P492, DOI 10.1016/j.trd.2012.04.004 Dimitropoulos A, 2013, TRANSPORT RES A-POL, V55, P27, DOI 10.1016/j.tra.2013.08.001 Dittmar H., 1992, SOCIAL PSYCHOL MAT P Energy Technologies Institute, 2013, TRANSP AFF TRANS SUS Eriksen M., 1996, J EUROMARKETING, V6, P41 Franke T, 2013, TRANSPORT RES F-TRAF, V21, P75, DOI 10.1016/j.trf.2013.09.002 Franke T, 2013, TRANSPORT RES A-POL, V48, P109, DOI 10.1016/j.tra.2012.10.010 Goldberg LR, 2006, J RES PERS, V40, P84, DOI 10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.007 Golob TF, 1998, TRANSPORT RES B-METH, V32, P441, DOI 10.1016/S0191-2615(98)00001-0 Gould J, 1998, TRANSPORT RES D-TR E, V3, P157, DOI 10.1016/S1361-9209(97)00018-7 Graham R. E., 2011, TRANSP RES PART A, V45, P401 Graham-Rowe E, 2012, TRANSPORT RES A-POL, V46, P140, DOI 10.1016/j.tra.2011.09.008 Hackbarth A, 2013, TRANSPORT RES D-TR E, V25, P5, DOI 10.1016/j.trd.2013.07.002 Heffner RR, 2007, TRANSPORT RES D-TR E, V12, P396, DOI 10.1016/j.trd.2007.04.003 Hewstone M, 1989, CAUSAL ATTRIBUTION C Hoeffler S, 2003, J MARKETING RES, V40, P406, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.40.4.406.19394 Jensen AF, 2013, TRANSPORT RES D-TR E, V25, P24, DOI 10.1016/j.trd.2013.07.006 Jones E.E., 1965, ADV EXPT SOCIAL PSYC, V2 Levine D., 1967, NEBRASKA S MOTIVATIO, V15 Klockner CA, 2013, TRANSPORT RES D-TR E, V21, P32, DOI 10.1016/j.trd.2013.02.007 Landsberger H.A., 1958, HAWTHORNE REV MANAGE Lebeau K, 2012, TRANSPORT RES D-TR E, V17, P592, DOI 10.1016/j.trd.2012.07.004 Liberman M., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B Lieven T, 2011, TRANSPORT RES D-TR E, V16, P236, DOI 10.1016/j.trd.2010.12.001 McCarney R, 2007, BMC MED RES METHODOL, V7, DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-7-30 McCrae R. R., 2003, PERSONALITY ADULTHOO Miller G., 2009, SPENT SEX EVOLUTION Rogers E, 2003, DIFFUSION INNOVATION Schuitema G, 2013, TRANSPORT RES A-POL, V48, P39, DOI 10.1016/j.tra.2012.10.004 Shin J, 2012, TRANSPORT RES D-TR E, V17, P138, DOI 10.1016/j.trd.2011.10.004 SIRGY MJ, 1985, J BUS RES, V13, P195, DOI 10.1016/0148-2963(85)90026-8 Sirgy M.J., 1982, DEV MARKETING SCI, V5, P129 Skippon S.M., 2014, THESIS Skippon S, 2011, TRANSPORT RES D-TR E, V16, P525, DOI 10.1016/j.trd.2011.05.005 Skippon SM, 2014, TRANSPORT RES F-TRAF, V23, P15, DOI 10.1016/j.trf.2013.12.008 Steg L, 2005, TRANSPORT RES A-POL, V39, P147, DOI 10.1016/j.tra.2004.07.001 Taubman-Ben-Ari O, 2004, ACCIDENT ANAL PREV, V36, P323, DOI 10.1016/S0001-4575(03)00010-1 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Ziegler A, 2012, TRANSPORT RES A-POL, V46, P1372, DOI 10.1016/j.tra.2012.05.016 NR 52 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 16 U2 22 PU PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD PI OXFORD PA THE BOULEVARD, LANGFORD LANE, KIDLINGTON, OXFORD OX5 1GB, ENGLAND SN 0965-8564 J9 TRANSPORT RES A-POL JI Transp. Res. Pt. A-Policy Pract. PD OCT PY 2016 VL 92 BP 26 EP 42 DI 10.1016/j.tra.2016.06.034 PG 17 WC Economics; Transportation; Transportation Science & Technology SC Business & Economics; Transportation GA DX4WL UT WOS:000384381700003 ER PT J AU Lu, MY Jen, W AF Lu, Mingying Jen, William TI Effects of Product Option Framing and Temporal Distance on Consumer Choice: The Moderating Role of Process versus Outcome Mental Simulations SO PSYCHOLOGY & MARKETING LA English DT Article ID CONSTRUAL LEVEL THEORY; LOSS AVERSION; REFERENCE DEPENDENCE; DECISION-MAKING; BRAND CHOICE; TIME; CONFLICT; BEHAVIOR; THOUGHT AB This research demonstrates that the type of product option framing (additive vs. subtractive) and the temporal distance between an option choice and later buying behavior can influence decision difficulty. In two studies, the authors show that consumers who engage in additive option framing experience greater difficulty in making decisions for the near future than for the distant future, whereas consumers who engage in subtractive option framing experience greater difficulty in making decisions for the distant future than for the near future. In addition, by using theories of mental simulation, the authors show that communication strategies that promote process simulations for distant-future choices in the subtractive option framing condition and those that promote outcome simulations for near-future choices in the additive option framing condition are most effective in reducing decision difficulty. These effects hold across varying product categories and varying option prices. C1 [Lu, Mingying; Jen, William] Natl Chiao Tung Univ, Hsinchu, Taiwan. RP Lu, MY (reprint author), Natl Chiao Tung Univ, Dept Transportat & Logist Management, Room A803,Assembly Bldg 1,1001 Daxue Rd, Hsinchu 30010, Taiwan. EM lancasterlu.tem95g@g2.nctu.edu.tw CR Ariely D, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P134, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.42.2.134.62283 Balakrishnan P. V., 2000, MARK MANAG, V10, P1 Biswas D, 2008, PSYCHOL MARKET, V25, P399, DOI 10.1002/mar.20217 Carmon Z, 2003, J CONSUM RES, V30, P15, DOI 10.1086/374701 Castano R, 2008, J MARKETING RES, V45, P320, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.45.3.320 Chandran S, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P375, DOI 10.1086/422116 Chatterjee S, 1996, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V67, P144, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1996.0070 Chernev A, 2009, SOC COGNITION, V27, P249 Dhar R, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P96, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70014-1 Escalas JE, 2003, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V13, P246, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP1303_06 Hansen F., 1972, CONSUMER CHOICE BEHA HARDIE BGS, 1993, MARKET SCI, V12, P378, DOI 10.1287/mksc.12.4.378 HUBER VL, 1987, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V40, P136, DOI 10.1016/0749-5978(87)90009-4 Jin LY, 2012, TOURISM MANAGE, V33, P266, DOI 10.1016/j.tourman.2011.03.005 KAHNEMAN D, 1979, ECONOMETRICA, V47, P263, DOI 10.2307/1914185 Kahneman D., 1990, J POLITICAL EC, V98, P1352 Levin IP, 1998, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V11, P193, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199809)11:3<193::AID-BDM297>3.3.CO;2-7 Levin IP, 2002, MARKET LETT, V13, P335, DOI 10.1023/A:1020370516638 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P113, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7 Luce MF, 1997, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V23, P384, DOI 10.1037/0278-7393.23.2.384 Lynch JG, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P107, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70016-5 MENASCO MB, 1978, J MARKETING RES, V15, P650, DOI 10.2307/3150639 Park CW, 2000, J MARKETING RES, V37, P187, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.37.2.187.18731 Pham LB, 1999, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V25, P250, DOI 10.1177/0146167299025002010 Sagristano MD, 2002, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V131, P364, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.131.3.364 SHAFIR E, 1993, COGNITION, V49, P11, DOI 10.1016/0010-0277(93)90034-S SHAFIR E, 1993, MEM COGNITION, V21, P546, DOI 10.3758/BF03197186 Simonson I, 2004, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V95, P156, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2004.07.001 Taylor SE, 1998, AM PSYCHOL, V53, P429, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.53.4.429 Thaler R., 1985, MARKET SCI, V4, P199, DOI DOI 10.1287/MKSC.4.3.199 Thompson DV, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P562, DOI 10.1086/599325 Thompson DV, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P431, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.2005.42.4.431 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X TVERSKY A, 1991, Q J ECON, V106, P1039, DOI 10.2307/2937956 TYEBJEE TT, 1979, J CONSUM RES, V6, P295, DOI 10.1086/208770 VonsNeumann J., 1953, THEORY GAMES EC BEHA Zhao M, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P379, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.379 NR 38 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 11 U2 16 PU WILEY PI HOBOKEN PA 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA SN 0742-6046 EI 1520-6793 J9 PSYCHOL MARKET JI Psychol. Mark. PD OCT PY 2016 VL 33 IS 10 BP 856 EP 863 DI 10.1002/mar.20921 PG 8 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA DX3TX UT WOS:000384298500006 ER PT J AU Hamby, A AF Hamby, Anne TI One For Me, One For You: Cause-Related Marketing with Buy-One Give-One Promotions SO PSYCHOLOGY & MARKETING LA English DT Article ID PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; CONSTRUAL-LEVEL; CONSUMER; RESPONSES; IMPACT; ORIENTATION; BEHAVIOR; CRM; FIT AB A Buy-one Give-one (BOGO) donation model features the donation of a physical entity and is a popular cause-related marketing (CM) promotion format. Little is known about factors that underlie consumer response to BOGO-format promotions. The current studies, collectively, indicate BOGO promotions evoke a concrete construal mindset [(Trope & Liberman 2003). Temporal construal. Psychological Review, 110, 403-421], which influences consumer response in a distinct manner: BOGO promotions enhance promotion attitudes and purchase intention when bundled with utilitarian products, and enhance consumer response through perceived helpfulness of the donated entity. (C) 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. C1 [Hamby, Anne] Hofstra Univ, Hempstead, NY 11550 USA. RP Hamby, A (reprint author), Hofstra Univ, Frank G Zarb Sch Business, 124 Weller Hall, Hempstead, NY 11549 USA. EM Anne.M.Hamby@hofstra.edu OI Hamby, Anne/0000-0001-9744-7076 CR AJZEN I, 1977, PSYCHOL BULL, V84, P888, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.84.5.888 BATSON CD, 1990, AM PSYCHOL, V45, P336, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.45.3.336 Chang CT, 2008, PSYCHOL MARKET, V25, P1089, DOI 10.1002/mar.20255 Fisher RJ, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P519, DOI 10.1086/586909 Fujita K, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P799, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02372.x Glaser J. S., 1994, UNITED WAY SCANDAL I, V22 Grau SL, 2007, J ADVERTISING, V36, P19, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367360402 Hayes A. F., 2013, INTRO MEDIATION MODE [Anonymous], 2015, IEG SPONSORSHIP REPO Kim H, 2008, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V18, P116, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2008.01.006 Kim HY, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P877, DOI 10.1086/593700 Koschate-Fischer N, 2012, J MARKETING RES, V49, P910 Lafferty BA, 2004, PSYCHOL MARKET, V21, P509, DOI 10.1002/mar.20017 Lafferty BA, 2014, J BUS RES, V67, P1455, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.07.021 Lee AY, 2004, J MARKETING RES, V41, P151, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.41.2.151.28665 Lee EM, 2012, J BUS RES, V65, P1558, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.02.040 Luguri JB, 2012, PSYCHOL SCI, V23, P756, DOI 10.1177/0956797611433877 Marquis C., 2014, STANFORD SOCIAL INNO, V12, P28 Nan XL, 2007, J ADVERTISING, V36, P63, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367360204 Olson JC, 1983, ADVERTISING CONSUMER, V1, P77 Pracejus JW, 2003, J ADVERTISING, V32, P19 Rim S, 2013, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V104, P457, DOI 10.1037/a0031024 Robinson SR, 2012, J MARKETING, V76, P126 Slovic P, 2007, JUDGM DECIS MAK, V2, P79 Strahilevitz M, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V24, P434, DOI 10.1086/209519 Strahilevitz Michal, 1999, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V8, P215, DOI DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP0803_02 Tangari AH, 2010, J ADVERTISING, V39, P35, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367390203 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 VARADARAJAN PR, 1988, J MARKETING, V52, P58, DOI 10.2307/1251450 Woltin KA, 2011, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P418, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.11.006 NR 32 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 20 U2 23 PU WILEY-BLACKWELL PI HOBOKEN PA 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA SN 0742-6046 EI 1520-6793 J9 PSYCHOL MARKET JI Psychol. Mark. PD SEP PY 2016 VL 33 IS 9 BP 692 EP 703 DI 10.1002/mar.20910 PG 12 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA DX3TT UT WOS:000384298000002 ER PT J AU Darke, PR Brady, MK Benedicktus, RL Wilson, AE AF Darke, Peter R. Brady, Michael K. Benedicktus, Ray L. Wilson, Andrew E. TI Feeling Close From Afar: The Role of Psychological Distance in Offsetting Distrust in Unfamiliar Online Retailers SO JOURNAL OF RETAILING LA English DT Article DE Construal Level Theory; Psychological distance; Online trust; Multichannel retailing; Internet retailing ID CONSTRUAL-LEVEL; CONSUMER; TRUST; EXPERIENCES; QUALITY AB E-commerce offers retailers the opportunity to attract new customers online; however, consumer distrust toward unfamiliar retailers can seriously impede these efforts. Construal Level Theory suggests that such distrust can be partially understood in terms of psychological distance, and that reducing psychological distance using simple website tactics should overcome distrust and encourage first-time purchases. Studies 1 and 2 show a physically distant retail store, or lack of a physical store altogether, contribute to psychological distance, distrust, and reluctance to purchase online. Studies 2 and 3 further show that website images of an office building (increased tangibility), or the owner's name and appearance (social proximity), can improve trust and purchase intentions by specifically reducing the psychological distance otherwise associated with purely virtual or physically distant retailers. Published by Elsevier Inc. C1 [Darke, Peter R.] York Univ, Schulich Sch Business, 4700 Keele St, Toronto, ON M3J 1P3, Canada. [Brady, Michael K.] Florida State Univ, Dept Mkt, Tallahassee, FL 32306 USA. [Benedicktus, Ray L.] Lieberman Res Worldwide, 7777 Ctr Ave,Suite 440, Huntington Beach, CA 92647 USA. [Wilson, Andrew E.] St Marys Coll Calif, 1928 St Marys Rd, Moraga, CA 94556 USA. RP Brady, MK (reprint author), Florida State Univ, Dept Mkt, Tallahassee, FL 32306 USA. EM pdarke@schulich.yorku.ca; mbrady@fsu.edu; rbenedicktus@lrwonline.com; andrew.wilson4@stmarys-ca.edu CR Aguirre E, 2015, J RETAILING, V91, P34, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2014.09.005 Bar-Anan Y, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P609, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.609 BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 Benedicktus RL, 2010, J RETAILING, V86, P322, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2010.04.002 Bodur HO, 2015, J RETAILING, V91, P125, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2014.09.003 Briggs Ronald, 1973, IMAGE ENV COGNITIVE, P361 Campbell MC, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P439, DOI 10.1086/323731 CHANG Y-C., 2004, J SOCIOECONOMICS, V33, P491, DOI 10.1016/j.socec.2004.04.004 Conway T., 2000, EUR J MARKETING, V34, P1391, DOI 10.1108/03090560010348641 COSHALL JT, 1985, GEOGR ANN B, V67, P107, DOI 10.2307/490422 Darke PR, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P114, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.1.114 Darke Peter R., 2012, ROUTLEDGE COMPANION Dholakia RR, 2005, J INTERACT MARK, V19, P63, DOI 10.1002/dir.20035 FORNELL C, 1981, J MARKETING RES, V18, P39, DOI 10.2307/3151312 Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x Anderson Erin, 1988, J LAW ECON ORGAN, V4, P305 Harwood J, 2000, J COMMUN, V50, P31, DOI 10.1093/joc/50.3.31 Herhausen D, 2015, J RETAILING, V91, P309, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2014.12.009 Kim K, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P706, DOI 10.1086/592131 Korgaonkar PK, 1999, J ADVERTISING RES, V39, P53 Landrum Gene N., 2004, ENTREPRENEURIAL GENI Liberman N., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B LICHTENSTEIN DR, 1990, J MARKETING, V54, P54, DOI 10.2307/1251816 Lyndon John, 1997, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V73, P419 Maglio SJ, 2013, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V142, P644, DOI 10.1037/a0030258 McCrea SM, 2012, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V102, P51, DOI 10.1037/a0026108 Melis K, 2015, J RETAILING, V91, P272, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2014.12.004 Microsoft, 2014, ONL SCAMS FRAUD SURV MORGAN RM, 1994, J MARKETING, V58, P20, DOI 10.2307/1252308 Pauwels Koen, 2015, J RETAILING IN PRESS Pavlou PA, 2004, INFORM SYST RES, V15, P37, DOI 10.1287/isre.1040.0015 PHIPPS AG, 1979, T I BRIT GEOGR, V4, P94, DOI 10.2307/621926 Schlosser AE, 2006, J MARKETING, V70, P133, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.70.2.133 Schonfeld Erick, 2010, FORRESTER RES, V8 Sethi R, 2000, J MARKETING, V64, P1, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.64.2.1.17999 Singh J, 2000, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V28, P150, DOI 10.1177/0092070300281014 Stephan E, 2011, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P397, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.11.001 Swift JS, 1999, INT MARKET REV, V16, P182, DOI 10.1108/02651339910274684 Tax SS, 1998, J MARKETING, V62, P60, DOI 10.2307/1252161 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Vara Vauhini, 2006, WALL STREET J, pA1 Haiping Wang, 2010, J INTERACT MARK, V2, P97, DOI [10.1109/CINC.2010.5643778, DOI 10.1002/DIR.10008] Zeithaml VA, 1996, J MARKETING, V60, P31, DOI 10.2307/1251929 Zhao M, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P486 NR 45 TC 1 Z9 1 U1 15 U2 26 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 0022-4359 EI 1873-3271 J9 J RETAILING JI J. Retail. PD SEP PY 2016 VL 92 IS 3 BP 287 EP 299 DI 10.1016/j.jretai.2016.02.001 PG 13 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA DV5ZO UT WOS:000383009400003 ER PT J AU Marzocchi, GL Pizzi, G Scarpi, D AF Marzocchi, Gian Luca Pizzi, Gabriele Scarpi, Daniele TI When a picture's worth a thousand words: The effects of visual construal priming on information acquisition and choice SO MARKETING LETTERS LA English DT Article DE Construal level; Choice; Priming; Attribute-based; Alternative-based ID PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; DECISION-MAKING; LEVEL; IMPACT; TASK; FEASIBILITY; STRATEGIES; ATTITUDE; FOREST AB Individuals acquire information in an attribute- or alternative-based way depending on the construal level of the choice situation. This research contributes to the literature by showing that different information acquisition strategies can emerge not only as a function of the psychological distance from the object of evaluation but also through situational cues unrelated to the evaluation task, such as a visual priming. Furthermore, results show that which pattern of information acquisition is adopted in turn affects individual choices. While the literature has already found a direct effect of construal levels on choices, the present analysis supports the existence also of an indirect effect, mediated by the information acquisition pattern. Consequently, managers can implement simple tools, such as visual stimuli alongside the presentation of product-related information, to display information consistently with individuals' construal levels, bearing in mind that the way consumers acquire information is a predictor of their choices. C1 [Marzocchi, Gian Luca; Pizzi, Gabriele; Scarpi, Daniele] Univ Bologna, Dept Management, Bologna, Italy. RP Pizzi, G (reprint author), Univ Bologna, Dept Management, Bologna, Italy. EM gianluca.marzocchi@unibo.it; gabriele.pizzi@unibo.it; daniele.scarpi@unibo.it OI Pizzi, Gabriele/0000-0002-7531-9003 CR Bar-Anan Y, 2007, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V136, P610, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.136.4.610 Barone MJ, 2015, MARKET LETT, V26, P213, DOI 10.1007/s11002-013-9276-8 Baskin E, 2014, J CONSUM RES, V41, P169, DOI 10.1086/675737 BETTMAN JR, 1977, J CONSUM RES, V3, P233, DOI 10.1086/208672 Borovoi L, 2010, JUDGM DECIS MAK, V5, P102 Chernev A, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V85, P151, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.85.1.151 Creyer E. H., 1990, Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, V3, P1 FISHBEIN M, 1963, HUM RELAT, V16, P233, DOI 10.1177/001872676301600302 Hansen J, 2010, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V36, P1576, DOI 10.1177/0146167210386238 Hayes AF, 2011, COMMUN SER, P434 Laran J, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P1002, DOI 10.1086/648380 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Mandel N, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V29, P235, DOI 10.1086/341573 Mantel SP, 1999, J CONSUM RES, V25, P335, DOI 10.1086/209543 Patalano AL, 2010, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V23, P353, DOI 10.1002/bdm.661 PAYNE JW, 1988, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V14, P534, DOI 10.1037//0278-7393.14.3.534 Pieters R, 1999, INT J RES MARK, V16, P1, DOI 10.1016/S0167-8116(98)00022-6 Pizzi G, 2014, J ECON PSYCHOL, V42, P41, DOI 10.1016/j.joep.2013.12.001 RUSSO JE, 1983, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V9, P676 Sagristano MD, 2002, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V131, P364, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.131.3.364 Simon HA, 1955, Q J ECON, V69, P99, DOI 10.2307/1884852 Smith PK, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P578, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.578 Stephan E, 2010, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V98, P268, DOI 10.1037/a0016960 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 TVERSKY A, 1969, PSYCHOL REV, V76, P31, DOI 10.1037/h0026750 Ulkumen G, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P958 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Van Kerckhove A., 2015, J CONSUMER RES, V41 Wakslak C, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P52, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02250.x Wright S, 2012, MARKET LETT, V23, P253, DOI 10.1007/s11002-011-9151-4 NR 30 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 8 U2 11 PU SPRINGER PI DORDRECHT PA VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS SN 0923-0645 EI 1573-059X J9 MARKET LETT JI Mark. Lett. PD SEP PY 2016 VL 27 IS 3 BP 487 EP 498 DI 10.1007/s11002-015-9365-y PG 12 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA DU1XS UT WOS:000382004600007 ER PT J AU Goldsmith, K Newman, GE Dhar, R AF Goldsmith, Kelly Newman, George E. Dhar, Ravi TI Mental representation changes the evaluation of green product benefits SO NATURE CLIMATE CHANGE LA English DT Article ID PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; CONCRETE MINDSETS; CONSTRUAL-LEVEL; CONSUMERS; BEHAVIOR; INTENTIONS; PERSUASION; FLUENCY; VALUES; MATTER AB Although campaigns designed to promote pro-environmental behaviours increasingly highlight self-interest, recent research suggests that such appeals may not always be effective(1-3). For example, individuals are more likely to check their tyre pressure when prompted with self-transcendent (that is, benefits to the environment) versus economic motives(1); and, self-transcendent appeals are more likely to promote recycling behaviours than self-interested appeals(2). The present experiments identify an important psychological factor that helps to explain when highlighting economic benefits will be more or less effective in encouraging pro-environmental behaviours. Specifically, we demonstrate that highlighting economic benefits (for example, the money a consumer can save) reduces consumer interest in sustainable products when individuals are in more abstract mindsets compared with when the evaluation is more immediate (that is, their mindset is more concrete). Further, we provide evidence that this shift in interest is driven by the lack of `fit' between abstract thinking and economic motivations, in the context of pro-environmental behaviour. C1 [Goldsmith, Kelly] Northwestern Univ, Kellogg Sch Management, Dept Mkt, Evanston, IL 60208 USA. [Newman, George E.; Dhar, Ravi] Northwestern Univ, Yale Sch Management, Dept Mkt, New Haven, CT 06520 USA. RP Goldsmith, K (reprint author), Northwestern Univ, Kellogg Sch Management, Dept Mkt, Evanston, IL 60208 USA. EM Kelly-Goldsmith@Kellogg.Northwestern.edu CR Aaker JL, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P33, DOI 10.1086/321946 Agerstrom J, 2009, SOC COGNITION, V27, P261 Auger P, 2003, J BUS ETHICS, V42, P281, DOI 10.1023/A:1022212816261 Auger P, 2007, J BUS ETHICS, V76, P361, DOI 10.1007/s10551-006-9287-y Bolderdijk JW, 2013, NAT CLIM CHANGE, V3, P413, DOI [10.1038/nclimate1767, 10.1038/NCLIMATE1767] Carrington MJ, 2010, J BUS ETHICS, V97, P139, DOI 10.1007/s10551-010-0501-6 Evans L, 2013, NAT CLIM CHANGE, V3, P122, DOI [10.1038/nclimate1662, 10.1038/NCLIMATE1662] Eyal T., 2012, HERZLIYA SERIES PERS, P185 Eyal T, 2009, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V45, P35, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.07.023 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Giacomantonio M, 2010, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P824, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.05.001 Griskevicius V, 2013, PSYCHOL SCI, V24, P197, DOI 10.1177/0956797612451471 Hunt CV, 2010, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P1155, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.05.004 Kivetz Y, 2007, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V102, P193, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.07.002 Labroo AA, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P374, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.3.374 Lamberton CP, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V40, P393, DOI 10.1086/671103 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Lee AY, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P205, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.205 Meyvis T, 2012, J MARKETING RES, V49, P206 Oberseder M, 2011, J BUS ETHICS, V104, P449, DOI 10.1007/s10551-11-0925-7 Oppenheimer DM, 2009, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V45, P867, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.03.009 Thogersen J, 2013, NAT CLIM CHANGE, V3, P100 Torelli CJ, 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V96, P231, DOI 10.1037/a0013836 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 White K, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P472 NR 27 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 4 U2 12 PU NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP PI LONDON PA MACMILLAN BUILDING, 4 CRINAN ST, LONDON N1 9XW, ENGLAND SN 1758-678X EI 1758-6798 J9 NAT CLIM CHANGE JI Nat. Clim. Chang. PD SEP PY 2016 VL 6 IS 9 BP 847 EP + DI 10.1038/NCLIMATE3019 PG 5 WC Environmental Sciences; Environmental Studies; Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences SC Environmental Sciences & Ecology; Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences GA DU3UB UT WOS:000382136600014 ER PT J AU Chen, MY AF Chen, Ming-Yi TI Consumer response to health product communication: The role of perceived product efficacy SO JOURNAL OF BUSINESS RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE Message framing; Self-construal; Temporal construal; Construal level theory; Perceived product efficacy ID TEMPORAL DISTANCE; CONSTRUAL-LEVEL; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; FRAMED MESSAGES; SELF-CONSTRUALS; BEHAVIOR; CULTURE; INFORMATION; PERSUASION; COGNITION AB This study investigates the persuasiveness effectiveness of the interplay effects of message framing, self-construal, and temporal construal (or construal level), on product attitudes, perceived product efficacy, and behavioral intention. The results indicate that for independent-self individuals, gain-framed messages raise more positive product attitudes, product efficacy, and behavioral intention than loss-framed messages when the temporal construal is distant or construal level is abstract. For interdependent-self individuals, loss-framed and mixed-framed messages raise more positive product attitudes, product efficacy, and behavioral intention than gain-framed messages. Interdependent-self individuals respond with more positive attitudes, product efficacy, and behavioral intention toward mixed-framed messages than independent-self individuals. Furthermore, the perceived product efficacy mediates the interaction between message framing, temporal construal, and self-construal for predicting behavioral intention. A match (vs. mismatch) between the message and temporal construal of an advertisement and the self-view of the recipient leads to systematic changes in advertisement effectiveness. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. C1 [Chen, Ming-Yi] Natl Chung Hsing Univ, Dept Mkt, 250 Kuo Kuang Rd, Taichung 402, Taiwan. RP Chen, MY (reprint author), Natl Chung Hsing Univ, Dept Mkt, 250 Kuo Kuang Rd, Taichung 402, Taiwan. EM myc@dragon.nchu.edu.tw CR Aaker JL, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P33, DOI 10.1086/321946 AJZEN I, 1991, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V50, P179, DOI 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T BLOCK LG, 1995, J MARKETING RES, V32, P192, DOI 10.2307/3152047 Brennan R, 2008, J ADVERTISING RES, V48, P57, DOI 10.2501/S0021849908080082 Briley DA, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V29, P400, DOI 10.1086/344426 Briley DA, 2009, UNDERSTANDING CULTURE: THEORY, RESEARCH, AND APPLICATION, P311 Brislin R. W., 1986, FIELD METHODS CROSS, P137 Chandran S, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P375, DOI 10.1086/422116 Chang CT, 2007, PSYCHOL MARKET, V24, P143, DOI 10.1002/mar.20156 Chang H, 2015, INT J ADVERT, V34, P158, DOI 10.1080/02650487.2014.994731 Choi H, 2012, INT J ADVERT, V31, P421, DOI 10.2501/IJA-31-2-421-443 CHU GC, 1967, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V3, P243, DOI 10.1016/0022-1031(67)90026-1 Cox AD, 2010, J MARKETING, V74, P31 English T, 2007, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V93, P478, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.93.3.478 Eyal T, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P781, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781 Fishbein M., 1975, BELIEF ATTITUDE INTE Fitzsimons GJ, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P224, DOI 10.1086/322899 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Freitas AL, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V80, P410, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.80.3.410 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Gallagher KM, 2012, ANN BEHAV MED, V43, P101, DOI 10.1007/s12160-011-9308-7 Gamliel E., 2012, EUR J MARKETING, V46, P1215 Gardner WL, 1999, PSYCHOL SCI, V10, P321, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00162 HAN SP, 1994, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V30, P326, DOI 10.1006/jesp.1994.1016 Heine SJ, 1999, PSYCHOL REV, V106, P766, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.106.4.766 Hong YY, 2000, AM PSYCHOL, V55, P709, DOI 10.1037//0003-066X.55.7.709 Jayanti RK, 1998, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V26, P6, DOI 10.1177/0092070398261002 Kinagawa C., 2001, PERSONALITY SOCIAL P, V27, P90 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Lee AY, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P205, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.205 Lee AY, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V78, P1122, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.78.6.1122 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Liberman N, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P143, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.12.009 Liberman N, 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V97, P203, DOI 10.1037/a0015671 Lin YC, 2012, J BUS RES, V65, P1152, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.08.001 MAHESWARAN D, 1990, J MARKETING RES, V27, P361, DOI 10.2307/3172593 MARKUS HR, 1991, PSYCHOL REV, V98, P224, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224 Masuda T, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P409, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2003.08.004 Meyers-Levy J, 2004, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V14, P159, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1401&2_18 Nussbaum S, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P485, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.485 O'Keefe DJ, 2007, J HEALTH COMMUN, V12, P623, DOI 10.1080/10810730701615198 Oyserman D, 2008, PSYCHOL BULL, V134, P311, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.134.2.311 Pinon A, 2005, PSICOTHEMA, V17, P325 Preacher KJ, 2008, BEHAV RES METHODS, V40, P879, DOI 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 RHEE E, 1995, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V69, P142, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.69.1.142 Shiv B, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P199, DOI 10.1086/383435 Shrout PE, 2002, PSYCHOL METHODS, V7, P422, DOI 10.1037//1082-989X.7.4.422 SINGELIS TM, 1994, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V20, P580, DOI 10.1177/0146167294205014 Smith PK, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P578, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.578 Spassova G, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V40, P159, DOI 10.1086/669145 TREIBER FA, 1986, J PEDIATR PSYCHOL, V11, P15, DOI 10.1093/jpepsy/11.1.15 TRIANDIS HC, 1989, PSYCHOL REV, V96, P506, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.96.3.506 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Tsai SP, 2007, J ADVERTISING RES, V47, P364, DOI 10.2501/S0021849907070377 Wakslak CJ, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P641, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.641 WEISZ JR, 1984, AM PSYCHOL, V39, P955, DOI 10.1037//0003-066X.39.9.955 White K, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P472 WILSON DK, 1990, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V20, P531, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1990.tb00426.x Zhao XS, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P197, DOI 10.1086/651257 NR 61 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 15 U2 28 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 0148-2963 EI 1873-7978 J9 J BUS RES JI J. Bus. Res. PD SEP PY 2016 VL 69 IS 9 BP 3251 EP 3260 DI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.02.024 PG 10 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA DQ1HX UT WOS:000378953200006 ER PT J AU Line, ND Hanks, L Zhang, L AF Line, Nathaniel D. Hanks, Lydia Zhang, Lu TI Sustainability communication: The effect of message construals on consumers' attitudes towards green restaurants SO INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT LA English DT Article DE Green restaurants; Sustainability; Construal level theory; Information processing theory ID CORPORATE SOCIAL-RESPONSIBILITY; AMAZONS MECHANICAL TURK; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; BEHAVIORAL-RESEARCH; TEMPORAL DISTANCE; FIRM PERFORMANCE; IMPACT; LEVEL; INFORMATION; SATISFACTION AB As consumer preferences for environmentally conscious products have intensified in recent years, scholars have begun to more deeply explore the complex relationship between green practices and consumer behavior in the hospitality industry. Recently, this stream of research has been extended to the restaurant industry where consumers have become increasingly concerned about corporate social responsibility in general, and sustainable operations in particular. However, while there is general agreement about the importance of promoting a company's sustainability message from a consumer marketing standpoint, an essential underlying question remains unanswered: What is it about sustainability messaging that leads to positive consumer attitudes? The purpose of this research is to explore this question via the complementary theoretical perspectives of construal level theory and information processing theory. Data collected from a sample of restaurant consumers in the United States suggest that consumers process information differently according to variations in the construals of a company's sustainability message. The results indicate that messages congruent with the consumer's perception of sustainability result in a more positive attitude toward the company. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. C1 [Line, Nathaniel D.] Florida State Univ, Dedman Sch Hospitality, Univ Ctr B4113, 288 Champ Way, Tallahassee, FL 32306 USA. [Hanks, Lydia] Florida State Univ, Dedman Sch Hospitality, Univ Ctr B4114, 288 Champ Way, Tallahassee, FL 32306 USA. [Zhang, Lu] Michigan State Univ, Sch Hospitality Business, 645N Shaw Lane,Room 241, E Lansing, MI 48824 USA. RP Line, ND (reprint author), Florida State Univ, Dedman Sch Hospitality, Univ Ctr B4113, 288 Champ Way, Tallahassee, FL 32306 USA. EM nline@business.fsu.edu; lhanks@business.fsu.edu; luzhang@msu.edu CR Alba JW, 1991, HDB CONSUMER BEHAV, P1 Bennett R., 2002, J BRAND MANAGEMENT, V9, P193, DOI DOI 10.1057/PALGRAVE.BM.2540069 Berezan O, 2013, INT J HOSP MANAG, V34, P227, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.03.010 BHATTACHARYA CB, 1995, J MARKETING, V59, P46, DOI 10.2307/1252327 Buhrmester M, 2011, PERSPECT PSYCHOL SCI, V6, P3, DOI 10.1177/1745691610393980 Carroll BA, 2006, MARKET LETT, V17, P79, DOI 10.1007/s11002-006-4219-2 CHAIKEN S, 1980, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P752, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.39.5.752 Chaiken S., 1987, SOCIAL INFLUENCE ONT, V5, P3 Chang CT, 2008, PSYCHOL MARKET, V25, P1089, DOI 10.1002/mar.20255 Chen MH, 2015, INT J HOSP MANAG, V48, P150, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2015.04.001 Chen MH, 2015, INT J HOSP MANAG, V47, P25, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2015.02.002 de Grosbois D, 2012, INT J HOSP MANAG, V31, P896, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.10.008 Dewald B., 2014, Anatolia, V25, P171, DOI 10.1080/13032917.2013.839457 Dillman DA, 2009, INTERNET MAIL MIXED DiPietro R. B., 2013, International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, V14, P139 Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x Gao YX, 2014, INT J HOSP MANAG, V42, P20, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.06.003 Goodman JK, 2013, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V26, P213, DOI 10.1002/bdm.1753 Ham S, 2011, TOURISM ECON, V17, P1055, DOI 10.5367/te.2011.0066 Han H, 2009, INT J HOSP MANAG, V28, P519, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2009.02.004 Hu HH, 2010, CORNELL HOSP Q, V51, P344, DOI 10.1177/1938965510370564 Inoue Y, 2011, TOURISM MANAGE, V32, P790, DOI 10.1016/j.tourman.2010.06.019 Jang YJ, 2011, INT J HOSP MANAG, V30, P803, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2010.12.012 Jeong E, 2014, INT J HOSP MANAG, V41, P10, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.03.002 Jonas E, 2006, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V32, P3, DOI 10.1177/0146167205276118 KAHNEMAN D, 1990, J POLIT ECON, V98, P1325, DOI 10.1086/261737 Kang KH, 2010, INT J HOSP MANAG, V29, P72, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2009.05.006 Karaosmanoglu E, 2011, EUR J MARKETING, V45, P1416, DOI 10.1108/03090561111151835 Kim E. J., 2003, Journal of Foodservice Business Research, V6, P3, DOI 10.1300/J369v06n01_02 Kim EEK, 2012, INT J HOSP MANAG, V31, P43, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.05.004 Kim H, 2008, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V18, P116, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2008.01.006 Kim YJ, 2013, INT J HOSP MANAG, V34, P255, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.04.004 Lee S, 2014, CORNELL HOSP Q, V55, P52, DOI 10.1177/1938965513504029 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Lii YS, 2012, J BUS ETHICS, V105, P69, DOI 10.1007/s10551-011-0948-0 Lindell MK, 2001, J APPL PSYCHOL, V86, P114, DOI 10.1037//0021-9010.86.1.114 Line ND, 2012, INT J HOSP MANAG, V31, P477, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.07.006 Lynch JG, 2006, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V25, P67, DOI 10.1509/jppm.25.1.67 Mason W, 2012, BEHAV RES METHODS, V44, P1, DOI 10.3758/s13428-011-0124-6 Namkung Y, 2013, INT J HOSP MANAG, V33, P85, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.06.006 NEUBERG SL, 1987, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V53, P431, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.53.3.431 PETTY RE, 1981, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V41, P847, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.41.5.847 Petty R. E., 1986, COMMUNICATION PERSUA PITTMAN TS, 1989, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V25, P465, DOI 10.1016/0022-1031(89)90001-2 Podsakoff PM, 2003, J APPL PSYCHOL, V88, P879, DOI 10.1037/0021-9101.88.5.879 Postmes T., 2013, S BOOK ENT MULT SELV Rabinovich A, 2009, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V29, P391, DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.09.004 Sen S, 2001, J MARKETING RES, V38, P225, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.38.2.225.18838 Siu NYM, 2014, INT J HOSP MANAG, V43, P87, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.08.007 Taylor S. E., 1978, ADV EXPT SOCIAL PSYC, V11, P249, DOI DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60009-X Teng CC, 2014, INT J HOSP MANAG, V40, P92, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.03.012 TETLOCK PE, 1987, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V52, P700, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.52.4.700 Torelli CJ, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V38, P948, DOI 10.1086/660851 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y., 2011, HDB THEORIES SOCIAL, V1, P118 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 van Rompay TJL, 2010, J INTERACT MARK, V24, P22, DOI 10.1016/j.intmar.2009.10.003 Verplanken B, 2001, EUR J PERSONALITY, V15, pS71, DOI 10.1002/per.423 Vlachos PA, 2009, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V37, P170, DOI 10.1007/s11747-008-0117-x Wagner T, 2009, J MARKETING, V73, P77 Wakslak C, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P52, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02250.x World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987, OUR COMMON FUTURE Yoon Y, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V39, P93, DOI 10.1086/661935 Youn H, 2015, INT J HOSP MANAG, V51, P127, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2015.09.008 Zan H, 2010, J CONSUM AFF, V44, P213, DOI 10.1111/j.1745-6606.2010.01163.x Zauberman G, 2005, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V134, P23, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.134.1.23 Zhang L, 2014, INT J HOSP MANAG, V41, P56, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.04.005 NR 69 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 11 U2 17 PU ELSEVIER SCI LTD PI OXFORD PA THE BOULEVARD, LANGFORD LANE, KIDLINGTON, OXFORD OX5 1GB, OXON, ENGLAND SN 0278-4319 EI 1873-4693 J9 INT J HOSP MANAG JI Int. J. Hosp. Manag. PD AUG PY 2016 VL 57 BP 143 EP 151 DI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.07.001 PG 9 WC Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism SC Social Sciences - Other Topics GA DV5ZW UT WOS:000383010200014 ER PT J AU Schill, M Shaw, D AF Schill, Marie Shaw, Deirdre TI Recycling today, sustainability tomorrow: Effects of psychological distance on behavioural practice SO EUROPEAN MANAGEMENT JOURNAL LA English DT Article DE Construal level theory; Psychological distance; Recycling; Sustainability; Consumer ID GLOBAL CLIMATE-CHANGE; CONSTRUAL-LEVEL; TEMPORAL DISTANCE; PLANNED BEHAVIOR; REGULATORY FIT; ENVIRONMENTAL BEHAVIOR; CONSUMER RESEARCH; ACTION IDENTIFICATION; HOUSEHOLD ATTITUDES; SPATIAL DISTANCE AB Much research has reported an attitude-behaviour gap in ecological behaviours. This research seeks to contribute important insights to this literature through a study that uses construal level theory (CLT) to understand the role and impact of psychological distance in explaining sustainable and recycling behaviours. Using a qualitative approach, the research found that consistency between mental construal and all dimensions of psychological distance was pertinent to recycling and sustainable behaviours. While theoretically CLT suggests there should be consistency across psychological distance dimensions and mental construal, there is limited research that explores all distance dimensions. Further, highlighted was the need for a near distance perspective to move individuals to behavioural action. Contrary to previous research, this served to facilitate rather than inhibit behavioural action. Finally, the results suggest that where sustainable behaviours are facilitated and/or required engagement in behaviour can be increased. These findings are important for public policy by highlighting the need to represent recycling behaviour in terms of temporal, spatial, social and hypothetical closeness. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. C1 [Schill, Marie] Univ Reims, 57 Bis Rue Pierre Taittinger, F-51086 Reims, France. [Shaw, Deirdre] Univ Glasgow, Univ Ave, Glasgow G12 8QQ, Lanark, Scotland. RP Schill, M (reprint author), Univ Reims, 57 Bis Rue Pierre Taittinger, F-51086 Reims, France. EM marie.schill@univ-reims.fr; deirdre.shaw@glasgow.ac.uk CR Aadland D, 2006, J POLICY ANAL MANAG, V25, P855, DOI 10.1002/pam.20211 Agerstrom J, 2012, SOC COGNITION, V30, P181 Agerstrom J, 2009, SOC COGNITION, V27, P261 Agerstrom J, 2009, BASIC APPL SOC PSYCH, V31, P49, DOI 10.1080/01973530802659885 AJZEN I, 1977, PSYCHOL BULL, V84, P888, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.84.5.888 Andorfer VA, 2012, J BUS ETHICS, V106, P415, DOI 10.1007/s10551-011-1008-5 Auger P, 2007, J BUS ETHICS, V76, P361, DOI 10.1007/s10551-006-9287-y Avnet T, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P1, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.1.1 Bagozzi R. P., 1994, PSYCHOL MARKET, V11, P313, DOI 10.1002/mar.4220110403 BANDURA A, 1981, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V41, P586, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.41.3.586 Bar-Anan Y, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P609, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.609 Barnett C, 2005, ANTIPODE, V37, P23, DOI 10.1111/j.0066-4812.2005.00472.x Barr S, 2005, APPL GEOGR, V25, P226, DOI 10.1016/j.apgeog.2005.03.007 BAUMOL WJ, 1977, J ENVIRON ECON MANAG, V4, P83, DOI 10.1016/0095-0696(77)90017-1 Beckmann SC, 2005, CONSUMERS, POLICY AND THE ENVIRONMENT: A TRIBUTE TO FOLKE OLANDER, P265, DOI 10.1007/0-387-25004-2_15 Black IR, 2010, J CONSUM BEHAV, V9, P437, DOI 10.1002/cb.337 Black IR, 2015, CHANGING NARRATIVE S Black I. R., 2009, CONSUMPTION VOTING P Blumer H., 1969, SYMBOLIC INTERACTION Brosius N, 2013, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V32, P286 Brucks W., 2007, SOC INFLUENCE, V2, P112, DOI DOI 10.1080/15534510701193436 Brundtland G. H., 1987, OUR COMMON FUTURE WO, P318 Camacho CJ, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P498, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.498 Carrigan M, 2001, J CONSUM MARK, V18, P560, DOI 10.1108/07363760110410263 Carrington MJ, 2016, MARKETING THEOR, V16, P21, DOI 10.1177/1470593115595674 Catlin JR, 2013, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V23, P122, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2012.04.001 Chao YL, 2011, ENVIRON BEHAV, V43, P53, DOI 10.1177/0013916509350849 Chatzidakis A, 2007, J BUS ETHICS, V74, P89, DOI 10.1007/s10551-006-9222-2 Cherrier H, 2011, EUR J MARKETING, V45, P1757, DOI 10.1108/03090561111167397 Chetty S., 1999, EUR J MARKETING, V33, P121, DOI 10.1108/03090569910249201 CIALDINI RB, 1990, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V58, P1015, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.58.6.1015 Denzin N., 1998, LANDSCAPE QUALITATIV DERKSEN L, 1993, AM SOCIOL REV, V58, P434, DOI 10.2307/2095910 Dilling L, 2007, ENVIRON SCI POLICY, V10, P1, DOI 10.1016/j.envsci.2006.10.002 Ebreo A, 1999, ENVIRON BEHAV, V31, P107, DOI 10.1177/00139169921972029 Ebreo A., 2001, ENVIRON BEHAV, V33, P35 Eckhardt GM, 2010, J CONSUM BEHAV, V9, P426, DOI 10.1002/cb.332 Eyal T., 2009, SOCIAL PSYCHOL CONSU, P65 Fessel F, 2011, SOC PSYCHOL PERS SCI, V2, P103, DOI 10.1177/1948550610381788 Fournier S, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V24, P343, DOI 10.1086/209515 Freitas AL, 2002, PSYCHOL SCI, V13, P1, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00401 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x Fujita K, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P562, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2007.10.005 Fuller Donald A., 1996, J MACROMARKETING, V16, P52, DOI DOI 10.1177/027614679601600104 GAMBA RJ, 1994, ENVIRON BEHAV, V26, P587, DOI 10.1177/0013916594265001 Giacomantonio M, 2010, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P824, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.05.001 Gordon R, 2011, MARKETING THEOR, V11, P143, DOI 10.1177/1470593111403218 Hansmann R, 2006, RESOUR CONSERV RECY, V47, P133, DOI 10.1016/j.resconrec.2005.10.006 Henderson MD, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V91, P845, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.91.5.845 Higgins ET, 2000, AM PSYCHOL, V55, P1217, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.55.11.1217 Higgins ET, 2005, CURR DIR PSYCHOL SCI, V14, P209 Higgins ET, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P1140, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.6.1140 HOPPER JR, 1991, ENVIRON BEHAV, V23, P195, DOI 10.1177/0013916591232004 Kaiser FG, 2005, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V35, P2150, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02213.x Kaiser FG, 2003, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V33, P586, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb01914.x Kilbourne W. E., 1998, J MARKETING MANAGEME, V14, P513, DOI DOI 10.1362/026725798784867716 Kivetz Y, 2007, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V102, P193, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.07.002 KOK G, 1985, J ECON PSYCHOL, V6, P157, DOI 10.1016/0167-4870(85)90019-4 Steger U., 2002, EUROPEAN MANAGEMENT, V20, P109, DOI DOI 10.1016/S0263-2373(02)00022-1 Latham GP, 1999, J ORGAN BEHAV, V20, P421, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199907)20:4<421::AID-JOB896>3.0.CO;2-# Latif SA, 2012, PROCD SOC BEHV, V35, P682, DOI 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.02.137 Libby LK, 2002, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V82, P167, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.82.2.167 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P1201, DOI 10.1126/science.1161958 Liberman N, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P143, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.12.009 LINN N, 1994, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V24, P1550, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb01562.x Luedicke MK, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P1016, DOI 10.1086/644761 Lynch JG, 2006, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V25, P67, DOI 10.1509/jppm.25.1.67 Maglio SJ, 2013, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V142, P644, DOI 10.1037/a0030258 Malaviya P, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P112, DOI 10.1086/595717 Mason J., 1996, QUALITATIVE RES MCCARTY JA, 1994, J BUS RES, V30, P53, DOI 10.1016/0148-2963(94)90068-X McCracken G, 1988, LONG INTERVIEW Mellema G, 2003, J BUS ETHICS, V47, P125, DOI 10.1023/A:1026051712266 Meneses GD, 2005, ENVIRON BEHAV, V37, P837, DOI 10.1177/0013916505276742 Moraes C., 2012, J MARKETING MANAGEME, V28, P103, DOI DOI 10.1080/0267257X.2011.615482 Moser SC, 2004, ENVIRONMENT, V46, P32 Nan XL, 2007, HUM COMMUN RES, V33, P489, DOI 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00309.x Newman CL, 2012, INT J ADVERT, V31, P511, DOI 10.2501/IJA-31-3-511-527 Nigbur D, 2010, BRIT J SOC PSYCHOL, V49, P259, DOI 10.1348/014466609X449395 Oreg S, 2006, ENVIRON BEHAV, V38, P462, DOI 10.1177/0013916505286012 Pahl S., 2011, ENVIRON BEHAV, V45, P1 Papaoikonomou E., 2011, INT ADV EC RES, V17, P77, DOI 10.1007/s11294-010-9288-6 Patton M. Q., 1990, QUALITATIVE EVALUATI Peattie K, 2009, INT J CONSUM STUD, V33, P107, DOI 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2009.00758.x Perrin D, 2001, RESOUR CONSERV RECY, V33, P61, DOI 10.1016/S0921-3449(01)00075-1 Polonsky M. J., 2012, J MARKETING MANAGEME, V28, P238, DOI DOI 10.1080/0267257X.2012.659279 Prothero A, 2011, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V30, P31 Reynolds T. J., 1985, PSYCHOL MARKET, V2, P297, DOI 10.1002/mar.4220020408 Rondinelli DA, 2000, EUROPEAN MANAGEMENT, V18, P70, DOI [10.1016/S0263-2373(99)00070-5, DOI 10.1016/S0263-2373(99)00070-5] Sanna LJ, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P1319, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02458.x Schwartz S. H., 1977, ADV EXPT SOCIAL PSYC, P221 SEMIN GR, 1988, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V54, P558, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.54.4.558 Stark J., 2015, PRODUCT LIFECYCLE MA Steg L, 2009, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V29, P309, DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.10.004 Steger U., 2000, EUROPEAN MANAGEMENT, V18, P23, DOI DOI 10.1016/S0263-2373(99)00066-3 Stern PC, 2000, J SOC ISSUES, V56, P407, DOI 10.1111/0022-4537.00175 STERN PC, 1995, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V25, P1611, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1995.tb02636.x STOCK J, 1990, COGNITIVE THER RES, V14, P483, DOI 10.1007/BF01172969 Szekely F., 2005, European Management Journal, V23, P628, DOI 10.1016/j.emj.2005.10.009 Taylor S, 1997, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V27, P602, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1997.tb00651.x THOMPSON CJ, 1989, J CONSUM RES, V16, P133, DOI 10.1086/209203 Thompson CJ, 1997, J MARKETING RES, V34, P438, DOI 10.2307/3151963 Todorov A, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P473, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.002 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 van Wijk J., 2006, EUROPEAN MANAGEMENT, V24, P381 Vasquez NA, 2007, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V33, P1392, DOI 10.1177/0146167207304541 VINING J, 1990, ENVIRON BEHAV, V22, P55, DOI 10.1177/0013916590221003 Viswanathan M, 2014, J MACROMARKETING, V34, P8, DOI 10.1177/0276146713499351 Wakslak CJ, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P641, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.641 Welfens M. J., 2015, J CLEANER PRODUCTION White K, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P472 Williams D.E., 1992, EUR J MARKETING, V26, P8, DOI 10.1108/EUM0000000000641 Young W, 2010, SUSTAIN DEV, V18, P20, DOI 10.1002/sd.394 NR 121 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 17 U2 32 PU ELSEVIER SCI LTD PI OXFORD PA THE BOULEVARD, LANGFORD LANE, KIDLINGTON, OXFORD OX5 1GB, OXON, ENGLAND SN 0263-2373 EI 1873-5681 J9 EUR MANAG J JI Eur. Manag. J. PD AUG PY 2016 VL 34 IS 4 BP 349 EP 362 DI 10.1016/j.emj.2016.05.004 PG 14 WC Business; Management SC Business & Economics GA DS2IW UT WOS:000380594200005 ER PT J AU Wang, J Cole, CA AF Wang, Jing Cole, Catherine A. TI The Effects of Age and Expertise on Product Evaluations: Does the Type of Information Matter? SO MANAGEMENT SCIENCE LA English DT Article DE age; aging; expertise; branding; segmentation; positioning; communications; information type; construal levels; diagnosticity ID CONSTRUAL-LEVEL; SUBJECTIVE KNOWLEDGE; MODERATING ROLE; ADVERTISEMENTS; CONSUMERS; MESSAGE AB To better understand two large consumer segments, the boomers and the echo-boomers, we examine whether and why experts and novices from these two segments rely on attribute versus benefit information in product evaluations. In four studies, we show that expertise affects younger consumers, such that younger novices evaluate products more favorably when the descriptions feature benefit information, whereas younger experts evaluate products more favorably when the descriptions feature attribute information. However, both older novices and experts evaluate products described with benefit information more favorably than those described with attribute information. We further show that differences in the perceived diagnosticity of different types of information mediate the effects of expertise and age on product evaluations. We theorize that age differences in perceived diagnosticity occur because older and younger consumers spontaneously construe information in different ways. Therefore, age differences in the effect of expertise on evaluations should disappear when construal levels are controlled. Consistent with our hypotheses, we demonstrate that when primed to construe information at concrete levels, older consumers behave just like younger consumers-older experts formed more favorable evaluations toward products described with attribute information, but older novices formed more favorable evaluations toward products described with benefit information. When younger consumers are primed to construe information at abstract levels, they prefer products described with benefit information regardless of expertise, just like older consumers. We discuss the implications of our results for both researchers and practitioners. C1 [Wang, Jing; Cole, Catherine A.] Univ Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242 USA. RP Wang, J (reprint author), Univ Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242 USA. EM jing-wang@uiowa.edu; cathy-cole@uiowa.edu CR Ahluwalia R, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V29, P270, DOI 10.1086/341576 BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 Carlson JP, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P864, DOI 10.1086/593688 Carstensen LL, 2003, MOTIV EMOTION, V27, P103, DOI 10.1023/A:1024569803230 Vega T, 2011, NY TIMES Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Fung HH, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V85, P163, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.85.1.163 GreganPaxton J, 1997, J CONSUM RES, V24, P266, DOI 10.1086/209509 Hadar L, 2013, J MARKETING RES, V50, P303 Hong JW, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P456, DOI 10.1086/653492 Lambert-Pandraud R, 2005, J MARKETING, V69, P97, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.69.2.97.60757 Lamberton CP, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V40, P393, DOI 10.1086/671103 Mitchell O, 2011, W17078 NBER MAHESWARAN D, 1990, J CONSUM RES, V17, P66, DOI 10.1086/208537 Maheswaran Durairaj, 1996, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V5, P115, DOI DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP0502_ McGinnis D, 2000, PSYCHOL AGING, V15, P335, DOI 10.1037/0882-7974.15.2.335 Morrin M, 2012, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V31, P254 Nam M, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V39, P736, DOI 10.1086/664987 PARK CW, 1994, J CONSUM RES, V21, P71, DOI 10.1086/209383 Preacher KJ, 2007, MULTIVAR BEHAV RES, V42, P185, DOI 10.1080/00273170701341316 Siemsen E, 2007, MANAGE SCI, V53, P1533, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.1070.0714 Sobel M.E., 1982, SOCIOL METHODOL, V13, P290, DOI DOI 10.2307/270723 Steinhart Y, 2013, PSYCHOL SCI, V24, P1842, DOI 10.1177/0956797613478948 Sternthal B, 2009, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V19, P23, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2008.12.004 Su HJ, 2008, PSYCHOL MARKET, V25, P859, DOI 10.1002/mar.20244 Thomas-Hunt MC, 2003, MANAGE SCI, V49, P464, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.49.4.464.14425 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Wang J, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P28, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.1.28 White K, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P472 Williams P, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P343, DOI 10.1086/497545 Yoon C, 2009, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V19, P2, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2008.12.002 Zhang X, 2009, AGING MENT HEALTH, V13, P336, DOI 10.1080/13607860802459815 NR 33 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 7 U2 15 PU INFORMS PI CATONSVILLE PA 5521 RESEARCH PARK DR, SUITE 200, CATONSVILLE, MD 21228 USA SN 0025-1909 EI 1526-5501 J9 MANAGE SCI JI Manage. Sci. PD JUL PY 2016 VL 62 IS 7 BP 2039 EP 2053 DI 10.1287/mnsc.2015.2224 PG 15 WC Management; Operations Research & Management Science SC Business & Economics; Operations Research & Management Science GA DQ8YH UT WOS:000379497100013 ER PT J AU Park, J Hedgcock, WM AF Park, Jooyoung Hedgcock, William M. TI Thinking concretely or abstractly: The influence of fit between goal progress and goal construal on subsequent self-regulation SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article DE Goal progress; Construal level; Goal construal; Self-regulation; Motivation ID ACTION IDENTIFICATION; NEGATIVE AFFECT; CONSUMER; BEHAVIOR; MOTIVATION; LEVEL; REPRESENTATION; PSYCHOLOGY; FRAMEWORK; DYNAMICS AB This article examines the relationship between goal progress and construal level and its influence on subsequent goal pursuit. Using action identification theory, we hypothesized that greater perceived goal progress leads to higher-level construals and that the fit between goal progress and goal construal is more likely to enhance self-regulation than non-fit. Our findings indicate that, compared with lesser perceived goal progress, greater perceived goal progress induces higher-level construals (studies la-2a). Moreover, as people perceive greater goal progress, abstract goal construal (i.e., "why") is more likely to promote goal-consistent behavior than concrete goal construal (i.e., "how"; studies 2a-2b). We also observed that this fit between goal progress and goal construal influences actual self-regulatory behavior (study 3). (C) 2015 Society for Consumer Psychology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. C1 [Park, Jooyoung] Peking Univ, HSBC Business Sch PHBS, Shenzhen 518055, Peoples R China. [Hedgcock, William M.] Univ Iowa, Dept Mkt, Iowa City, IA USA. RP Park, J (reprint author), Peking Univ, HSBC Business Sch PHBS, Shenzhen 518055, Peoples R China. EM jpark@phbs.pku.edu.cn CR ATKINSON JW, 1957, PSYCHOL REV, V64, P359, DOI 10.1037/h0043445 Austin JT, 1996, PSYCHOL BULL, V120, P338, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.120.3.338 Bagozzi RP, 1999, J MARKETING, V63, P19, DOI 10.2307/1252098 Browning E. S., 2011, WALL STREET J, pAl CARVER CS, 1990, PSYCHOL REV, V97, P19, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.97.1.19 CARVER CS, 1982, PSYCHOL BULL, V92, P111, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.92.1.111 Dhar R, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P96, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70014-1 Finkelstein EA, 2009, HEALTH AFFAIR, V28, pW822, DOI 10.1377/hlthaff.28.5.w822 Fishbach A, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P370, DOI 10.1086/497548 Fishbach A, 2008, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V94, P547, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.94.4.547 Fishbach A, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V91, P232, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.91.2.232 Forster J, 2010, PSYCHOL INQ, V21, P175, DOI 10.1080/1047840X.2010.487849 Hedges LV, 1998, PSYCHOL METHODS, V3, P486, DOI 10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.486 Hedges L. V., 1985, STAT METHODS METAANA Higgins ET, 2008, SOC COGNITION, V26, P496, DOI 10.1521/soco.2008.26.5.496 Higgins ET, 2009, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V19, P100, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2009.02.002 Higgins ET, 2006, PSYCHOL REV, V113, P439, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.113.3.439 Houser-Marko L, 2008, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V34, P1556, DOI 10.1177/0146167208322618 HYLAND ME, 1988, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V55, P642, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.55.4.642 International Food Information Council Foundation, 2011, NUTR HLTH Kozlowski SWJ, 2006, J APPL PSYCHOL, V91, P900, DOI 10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.900 Labroo AA, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P800, DOI 10.1086/593683 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 LORD RG, 1994, APPL PSYCHOL-INT REV, V43, P335, DOI 10.1111/j.1464-0597.1994.tb00828.x Louro MJ, 2007, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V93, P174, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.93.2.174 Mussweiler T, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P472, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.472 National Institutes of Health, 2012, NIH PUBLICATION Preacher KJ, 2004, BEHAV RES METH INS C, V36, P717, DOI 10.3758/BF03206553 Schmidt AM, 2009, J APPL PSYCHOL, V94, P692, DOI 10.1037/a0015012 Sobh R, 2011, EUR J MARKETING, V45, P963, DOI 10.1108/03090561111119976 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 VALLACHER RR, 1987, SOC COGNITION, V5, P301, DOI 10.1521/soco.1987.5.3.301 Vallacher R. R., 1985, THEORY ACTION IDENTI Vroom V., 1964, WORK MOTIVATION Wakslak CJ, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P641, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.641 WATSON D, 1988, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V54, P1063, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063 WEGNER DM, 1984, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P269, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.46.2.269 Wegner D. M., 1986, HDB MOTIVATION COGNI, P550 Zhang Y, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P641, DOI 10.1086/655417 Zhao XS, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P197, DOI 10.1086/651257 NR 44 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 6 U2 19 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 1057-7408 EI 1532-7663 J9 J CONSUM PSYCHOL JI J. Consum. Psychol. PD JUL PY 2016 VL 26 IS 3 BP 395 EP 409 DI 10.1016/j.jcps.2015.12.003 PG 15 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA DP5WV UT WOS:000378569800007 ER PT J AU Zhang, ZY Zhang, BJ Li, ZQ AF Zhang, Ziyuan Zhang, Baojun Li, Zhongquan TI Price Discrepancy Between Sellers and Buyers When Making Decisions for the Self and Others SO PSYCHOLOGICAL REPORTS LA English DT Article DE endowment effect; self-other decision; psychological distance ID CONSTRUAL-LEVEL THEORY; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; CONSUMER CHOICE; ENDOWMENT; DESIRABILITY; FEASIBILITY; VALUATIONS; OWNERSHIP AB In daily life, people make decisions not only for themselves but also on behalf of others. There may be differences in terms of the endowment effect when making decisions in these two situations. In Study I, this question was investigated with an existing dataset exploring the traditional endowment effect, in which 86 students (M age = 20.8 years, SD = 5.0) at Harvard University were asked to make a decision on selling or buying a coffee mug for themselves or for others as brokers. When making decisions for the self, the average price demanded by sellers was much higher than that offered by buyers; while making decisions for others, the price discrepancy disappeared. In Study 2, a similar study was conducted with a sample of 42 Chinese university students (M age = 22.3 years, SD = 2.5), and a similar pattern of results was obtained. Further analysis indicated that when making decisions for others, only buyers increased their valuations, therefore mitigating the seller-buyer price discrepancy. Finally, the findings were interpreted from the perspective of Construal Level Theory. C1 [Zhang, Ziyuan] Nanjing Univ, Dept Appl Foreign Language Studies, 163 Xianlin Ave, Nanjing 210023, Jiangsu, Peoples R China. [Zhang, Baojun; Li, Zhongquan] Nanjing Univ, Sch Social & Behav Sci, Dept Psychol, Psychol, 163 Xianlin Ave, Nanjing 210023, Jiangsu, Peoples R China. RP Li, ZQ (reprint author), Nanjing Univ, Sch Social & Behav Sci, Dept Psychol, 163 Xianlin Ave, Nanjing 210023, Jiangsu, Peoples R China. EM zqli@nju.edu.cn FU National Natural Science Foundation of China [71201079]; Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities; China Scholarship Council [201506195028] FX The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71201079), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, and China Scholarship Council (No. 201506195028). CR Ariely D, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P134, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.42.2.134.62283 Bar-Anan Y, 2007, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V136, P610, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.136.4.610 Bonaccio S, 2006, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V101, P127, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.07.001 Brosnan SF, 2007, CURR BIOL, V17, P1704, DOI 10.1016/j.cub.2007.08.059 Carmon Z, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V27, P360, DOI 10.1086/317590 Cross SE, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V78, P791, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.78.4.791 Dhar R, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P96, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70014-1 Eyal T, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P781, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781 Feng TY, 2013, BEHAV BRAIN RES, V248, P74, DOI 10.1016/j.bbr.2013.04.005 Gawronski B, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P221, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.001 Heine SJ, 2001, J PERS, V69, P881, DOI 10.1111/1467-6494.696168 Iyengar Sheena S., 1999, CULTURAL DIVIDES UND, P273 Johnson EJ, 2007, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V33, P461, DOI 10.1037/0278-7393.33.3.461 Jonas E, 2003, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V91, P154, DOI 10.1016/S0749-5978(03)00059-1 Jonas Eva, 2005, Pers Soc Psychol Bull, V31, P977, DOI 10.1177/0146167204274095 KAHNEMAN D, 1979, ECONOMETRICA, V47, P263, DOI 10.2307/1914185 Kahneman D., 1990, J POLITICAL EC, V98, P1352 KNETSCH JL, 1989, AM ECON REV, V79, P1277 Kurt D, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V40, P78, DOI 10.1086/668888 Liberman N, 1999, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V77, P1135, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.77.6.1135 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, P353 Liviatan I, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1256, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.007 Lu JY, 2013, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V39, P144, DOI 10.1177/0146167212470146 Mandel DR, 2002, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V88, P737, DOI 10.1016/S0749-5978(02)00013-4 MARKUS HR, 1991, PSYCHOL REV, V98, P224, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224 Morewedge CK, 2009, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V45, P947, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.05.014 Nayakankuppam D, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P390, DOI 10.1086/497550 Peters E, 2003, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V16, P309, DOI 10.1002/bdm.448 Pham MT, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P814 Polman E, 2012, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V119, P141, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.06.005 Polman E, 2011, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V37, P492, DOI 10.1177/0146167211398362 Polman E, 2010, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P432, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.11.003 Strahilevitz MA, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V25, P276, DOI 10.1086/209539 THALER R, 1980, J ECON BEHAV ORGAN, V1, P39, DOI 10.1016/0167-2681(80)90051-7 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Van Boven L, 2003, J ECON BEHAV ORGAN, V51, P351, DOI 10.1016/S0167-2681(02)00150-6 NR 39 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 5 U2 7 PU SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC PI THOUSAND OAKS PA 2455 TELLER RD, THOUSAND OAKS, CA 91320 USA SN 0033-2941 EI 1558-691X J9 PSYCHOL REP JI Psychol. Rep. PD JUN PY 2016 VL 118 IS 3 BP 889 EP 901 DI 10.1177/0033294116649144 PG 13 WC Psychology, Multidisciplinary SC Psychology GA DP0OV UT WOS:000378190000016 PM 27184409 ER PT J AU Davidson, A Laroche, M AF Davidson, Alexander Laroche, Michel TI Connecting the dots: how personal need for structure produces false consumer pattern perceptions SO MARKETING LETTERS LA English DT Article DE False pattern perceptions; Personal need for structure; Construal level; Product anthropomorphism; Corporate conspiracy theory ID CONSTRUAL LEVELS; SELF-CONTROL; LEVEL AB The human tendency to recognize patterns even when none exist is shown to have applications in consumer behavior. The current research demonstrates that as one's personal need for structure (PNS) increases (i.e., requiring predictability and disfavoring uncertainty), false consumer pattern perceptions emerge. Construal level moderates this relationship such that as abstract mindsets (high construal) seek out underlying explanations and enhance, concrete mindsets (low construal) evaluate consumer-related stimuli in terms of its contextual elements and therefore attenuate the effect. Types of consumer patterns are characterized by false expectations about the performance of a cellular phone (study 1), the association of human characteristics toward personal computers (study 2), and the development of beliefs in corporate conspiracy theories (study 3). This research has implications for practitioners and academics as it expands on the literature related to false pattern perceptions by investigating it through the lens of consumer decision-making. C1 [Davidson, Alexander; Laroche, Michel] Concordia Univ, Dept Mkt, John Molson Sch Business, 1455 Maisonneuve West, Montreal, PQ H3G 1M8, Canada. RP Davidson, A; Laroche, M (reprint author), Concordia Univ, Dept Mkt, John Molson Sch Business, 1455 Maisonneuve West, Montreal, PQ H3G 1M8, Canada. EM al_david@jmsb.concordia.ca; laroche@jmsb.concordia.ca CR Aviv R., 2014, VALUABLE REPUTATION Baudrillard J., 1994, SIMULACRA SIMULATION Eyal T, 2009, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V45, P35, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.07.023 Freitas AL, 2009, J RES PERS, V43, P938, DOI 10.1016/j.jrp.2009.05.006 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Fujita K, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P799, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02372.x Kay AC, 2014, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V143, P486, DOI 10.1037/a0034462 Kim H, 2008, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V18, P116, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2008.01.006 Nenkov GY, 2012, MARKET LETT, V23, P615, DOI 10.1007/s11002-012-9166-5 NEUBERG SL, 1993, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V65, P113, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.65.1.113 Sagan C., 1995, SCI CANDLE DARK DEMO Shermer M., 2011, BELIEVING BRAIN GHOS VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Waytz A, 2010, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V99, P410, DOI 10.1037/a0020240 Whitson JA, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P115, DOI 10.1126/science.1159845 Wright S, 2012, MARKET LETT, V23, P253, DOI 10.1007/s11002-011-9151-4 Zusne L, 2014, ANOMALISTIC PSYCHOL NR 17 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 7 U2 14 PU SPRINGER PI DORDRECHT PA VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS SN 0923-0645 EI 1573-059X J9 MARKET LETT JI Mark. Lett. PD JUN PY 2016 VL 27 IS 2 BP 337 EP 350 DI 10.1007/s11002-014-9332-z PG 14 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA DK3TZ UT WOS:000374841600011 ER PT J AU Thorbjornsen, H Dahlen, M Lee, YH AF Thorbjornsen, Helge Dahlen, Micael Lee, Yih H. TI The Effect of New Product Preannouncements on the Evaluation of Other Brand Products SO JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT LA English DT Article ID CONSTRUAL LEVELS; IMPACT; DECISIONS; BEHAVIOR; REPRESENTATION; ANNOUNCEMENTS; INTRODUCTIONS; CONSEQUENCES; INTENTIONS; CATEGORIES AB Some firms preannounce new products long before they are actually available on the market. Previous research has investigated the effects of such new product preannouncements (NPPs) on consumer and competitor responses. This paper examines how NPPs affect consumers' construal of and preferences for the new product and, in turn, how these evaluations influence their preferences for the brands' other products. Specifically, the paper demonstrates that consumers' construal level of NPPs spills over to their construal of other products in the brand family, causing a positive, biased evaluation of these products. Three experimental studies reveal that the mere information about an NPP can shift evaluation of currently available brand products in a positive direction through construal-level spillover and increased perceptions of similarity. The studies contrast NPPs to new product announcements (NPAs) and consistently find more positive results for the former. Moreover, the studies find that product newness has a moderating effect on the results, such that the positive spillover effects are more pronounced for really new products than for incrementally new products. The results also show that the effects are contingent on the credibility of the NPP: If consumers do not consider the NPPs credible, no positive spillover effects will materialize. Finally, the studies demonstrate that the positive evaluative spillover is specific to the products in the brand family and does not affect consumers' perceptions or choice of competitor products. Consumers actually rate the competing brand's remaining products lower when the focal brand engages in NPPs. The study has important implications for managers regarding how to use NPPs to influence consumers' construal and evaluations of brand products. C1 [Thorbjornsen, Helge] Norwegian Sch Econ, Ctr Serv Innovat, Mkt, Bergen, Norway. [Dahlen, Micael] Stockholm Sch Econ, Ctr Consumer Mkt, Mkt, Stockholm, Sweden. [Lee, Yih H.] Natl Univ Singapore, Sch Business, Dept Mkt, Singapore 117548, Singapore. RP Thorbjornsen, H (reprint author), Norwegian Sch Econ, Ctr Serv Innovat, Breiviksveien 40, N-5045 Bergen, Norway. EM helge.thorbjornsen@nhh.no CR Alexander DL, 2008, J MARKETING RES, V45, P307, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.45.3.307 Bargh J. A, 2000, HDB RES METHODS SOCI, P253 Bayus BL, 2001, J MARKETING RES, V38, P3, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.38.1.3.18834 Boone DS, 2001, J PROD INNOVAT MANAG, V18, P96, DOI 10.1111/1540-5885.1820096 BURKE RR, 1990, ADV CONSUM RES, V17, P342 Chang JW, 2002, ADV CONSUM RES, V29, P299 Chen C. W., 2012, J MARKETING THEORY P, V20, P203 Dahlen M, 2008, J ADVERTISING RES, V48, P392, DOI 10.2501/S002184990808046X Dahlen M, 2006, J ADVERTISING RES, V46, P388, DOI 10.2501/S0021849906060417 Dahlen M, 2011, J ADVERTISING, V40, P33, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367400403 ELIASHBERG J, 1988, J MARKETING RES, V25, P282, DOI 10.2307/3172530 Eyal T, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P781, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Forster J, 2009, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V138, P88, DOI 10.1037/a0014484 Fosfuri A, 2009, MANAGE SCI, V55, P181, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.1080.0939 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Gerlach HA, 2004, RAND J ECON, V35, P184, DOI 10.2307/1593736 Hayes A. F., 2010, SOURCEBOOK POLITICAL, P434 Hoeffler S, 2003, J MARKETING RES, V40, P406, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.40.4.406.19394 Homburg C, 2009, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V37, P310, DOI 10.1007/s11747-009-0134-4 John DR, 1998, J MARKETING, V62, P19, DOI 10.2307/1251800 JOHNSON MD, 1987, J CONSUM RES, V14, P214, DOI 10.1086/209107 Jung H, 2011, J BUS RES, V64, P1251, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.06.032 Khan U, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P62, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.48.1.62 Kohli C, 1999, J BUS RES, V46, P45, DOI 10.1016/S0148-2963(98)00041-1 Lee Y, 2003, J PROD INNOVAT MANAG, V20, P4, DOI 10.1111/1540-5885.t01-1-201002 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Lilly B, 1997, J PROD INNOVAT MANAG, V14, P4, DOI 10.1016/S0737-6782(96)00092-6 Lin Wen-Chun, 2012, REV QUANTITATIVE FIN, V39, P273 Malkoc SA, 2010, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V113, P112, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.07.003 MEYERSLEVY J, 1989, J CONSUM RES, V16, P39, DOI 10.1086/209192 Mishra DP, 2001, J PRODUCT BRAND MANA, V10, P75, DOI 10.1108/10610420110388645 ROBERTSON TS, 1995, J MARKETING, V59, P1, DOI 10.2307/1252115 ROSCH E, 1975, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V7, P573, DOI 10.1016/0010-0285(75)90024-9 Sagristano MD, 2002, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V131, P364, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.131.3.364 Schatzel K, 2006, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V34, P357, DOI 10.1177/0092070304270737 Smith ER, 1998, HDB SOCIAL PSYCHOL, V1, P391 Sorescu A, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P468, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.468 Su M, 2010, J PROD INNOVAT MANAG, V27, P658 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Ulkumen G, 2010, J MARKETING RES, V47, P659 Wakslak C, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P52, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02250.x Wu YH, 2004, J MARKETING, V68, P101, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.68.2.101.27792 Zhang LS, 2011, APPL CATAL B-ENVIRON, V106, P1, DOI 10.1016/j.apcatb.2011.05.008 Zhao M, 2009, J MARKETING RES, V46, P46 NR 47 TC 1 Z9 1 U1 1 U2 9 PU WILEY-BLACKWELL PI HOBOKEN PA 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA SN 0737-6782 EI 1540-5885 J9 J PROD INNOVAT MANAG JI J. Prod. Innov. Manage. PD MAY PY 2016 VL 33 IS 3 BP 342 EP 355 DI 10.1111/jpim.12280 PG 14 WC Business; Engineering, Industrial; Management SC Business & Economics; Engineering GA DJ2QA UT WOS:000374048700006 ER PT J AU Kim, DH Sung, YH Lee, SY Choi, D Sung, Y AF Kim, Dong Hoo Sung, Yoon Hi Lee, So Young Choi, Dongwon Sung, Yongjun TI Are you on Timeline or News Feed? The roles of Facebook pages and construal level in increasing ad effectiveness SO COMPUTERS IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR LA English DT Article DE Facebook; Social networking advertising; Construal level theory ID MECHANICAL TURK; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; SOCIAL DISTANCE; SELF; PERSONALITY; PERCEPTION; CONSUMERS; OBSERVER; PEOPLE; OTHERS AB This study examines how psychological distance between a user and a Facebook page (Timeline vs. News Feed) impacts the effectiveness of advertising messages framed by two different construal levels (high- vs. low-level construal). Based on construal level theory, a 2 (Psychological distance: distant vs. proximal) x 2 (Message type: high-level vs. low-level construals) factorial design was employed. The results of the study showed that individuals accessing the News Feed page responded more favorably to abstractly framed desirability-focused messages than concretely framed feasibility-focused messages. In contrast, individuals accessing the Timeline page showed more positive reactions to concretely framed feasibility-focused messages compared to abstractly framed desirability-focused messages. The study concludes with the discussions of theoretical and empirical implications and recommendations for future research. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. C1 [Kim, Dong Hoo] Univ N Carolina, Sch Media & Journalism, 226 Carroll Hall,Campus Box 3365, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA. [Sung, Yoon Hi; Lee, So Young] Univ Texas Austin, Stan Richards Sch Advertising & Publ Relat, Moody Coll Commun, 300 W Dean Keeton St STOP A1200, Austin, TX 78712 USA. [Choi, Dongwon] Univ Georgia, Grady Coll Journalism & Mass Commun, 120 Hooper St, Athens, GA 30602 USA. [Sung, Yongjun] Korea Univ, Dept Psychol, 145 Anam Ro, Seoul, South Korea. RP Sung, Y (reprint author), Korea Univ, Dept Psychol, 145 Anam Ro, Seoul, South Korea. EM dh_kim@unc.edu; yhsung@utexas.edu; leesy8733@utexas.edu; seandwchoi@gmail.com; sungyj@korea.ac.kr CR ABELSON RP, 1981, AM PSYCHOL, V36, P715, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.36.7.715 Andersen SM, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P845, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.4.845 Bar-Anan Y, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P609, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.609 Barreto Ana Margarida, 2013, Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, V7, P119, DOI 10.1108/JRIM-Mar-2012-0013 Beck M., 2015, FACEBOOK ACCOUNTED 7 Berinsky AJ, 2012, POLIT ANAL, V20, P351, DOI 10.1093/pan/mpr057 Boyd D. M., 2008, J COMPUT-MEDIAT COMM, V13, P210, DOI DOI 10.1111/J.1083-6101.2007.00393.X Buhrmester M, 2011, PERSPECT PSYCHOL SCI, V6, P3, DOI 10.1177/1745691610393980 Chen BY, 2012, COMPUT HUM BEHAV, V28, P2091, DOI 10.1016/j.chb.2012.06.013 Chi H., 2011, J INTERACTIVE ADVERT, V12, P44 Chu S.-C., 2011, J INTERACTIVE ADVERT, V12, P30, DOI DOI 10.1080/15252019.2011.10722189 Dehghani M, 2015, COMPUT HUM BEHAV, V49, P597, DOI 10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.051 Steinfield Charles, 2007, J COMPUT-MEDIAT COMM, V12, P1143, DOI DOI 10.1111/J.1083-6101.2007.00367.X FIEDLER K, 1995, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V21, P525, DOI 10.1177/0146167295215010 Goodman JK, 2013, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V26, P213, DOI 10.1002/bdm.1753 Idson LC, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V80, P585, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.80.4.585 Jin SV, 2015, COMPUT HUM BEHAV, V46, P6, DOI 10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.046 Jung J., 2015, INT J ADVERTISING Kerr G., 2010, J INTERACTIVE ADVERT, V10, P16, DOI DOI 10.1080/15252019.2010.10722167 KENT RJ, 1994, J MARKETING, V58, P97, DOI 10.2307/1252313 Kim K, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P706, DOI 10.1086/592131 Kramer N. C., 2008, J MEDIA PSYCHOL, V20, P106, DOI DOI 10.1027/1864-1105.20.3.106 Lang C, 2015, COMPUT HUM BEHAV, V43, P147, DOI 10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.051 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Lee AY, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P205, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.205 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Trope J., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, V2, P353 Liviatan I, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1256, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.007 Logan Kelty, 2012, Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, V6, P164, DOI 10.1108/17505931211274651 Malar L, 2011, J MARKETING, V75, P35 MARKUS HR, 1991, PSYCHOL REV, V98, P224, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224 Mason W, 2012, BEHAV RES METHODS, V44, P1, DOI 10.3758/s13428-011-0124-6 Maurer C, 2011, INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES IN TOURISM 2011, P485 Paolacci G, 2010, JUDGM DECIS MAK, V5, P411 PARK B, 1982, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V42, P1051, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.42.6.1051 Rumelhart D. E., 1994, THEORETICAL MODELS P, P864 Ryan T, 2011, COMPUT HUM BEHAV, V27, P1658, DOI 10.1016/j.chb.2011.02.004 SINGELIS TM, 1994, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V20, P580, DOI 10.1177/0146167294205014 Triandis HC, 2001, J PERS, V69, P907, DOI 10.1111/1467-6494.696169 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y., 2011, HDB THEORIES SOCIAL, VOne, P118, DOI DOI 10.4135/9781446249215.N7 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 van Noort G, 2014, INT J ADVERT, V33, P235, DOI 10.2501/IJA-33-2-235-252 WATSON D, 1982, PSYCHOL BULL, V92, P682, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.92.3.682 Zacks JM, 2001, PSYCHOL BULL, V127, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.127.1.3 Zhao SY, 2008, COMPUT HUM BEHAV, V24, P1816, DOI 10.1016/j.chb.2008.02.012 NR 47 TC 1 Z9 1 U1 9 U2 33 PU PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD PI OXFORD PA THE BOULEVARD, LANGFORD LANE, KIDLINGTON, OXFORD OX5 1GB, ENGLAND SN 0747-5632 EI 1873-7692 J9 COMPUT HUM BEHAV JI Comput. Hum. Behav. PD APR PY 2016 VL 57 BP 312 EP 320 DI 10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.031 PG 9 WC Psychology, Multidisciplinary; Psychology, Experimental SC Psychology GA DE2LC UT WOS:000370457800035 ER PT J AU Septianto, F Pratiwi, L AF Septianto, Felix Pratiwi, Loren TI The moderating role of construal level on the evaluation of emotional appeal vs. cognitive appeal advertisements SO MARKETING LETTERS LA English DT Article DE Construal level; Emotional appeal; Cognitive appeal; Persuasion; Advertising ID PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; SELF-CONTROL; PERSUASION; BEHAVIOR; ATTITUDES; FLUENCY; CLAIMS; IMAGE; BASES AB This article proposes that construal level moderates consumer evaluation of different appeals (emotional vs. cognitive appeals) in advertisements. Low-level construal is associated with close psychological distance; this condition implies that people with low-level construal can feel an emotion more intensely than those with high-level construal. Consequently, consumers with low-level construal could positively relate with the emotional appeal ad, and they would evaluate an ad with emotional appeal more favorably than an ad with cognitive appeal. However, this effect does not occur among consumers who construe information at high-level, due to the fact that they are able to focus on the central and positive features of different appeals. C1 [Septianto, Felix] Univ New S Wales, Australian Sch Business, Sydney, NSW, Australia. [Pratiwi, Loren] Parahyangan Catholic Univ, Dept Ind Engn, Bandung, Indonesia. RP Septianto, F (reprint author), Univ New S Wales, Australian Sch Business, Sydney, NSW, Australia. EM septianto.felix@gmail.com CR Alter AL, 2010, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V99, P436, DOI 10.1037/a0020218 Clarkson JJ, 2011, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V37, P1415, DOI 10.1177/0146167211413394 DeBono KG, 2006, J PERS, V74, P715, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00390.x Fabrigar LR, 1999, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V25, P363, DOI 10.1177/0146167299025003008 Forster J, 2008, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V94, P579, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.94.4.579 Fox S., 1997, MIRROR MAKERS HIST A Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 FRIJDA NH, 1992, COGNITION EMOTION, V6, P467, DOI 10.1080/02699939208409699 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Han D., 2014, J CONSUMER IN PRESS, V41 Hansen J, 2013, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V142, P336, DOI 10.1037/a0029283 Herzog SM, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P483, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.05.008 JOHAR JS, 1991, J ADVERTISING, V20, P23 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, P353 Liberman N, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P113, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7 Liberman N, 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V97, P203, DOI 10.1037/a0015671 Loewenstein G, 1996, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V65, P272, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1996.0028 Maio G. R., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, P565 Mayer ND, 2010, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V36, P443, DOI 10.1177/0146167210362981 McCrea SM, 2008, PSYCHOL SCI, V19, P1308, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02240.x Metcalfe J, 1999, PSYCHOL REV, V106, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.106.1.3 PARK CW, 1986, J MARKETING, V50, P135, DOI 10.2307/1251291 Park K., 2012, SEOUL J BUSINESS, V18, P105 Schmeichel BJ, 2011, SOC PSYCHOL PERS SCI, V2, P182, DOI 10.1177/1948550610385955 See YHM, 2008, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V94, P938, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.94.6.938 SHAVITT S, 1990, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V26, P124, DOI 10.1016/0022-1031(90)90072-T SNYDER M, 1985, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V49, P586, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.49.3.586 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Tsai CI, 2011, PSYCHOL SCI, V22, P348, DOI 10.1177/0956797611398494 Tsai CI, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V37, P807, DOI 10.1086/655855 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Van Boven L, 2007, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V136, P289, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.136.2.289 Van Boven L, 2010, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V98, P872, DOI 10.1037/a0019262 Wakslak CJ, 2009, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V45, P927, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.05.002 Wright S, 2012, MARKET LETT, V23, P253, DOI 10.1007/s11002-011-9151-4 NR 38 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 11 U2 35 PU SPRINGER PI DORDRECHT PA VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS SN 0923-0645 EI 1573-059X J9 MARKET LETT JI Mark. Lett. PD MAR PY 2016 VL 27 IS 1 BP 171 EP 181 DI 10.1007/s11002-014-9324-z PG 11 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA DC7XQ UT WOS:000369434600014 ER PT J AU Hilverda, F Jurgens, M Kuttschreuter, M AF Hilverda, Femke Jurgens, Manon Kuttschreuter, Margot TI Word associations with "organic": what do consumers think of? SO BRITISH FOOD JOURNAL LA English DT Article DE Organic vegetables; Organic food; Organic meat; Word associations ID CONSTRUAL-LEVEL THEORY; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; FOOD; DETERMINANTS; PERCEPTIONS; ATTITUDES; BEHAVIOR AB Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine the word associations that consumers have with organic food, organic meat or organic vegetables, and how these associations differ between food type and consumer groups. Construal-level theory was used as a theoretical framework to interpret the associations. In addition, consumer groups were compared on psychological distance, values, age, and gender. Design/methodology/approach - Two studies were performed. In Study 1, a sample of 154 participants filled out the words that came to their mind when thinking of organic food, organic meat or organic vegetables, and psychological distance and values were measured. In Study 2 these words were rated on centrality by an independent sample (n = 52). Findings - Consumers think of animal welfare, price, health, pesticides, and naturalness the most when thinking of organic. The environment, health, honesty, pesticides, sustainability, quality, natural, additives, origin, certification, and taste were central across organic food, organic meat, and organic vegetables. Thinking of organic meat showed consumers' concern for animal welfare, while thinking of organic vegetables showed concern for human health. Consumer groups differed regarding psychological distance, values, gender, and age. Consumers who frequently bought organic food were more positive about organic food products compared to consumers who occasionally or hardly ever bought organic food products. Originality/value - This research extends the scope of current consumer research about organic food and provides new insight in the word associations consumers have with organic food products. C1 [Hilverda, Femke; Jurgens, Manon; Kuttschreuter, Margot] Univ Twente, Dept Psychol Conflict Risk & Safety, Enschede, Netherlands. RP Hilverda, F (reprint author), Univ Twente, Dept Psychol Conflict Risk & Safety, Enschede, Netherlands. EM m.d.hilverda@utwente.nl CR Ahmad S. N. B., 2010, INT J BUSINESS MANAG, V5, P105, DOI DOI 10.5539/IJBM.V5N2P105 Bruhn M, 2009, AM ECON J-APPL ECON, V1, P200, DOI 10.1257/app.1.4.200 EC Regulation Council, 2007, OFFICIAL J EUROPEAN, P1 Eden S., 2009, PUBLIC UNDERST SCI, V20, P179 FEHR B, 1988, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V55, P557, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.55.4.557 Fiedler K, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P101, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70015-3 Giraud G., 2002, Ecolabels and the greening of the food market. Proceedings of a Conference Boston, Massachusetts, USA, 7-9 November 2002, P41 Harper G. C., 2002, British Food Journal, V104, P287, DOI 10.1108/00070700210425723 Hughner R. S., 2007, J CONSUM BEHAV, V6, P94, DOI DOI 10.1002/CB.210 Lea E, 2005, BRIT FOOD J, V107, P855, DOI 10.1108/00070700510629797 Lee HJ, 2015, FOOD QUAL PREFER, V39, P259, DOI 10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.06.002 Loewenthal KM, 2004, INTRO PSYCHOL TESTS Magnusson M. K., 2001, British Food Journal, V103, P209, DOI 10.1108/00070700110386755 Makatouni A., 2002, BRIT FOOD J, V104, P3 Miranda SM, 2003, INFORM SYST RES, V14, P87, DOI 10.1287/isre.14.1.87.14765 Padel S, 2005, BRIT FOOD J, V107, P606, DOI 10.1108/00070700510611002 Roitner-Schobesberger B, 2008, FOOD POLICY, V33, P112, DOI 10.1016/j.foodpol.2007.09.004 Schifferstein HNJ, 1998, FOOD QUAL PREFER, V9, P119, DOI 10.1016/S0950-3293(97)00044-X Schwartz S. H., 2012, ONLINE READINGS PSYC, V2, P1, DOI DOI 10.9707/2307-0919.1116 Soler F., 2002, British Food Journal, V104, P670, DOI 10.1108/00070700210425921 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Zanoli R., 2002, British Food Journal, V104, P643, DOI 10.1108/00070700210425930 NR 23 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 6 U2 6 PU EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD PI BINGLEY PA HOWARD HOUSE, WAGON LANE, BINGLEY BD16 1WA, W YORKSHIRE, ENGLAND SN 0007-070X EI 1758-4108 J9 BRIT FOOD J JI Br. Food J. PY 2016 VL 118 IS 12 BP 2931 EP 2948 DI 10.1108/BFJ-05-2016-0229 PG 18 WC Food Science & Technology SC Food Science & Technology GA EG0AF UT WOS:000390692100006 ER PT J AU Wang, LY Wang, SJ Keller, LR Li, J AF Wang, Liangyan Wang, Shijian Keller, L. Robin Li, Jie TI Thinking styles affect reactions to brand crisis apologies SO EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MARKETING LA English DT Article DE Brand management; Customer behavior ID CONSTRUAL-LEVEL; MODERATING ROLE; SELF-EFFICACY; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; HOLISTIC THINKING; REGULATORY FOCUS; ATTITUDE-CHANGE; CULTURE; RESPONSES; MESSAGE AB Purpose - This article aims to examine how a person's thinking style, specifically holistic versus analytic, and a firm's crisis apology with the remedial solution framed in "why" (vs "how") terms can interactively impact consumers' perceived efficacy of the firm to respond to the crisis and their impression or evaluation of the brand. Design/methodology/approach - Hypotheses were tested through three experimental studies involving 308 participants recruited in China. Participants answered survey questions investigating the interactive effects from consumers' thinking style (culture as a proxy in Study 1, measured in Study 2 or primed in Study 3) and a brand's crisis apology with the remedial solution framed in "why" (vs "how") terms on consumers' perceived efficacy and evaluation of the firm. Findings - The frame of the remedial solution resulting in a higher evaluation improvement depended on a consumer's thinking style. For holistic thinkers, a "why" (vs "how") framed remedial solution resulted in a higher evaluation improvement; however, for analytic thinkers, a "how" (vs "why") framed remedial solution resulted in a higher evaluation improvement. Additionally, the results showed that a consumer's perceived efficacy of the brand being able to successfully respond to the crisis mediated the interactive effects of the remedial solution framing and thinking styles on the evaluation improvement. Practical Implications - The findings provide evidence that framing of the remedial solution can be leveraged as a tool to reduce negative impact resulting from a brand crisis. Specifically, the results suggest that companies may do well to employ a "why" framed remedial solution, particularly in cases where consumers are likely to process information holistically. Conversely, a "how" framed remedial solution may be effective in situations where consumers are likely to process information analytically. Originality/value - This research contributes to the literature, being among the first to consider how the remedial solution framing in a firm's apology can enhance people's evaluation of the brand and decrease the perceived negative impact resulting from the brand crisis. C1 [Wang, Liangyan; Wang, Shijian; Li, Jie] Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Dept Mkt, Shanghai, Peoples R China. [Keller, L. Robin] Univ Calif Irvine, Operat & Decis Technol, Irvine, CA USA. RP Wang, LY (reprint author), Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Dept Mkt, Shanghai, Peoples R China. EM wly@sjtu.edu.cn FU National Natural Science Foundation of China [71072059, 71572110]; Shanghai Shuguang Program [13SG16] FX This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China Grant (71072059, 71572110) and Shanghai Shuguang Program Grant (13SG16). The authors thank Barbara Loken for helpful comments on earlier versions. CR ABC News, 2015, ABC NEWS Ahluwalia R, 2000, J MARKETING RES, V37, P203, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.37.2.203.18734 AOL, 2014, WE AR DEEPL SORR TAK BANDURA A, 1982, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P5, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.43.1.5 Bhargave R, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V40, P501, DOI 10.1086/671053 BLOCK LG, 1995, J MARKETING RES, V32, P192, DOI 10.2307/3152047 BRADFORD JL, 1995, J BUS ETHICS, V14, P875, DOI 10.1007/BF00882067 CHIU LH, 1972, INT J PSYCHOL, V7, P235, DOI 10.1080/00207597208246604 Choi I, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P46, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.1.46 Choi I, 1999, PSYCHOL BULL, V125, P47, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.125.1.47 Choi I, 1998, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V24, P949, DOI 10.1177/0146167298249003 Choi I, 2007, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V33, P691, DOI 10.1177/0146167206298568 Chung S., 2011, THESIS Conlon DE, 1996, ACAD MANAGE J, V39, P1040, DOI 10.2307/256723 Dawar N, 2000, J MARKETING RES, V37, P215, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.37.2.215.18729 Dean D. H., 2004, Journal of Business Communication, V41, P192, DOI 10.1177/0021943603261748 Delgado-Ballester Elena, 2001, EUR J MARKETING, V35, P1238, DOI DOI 10.1108/EUM0000000006475 DICLEMENTE CC, 1981, COGNITIVE THER RES, V5, P175, DOI 10.1007/BF01172525 Dutta S, 2011, J BUS RES, V64, P1281, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.01.013 Fehr R, 2010, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V113, P37, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.04.002 Feng TJ, 2014, RISK ANAL, V34, P698, DOI 10.1111/risa.12099 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 GIST ME, 1992, ACAD MANAGE REV, V17, P183, DOI 10.2307/258770 GLEICHER F, 1992, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V28, P86, DOI 10.1016/0022-1031(92)90033-G Hayes A. F., 2013, INTRO MEDIATION MODE Hong JW, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P456, DOI 10.1086/653492 Hong YY, 2000, AM PSYCHOL, V55, P709, DOI 10.1037//0003-066X.55.7.709 Ji LJ, 2001, PSYCHOL SCI, V12, P450, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00384 Kellogg S., 2007, WASHINGTON LAWYER, V21, P20 Kirmani Amna, 1998, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V7, P25, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp0701_02 Konrath S, 2009, J PERS, V77, P1197, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2009.00579.x Kuhnen U, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P492, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00011-2 Lalwani AK, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V40, P255, DOI 10.1086/670034 Lee AY, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P205, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.205 Lee AY, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V78, P1122, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.78.6.1122 Liberman N, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P143, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.12.009 Lin ZC, 2008, BIOL PSYCHOL, V77, P93, DOI 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2007.08.002 Lin ZC, 2009, Q J EXP PSYCHOL, V62, P802, DOI 10.1080/17470210802271650 Kim P. H., 2011, INT NEGOTIATION, V16, P405, DOI DOI 10.1163/157180611X592932 Masuda T, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V81, P922, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.81.5.922 Maxham JG, 2003, J MARKETING, V67, P46, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.67.1.46.18591 McElroy T, 2003, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P610, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00036-2 Mitchell C.E., 1989, FAMILY THERAPY, V16, P283 Monga AB, 2010, J MARKETING, V74, P80 Monga AB, 2008, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V18, P320, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2008.09.009 NEWCOMB MD, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P564, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.3.564 Newman LS, 2013, SOC BEHAV PERSONAL, V41, P31, DOI 10.2224/sbp.2013.41.1.31 Nisbett RE, 2001, PSYCHOL REV, V108, P291, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.108.2.291 Orenstein Aviva, 1999, SW U L REV, V28, P221 OSMONBEKOV T., 2009, J TARGETING MEASUREM, V17, P321 Peck E., 2015, SORRY NOT SORRY WHY Peng KP, 1999, AM PSYCHOL, V54, P741, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.54.9.741 ROGERS RW, 1975, J PSYCHOL, V91, P93, DOI 10.1080/00223980.1975.9915803 Roschk H, 2013, MARKET LETT, V24, P293, DOI 10.1007/s11002-012-9218-x Shavitt S, 2006, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V16, P325, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1604_3 Skarlicki DP, 2004, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V34, P322, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02550.x Sobel J., 2015, TAKATA CHIEF APOLOGI Spiller SA, 2013, J MARKETING RES, V50, P277 Stephan E, 2010, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V98, P268, DOI 10.1037/a0016960 Triandis H. C., 1995, INDIVIDUALISM COLLEC Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Trudell C., 2014, TAKATA CHAIRMAN APOL Uchida Y, 2010, PSYCHOLOGIA, V53, P236 Valenzuela A, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P792, DOI 10.1086/605592 Wakslak C, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P52, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02250.x White K, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P472 Zhao GZ, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P671, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.4.671 [Anonymous], 2014, JAPAN TIMES NR 68 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 8 U2 8 PU EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD PI BINGLEY PA HOWARD HOUSE, WAGON LANE, BINGLEY BD16 1WA, W YORKSHIRE, ENGLAND SN 0309-0566 EI 1758-7123 J9 EUR J MARKETING JI Eur. J. Market. PY 2016 VL 50 IS 7-8 BP 1263 EP 1289 DI 10.1108/EJM-07-2014-0457 PG 27 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA DZ7BQ UT WOS:000386019100007 ER PT J AU Vabo, M Hansen, H AF Vabo, Mette Hansen, Havard TI Purchase intentions for domestic food: a moderated TPB-explanation SO BRITISH FOOD JOURNAL LA English DT Article DE Self-construal; Purchase intentions; Consumer ethnocentrism; Theory of planned behaviour; Domestic food ID PLANNED BEHAVIOR; FUNCTIONAL FOODS; CHOICE; SELF; CONSUMERS; BELIEFS AB Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to investigate consumers' intention to buy domestic food applying the theory of planned behavior. Based on this framework, the authors investigate the moderating effects of consumer ethnocentrism and self-construal. Design/methodology/approach - To test the conceptual model, a cross-sectional study from a randomsample of Norwegian consumers was employed. A total of 501 consumers filled out the web-based survey. The data were analyzed by means of confirmatory factor analysis and multiple regression. Findings - The results show that subjective norm and perceived behavioral control (PBC) both have positive significant effects on consumers' intention to buy domestic food. Attitude also has a positive effect but is only significant on the ten percent level. The effect of subjective norm is reduced with increasing levels of ethnocentrism, and the effect of PBC is reduced when consumers are collectivistic rather than individualistic. Originality/value - This study provides the food industry with useful information about which mechanisms underlie the consumers' intention to buy domestic food. In addition the study provides useful insight into how different personality characteristics affect the consumers' intentions. C1 [Vabo, Mette; Hansen, Havard] Univ Stavanger, UiS Business Sch, Stavanger, Norway. [Vabo, Mette] Tine R&D, Stavanger, Norway. RP Vabo, M (reprint author), Univ Stavanger, UiS Business Sch, Stavanger, Norway.; Vabo, M (reprint author), Tine R&D, Stavanger, Norway. EM mette.vabo@tine.no CR AJZEN I, 1991, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V50, P179, DOI 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T Ajzen I., 1988, ATTITUDES PERSONALIT Ares G, 2007, APPETITE, V49, P148, DOI 10.1016/j.appet.2007.01.006 Armitage CJ, 2001, BRIT J SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P471, DOI 10.1348/014466601164939 Arvola A, 2008, APPETITE, V50, P443, DOI 10.1016/j.appet.2007.09.010 Belsley DA, 1980, REGRESSION DIAGNOSTI Bergkvist L, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P175, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.2.175 Chryssochoidis G, 2007, EUR J MARKETING, V41, P1518, DOI 10.1108/03090560710821288 Conner M, 2001, SOC SCI MED, V52, P621, DOI 10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00165-9 Cross SE, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V78, P791, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.78.4.791 D'Astous A., 2005, J CONSUMER POLICY, V28, P289, DOI [10.1007/s10603-005-8489-5, DOI 10.1007/S10603-005-8489-5] Furst T, 1996, APPETITE, V26, P247, DOI 10.1006/appe.1996.0019 Grunert KG, 2002, TRENDS FOOD SCI TECH, V13, P275, DOI 10.1016/S0924-2244(02)00137-1 Grunert K. G., 1996, MARKET ORIENTATION F Hansen T, 2008, INT J CONSUM STUD, V32, P128, DOI 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2007.00655.x Hassan L. M., 2007, International Journal of Consumer Studies, V31, P317, DOI 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2006.00555.x Hewitt Allison M, 2007, Psychol Health Med, V12, P526, DOI 10.1080/13548500601164396 Hofstede G., 1993, KULTURER ORG Ipsos MMI, 2014, RES REPORT Ipsos MMI, 2016, RES REPORT Jain SP, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P66, DOI 10.1086/513047 JANSSON-BOYD C V., 2010, CONSUMER PSYCHOL Koster EP, 2009, FOOD QUAL PREFER, V20, P70, DOI 10.1016/j.foodqual.2007.11.002 Lutz R. J., 1991, PERSPECTIVES CONSUME, V4/e, P317 MARKUS HR, 1991, PSYCHOL REV, V98, P224, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224 Melbye EL, 2015, J INT FOOD AGRIBUS M, V27, P142, DOI 10.1080/08974438.2014.918916 Nocella G, 2012, PSYCHOL MARKET, V29, P850, DOI 10.1002/mar.20569 Orth U. R., 2003, Agribusiness (New York), V19, P137, DOI 10.1002/agr.10051 Pohlmann C, 2006, EUR J PERSONALITY, V20, P525, DOI 10.1002/per.599 Ren J, 2011, INT J CONSUM STUD, V35, P661, DOI 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2010.00959.x Robinson C, 2009, MULTIPLE LINEAR REGR, V35, P6 Roos GM, 2016, BRIT FOOD J, V118, P2359, DOI 10.1108/BFJ-01-2016-0041 Rossiter JR, 2002, INT J RES MARK, V19, P305, DOI 10.1016/S0167-8116(02)00097-6 Schiffman L. G., 2011, CONSUMER BEHAV EUROP Selnes F., 2001, J SERV RES-US, V4, P79, DOI 10.1177/109467050142001 Shepherd R., 2001, FOOD PEOPLE SOC EURO, P117 SHIMP TA, 1987, J MARKETING RES, V24, P280, DOI 10.2307/3151638 Siddique MAM, 2012, J GLOB MARK, V25, P181 STEPTOE A, 1995, APPETITE, V25, P267, DOI 10.1006/appe.1995.0061 Sumner W. G., 1906, FOLKWAYS SOCIOLOGICA Vabo M., J FOOD PROD IN PRESS NR 41 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 5 U2 5 PU EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD PI BINGLEY PA HOWARD HOUSE, WAGON LANE, BINGLEY BD16 1WA, W YORKSHIRE, ENGLAND SN 0007-070X EI 1758-4108 J9 BRIT FOOD J JI Br. Food J. PY 2016 VL 118 IS 10 BP 2372 EP 2387 DI 10.1108/BFJ-01-2016-0044 PG 16 WC Food Science & Technology SC Food Science & Technology GA DZ6OM UT WOS:000385981800003 ER PT J AU Steenis, ND Fischer, ARH AF Steenis, Nigel D. Fischer, Arnout R. H. TI Consumer attitudes towards nanotechnology in food products: an attribute-based analysis SO BRITISH FOOD JOURNAL LA English DT Article DE Risk perception; Consumer attitudes; Construal-level theory; Food technology acceptance ID GENETICALLY-MODIFIED FOODS; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; PERCEIVED BENEFITS; PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE; RISK; TECHNOLOGIES; BEHAVIOR; ISSUES; PERCEPTIONS; PREDICTION AB Purpose - Nanotechnology is a technology that holds much promise for food production. It is, however not clear to what extent consumers will accept different types of nanotechnologies in food products. The purpose of this paper is to research consumer attitudes towards differing applications of food nanotechnologies. Design/methodology/approach - Using an attribute -based approach, the authors compare a product with three different nanotechnology application types (during production, implemented in packaging and as additive to the -food) with the same product without any nanotechnology attributes. Findings Adding a nanotechnology attribute is shown to contribute to the overall product attitude, without substantially affecting the contribution of the other product attributes to overall product attitude. There are no indications that nanotechnology provides a non -compensatory harrier against acceptance. Risk perception increased for applications proximate to consumers while benefits remained similar across conditions. Practical - implications Low -distance applications (e.g. nano -additives that enter the body) are perceived as riskier, but not necessarily more beneficial, implying they will be rejected more readily by consumers. Food producers should primarily focus on reducing consumers risk perceptions of nanotechnologies and providing (and communicating clearly) the end -user benefits obtained from the technology. Originality/value - This study shows that introducing nanotechnology into a product has an almost uniquely additive contribution to attitude. The study aimed at relevant nanotechnology applications for food products, as opposed to general attitudes towards technologies. The study also confirms in an experimental setting earlier exploratory-findings that food applications closer to the end user are less acceptable and provides a case for nanotechnology-food innovations. C1 [Steenis, Nigel D.; Fischer, Arnout R. H.] Wageningen Univ, Dept Mkt & Consumer Behav, NL-6700 AP Wageningen, Netherlands. RP Steenis, ND (reprint author), Wageningen Univ, Dept Mkt & Consumer Behav, NL-6700 AP Wageningen, Netherlands. EM nigel.steenis@wur.nl CR AJZEN I, 1991, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V50, P179, DOI 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T Balbus JM, 2006, ANN NY ACAD SCI, V1076, P331, DOI 10.1196/annals.1371.027 Bonny S, 2003, ELECTRON J BIOTECHN, V6, P1, DOI 10. 2225/vol6-issue1-fulltext-4 Bouwmeester H., 2007, HLTH IMPACT NANOTECH Bouwmeester H, 2009, REGUL TOXICOL PHARM, V53, P52, DOI 10.1016/j.yrtph.2008.10.008 Bredahl L, 1998, J CONSUMER POLICY, V21, P251, DOI DOI 10.1023/A:1006940724167 Bruhn CM, 2007, INNOV FOOD SCI EMERG, V8, P555, DOI 10.1016/j.ifset.2007.04.006 Cameron NMDS, 2006, ANN NY ACAD SCI, V1093, P280, DOI 10.1196/annals.1382.019 Chaiken S, 1999, PSYCHOL INQ, V10, P118, DOI 10.1207/S15327965PL100204 Chau CF, 2007, TRENDS FOOD SCI TECH, V18, P269, DOI 10.1016/j.tifs.2007.01.007 Chaudhry Q, 2008, FOOD ADDIT CONTAM A, V25, P241, DOI 10.1080/02652030701744538 Conti J, 2011, RISK ANAL, V31, P1734, DOI 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01608.x Costa-Font M, 2008, FOOD POLICY, V33, P99, DOI 10.1016/j.foodpol.2007.07.002 CRITES SL, 1994, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V20, P619, DOI 10.1177/0146167294206001 FAZIO RH, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V50, P229, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.50.2.229 Fazio RH, 2007, SOC COGNITION, V25, P603, DOI 10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.603 Fischer ARH, 2013, PUBLIC UNDERST SCI, V22, P817, DOI 10.1177/0963662512440220 FISHBEIN M, 1963, HUM RELAT, V16, P233, DOI 10.1177/001872676301600302 Fortin D. R., 2003, British Food Journal, V105, P42, DOI 10.1108/00070700310467483 Frewer L., 2003, British Food Journal, V105, P714, DOI 10.1108/00070700310506263 Frewer L, 2003, TRENDS FOOD SCI TECH, V14, P319, DOI 10.1016/S0924-2244(03)00064-5 Frewer LJ, 2011, TRENDS FOOD SCI TECH, V22, P442, DOI 10.1016/j.tifs.2011.05.005 Frewer LJ, 2002, RISK ANAL, V22, P701, DOI 10.1111/0272-4332.00062 Gaskell G, 2005, PUBLIC UNDERST SCI, V14, P81, DOI 10.1177/0963662505048949 Grunert K. G., 2003, Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies, V4, P435, DOI 10.1016/S1466-8564(03)00035-3 Grunert KG, 2002, TRENDS FOOD SCI TECH, V13, P275, DOI 10.1016/S0924-2244(02)00137-1 Grunert K. G., 1996, MARKET ORIENTATION F Gupta N, 2015, NANOETHICS, V9, P93, DOI 10.1007/s11569-015-0222-5 Gupta N, 2013, J NANOPART RES, V15, P1, DOI DOI 10.1007/S11051-013-1838-4 Gustafson PE, 1998, RISK ANAL, V18, P805, DOI 10.1023/B:RIAN.0000005926.03250.c0 HENDLER R, 1975, AM ECON REV, V65, P194 IRWIN JR, 1993, J RISK UNCERTAINTY, V6, P5, DOI 10.1007/BF01065347 Kuzma J., 2006, NANOTECHNOLOGY AGR F LANCASTER KJ, 1966, J POLIT ECON, V74, P132, DOI 10.1086/259131 Liberman N, 2014, TRENDS COGN SCI, V18, P364, DOI 10.1016/j.tics.2014.03.001 Magnusson MK, 2002, APPETITE, V39, P9, DOI 10.1006/appe.2002.0486 Nussbaum S, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P485, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.485 PD Hart Research Associates, 2006, REP FIND ATT NAN FED Priest S, 2011, RISK ANAL, V31, P1718, DOI 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01705.x Rogers E, 2003, DIFFUSION INNOVATION Ronteltap A, 2007, APPETITE, V49, P1, DOI 10.1016/j.appet.2007.02.002 Ronteltap A, 2011, J NANOPART RES, V13, P4399, DOI 10.1007/s11051-011-0473-1 The Royal Society and The Royal Academy of Engineering, 2004, NAN NAN OPP UNC Schenk MF, 2008, HEALTH RISK SOC, V10, P263, DOI 10.1080/13698570802160947 Siegrist M, 2008, TRENDS FOOD SCI TECH, V19, P603, DOI 10.1016/j.tifs.2008.01.017 Siegrist M, 2008, APPETITE, V51, P283, DOI 10.1016/j.appet.2008.02.020 Siegrist M, 2007, APPETITE, V49, P459, DOI 10.1016/j.appet.2007.03.002 Siegrist M, 2011, RISK ANAL, V31, P1762, DOI 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01720.x Solomon MR, 2010, CONSUMER BEHAV EUROP Sozer N, 2009, TRENDS BIOTECHNOL, V27, P82, DOI 10.1016/j.tibtech.2008.10.010 Trope Y., 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P296 Trope Y., 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 van Giesen RI, 2015, PLOS ONE, V10, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0141790 Van Overwalle F, 2005, PERS SOC PSYCHOL REV, V9, P231, DOI 10.1207/s15327957pspr0903_3 Vandermoere F, 2011, PUBLIC UNDERST SCI, V20, P195, DOI 10.1177/0963662509350139 Van Dijk H., J RISK RES IN PRESS Zhou G, 2013, NANOTECHNOLOGY FOOD NR 59 TC 1 Z9 1 U1 3 U2 12 PU EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD PI BINGLEY PA HOWARD HOUSE, WAGON LANE, BINGLEY BD16 1WA, W YORKSHIRE, ENGLAND SN 0007-070X EI 1758-4108 J9 BRIT FOOD J JI Br. Food J. PY 2016 VL 118 IS 5 BP 1254 EP 1267 DI 10.1108/311-09-2010-0330 PG 14 WC Food Science & Technology SC Food Science & Technology GA DM1PO UT WOS:000376118700015 ER PT J AU Chen, MY Chiu, CI AF Chen, Ming-Yi Chiu, Ching-I TI Go green: how to influence the perceived effectiveness of a green product? SO INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING LA English DT Article DE construal level theory; temporal construal; environmental consciousness; perceived green product effectiveness; brand attitude ID CONSTRUAL LEVELS; ENVIRONMENTAL CONSCIOUSNESS; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; RELUCTANT CONSUMER; THREAT APPEALS; GUILT APPEALS; SELF-CONTROL; BEHAVIOR; MEDIATION; MESSAGES AB Across two studies, this research elucidates on which green messages in advertising are most effective in influencing the perceived effectiveness of green products by examining the moderating role of environmental consciousness. This study further considers a mechanism underlying the interaction between green messages and environmental consciousness on brand attitude with the perceived effectiveness of green products. The results show that when environmentally conscious individuals are exposed to abstract and distant temporal messages, they will report greater perceptions of a green product's effectiveness and brand attitude than for concrete and proximal temporal messages. In contrast, less environmentally conscious respondents will not have different responses to the abstract/concrete and distant/proximal temporal messages. Furthermore, the perceived effectiveness of a green product mediates the interaction between green messages and environmental consciousness for predicting brand attitudes. With an understanding of how environmentally conscious individuals evaluate green advertising, marketers can better understand how to promote their green products more effectively. C1 [Chen, Ming-Yi] Natl Chung Hsing Univ, Dept Mkt, Taichung 40227, Taiwan. [Chiu, Ching-I] Easy Field Corp, Dept R&D, Taoyuan, Taiwan. RP Chen, MY (reprint author), Natl Chung Hsing Univ, Dept Mkt, Taichung 40227, Taiwan. EM myc@dragon.nchu.edu.tw CR Aaker J, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P224, DOI 10.1086/651566 Agerstrom J, 2009, SOC COGNITION, V27, P261 Agrawal N, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P448, DOI 10.1086/597331 Aiken L.S., 1991, MULTIPLE REGRESSION Ajzen I., 1980, UNDERSTANDING ATTITU Baek TH, 2015, INT J ADVERT, V34, P135, DOI 10.1080/02650487.2014.993513 Block LG, 2002, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V32, P803, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00243.x Brehm Jack, 1966, THEORY PSYCHOL REACT Brislin R. W., 1986, FIELD METHODS CROSS, P137 Chan RYK, 2008, J BUS ETHICS, V79, P469, DOI 10.1007/s10551-007-9410-8 Chang C, 2006, J ADVERTISING RES, V46, P315, DOI 10.2501/S0021849906060296 Chang CC, 2011, J ADVERTISING, V40, P19, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367400402 Chang CC, 2010, INT J ADVERT, V29, P765, DOI 10.2501/S0265048710201452 Chang CT, 2012, INT J ADVERT, V31, P741, DOI 10.2501/IJA-31-4-741-771 Chang CT, 2011, INT J ADVERT, V30, P587, DOI 10.2501/IJA-30-4-587-616 Chang H, 2015, INT J ADVERT, V34, P158, DOI 10.1080/02650487.2014.994731 Chen YS, 2013, SUSTAIN DEV, V21, P294, DOI 10.1002/sd.500 Chen YS, 2013, J BUS ETHICS, V114, P489, DOI 10.1007/s10551-012-1360-0 Cotte J, 2005, J BUS RES, V58, P361, DOI 10.1016/S0148-2963(03)00102-4 Diamantopoulos A, 2003, J BUS RES, V56, P465, DOI 10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00241-7 Dickinson S, 2008, INT J ADVERT, V27, P251 Taghian M., 2005, ASIA PACIFIC J MARKE, V17, P51, DOI 10.1108/13555850510672386 Dunlap RE, 2000, J SOC ISSUES, V56, P425, DOI 10.1111/0022-4537.00176 Dunlap R.E., 2008, J ENVIRON EDUC, V41, P3 Dunlap R.E., 2002, ENV CONCEPTUAL MEASU Easley RW, 2000, J BUS RES, V48, P83, DOI 10.1016/S0148-2963(98)00079-4 Fishbach A, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P296, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.2.296 Fishbein M., 1975, BELIEF ATTITUDE INTE Fitzsimons GJ, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P224, DOI 10.1086/322899 Fitzsimons G. I., 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P1 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x Griskevicius V, 2010, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V98, P392, DOI 10.1037/a0017346 GRUNERT SC, 1995, J ECON PSYCHOL, V16, P39, DOI 10.1016/0167-4870(94)00034-8 HANSEN CJ, 1984, ADV CONSUM RES, V11, P187 Hartmann P, 2014, INT J ADVERT, V33, P741, DOI 10.2501/IJA-33-4-741-765 Hartmann P, 2010, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V30, P119, DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.10.001 Hartmann P, 2009, INT J ADVERT, V28, P715, DOI 10.2501/S0265048709200837 Hernandez J.M.D.C., 2014, J ADVERTISING, V44, P243 HOFSTEDE G, 1983, J INT BUS STUD, V14, P75, DOI 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490867 Hubbard R., 1994, INT J RES MARK, V11, P233, DOI DOI 10.1016/0167-8116(94)90003-5 Jenkins TN, 2002, ECOL ECON, V40, P39, DOI 10.1016/S0921-8009(01)00263-4 Kaiser FG, 1999, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V19, P1, DOI 10.1006/jevp.1998.0107 Keinan A, 2008, J MARKETING RES, V45, P676, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.45.6.676 Keller PA, 1999, J APPL PSYCHOL, V84, P403, DOI 10.1037/0021-9010.84.3.403 Kirmani A, 2000, J MARKETING, V64, P66, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.64.2.66.18000 Lafferty B.A., 2009, J MARKETING THEORY P, V17, P129, DOI DOI 10.2753/MTP1069-6679170203 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Lin YC, 2012, J MARKETING, V76, P125 Loewenstein G, 1996, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V65, P272, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1996.0028 MASON CH, 1991, J MARKETING RES, V28, P268, DOI 10.2307/3172863 McCarty JA, 2001, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V20, P93, DOI 10.1509/jppm.20.1.93.17291 Metcalfe J, 1999, PSYCHOL REV, V106, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.106.1.3 Mogilner C, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V39, P429, DOI 10.1086/663774 Nunnally J. C., 1994, PSYCHOMETRIC THEORY Parguel B, 2015, INT J ADVERT, V34, P107, DOI 10.1080/02650487.2014.996116 Peloza J, 2013, J MARKETING, V77, P104 Pickett-Baker J, 2008, J CONSUM MARK, V25, P281, DOI 10.1108/07363760810890516 Preacher KJ, 2008, BEHAV RES METHODS, V40, P879, DOI 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 Roberts JA, 1996, J BUS RES, V36, P217, DOI 10.1016/0148-2963(95)00150-6 Schlegelmilch B. B., 1996, EUR J MARKETING, V30, P35, DOI DOI 10.1108/03090569610118740 Sheehan K, 2012, J ADVERTISING, V41, P5, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367410400 Shrout PE, 2002, PSYCHOL METHODS, V7, P422, DOI 10.1037//1082-989X.7.4.422 SHRUM LJ, 1995, J ADVERTISING, V24, P71 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Van Vugt M, 2009, CURR DIR PSYCHOL SCI, V18, P169 Wakslak CJ, 2008, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V95, P757, DOI 10.1037/a0012939 White K, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P472 Xue F, 2014, J INT CONSUM MARK, V26, P75 Xue F., 2015, J INT CONSUMER MARKE, V27, P152 Zhao XS, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P197, DOI 10.1086/651257 Zheng Y., 2010, BEHAVIORMETRIKA, V37, P55 ZINKHAN GM, 1995, J ADVERTISING, V24, P1 NR 76 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 10 U2 17 PU ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD PI ABINGDON PA 4 PARK SQUARE, MILTON PARK, ABINGDON OX14 4RN, OXFORDSHIRE, ENGLAND SN 0265-0487 EI 1759-3948 J9 INT J ADVERT JI Int. J. Advert. PY 2016 VL 35 IS 4 BP 622 EP 641 DI 10.1080/02650487.2015.1105647 PG 20 WC Business; Communication SC Business & Economics; Communication GA DL4RK UT WOS:000375624700002 ER PT J AU Yan, DF Tsang, ASL AF Yan, Dengfeng Tsang, Alex S. L. TI The misforecasted spoiler effect: Underlying mechanism and boundary conditions SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article DE Spoiler; Affective misforecasting; Construal level; Focusing illusion ID CONSTRUAL-LEVEL THEORY; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; CONSUMER CHOICE; EXPERIENCE; BEHAVIOR; PREFERENCE; VARIETY; IMPACT; HAPPY; TIME AB While consumers believe that knowing the ending of a story will spoil their enjoyment of the narrative, recent work shows that spoilers have little impact on consumers' actual experiences. The psychological mechanism underlying this affective misforecasting, however, is less clear. In this research, we propose that compared with real experience, affective forecasting may be associated with longer psychological distance and high-level construal, which may encourage forecasters to assign greater weight to the outcome of a plot. In addition to showing the basic effect, we also identify circumstances under which such affective misforecasting is less likely to happen or even reverses. In line with our theorizing, the results of two studies showed that the misforecasting disappeared when participants had chronic or situationally primed low (vs. high) construal levels. In the final experiment we reversed the previous finding, showing that participants underpredicted the negative impact of a spoiler when the spoiler revealed the process of a plot. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of Society for Consumer Psychology. C1 [Yan, Dengfeng] Univ Texas San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78249 USA. [Tsang, Alex S. L.] Hong Kong Baptist Univ, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. RP Yan, DF (reprint author), Univ Texas San Antonio, Dept Mkt, 1 UTSA Circle, San Antonio, TX 78249 USA. EM dengfeng.yan@utsa.edu CR Aiken L.S., 1991, MULTIPLE REGRESSION Eliashberg J, 2007, MANAGE SCI, V53, P881, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0668 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Gilbert DT, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P617, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.3.617 Gilbert Daniel T., 2002, HEURISTICS BIASES PS, P292 Johnson Benjamin K., 2014, COMMUN RES, P1 Kahneman D, 2006, SCIENCE, V312, P1908, DOI 10.1126/science.1129688 Labroo AA, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P800, DOI 10.1086/593683 Leavitt JD, 2011, PSYCHOL SCI, V22, P1152, DOI 10.1177/0956797611417007 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Lee L, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P1054, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01829.x Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Liberman N, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P113, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7 Meyvis T, 2010, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V139, P579, DOI 10.1037/a0020285 Neelamegham R, 1999, J MARKETING RES, V36, P373, DOI 10.2307/3152083 Nelson LD, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P160, DOI 10.1086/597030 Patrick VM, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V33, P479, DOI 10.1086/510221 Ratner RK, 1999, J CONSUM RES, V26, P1, DOI 10.1086/209547 Reber R, 2004, PERS SOC PSYCHOL REV, V8, P364, DOI 10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_3 Schwarz N, 2011, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V21, P142, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2011.02.006 Shiv B, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V27, P202, DOI 10.1086/314320 SIMONSON I, 1990, J MARKETING RES, V27, P150, DOI 10.2307/3172842 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 [Anonymous], 2015, SPOIL MED Wilson TD, 2005, CURR DIR PSYCHOL SCI, V14, P131, DOI 10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00355.x Wilson TD, 2003, SOC COGNITION, V21, P421, DOI 10.1521/soco.21.6.421.28688 Zhao M, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P379, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.379 NR 30 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 4 U2 15 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 1057-7408 EI 1532-7663 J9 J CONSUM PSYCHOL JI J. Consum. Psychol. PD JAN PY 2016 VL 26 IS 1 BP 81 EP 90 DI 10.1016/j.jcps.2015.05.003 PG 10 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA DB0QY UT WOS:000368213800007 ER PT J AU MacDonnell, R White, K AF MacDonnell, Rhiannon White, Katherine TI How Construals of Money versus Time Impact Consumer Charitable Giving SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE prosocial behavior; charity; donations; volunteering; abundance; construal ID BEHAVIORS; CONSEQUENCES; PREFERENCES; INTENTIONS; JUDGMENTS; HAPPINESS; DISTANCE; THINKING; VICTIMS; APPEALS AB While past research has suggested that consumers have fundamentally different responses to thinking about money versus time, the current work clarifies an important nuance in terms of how consumers construe these two resources. We demonstrate that, in the domain of charitable giving, money is construed relatively more concretely, whereas time is construed relatively more abstractly. This difference in the construal of these two resources has implications for how appeals for charitable contributions or money versus time should be framed. When the construal level at which the consumer considers the cause is aligned (misaligned) with the construal level of the resource being requested, contribution intentions and behaviors increase (decrease). In addition, the moderating role of resource abundance is examined. In particular, when money is considered abundant (vs. nonabundant), consumers no longer exhibit more concrete thoughts in response to money compared to time. Finally, when the donation request makes consumers think of money in a more abundant manner, monetary donations can be successfully motivated with a more abstract call for charitable support. The theoretical and practical implications for marketers and charitable organizations are discussed. C1 [MacDonnell, Rhiannon] City Univ London, Cass Business Sch, Mkt, 106 Bunhill Row, London EC1Y 8TZ, England. [White, Katherine] Univ British Columbia, Sauder Sch Business, Mkt, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z2, Canada. RP MacDonnell, R (reprint author), City Univ London, Cass Business Sch, Mkt, 106 Bunhill Row, London EC1Y 8TZ, England. EM r.macdonnell@city.ac.uk; Katherine.White@sauder.ubc.ca FU Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada; Killam Trust FX Financial support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Killam Trust to the first author is gratefully acknowledged. We thank Jennifer Argo, Joe Arvai, Debra Basil, Susan Boon, Joey Hoegg, Mehdi Mourali, Rebecca Ratner, and three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this manuscript. This article is based on the dissertation of the first author. CR Aaker JL, 2011, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V21, P126, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2011.01.004 Auger P, 2007, J BUS ETHICS, V76, P361, DOI 10.1007/s10551-006-9287-y Double the Donation, 2011, DAT CORP PROGR Ein-Gar D, 2013, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V23, P197, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2012.09.002 Fisher RJ, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P519, DOI 10.1086/586909 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Fujita Kentaro, 2008, J Exp Soc Psychol, V227, P9044 Giving USA, 2012, GIV US 2011 EX SUMM Gneezy U, 2014, SCIENCE, V346, P632, DOI 10.1126/science.1253932 Hafer CL, 2005, PSYCHOL BULL, V131, P128, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.131.1.128 Hansen J, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V39, P1154, DOI 10.1086/667691 Irwin JR, 1996, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V9, P1 Mogilner Cassie, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P277 Judd CM, 2001, PSYCHOL METHODS, V6, P115, DOI 10.1037/1082-989X.6.2.115 Kogut T, 2005, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V18, P157, DOI 10.1002/bdm.492 Kogut T, 2005, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V97, P106, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.02.003 LECLERC F, 1995, J CONSUM RES, V22, P110, DOI 10.1086/209439 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Lee LC, 1999, SOC PSYCHOL QUART, V62, P276, DOI 10.2307/2695864 Lee L, 2015, J MARKETING RES, V52, P184 Trope J., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, V2, P353 Liu W, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P543, DOI 10.1086/588699 Loewenstein George, 2007, REV GEN PSYCHOL, V11, P112 Lynch JG, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P108, DOI 10.1086/649907 Mogilner C, 2010, PSYCHOL SCI, V21, P1348, DOI 10.1177/0956797610380696 Okada EM, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P43, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.42.1.43.56889 Okada EM, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P313, DOI 10.1086/422110 Piff PK, 2010, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V99, P771, DOI 10.1037/a0020092 Reed A, 2007, J MARKETING, V71, P178, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.71.1.178 Rudd Melanie, 2012, PSYCHOL SCI Small DA, 2007, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V102, P143, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.01.005 Soman D, 2001, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V14, P169, DOI 10.1002/bdm.370 Spiller Stephen A, 2010, SSRN Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Vallacher Robin R., 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V57, P3 Vohs KD, 2006, SCIENCE, V314, P1154, DOI 10.1126/science.1132491 White K, 2012, J MARKETING, V76, P103 White K, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P472 White K, 2009, J MARKETING, V73, P109 Zauberman G, 2005, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V134, P23, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.134.1.23 NR 41 TC 3 Z9 3 U1 11 U2 69 PU OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC PI CARY PA JOURNALS DEPT, 2001 EVANS RD, CARY, NC 27513 USA SN 0093-5301 EI 1537-5277 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD DEC PY 2015 VL 42 IS 4 BP 551 EP 563 DI 10.1093/jcr/ucv042 PG 13 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA DD0DN UT WOS:000369590600003 ER PT J AU Chang, SS Chang, CC Liao, YY AF Chang, Shin-Shin Chang, Chung-Chau Liao, Yen-Yi TI A joint examination of effects of decision task type and construal level on the attraction effect SO JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article DE Attraction effect; Decision task type; Construal level ID PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; CONSUMER CHOICE; COMPROMISE; JUDGMENT; CONTEXT; PRODUCT; OTHERS; COMPATIBILITY; ALTERNATIVES; PROBABILITY AB The attraction effect refers to a situation in which adding an inferior alternative to a choice set increases the share of the relatively dominating alternative. This research posits that decision task type affect the attraction effect. People usually seek justification for their decisions. In a selection (or rejection) task, they are more likely to emphasize the positive (or negative) features of each option. The addition of an asymmetrically dominated decoy to a binary set of options undoubtedly provides an extra positive feature for the dominant option, and therefore induces a greater attraction effect. Contrarily, in a rejection task condition, the decoy in the trinary set seems to be the worst option and would be eliminated first, and the remaining comparison is identical with the original binary condition. Therefore, the attraction effect may decrease. Besides, the decision task type interacts with the construal level to affect the attraction effect. Specifically, a low construal level, compared with a high construal level, dampens the attraction effect to a greater extent in a rejection task than in a selection task. Results from three experiments support the proposed hypotheses. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. C1 [Chang, Shin-Shin] Chung Yuan Christian Univ, Dept Business Adm, Tainan, Taiwan. [Chang, Chung-Chau; Liao, Yen-Yi] Natl Taiwan Univ, Dept & Grad Inst Business Adm, Taipei, Taiwan. RP Chang, SS (reprint author), 200 Chung Pei Rd, Chungli, Taiwan. EM edelweissaa@gmail.com; ccc@ntu.edu.tw; liaorache10416@gmail.com CR AAKER J, 1991, ADV CONSUM RES, V18, P462 Ahn S., 2014, MARKET LETT, P1 Besharat A., 2014, J MARKETING THEORY P, V22, P421 Chang CC, 2012, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V25, P109, DOI 10.1002/bdm.720 Chatterjee S, 2011, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V21, P473, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2010.05.001 Chernev A, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P213, DOI 10.1086/432231 Chernev A, 2009, SOC COGNITION, V27, P249 Chuang SC, 2007, MARKET LETT, V18, P279, DOI 10.1007/s11002-007-9017-y Connolly T, 2012, THEOR DECIS, V73, P35, DOI 10.1007/s11238-011-9269-0 Dhar R, 2003, J MARKETING RES, V40, P146, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.40.2.146.19229 Dhar R, 2000, J MARKETING RES, V37, P60, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.37.1.60.18718 Frederick S, 2014, J MARKETING RES, V51, P487 GANZACH Y, 1995, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V62, P113, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1995.1036 Grant SJ, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P897, DOI 10.1086/527342 Ha YW, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P463, DOI 10.1086/599045 Hamilton R, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P187, DOI 10.1086/519147 Hedgcock W, 2009, J MARKETING RES, V46, P330 Hedgcock W, 2009, J MARKETING RES, V46, P1 Heller D, 2002, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V89, P1194, DOI 10.1016/S0749-5978(02)00028-6 HUBER J, 1982, J CONSUM RES, V9, P90, DOI 10.1086/208899 HUBER J, 1983, J CONSUM RES, V10, P31, DOI 10.1086/208943 Khan U, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P62, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.48.1.62 Krishnamurthy P, 2010, MARKET LETT, V21, P37, DOI 10.1007/s11002-009-9079-0 Laran J, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P229, DOI 10.1086/659040 Levav J, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P429, DOI 10.1086/653044 Levin IP, 2000, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V82, P171, DOI 10.1006/obhd.2000.2881 Levin IP, 2002, MARKET LETT, V13, P335, DOI 10.1023/A:1020370516638 Lin CH, 2008, ADV CONSUM RES, V35, P348 Liviatan I, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1256, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.007 Malaviya P., 2002, J MARKETING THEORY P, V10, P20 Malkoc SA, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P411 Malkoc SA, 2013, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V23, P317, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2012.10.008 Mao W, 2012, MARKET LETT, V23, P339, DOI 10.1007/s11002-011-9157-y Meloy MG, 2004, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V93, P114, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2003.12.002 Mourali M., 2011, J BUS RES, V66, P874 Mourali M, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P234, DOI 10.1086/519151 Nagpal A, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P696, DOI 10.1086/521903 Ordonez L. D., 1999, ORG BEHAV HUMAN DECI, V78, P63 Park CW, 2000, J MARKETING RES, V37, P187, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.37.2.187.18731 Pechtl H, 2009, PSYCHOL MARKET, V26, P736, DOI 10.1002/mar.20297 Pettibone JC, 2000, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V81, P300, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1999.2880 Pocheptsova A, 2009, J MARKETING RES, V46, P344 Polman E, 2011, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V37, P492, DOI 10.1177/0146167211398362 Pronin E, 2008, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V34, P224, DOI 10.1177/0146167207310023 Sen S, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V25, P64, DOI 10.1086/209527 SHAFIR E, 1993, MEM COGNITION, V21, P546, DOI 10.3758/BF03197186 SIMONSON I, 1992, J MARKETING RES, V29, P281, DOI 10.2307/3172740 SIMONSON I, 1989, J CONSUM RES, V16, P158, DOI 10.1086/209205 Simonson I, 2014, J MARKETING RES, V51, P514 Simonson I, 2013, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V23, P137, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2012.10.002 Stephan E, 2011, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P397, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.11.001 Todorov A, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P473, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.002 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Wakslak C, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P52, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02250.x Wakslak CJ, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P641, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.641 Yang S, 2014, J MARKETING RES, V51, P508, DOI 10.1509/jmr.14.0020 Yaniv I, 1997, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V10, P211, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199709)10:3<211::AID-BDM250>3.0.CO;2-J Yaniv I, 2000, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V82, P293, DOI 10.1006/obhd.2000.2899 Zhang Y., 2002, ASIA PACIFIC ADV CON, V5, P212 NR 60 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 10 U2 15 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV PI AMSTERDAM PA PO BOX 211, 1000 AE AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS SN 0167-4870 EI 1872-7719 J9 J ECON PSYCHOL JI J. Econ. Psychol. PD DEC PY 2015 VL 51 BP 168 EP 182 DI 10.1016/j.joep.2015.09.007 PG 15 WC Economics; Psychology, Multidisciplinary SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA CY9ZZ UT WOS:000366766200012 ER PT J AU Yang, DF Lu, Y Zhu, WT Su, CT AF Yang, Defeng Lu, Yue Zhu, Wenting Su, Chenting TI Going green: How different advertising appeals impact green consumption behavior SO JOURNAL OF BUSINESS RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE Green consumption; Advertising appeals; Benefit association; Public self-awareness; Identity salience ID SOCIAL SELF; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; IDENTITY SALIENCE; CONSTRUAL-LEVEL; CONSUMER; CONSERVATION; MOTIVATION; RESPONSES; SUSTAINABILITY; EXPLANATION AB This research explores how abstract appeal (i.e., describing the features of green products in a more vague way) and concrete appeal (i.e., describing the features of green products in a more specific way) can encourage consumers to engage in green consumption behavior, such as purchasing green products. Across three experiments, this research tests the prediction that abstract (concrete) appeal is more effective in generating green purchase intentions than concrete (abstract) appeal in situations where the benefit association of green products is other (self). Public self-awareness and identity salience moderate the effect of appeal type and benefit association on green purchase intentions. In particular, when green products associate with the benefit of other, abstract appeal is more effective, whereas both abstract and concrete appeals are less effective when green products associate with the benefit of self. This effect is moderated by public self-awareness and whether a collective level of self or an individual level of self is made salient. The results provide important managerial implications for marketers who seek to promote green consumption by suggesting that rather than merely depending on the types of advertising appeals, marketers should modify their advertising message to match the benefit association of the products and to consider the situations where public self-awareness and identity salience are present. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. C1 [Yang, Defeng; Lu, Yue] Jinan Univ, Sch Management, Guangzhou 510632, Guangdong, Peoples R China. [Zhu, Wenting; Su, Chenting] City Univ Hong Kong, Dept Mkt, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. RP Su, CT (reprint author), City Univ Hong Kong, Coll Business, Dept Mkt, Tat Chee Ave, Kowloon, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. EM yangdefeng@163.com; abraham.lu@hotmail.com; mkchristy@cityu.edu.hk; mkctsu@cityu.edu.hk OI SU, Chenting/0000-0003-4580-9607 FU National Natural Science Foundation of China [71102009, 71472074]; Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province in China [2014A030311022]; Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [15JNQM015] FX The authors acknowledge the financial support provided by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 71102009, 71472074), Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province in China (No. 2014A030311022) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No. 15JNQM015). CR ABRAMS D, 1994, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V20, P473, DOI 10.1177/0146167294205004 Ariely D, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V27, P279, DOI 10.1086/317585 Ashworth L, 2005, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V15, P295, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1504_4 BBC, 2015, TESL LOSS MOUNT CHIN BELK RW, 1988, J CONSUM RES, V15, P139, DOI 10.1086/209154 Bickart BA, 2012, J ADVERTISING, V41, P51, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367410404 BREWER MB, 1991, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V17, P475, DOI 10.1177/0146167291175001 Chattaraman V, 2009, J BUS RES, V62, P826, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.04.002 Choi WJ, 2013, J MARKETING, V77, P96 COSTANZO M, 1986, AM PSYCHOL, V41, P521, DOI 10.1037//0003-066X.41.5.521 DARLEY WK, 1993, J MARKETING, V57, P100, DOI 10.2307/1252222 Davis J.J., 1994, J CONSUMER MARKETING, V11, P25, DOI DOI 10.1108/07363769410058902 de Groot JIM, 2008, ENVIRON BEHAV, V40, P330, DOI 10.1177/0013916506297831 Fisher RJ, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P519, DOI 10.1086/586909 FORD GT, 1990, J CONSUM RES, V16, P433, DOI 10.1086/209228 Forehand MR, 2002, J APPL PSYCHOL, V87, P1086, DOI 10.1037//0021-9010.87.6.1086 Gardner WL, 1999, PSYCHOL SCI, V10, P321, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00162 Glazer A, 1996, AM ECON REV, V86, P1019 Goldsmith EB, 2011, INT J CONSUM STUD, V35, P117, DOI 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2010.00965.x Goldstein NJ, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P472, DOI 10.1086/586910 Green T, 2014, J ADVERTISING, V43, P128, DOI 10.1080/00913367.2013.834805 Grigore G. F., 2011, GOVERNANCE BUSINESS Grinstein A, 2009, J MARKETING, V73, P105 Griskevicius V, 2010, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V98, P392, DOI 10.1037/a0017346 HASS RG, 1984, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P788, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.46.4.788 Hinkle S., 1990, SOCIAL IDENTITY THEO, P48 Hogg M. A., 1992, SOCIAL PSYCHOL GROUP Holmes JG, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P144, DOI 10.1006/jesp.2001.1494 Howell DC, 1997, STAT METHODS PSYCHOL Jacobson RP, 2011, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V100, P433, DOI 10.1037/a0021470 Kronrod A, 2012, J MARKETING, V76, P95 Labroo AA, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P374, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.3.374 Lafferty B.A., 2009, J MARKETING THEORY P, V17, P129, DOI DOI 10.2753/MTP1069-6679170203 LEARY MR, 1990, PSYCHOL BULL, V107, P34, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.107.1.34 LeBoeuf RA, 2010, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V111, P48, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.08.004 Lee AY, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V78, P1122, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.78.6.1122 Lee K., 2008, MARKETING INTELLIGEN, V26, P573, DOI DOI 10.1108/02634500810902839 Leonidou LC, 2011, INT MARKET REV, V28, P6, DOI 10.1108/02651331111107080 Liberman N, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P1201, DOI 10.1126/science.1161958 Luchs MG, 2010, J MARKETING, V74, P18 MARKUS HR, 1991, PSYCHOL REV, V98, P224, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224 Matheson K., 1990, Social Science Computer Review, V8, P1, DOI 10.1177/089443939000800102 Michaelidou N, 2008, INT J CONSUM STUD, V32, P163, DOI 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2007.00619.x Mohr LA, 2005, J CONSUM AFF, V39, P121, DOI 10.1111/j.1745-6606.2005.00006.x OBERMILLER C, 1995, J ADVERTISING, V24, P55 Ogilvy David, 1983, OGILVY ADVERTISING ORIVE R, 1984, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P727, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.47.4.727 Oyserman D., 2007, HDB CULTURAL PSYCHOL, P255 Oyserman D, 2013, ECON EDUC REV, V33, P179, DOI 10.1016/j.econedurev.2012.09.002 Peattie K., 2005, QUALITATIVE MARKET R, V8, P357, DOI DOI 10.1108/13522750510619733 Peattie K., 2001, BUSINESS STRATEGY EN, V10, P187, DOI DOI 10.1002/BSE.292 Peattie K, 2009, J BUS RES, V62, P260, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.01.033 Peloza J, 2013, J MARKETING, V77, P104 PIETERS RGM, 1991, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V10, P59 Salazar HA, 2013, INT J CONSUM STUD, V37, P172, DOI 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2012.01110.x Schlenker, 1980, IMPRESSION MANAGEMEN Sengupta J, 2002, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V12, P69, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP1202_01 Shavitt S., 2002, PERSUASION HDB DEV T, P137, DOI DOI 10.4135/9781412976046.N8 Sheehan K, 2012, J ADVERTISING, V41, P5, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367410400 Singelis, 1994, PERSONALITY SOCIAL P, V20, P580 Smith JR, 2008, BRIT J SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P647, DOI 10.1348/014466607X269748 Stern PC, 2000, J SOC ISSUES, V56, P407, DOI 10.1111/0022-4537.00175 Stryker S., 1980, SYMBOLIC INTERACTION Stryker S, 2007, J PERS, V75, P1083, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2007.00468.x Szmigin I, 2009, INT J CONSUM STUD, V33, P224, DOI 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2009.00750.x Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Van Boven L, 2010, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V36, P551, DOI 10.1177/0146167210362790 Webb DJ, 2008, J BUS RES, V61, P91, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.05.007 White K, 2013, J MARKETING, V77, P78 White K, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P667, DOI 10.1086/660187 White K, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P472 White K, 2009, J MARKETING, V73, P109 Zhang YL, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P524, DOI 10.1086/598794 [Anonymous], 2007, CONSUMER REPORTS [Anonymous], 2014, AUTOMOTIVE NEWS NR 77 TC 6 Z9 6 U1 12 U2 77 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 0148-2963 EI 1873-7978 J9 J BUS RES JI J. Bus. Res. PD DEC PY 2015 VL 68 IS 12 BP 2663 EP 2675 DI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.04.004 PG 13 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA CU2KF UT WOS:000363351700026 ER PT J AU Pizzi, G Marzocchi, GL Orsingher, C Zammit, A AF Pizzi, Gabriele Marzocchi, Gian Luca Orsingher, Chiara Zammit, Alessandra TI The Temporal Construal of Customer Satisfaction SO JOURNAL OF SERVICE RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE customer satisfaction; construal-level theory; temporal distance; services; experimental design ID ATTRIBUTE-LEVEL PERFORMANCE; TIME; CONSUMPTION; EXPERIENCE; VALUATION; INTENTION; JUDGMENTS; RESPONSES; RECOVERY; DISTANCE AB Traditional customer satisfaction research considers satisfaction judgments invariant to temporal distance. We conduct two experiments and a field study to show that the amount of time elapsed between a service consumption experience and its evaluation influences satisfaction judgments. We show that consumers rely on concrete attributes to represent near-past (NP) experiences and on abstract attributes to represent distant-past (DP) experiences (i.e., different construal levels). The findings indicate that construal mechanisms generate intertemporal shifts in the importance of the attributes driving satisfaction over time (Study 1), in the weights assigned to abstract and concrete attributes of a past service experience (Study 2), and in overall satisfaction judgments when abstract and concrete attributes perform differently (Study 3). Overall, the results provide support for the idea that satisfaction judgments shift over time as a result of the different psychological mechanisms that are activated as a function of the time elapsing between the service experience and its evaluation. Managers are advised to adopt longitudinal approaches to customer satisfaction measurement: An immediate assessment to capture customers' evaluations of the performance of the concrete details of the experience and a delayed assessment to measure customer satisfaction with more abstract and goal-related features of the experience. C1 [Pizzi, Gabriele; Marzocchi, Gian Luca; Orsingher, Chiara; Zammit, Alessandra] Univ Bologna, Dept Management, I-40126 Bologna, Italy. RP Pizzi, G (reprint author), Univ Bologna, Dept Management, Via Capo Lucca 34, I-40126 Bologna, Italy. EM gabriele.pizzi@unibo.it OI Zammit, Alessandra/0000-0002-5234-2120 CR AINSLIE G, 1975, PSYCHOL BULL, V82, P463, DOI 10.1037/h0076860 Anderson Eugene W, 2000, J SERV RES-US, V3, P107, DOI DOI 10.1177/109467050032001 Bendall-Lyon D, 2002, J CONSUM MARK, V19, P12, DOI 10.1108/07363760210414925 Chan E, 2010, J MARKETING RES, V47, P497 Choi SY, 2012, J HEALTH PSYCHOL, V17, P590, DOI 10.1177/1359105311421048 Dhar R, 2000, J MARKETING RES, V37, P60, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.37.1.60.18718 Fujita K, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P562, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2007.10.005 Gilbert A., 1979, J MARKETING RES, V16, P64 Grant SJ, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P897, DOI 10.1086/527342 Hakkyun Kim, 2008, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V18, P116 Hong JW, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P456, DOI 10.1086/653492 Hong JW, 2010, J MARKETING RES, V47, P301 Jiang PJ, 2005, EUR J MARKETING, V39, P150, DOI 10.1108/03090560510572061 KAHNEMAN D, 1993, PSYCHOL SCI, V4, P401, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1993.tb00589.x Kim YJ, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P634, DOI 10.1086/599765 Kyung EJ, 2010, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P217, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.09.003 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 LOEWENSTEIN G, 1987, ECON J, V97, P666, DOI 10.2307/2232929 Lynch JG, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P107, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70016-5 Malkoc SA, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P411 Mitchell TR, 1997, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V33, P421, DOI 10.1006/jesp.1997.1333 Mittal V, 2001, J MARKETING RES, V38, P131, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.38.1.131.18832 Mittal V, 1999, J MARKETING, V63, P88, DOI 10.2307/1251947 Katrichis J. M., 2001, J SERV MARK, V15, P343, DOI 10.1108/EUM0000000005655 Liberman Nira Trope Yaacov, 1998, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403 Ofir C, 2001, J MARKETING RES, V38, P170, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.38.2.170.18841 OLIVA TA, 1995, BEHAV SCI, V40, P104, DOI 10.1002/bs.3830400203 OLIVER RL, 1980, J MARKETING RES, V17, P460, DOI 10.2307/3150499 Samuelson Paul A., 1937, REV ECON STUD, V4, P155 Peterson R. A., 1992, J ACADEMY MARKETING, V20, P61, DOI DOI 10.1007/BF02723476 Pocheptsova A, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P992, DOI 10.1086/644760 Oliver Richard L., 1997, SATISFACTION BEHAV P Sagristano MD, 2002, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V131, P364, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.131.3.364 McQuitty Shaun Finn Adam Wiley James B, 2000, ACAD MARKETING SCI R, V10, P231 SKOWRONSKI JJ, 1989, PSYCHOL BULL, V105, P131, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.105.1.131 Slotegraaf RJ, 2004, J MARKETING RES, V41, P269, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.41.3.269.35989 Smith AK, 2002, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V30, P5, DOI 10.1177/03079450094298 Smith AK, 1999, J MARKETING RES, V36, P356, DOI 10.2307/3152082 Soman D, 2003, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V16, P35, DOI 10.1002/bdm.431 Susan Fournier, 1999, J MARKETING, V64, P5 Szymanski DM, 2001, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V29, P16 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 WESTBROOK RA, 1987, J MARKETING RES, V24, P258, DOI 10.2307/3151636 Wirtz D, 2003, PSYCHOL SCI, V14, P520, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.03455 Woodruff R. B., 1983, J MARKETING RES, P296, DOI DOI 10.2307/3151833 NR 47 TC 2 Z9 2 U1 5 U2 31 PU SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC PI THOUSAND OAKS PA 2455 TELLER RD, THOUSAND OAKS, CA 91320 USA SN 1094-6705 EI 1552-7379 J9 J SERV RES-US JI J. Serv. Res. PD NOV PY 2015 VL 18 IS 4 BP 484 EP 497 DI 10.1177/1094670515584752 PG 14 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA CT3MU UT WOS:000362711600004 ER PT J AU Tangari, AH Burton, S Smith, RJ AF Tangari, Andrea Heintz Burton, Scot Smith, Ronn J. TI Now that's a Bright Idea: The Influence of Consumer Elaboration and Distance Perceptions on Sustainable Choices SO JOURNAL OF RETAILING LA English DT Article DE Sustainable product choices; Energy efficient products; Temporal distance; Elaboration on potential outcomes; Psychological distance ID CONSTRUAL-LEVEL THEORY; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; CONJOINT-ANALYSIS; DECISION-MAKING; TIME; FUTURE; INFORMATION; BEHAVIOR; GREEN; PRICE AB Integrating theory related to psychological distance and elaboration on potential outcomes, hypotheses are offered that predict that consumers' elaboration levels moderate the effect of temporal distance on choice of energy efficient products. In three experiments, the authors examine the influence of temporal and psychological distance and the moderating effect of a consumer's propensity to elaborate on potential outcomes (EPO) in retail choice-based situations. Results support these predictions with consumers lower in elaboration more likely to choose an energy efficient product when perceived distance is proximal versus distal, while the distance effect has less of an influence on consumers prone to higher elaboration. We test the effect of distance perceptions within a retail lab environment, as well as across ad and retail contexts. These results will help marketers better understand how to promote products in ad versus retail-based contexts and across different consumer groups. Findings offer implications for theory, retailers, product marketers, and NGO's interested in promoting energy efficient choices. (C) 2015 New York University. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. C1 [Tangari, Andrea Heintz] Wayne State Univ, Sch Business Adm, Dept Mkt & Supply Chain Management, Detroit, MI 48202 USA. [Burton, Scot; Smith, Ronn J.] Univ Arkansas, Sam M Walton Coll Business, Dept Mkt, Fayetteville, AR 72701 USA. RP Tangari, AH (reprint author), Wayne State Univ, Sch Business Adm, Dept Mkt & Supply Chain Management, Detroit, MI 48202 USA. EM andrea.tangari@wayne.edu; sburton@walton.uark.edu; rjsmith@walton.uark.edu CR Aiken L.S., 1991, MULTIPLE REGRESSION Ailawadi KL, 2009, J RETAILING, V85, P42, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11.002 AINSLIE G, 1975, PSYCHOL BULL, V82, P463, DOI 10.1037/h0076860 Bar-Anan Y, 2007, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V136, P610, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.136.4.610 Bell DR, 2011, J MARKETING, V75, P31, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.75.1.31 Benedicktus Ray L., 2008, THESIS FLORIDA STATE Bornemann T, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P490, DOI 10.1086/659874 Buchanan L, 1999, J MARKETING RES, V36, P345, DOI 10.2307/3152081 Burton S, 2015, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V43, P240, DOI 10.1007/s11747-014-0378-5 Chan E, 2010, J MARKETING RES, V47, P497 Chandran S, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P375, DOI 10.1086/422116 Ding M, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P67, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.42.1.67.56890 Ding M, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P214, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.2.214 Elks Jennifer, 2013, TARGET TAKES IMPORTA Fiedler K, 2012, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V48, P1014, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2012.03.013 Gleim MR, 2013, J RETAILING, V89, P44, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2012.10.001 GOLLWITZER PM, 1990, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V59, P1119, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.59.6.1119 Hayes AF, 2009, BEHAV RES METHODS, V41, P924, DOI 10.3758/BRM.41.3.924 The Home Depot, 2014, EPA NAM HOM DEP 2014 Hopkins MS, 2009, MIT SLOAN MANAGE REV, V50, P87 Inman JJ, 2009, J MARKETING, V73, P19 Kahn Uzma, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P62 KAHNEMAN D, 1979, ECONOMETRICA, V47, P263, DOI 10.2307/1914185 Kim K, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P706, DOI 10.1086/592131 Kotler, 2011, J MARKETING, V75, P132 Kronrod A, 2012, J MARKETING, V76, P95 Lee L, 2006, J CONSUM RES, V33, P60, DOI 10.1086/504136 LEVINE MD, 1995, ANNU REV ENERG ENV, V20, P535 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 LICHTENSTEIN DR, 1988, J CONSUM RES, V15, P243, DOI 10.1086/209161 Loewenstein G, 1996, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V65, P272, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1996.0028 Mogilner C, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P670, DOI 10.1086/521901 MOWEN JC, 1991, J MARKETING, V55, P54, DOI 10.2307/1251956 Nenkov GY, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P126, DOI 10.1086/525504 Nenkov GY, 2009, J MARKETING RES, V46, P764 Newman CL, 2014, J RETAILING, V90, P13, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2013.11.001 Nielsen, 2011, GREEN GAP ENV CASH R Reynolds T, 2012, ENERG POLICY, V41, P712, DOI 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.11.035 Shankar V, 2011, J RETAILING, V87, pS29, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2011.04.007 SIMONSON I, 1992, J MARKETING RES, V29, P281, DOI 10.2307/3172740 Stilley KM, 2010, J MARKETING, V74, P34 STRATHMAN A, 1994, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V66, P742, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.66.4.742 TELLIS GJ, 1990, J MARKETING, V54, P34, DOI 10.2307/1251868 Thaler RH, 1999, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V12, P183, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199909)12:3<183::AID-BDM318>3.0.CO;2-F Todorov A, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P473, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.002 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 van Ittersum K, 2013, J MARKETING, V77, P21 Walsh Dennis, 2014, CORPORATE RESPONSIBI White K, 2013, J MARKETING, V77, P78 Zauberman G, 2009, J MARKETING RES, V46, P543 Zimbardo PG, 1999, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V77, P1271, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1271 NR 51 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 7 U2 35 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 0022-4359 EI 1873-3271 J9 J RETAILING JI J. Retail. PD SEP PY 2015 VL 91 IS 3 BP 410 EP 421 DI 10.1016/j.jretai.2015.05.002 PG 12 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA CQ9PZ UT WOS:000360948500004 ER PT J AU Han, JK Sohn, YS Yoo, KW AF Han, Jin K. Sohn, Yong Seok Yoo, Kun Woo TI The Korean language and the effects of its honorifics system in advertising: deferential vs. informal speech as regulatory prime on persuasive impact SO MARKETING LETTERS LA English DT Article DE Honorifics; Regulatory fit; Utilitarian; Hedonic; Construal ID CONSUMER CHOICE; FIT; PREVENTION; POLITENESS; PROMOTION; EMOTIONS; DECISION; FLUENCY; CULTURE; STYLES AB A very prominent feature of the Korean language is its extensive honorifics system. Korean speakers are obliged to adopt a level of speech (deferential vs. informal) befitting the status of the target audience. As the context of deferential (informal) speech parallels the setting for a prevention (promotion) focus, we examine whether the Korean honorifics system itself functions as a natural prime for regulatory orientation. In study 1, we find that the deferential (informal) speech style activates a prevention (promotion) focus in the addressee. Accordingly, we show that ad copies written in the deferential (informal) speech style lead to regulatory fit with utilitarian (hedonic) products. In study 2, we test for construal fit when deferential (informal) speech style is matched with a lower (higher) level of abstraction. Finally, we provide a discussion on the findings and theoretical contributions of this study, followed by managerial implications and directions for future research. C1 [Han, Jin K.] Singapore Management Univ, LKC Sch Business, Singapore 178902, Singapore. [Han, Jin K.] Asian Consumer Insight, Singapore, Singapore. [Han, Jin K.] Yonsei Univ, Sch Business, Seoul 120749, South Korea. [Sohn, Yong Seok; Yoo, Kun Woo] Kyung Hee Univ, Sch Management, Seoul, South Korea. RP Sohn, YS (reprint author), Kyung Hee Univ, Sch Management, 26 Kyunghee Daero, Seoul, South Korea. EM jkhan@smu.edu.sg; ysohn@khu.ac.kr; yukw35@hanmail.net RI HAN, Jin Kyung/D-2156-2010 CR Avnet T, 2003, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P525, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00027-1 BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 Lee Peter W. H., 1981, SOCIAL LIFE DEV HONG, P289 Brown L, 2010, J POLITENESS RES-LAN, V6, P243, DOI 10.1515/JPLR.2010.012 Cesario J., 2007, SOCIAL PERSONALITY P, V2, P444, DOI DOI 10.1111/J.1751-9004 Chernev A, 2004, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V14, P141, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1401&2_16 Chitturi R, 2008, J MARKETING, V72, P48, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.72.3.48 Chitturi R, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P702, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.4.702 Chitturi R, 2009, INT J DES, V3, P7 Crowe E, 1997, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V69, P117, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1996.2675 Dhar R, 2000, J MARKETING RES, V37, P60, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.37.1.60.18718 Eun JO, 2004, LANG SCI, V26, P251, DOI 10.1016/j.langsci.2003.02.003 Higgins ET, 2000, AM PSYCHOL, V55, P1217, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.55.11.1217 Higgins ET, 1997, AM PSYCHOL, V52, P1280, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280 Higgins ET, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P1140, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.6.1140 Kim JY, 1998, ORGAN SCI, V9, P522, DOI 10.1287/orsc.9.4.522 Kruglanski AW, 2007, BASIC APPL SOC PSYCH, V29, P137 Labroo AA, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P374, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.3.374 LECLERC F, 1994, J MARKETING RES, V31, P263, DOI 10.2307/3152198 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Lee AY, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P205, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.205 Leech G, 2007, J POLITENESS RES-LAN, V3, P167, DOI 10.1515/PR.2007.009 Liberman N, 1999, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V77, P1135, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.77.6.1135 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 MARKUS HR, 1991, PSYCHOL REV, V98, P224, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224 Na J, 2009, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V35, P1492, DOI 10.1177/0146167209343810 Sobel M.E., 1982, SOCIOLOGICAL METHODO Strahilevitz M. A., 1998, J CONSUM RES, V24, P436 Tavassoli NT, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P482, DOI 10.1086/323735 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Yoon Kyung-joo, 2004, INTERCULT PRAGMAT, V1, P189, DOI 10.1515/iprg.2004.1.2.189 YUM JO, 2012, CHINA MEDIA RES, V8, P11 NR 32 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 2 U2 11 PU SPRINGER PI DORDRECHT PA VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS SN 0923-0645 EI 1573-059X J9 MARKET LETT JI Mark. Lett. PD SEP PY 2015 VL 26 IS 3 SI SI BP 321 EP 333 DI 10.1007/s11002-015-9353-2 PG 13 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA CN7AQ UT WOS:000358586300009 ER PT J AU Ein-Gar, D AF Ein-Gar, Danit TI Committing under the shadow of tomorrow: Self-control and commitment to future virtuous behaviors SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article DE Virtuous behaviors; Commitment; Self-control; Time focus; Pro-social behavior ID TEMPORAL DISTANCE; CONSTRUAL LEVEL; PROCRASTINATION; TIME; PERSONALITY; AMBIGUITY; OUTCOMES; VICE AB Individuals acknowledge the importance of engaging in virtuous behaviors, but find them difficult. Past research suggests that a distant-future focus may result in more commitment. This researeh demonstrates that, for certain consumers, distant-future execution timing may discourage commitment. Specifically, whereas low self-control consumers are indeed more likely to commit to distant-future behaviors, high self-control consumers are more likely to commit to near-future behaviors. This is demonstrated when commitment does not hold a cost (study 1), but also when it does (study 2). Consumers' time availability certainty underlies the effect: Low self-control consumers feel more certain that in the distant future they will be able to identify the time necessary to fulfill their commitments, whereas high self-control consumers feel more certain regarding their ability to identify their available time in the near future (studies 3a-3b). The effect is shown to occur only when the commitment's time of execution reflects different levels of time concreteness: The effect is eliminated among consumers who perceive the near and distant future as equally concrete or abstract (study 4). (C) 2014 Society for Consumer Psychology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. C1 Tel Aviv Univ, Grad Sch Business Adm, IL-69978 Ramat Aviv, Israel. RP Ein-Gar, D (reprint author), Tel Aviv Univ, Grad Sch Business Adm, IL-69978 Ramat Aviv, Israel. EM danite@post.tau.ac.il FU Israel Foundation [53/2011] FX This research was supported in part by a grant from the Israel Foundation Trustees (53/2011). The author would like to thank the JCP editor, AE and reviewers for their helpful comments. I also wish to thank Liat Levontin and Yael Steinhart for their support and insightful suggestions. CR Baumeister Roy F., 2004, HDB SELF REGULATION CAMERER C, 1992, J RISK UNCERTAINTY, V5, P325, DOI 10.1007/BF00122575 Chan E, 2013, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V23, P90, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2012.04.003 Dhar R, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P96, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70014-1 DUNNING D, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P1082, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1082 Ein-Gar D, 2012, INT J RES MARK, V29, P123, DOI 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2011.08.003 Ein-Gar D, 2011, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V21, P240, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2010.11.003 Ein-Gar D, 2008, ADV CONSUM RES, V35, P542 Ein-Gar D., 2014, J PERS ASSESS, V82, P402 Felson B. R., 1981, SOCIAL PSYCHOL Q, V44, P64 FERRARI JR, 1995, J SOC BEHAV PERS, V10, P135 FREEDMAN JL, 1966, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V4, P195, DOI 10.1037/h0023552 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Gollwitzer PM, 2009, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V19, P593, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2009.08.004 Gollwitzer P. M., 2003, PSYCHOL INQ, V14, P259 Kivetz R, 2006, J CONSUM RES, V33, P273, DOI 10.1086/506308 Laran J, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P1002, DOI 10.1086/648380 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Mason W, 2012, BEHAV RES METHODS, V44, P1, DOI 10.3758/s13428-011-0124-6 McCabe L. A., 2004, HDB SELF REGULATION, P151 Milkman KL, 2010, MARKET LETT, V21, P17, DOI 10.1007/s11002-009-9087-0 MISCHEL W, 1989, SCIENCE, V244, P933, DOI 10.1126/science.2658056 Mishra H, 2011, PSYCHOL SCI, V22, P733, DOI 10.1177/0956797611407208 Myrseth KOR, 2009, CURR DIR PSYCHOL SCI, V18, P247 Myrseth KOR, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P159, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02268.x Nenkov GY, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P126, DOI 10.1086/525504 Nussbaum S, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P152, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.2.152 O'Gorman JG, 2002, PERS INDIV DIFFER, V32, P533, DOI 10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00055-1 Preacher J. R. H., 2007, MULTIVARIATE BEHAV R, V42, P185 Read D, 1999, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V12, P257, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199912)12:4<257::AID-BDM327>3.0.CO;2-6 Rogers T, 2008, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V106, P1, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.08.001 SCHOUWENBURG HC, 1995, PERS INDIV DIFFER, V18, P481, DOI 10.1016/0191-8869(94)00176-S Spiller SA, 2013, J MARKETING RES, V50, P277 Steel P, 2007, PSYCHOL BULL, V133, P65, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.65 STRATHMAN A, 1994, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V66, P742, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.66.4.742 Tangney JP, 2004, J PERS, V72, P271, DOI 10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00263.x Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P493, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.79.4.493 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Turner MG, 2002, J CRIM JUST, V30, P457, DOI 10.1016/S0047-2352(02)00169-1 van Eerde W, 2003, PERS INDIV DIFFER, V35, P1401, DOI 10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00358-6 vanDellen R. M., 2010, PERSONALITY SOCIAL P, V36, P251 Wertenbroch K, 1998, MARKET SCI, V17, P317, DOI 10.1287/mksc.17.4.317 Yan DF, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P376, DOI 10.1086/659755 Zauberman G, 2005, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V134, P23, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.134.1.23 Zimbardo PG, 1997, PERS INDIV DIFFER, V23, P1007, DOI 10.1016/S0191-8869(97)00113-X NR 45 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 3 U2 21 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 1057-7408 EI 1532-7663 J9 J CONSUM PSYCHOL JI J. Consum. Psychol. PD APR PY 2015 VL 25 IS 2 BP 268 EP 285 DI 10.1016/j.jcps.2014.08.006 PG 18 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA CF6NO UT WOS:000352673600008 ER PT J AU Chen, FY Wyer, RS AF Chen, Fangyuan Wyer, Robert S., Jr. TI The effects of affect, processing goals and temporal distance on information processing: Qualifications on temporal construal theory SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article DE Affect; Processing objectives; Temporal construal theory ID MOOD; JUDGMENT AB According to temporal construal theory (Trope & Liberman, 2003, 2010), people are likely to evaluate a product on the basis of global, high-level criteria (e.g., the intrinsic desirability of its features) if they consider it for future consumption but consider situation-specific (e.g., feasibility-related) criteria if they consider it for immediate use. However, this may be true only when people are unmotivated to assess the implications of all of the information they have available, and this motivation, in turn, is a function of both their mood and the goal they happen to be pursuing. When individuals' objective is to make a good decision, the theory's implications are more likely to be supported when they are happy (and believe they have enough information to make a good judgment) than when they are sad. When their goal is to enjoy themselves, however, the theory is more strongly supported when they are sad (and are unmotivated to engage in extensive processing) than when they are happy. (C) 2014 Society for Consumer Psychology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. C1 [Chen, Fangyuan] Hong Kong Univ Sci & Technol, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. [Wyer, Robert S., Jr.] Chinese Univ Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. RP Chen, FY (reprint author), Hong Kong Univ Sci & Technol, Dept Mkt, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. EM fangyuan@ust.hk FU Research Grants Council, University Grants Committee, Hong Kong [GRF 640011, GRF 453710, GRF 453110, GRF 451812] FX This research was supported by grants GRF 640011, GRF 453710, GRF 453110, and GRF 451812 from the Research Grants Council, University Grants Committee, Hong Kong. CR Adaval R, 2003, J CONSUM RES, V30, P352, DOI 10.1086/378614 Adaval R, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P1, DOI 10.1086/321944 BLESS H, 1990, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V16, P331, DOI 10.1177/0146167290162013 BODENHAUSEN GV, 1994, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V66, P621, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.66.4.621 Bodenhausen G. V., 1993, AFFECT COGNITION STE, P13 Chang H. H., 2014, J CONSUMER IN PRESS Clore GL, 2001, HANDBOOK OF AFFECT AND SOCIAL COGNITION, P121 Forster J., 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177 Gasper K, 2002, PSYCHOL SCI, V13, P34, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00406 Kim YJ, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P634, DOI 10.1086/599765 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 MARTIN LL, 1993, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V64, P317, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.64.3.317 SCHWARZ N, 1983, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V45, P513, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.45.3.513 SCHWARZ N, 1991, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V24, P161, DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60329-9 Schwarz N., 1996, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, V2, P385 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 WEGENER DT, 1995, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V69, P5, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.69.1.5 Wyer R. S., 1999, ADV EXPT SOCIAL PSYC, V31, P1, DOI DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60271-3 Yeung CWM, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P412, DOI 10.1086/422119 NR 20 TC 1 Z9 1 U1 3 U2 29 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 1057-7408 EI 1532-7663 J9 J CONSUM PSYCHOL JI J. Consum. Psychol. PD APR PY 2015 VL 25 IS 2 BP 326 EP 332 DI 10.1016/j.jcps.2014.09.004 PG 7 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA CF6NO UT WOS:000352673600014 ER PT J AU Van Kerckhove, A Geuens, M Vermeir, I AF Van Kerckhove, Anneleen Geuens, Maggie Vermeir, Iris TI The Floor Is Nearer than the Sky: How Looking Up or Down Affects Construal Level SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID LOWER VISUAL-FIELD; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; EYE-MOVEMENTS; MENTAL REPRESENTATION; CONCEPTUAL SCOPE; CATEGORIZATION; BEHAVIOR; ATTITUDE; SPACE; DESIRABILITY AB This research shows that consumers select a different product when they look down versus up. Because (1) people are accustomed to looking down to process nearby stimuli and to looking up to process distant stimuli, and because (2) perceived distance is linked to concrete versus abstract processing, the association between moving one's eyes or head down or up and concrete versus abstract processing has become overly generalized. A series of three experiments highlights that downward (upward) head and eye movements evoke more concrete (abstract) processing because downward (upward) head or eye movements have come to serve as a proximity (distance) cue. Two additional experiments indicate downstream behavioral consequences of moving one's eyes or head down versus up. Consumers choose more for feasible versus desirable products when looking down and vice versa when looking up. They also tend to be more preference-consistent when looking down versus up. C1 [Van Kerckhove, Anneleen] Univ Ghent, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium. [Geuens, Maggie; Vermeir, Iris] Univ Ghent, Mkt, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium. [Geuens, Maggie] Vlerick Business Sch, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium. RP Van Kerckhove, A (reprint author), Univ Ghent, Tweekerkenstr 2, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium. EM anneleen.vankerckhove@ugent.be; maggie.geuens@ugent.be; iris.vermeir@ugent.be FU Research Foundation Flanders [3E016512T] FX The authors wish to thank the editor, the associate editor, and the three anonymous reviewers for providing invaluable feedback on previous versions of this article. Financial support of the Research Foundation Flanders (3E016512T) granted to the first author is gratefully acknowledged. This article is based on the first author's doctoral dissertation. CR Agrawal N, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P448, DOI 10.1086/597331 Barsalou LW, 1999, BEHAV BRAIN SCI, V22, P577 BROWN SP, 1992, J CONSUM RES, V19, P34, DOI 10.1086/209284 CACIOPPO JT, 1993, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V65, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.65.1.5 Chandon P, 2009, J MARKETING, V73, P1 CHATTOPADHYAY A, 1990, ADV CONSUM RES, V17, P619 Chen M, 1999, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V25, P215, DOI 10.1177/0146167299025002007 Danckert J, 2001, EXP BRAIN RES, V137, P303 FALCONE DJ, 1984, PERCEPT MOTOR SKILL, V58, P823 Forster J, 2006, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V42, P133, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.02.004 Forster J, 2009, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V138, P88, DOI 10.1037/a0014484 Fredrickson Barbara L, 1998, Rev Gen Psychol, V2, P300, DOI 10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.300 Friedman RS, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P477, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.4.477 Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x Gabbard C, 2012, J GENET PSYCHOL, V173, P302, DOI 10.1080/00221325.2011.610392 Galluscio EH, 1995, PERCEPT MOTOR SKILL, V81, P755 Glenberg AM, 1998, MEM COGNITION, V26, P651, DOI 10.3758/BF03211385 Goodrich K, 2010, J ADVERTISING RES, V50, P91, DOI 10.2501/S002184991009121X Hansen J, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V39, P1154, DOI 10.1086/667691 Huntsinger JR, 2013, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V49, P132, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2012.07.018 Irmak C, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V40, P284, DOI 10.1086/670020 ISEN AM, 1984, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P1206, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.47.6.1206 Kardes FR, 2006, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V16, P135, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1602_4 Kim H, 2008, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V18, P116, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2008.01.006 Kim HY, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P877, DOI 10.1086/593700 Wong Jimmy, 2011, ADV CONSUMER PSYCHOL, V3, P381 Krigolson Olav, 2006, Exp Brain Res, V170, P127, DOI 10.1007/s00221-006-0386-x Labroo AA, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P800, DOI 10.1086/593683 Lajos J, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P122, DOI 10.1086/595024 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Liberman N, 2009, COGNITIVE SCI, V33, P1330, DOI 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01061.x Liu W, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P640, DOI 10.1086/592126 Losier BJ, 2004, COGNITIVE BRAIN RES, V19, P269, DOI 10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2004.01.002 Markman AB, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P6, DOI 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.00772.x MATIN L, 1995, J VESTIBUL RES-EQUIL, V5, P499 Meier BP, 2007, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V93, P699, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.699 Michalak J, 2009, PSYCHOSOM MED, V71, P580, DOI 10.1097/PSY.0b013e3181a2515c MIKULINCER M, 1990, PERS INDIV DIFFER, V11, P815, DOI 10.1016/0191-8869(90)90190-3 Ohman A, 2001, PSYCHOL REV, V108, P483, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.108.3.483 Ooi TL, 2001, NATURE, V414, P197, DOI 10.1038/35102562 Pham MT, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P814 Preacher KJ, 2004, BEHAV RES METH INS C, V36, P717, DOI 10.3758/BF03206553 PREVIC FH, 1990, BEHAV BRAIN SCI, V13, P519 Previc FH, 1997, PERCEPT MOTOR SKILL, V84, P835 Previc FH, 2005, ACTA PSYCHOL, V118, P7, DOI 10.1016/j.actpsy.2004.10.012 Previc FH, 2001, PERCEPT PSYCHOPHYS, V63, P445, DOI 10.3758/BF03194411 Raghubir P, 2006, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V99, P66, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.06.001 ROSCH E, 1975, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V104, P192, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.104.3.192 Sagistrano Michael D., 2002, J EXPT PSYCHOL GEN, V131, P364 Schubert TW, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P1, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.1.1 Schwarz N., 1991, EMOTION SOCIAL JUDGM, P55 Shrout PE, 2002, PSYCHOL METHODS, V7, P422, DOI 10.1037//1082-989X.7.4.422 Smith PK, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P578, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.578 Spencer SJ, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P845, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.845 Spivey MJ, 2001, PSYCHOL RES-PSYCH FO, V65, P235, DOI 10.1007/s004260100059 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Wakslak CJ, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P641, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.641 Xu J, 2013, J MARKETING RES, V50, P548 [Anonymous], 2002, INT J POSTCOLONIAL S, V4 NR 62 TC 3 Z9 3 U1 9 U2 48 PU OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC PI CARY PA JOURNALS DEPT, 2001 EVANS RD, CARY, NC 27513 USA SN 0093-5301 EI 1537-5277 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD APR PY 2015 VL 41 IS 6 BP 1358 EP 1371 DI 10.1086/679309 PG 14 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA CD1BC UT WOS:000350807600002 ER PT J AU Aggarwal, P Zhao, M AF Aggarwal, Pankaj Zhao, Min TI Seeing the Big Picture: The Effect of Height on the Level of Construal SO JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE construal level; consumer preference; processing style; physical height; grounded cognition ID PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; ACTION IDENTIFICATION; VERTICAL POSITION; MENTAL SIMULATION; REPRESENTATION; BEHAVIOR; SENSITIVITY; GLOMO(SYS); PERCEPTION; MORALITY AB Drawing on research on grounded cognition and metaphorical representation, the authors propose and confirm in five studies that physical height, or even the mere concept of height, can affect the perceptual and conceptual levels of mental construal. As such, consumers who perceive themselves to be physically "high" or elevated are more likely to adopt a global perceptual processing and higher level of conceptual construal, whereas those who perceive themselves to be physically "low" are more likely to adopt a local perceptual processing and lower level of conceptual construal. This difference in construal level also affects product choices that involve trade-offs between long-term benefits and short-term effort. The authors address alternative accounts such as vertical distance, visual distance, and perceived power. By highlighting the novel relationship between height and construal level, these findings contribute to research on grounded cognition and construal-level theory while also providing practical suggestions to marketing managers across a variety of domains. C1 [Aggarwal, Pankaj; Zhao, Min] Univ Toronto, Rotman Sch Management, Mkt, Toronto, ON M5S 1A1, Canada. RP Aggarwal, P (reprint author), Univ Toronto, Rotman Sch Management, Mkt, Toronto, ON M5S 1A1, Canada. EM paggarwal@rotman.utoronto.ca; min.zhao@rotman.utoronto.ca FU Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada FX Pankaj Aggarwal is Associate Professor of Marketing (e-mail: paggarwal@rotman.utoronto.ca), and Min Zhao is Associate Professor of Marketing (email: min.zhao@rotman.utoronto.ca), Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto. Both authors contributed equally to this research. The authors acknowledge the insightful input of three anonymous JMR reviewers. In addition, the authors thank Ken Fujita, Jochim Hansen, Steve Hoeffler, Sam Maglio, Ann McGill, Chen-Bo Zhong, and participants of the marketing brown-bag seminar at University of Toronto and Hong Kong University of Science and Technology for their helpful comments. The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Gita Johar served as associate editor for this article. CR Ainslie G., 1992, CHOICE TIME, P177 Asch S. E., 1958, PERSON PERCEPTION IN, P86 Baker J, 2002, J MARKETING, V66, P120, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.66.2.120.18470 Bargh JA, 2006, EUR J SOC PSYCHOL, V36, P147, DOI 10.1002/ejsp.336 Barsalou LW, 1999, BEHAV BRAIN SCI, V22, P577 Custers R, 2010, SCIENCE, V329, P47, DOI 10.1126/science.1188595 Elder RS, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V38, P988, DOI 10.1086/661531 Forster J, 2012, CURR DIR PSYCHOL SCI, V21, P15, DOI 10.1177/0963721411429454 Forster J, 2010, PSYCHOL INQ, V21, P175, DOI 10.1080/1047840X.2010.487849 Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x Hansen J, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V39, P1154, DOI 10.1086/667691 Kim K, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P706, DOI 10.1086/592131 Lakoff G., 1980, METAPHORS WE LIVE Lakoff G., 1999, PHILOS FLESH EMBODIE LeBoeuf RA, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P59, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.1.59 Lee SWS, 2010, SCIENCE, V328, P709, DOI 10.1126/science.1186799 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2009, COGNITIVE SCI, V33, P1330, DOI 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01061.x Liberman N, 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V97, P203, DOI 10.1037/a0015671 Maeng A, 2013, J MARKETING RES, V50, P739, DOI 10.1509/jmr.12.0118 Maglio SJ, 2013, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V142, P644, DOI 10.1037/a0030258 Meier BP, 2004, PSYCHOL SCI, V15, P243, DOI 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00659.x Meier BP, 2007, PERS INDIV DIFFER, V43, P757, DOI 10.1016/j.paid.2007.02.001 Meier BP, 2009, SOC COGNITION, V27, P883 Meyers-Levy J, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P174, DOI 10.1086/519146 MITCHELL DJ, 1995, J CONSUM RES, V22, P229, DOI 10.1086/209447 NAVON D, 1977, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V9, P353, DOI 10.1016/0010-0285(77)90012-3 Nelson LD, 2009, J MARKETING RES, V46, P715 Preacher KJ, 2008, BEHAV RES METHODS, V40, P879, DOI 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 ROSCH E, 1975, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V104, P192, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.104.3.192 Soussy C.J., 2008, COMITE ANTIBIOGRAMME, V2008, P1 Sun Yan, 2011, PLOS ONE, V6, P1 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Wakslak CJ, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P641, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.641 Williams LE, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P606, DOI 10.1126/science.1162548 Williams LE, 2009, EUR J SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P1257, DOI 10.1002/ejsp.665 Zhang M, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V38, P1063, DOI 10.1086/661768 Zhao M, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P379, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.379 Zhao M, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P486 Zhao XS, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P197, DOI 10.1086/651257 Zhong CB, 2006, SCIENCE, V313, P1451, DOI 10.1126/science.1130726 NR 45 TC 2 Z9 2 U1 5 U2 28 PU AMER MARKETING ASSOC PI CHICAGO PA 311S WACKER DR, STE 5800, CHICAGO, IL 60606-6629 USA SN 0022-2437 EI 1547-7193 J9 J MARKETING RES JI J. Mark. Res. PD FEB PY 2015 VL 52 IS 1 BP 120 EP 133 DI 10.1509/jmr.12.0067 PG 14 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA CE8RT UT WOS:000352112500009 ER PT J AU Jeong, E Jang, S AF Jeong, EunHa Jang, SooCheong (Shawn) TI Healthy menu promotions: A match between dining value and temporal distance SO INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT LA English DT Article DE Construal level theory; Temporal distance; Hedonic versus utilitarian dining value; Healthy menu; Advertisement ID PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; PROCESSING STRATEGIES; GENDER DIFFERENCES; AGE-DIFFERENCES; SEX-DIFFERENCES; INFORMATION; CONSUMER; SELF; PERSPECTIVE; CONSUMPTION AB This study intended to identify a persuasive communication strategy in the context of healthy menu promotions in restaurants by adopting construal level theory (CLT) and considering temporal distance. The study proposed that customers' psychological states, in terms of hedonic versus utilitarian dining values, can qualitatively evoke different types of thinking (abstract versus concrete) with respect to the level of construal. The study demonstrated that a focus on hedonic value tends to lead people to think at a more abstract level of construal and have greater positive attitudes and purchasing intentions toward a healthy menu when the advertising message is framed in terms of the long-term benefits of a healthy diet. Conversely, a focus on utilitarian value tends to lead people to think at a more concrete level of construal and have greater positive attitudes and purchasing intentions toward a healthy menu when the advertising message is framed in terms of the immediate benefits of a healthy diet. Finally, the study also determined that gender plays a moderating role in the relationship between dining values and temporal frames. The results enhance the existing literature by identifying an antecedent influencing CLT and provide practical implications for effective marketing communication in the context of healthy menu item promotion in restaurants. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. C1 [Jeong, EunHa; Jang, SooCheong (Shawn)] Purdue Univ, Sch Hospitality & Tourism Management, W Lafayette, IN 47907 USA. RP Jang, S (reprint author), Purdue Univ, Sch Hospitality & Tourism Management, Room 245,Marriott Hall,900 W State St, W Lafayette, IN 47907 USA. EM ejeong@purdue.edu; jang12@purdue.edu CR Aspinwall LG, 1998, MOTIV EMOTION, V22, P1, DOI 10.1023/A:1023080224401 BABIN BJ, 1994, J CONSUM RES, V20, P644, DOI 10.1086/209376 Bakamitsos GA, 2006, J CONSUM RES, V33, P403, DOI 10.1086/508525 Batra R., 1991, MARKET LETT, V2, P159, DOI DOI 10.1007/BF00436035 Berenbaum SA, 1999, HORM BEHAV, V35, P102, DOI 10.1006/hbeh.1998.1503 BROVERMAN DM, 1968, PSYCHOL REV, V75, P23, DOI 10.1037/h0025293 CARLSON R, 1972, J SOC ISSUES, V28, P17 Costa PT, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V81, P322, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.81.2.322 DARLEY WK, 1995, J ADVERTISING, V24, P41 EAGLY AH, 1991, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V17, P306, DOI 10.1177/0146167291173011 Fishbach A, 2007, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V93, P158, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.93.2.158 FORNELL C, 1981, J MARKETING RES, V18, P39, DOI 10.2307/3151312 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Ha J, 2013, INT J CONTEMP HOSP M, V25, P383, DOI 10.1108/09596111311311035 Ha J, 2010, INT J HOSP MANAG, V29, P2, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2009.03.009 Hair IF, 1998, MULTIVARIATE DATA AN HIRSCHMAN EC, 1982, J MARKETING, V46, P92, DOI 10.2307/1251707 HOLBROOK MB, 1982, J CONSUM RES, V9, P132, DOI 10.1086/208906 HOLBROOK MB, 1986, J CONSUM RES, V13, P337, DOI 10.1086/209073 Holbrook M. B., 1978, J MARKETING RES, V15, P546 HUNT RR, 1981, J VERB LEARN VERB BE, V20, P497, DOI 10.1016/S0022-5371(81)90138-9 Isen Alice M., 2003, EMERGING PERSPECTIVE, P365 JOHN DR, 1986, J CONSUM RES, V13, P297, DOI 10.1086/209070 Johnson M. M., 1990, J GERONTOL, V45, pP75 Kivetz Y, 2007, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V102, P193, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.07.002 Kozup JC, 2003, J MARKETING, V67, P19, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.67.2.19.18608 Kwun DJW, 2011, INT J HOSP MANAG, V30, P252, DOI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2010.09.001 Labroo AA, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P800, DOI 10.1086/593683 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Ma E., 2014, Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, V23, P513, DOI 10.1080/19368623.2013.835250 Ma E., 2011, Journal of Foodservice Business Research, V14, P290, DOI 10.1080/15378020.2011.594390 Mariani S., 2011, FAST FOOD RESTAURANT McClelland D. C., 1975, POWER INNER EXPERIEN McCrory MA, 1999, OBES RES, V7, P564 MEYERSLEVY J, 1991, J CONSUM RES, V18, P63, DOI 10.1086/209241 MEYERSLEVY J, 1989, J CONSUM RES, V16, P197, DOI 10.1086/209208 NRA, 2013, MEN REST NUTR IN 201 PHILLIPS LW, 1977, J MARKETING RES, V14, P444, DOI 10.2307/3151185 Putrevu S., 2001, ACAD MARKETING SCI R, V10, P1 REYNOLDS TJ, 1988, J ADVERTISING RES, V28, P11 Roehm ML, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P257, DOI 10.1086/322901 Roininen K, 1999, APPETITE, V33, P71, DOI 10.1006/appe.1999.0232 Ryu K, 2010, INT J CONTEMP HOSP M, V22, P416, DOI 10.1108/09596111011035981 Spassova G, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V40, P159, DOI 10.1086/669145 Strom S., 2013, NY TIMES Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Wakslak CJ, 2008, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V95, P757, DOI 10.1037/a0012939 Wan EW, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V39, P977, DOI 10.1086/666467 NR 51 TC 1 Z9 1 U1 1 U2 23 PU ELSEVIER SCI LTD PI OXFORD PA THE BOULEVARD, LANGFORD LANE, KIDLINGTON, OXFORD OX5 1GB, OXON, ENGLAND SN 0278-4319 EI 1873-4693 J9 INT J HOSP MANAG JI Int. J. Hosp. Manag. PD FEB PY 2015 VL 45 BP 1 EP 13 DI 10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.11.001 PG 13 WC Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism SC Social Sciences - Other Topics GA CB6KW UT WOS:000349736900001 ER PT J AU Chang, H Zhang, LL Xie, GX AF Chang, Hua Zhang, Lingling Xie, Guang-Xin TI Message framing in green advertising: the effect of construal level and consumer environmental concern SO INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING LA English DT Article ID GAIN-FRAMED MESSAGES; PROCESSING FLUENCY; BEHAVIOR; PERCEPTIONS; INVOLVEMENT; ANTECEDENTS; INFORMATION; CONGRUENCY; HYPOTHESIS; COGNITION AB Many firms adopt green advertising and put great emphasis on the value of green marketing strategies. However, little research has examined the effectiveness of green appeal in advertisements. Building on message framing and construal level theory, this study examines the moderating role of temporal distance in effects of gain or loss framed messages on consumers' attitudes and purchase intentions towards advertised brand. The findings demonstrate that a congruency between loss frame and low level construal, as well as the match between gain frame and high level construal, leads to more positive outcomes in consumers' attitudes and purchase intention. Furthermore, this research reveals that salience of the congruency effect varies in line with the level of consumer environmental concern, which has important theoretical and practical implications. C1 [Chang, Hua] Philadelphia Univ, Sch Business Adm, Philadelphia, PA 19144 USA. [Zhang, Lingling] Towson Univ, Dept Mass Commun & Commun Studies, Towson, MD 21252 USA. [Xie, Guang-Xin] Univ Massachusetts Boston, Coll Management, Boston, MA USA. RP Chang, H (reprint author), Philadelphia Univ, Sch Business Adm, Philadelphia, PA 19144 USA. EM changh@philau.edu CR Aiken L.S., 1991, MULTIPLE REGRESSION Bamberg S, 2003, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V23, P21, DOI 10.1016/S0272-4944(02)00078-6 Ahern L., 2012, INT J NONPROFIT VOLU, V17, P77 CELSI RL, 1988, J CONSUM RES, V15, P210, DOI 10.1086/209158 Chan R. Y. K., 2000, INT J ADVERT, V19, P349 Chang CC, 2011, J ADVERTISING, V40, P19, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367400402 Chang CT, 2012, INT J ADVERT, V31, P741, DOI 10.2501/IJA-31-4-741-771 Detweiler JB, 1999, HEALTH PSYCHOL, V18, P189, DOI 10.1037/0278-6133.18.2.189 Eagly A. H., 1993, PSYCHOL ATTITUDES Fiske S. T., 1990, SOCIAL COGNITION STU, V23, P1 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 [Anonymous], 2012, GREEN MARKETING GLOB Goodall C, 2008, HEALTH COMMUN, V23, P117, DOI 10.1080/10410230801967825 Hartmann P, 2009, INT J ADVERT, V28, P715, DOI 10.2501/S0265048709200837 Herrmann A, 2013, J RETAILING, V89, P30, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2012.08.002 Huang JY, 2011, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P506, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.12.002 Datta S. K., 2011, INT J BUSINESS MANAG, V6, P124 Kim Y, 2005, ADV CONSUM RES, V32, P592 KONG Y, 2014, J MARK COMMUN, V20, P197, DOI DOI 10.1080/13527266.2012.672335 Kornell N, 2011, PSYCHOL SCI, V22, P787, DOI 10.1177/0956797611407929 Kronrod A, 2012, J MARKETING, V76, P95 Labroo AA, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P800, DOI 10.1086/593683 Latimer AE, 2007, J HEALTH COMMUN, V12, P645, DOI 10.1080/10810730701619695 Lee AY, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P205, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.205 Lee K., 2008, MARKETING INTELLIGEN, V26, P573, DOI DOI 10.1108/02634500810902839 Levin IP, 1998, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V76, P149, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1998.2804 MACINNIS DJ, 1991, J CONSUM RES, V18, P161, DOI 10.1086/209249 MACKENZIE SB, 1989, J MARKETING, V53, P48, DOI 10.2307/1251413 MAHESWARAN D, 1991, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V61, P13, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.61.1.13 MAHESWARAN D, 1990, J MARKETING RES, V27, P361, DOI 10.2307/3172593 Mann T, 2004, HEALTH PSYCHOL, V23, P330, DOI 10.1037/0278-6133.23.3.330 MEYEROWITZ BE, 1987, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V52, P500, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.500 Meyers-Levy J, 2004, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V14, P159, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1401&2_18 Mogilner C, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V39, P429, DOI 10.1086/663774 Newman CL, 2012, INT J ADVERT, V31, P511, DOI 10.2501/IJA-31-3-511-527 O'Keefe DJ, 2007, J HEALTH COMMUN, V12, P623, DOI 10.1080/10810730701615198 Petty R. E., 1986, COMMUNICATION PERSUA Quintero Johnson Jessie M, 2013, J Health Commun, V18, P160, DOI 10.1080/10810730.2012.688244 Reber R, 2004, PERS SOC PSYCHOL REV, V8, P364, DOI 10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_3 Rothman AJ, 2006, J COMMUN, V56, pS202, DOI 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00290.x Royne MB, 2011, J CONSUM AFF, V45, P329, DOI 10.1111/j.1745-6606.2011.01205.x Schneider TR, 2001, HEALTH PSYCHOL, V20, P256, DOI 10.1037//0278-6133.20.4.256 SCHUHWERK ME, 1995, J ADVERTISING, V24, P45 Schwarz N, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P20, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.1.20 Schwarz N, 2012, HDB THEORIES SOCIAL, P289, DOI DOI 10.4135/9781446249215.N15 Sherman DK, 2008, J AM DENT ASSOC, V139, P1382 Sherman JW, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P589, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.589 TAYLOR SE, 1991, PSYCHOL BULL, V110, P67, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.110.1.67 TerraChoice, 2009, 7 SINS GREENW ENV CL Thompson DV, 2006, J CONSUM RES, V32, P530, DOI 10.1086/500483 Toll BA, 2008, NICOTINE TOB RES, V10, P195, DOI 10.1080/14622200701767803 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 TVERSKY A, 1981, SCIENCE, V211, P453, DOI 10.1126/science.7455683 Updegraff JA, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P249, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.01.007 White K, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P472 WHITTLESEA BWA, 1990, J MEM LANG, V29, P716, DOI 10.1016/0749-596X(90)90045-2 Xie GX, 2012, J ADVERTISING, V41, P103, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367410407 Yoon K, 1998, J MARK COMMUN, V4, P101, DOI 10.1080/13527269800000003 ZIMMER MR, 1994, J BUS RES, V30, P63, DOI 10.1016/0148-2963(94)90069-8 ZINKHAN GM, 1995, J ADVERTISING, V24, P1 NR 61 TC 13 Z9 13 U1 23 U2 52 PU ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD PI ABINGDON PA 4 PARK SQUARE, MILTON PARK, ABINGDON OX14 4RN, OXFORDSHIRE, ENGLAND SN 0265-0487 EI 1759-3948 J9 INT J ADVERT JI Int. J. Advert. PY 2015 VL 34 IS 1 BP 158 EP 176 DI 10.1080/02650487.2014.994731 PG 19 WC Business; Communication SC Business & Economics; Communication GA DD5HO UT WOS:000369954100010 ER PT J AU Ramirez, E Jimenez, FR Gau, R AF Ramirez, Edward Jimenez, Fernando R. Gau, Roland TI Concrete and abstract goals associated with the consumption of environmentally sustainable products SO EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MARKETING LA English DT Article DE Laddering; Construal-level theory; Environmentally sustainable consumption; Goal theory; Means-end chain theory ID MEANS-END CHAINS; CONSTRUAL-LEVEL; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; CONCERNED CONSUMERS; GREEN; BEHAVIOR; CONSEQUENCES; STRATEGY; CAMPAIGN; PAY AB Purpose - This paper aims to identify and classify consumers' goals associated with the consumption of environmentally sustainable products. The applicability of such goals to the positioning of environmental products is also tested. Design/methodology/approach - Study 1 used 62 laddering interviews to identify a hierarchical map of adoption related goals. Study 2 used a survey design (N = 152 students) to test the effects of construal-goal fit on evaluations of environmental product attributes of a hybrid car. Study 3 involved an online experiment (N = 125 consumer panellists) to test the effects of construal-goal fit on consumers' willingness to pay a price premium (WTPP) for energy-efficient light bulbs. Findings - A hierarchical goal map displays consumption goals attainable through environmentally sustainable products. Consumers with a chronic, high-level construal placed more importance on product attributes associated with abstract goals than those with chronic, low-level construal. This effect was stronger for males than for females. Additionally, construal-goal fit increased WTPP. Research limitations/implications - The results suggest that marketers consider construal-goal fit to communicate the value of environmentally sustainable products. The results, however, should be replicated in other product categories and across diverse cultural settings. Originality/value - This paper identifies and classifies the goals related to consumption of environmentally sustainable products. Additionally, it tests the effects of construal-goal fit on evaluations of environmental products, providing insights for marketers seeking to improve their promotional efforts and for public policymakers as they institute demarketing campaigns. C1 [Ramirez, Edward; Jimenez, Fernando R.; Gau, Roland] Univ Texas El Paso, Dept Mkt & Management, El Paso, TX 79968 USA. RP Ramirez, E (reprint author), Univ Texas El Paso, Dept Mkt & Management, El Paso, TX 79968 USA. EM eramirez29@utep.edu FU Institute for Energy Systems, Economics and Sustainability at Florida State University FX This research was funded by a grant from the Institute for Energy Systems, Economics and Sustainability at Florida State University. CR Andrews JC, 2004, J MARKETING, V68, P110, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.68.3.110.34767 Bagozzi RP, 1999, J MARKETING, V63, P19, DOI 10.2307/1252098 Bagozzi RP, 2000, PSYCHOL MARKET, V17, P535, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(200007)17:7<535::AID-MAR1>3.0.CO;2-H Bagozzi R. P., 1994, PSYCHOL MARKET, V11, P313, DOI 10.1002/mar.4220110403 Baker S., 2004, EUR J MARKETING, V38, P995, DOI DOI 10.1108/03090560410539131 BALDERJAHN I, 1988, J BUS RES, V17, P51, DOI 10.1016/0148-2963(88)90022-7 BANERJEE S, 1995, J ADVERTISING, V24, P21 Banerjee SB, 2003, J MARKETING, V67, P106, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.67.2.106.18604 Bansal P, 2005, STRATEGIC MANAGE J, V26, P197, DOI 10.1002/smj.441 Barone MJ, 2010, J MARKETING, V74, P121 Bay D, 2003, PSYCHOL MARKET, V20, P669, DOI 10.1002/mar.10091 Bonini S., 2008, STANFORD SOCIAL INNO, V2008, P1 CALDER BJ, 1981, J CONSUM RES, V8, P197, DOI 10.1086/208856 CARLSON L, 1993, J ADVERTISING, V22, P27 Chang CC, 2011, J ADVERTISING, V40, P19, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367400402 Chylinski M, 2010, EUR J MARKETING, V44, P796, DOI 10.1108/03090561011032720 Clifford S., 2011, NY TIMES Cohen J, 2009, REPUTATION CAPITAL: BUILDING AND MAINTAINING TRUST IN THE 21ST CENTURY, P235, DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-01630-1_15 Cronin JJ, 2011, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V39, P158, DOI 10.1007/s11747-010-0227-0 de Ferran F, 2007, FOOD QUAL PREFER, V18, P218, DOI 10.1016/j.foodqual.2005.11.001 Segal-Horn S., 2003, EUR J MARKETING, V37, P1095 Denzin N. K., 1994, HDB QUALITATIVE RES Freitas AL, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V80, P410, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.80.3.410 Ginsberg JM, 2004, MIT SLOAN MANAGE REV, V46, P79 Grinstein A, 2009, J MARKETING, V73, P105 Gundlach GT, 2010, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V29, P103 Gutman J, 1997, PSYCHOL MARKET, V14, P545, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(199709)14:6<545::AID-MAR2>3.0.CO;2-7 Homer PM, 2006, J ADVERTISING, V35, P35, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367350103 Irmak C, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V40, P284, DOI 10.1086/670020 Iyengar SS, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P995, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.995 KASSARJIAN HH, 1977, J CONSUM RES, V4, P8, DOI 10.1086/208674 Kelly KJ, 1996, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V15, P238 Kilbourne WE, 2010, J MACROMARKETING, V30, P109, DOI 10.1177/0276146710363726 Kim H, 2008, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V18, P116, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2008.01.006 KINNEAR TC, 1974, J MARKETING, V38, P20, DOI 10.2307/1250192 Klanac NG, 2012, EUR J MARKETING, V46, P313, DOI 10.1108/03090561211202495 Kronrod A, 2012, J MARKETING, V76, P95 Laroche M, 2001, J CONSUM MARK, V18, P503, DOI 10.1108/EUM0000000006155 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Leonidou CN, 2011, EUR J MARKETING, V45, P68, DOI 10.1108/03090561111095603 Lovelock James, 2009, VANISHING FACE GAIA Luchs Michael G., 2012, Journal of Consumer Policy, V35, P127, DOI 10.1007/s10603-011-9179-0 Luchs MG, 2010, J MARKETING, V74, P18 Miles M.B., 1994, QUALITY DATA ANAL EX Mitchell VW, 2005, EUR J MARKETING, V39, P821, DOI 10.1108/03090560510601789 MURPHY PE, 1978, J MARKETING, V42, P61, DOI 10.2307/1250087 Obermiller C, 2005, J ADVERTISING, V34, P7 Osterhuis TL, 1997, J MARKETING, V61, P16, DOI 10.2307/1252084 Overby JW, 2004, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V32, P437, DOI 10.1177/0092070304265697 Pechmann C, 2003, J MARKETING, V67, P1, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.67.2.1.18607 PERREAULT WD, 1989, J MARKETING RES, V26, P135, DOI 10.2307/3172601 Phillips JM, 2010, EUR J MARKETING, V44, P310, DOI 10.1108/03090561011020444 Baumgartner H., 1995, INT J RES MARK, V12, P227, DOI DOI 10.1016/0167-8116(95)00023-U REYNOLDS TJ, 1988, J ADVERTISING RES, V28, P11 SCHUHWERK ME, 1995, J ADVERTISING, V24, P45 Sheth JN, 2011, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V39, P21, DOI 10.1007/s11747-010-0216-3 SHRUM LJ, 1995, J ADVERTISING, V24, P71 Stobbe M., 2013, CDC LAUNCHES NEW BAT Tanner C, 2003, PSYCHOL MARKET, V20, P883, DOI 10.1002/mar.10101 Thogersen J, 2010, EUR J MARKETING, V44, P1787, DOI 10.1108/03090561011079882 Thomson M, 2005, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V15, P77, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1501_10 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Trudel R, 2009, MIT SLOAN MANAGE REV, V50, P61 Urien B, 2011, PSYCHOL MARKET, V28, P69, DOI 10.1002/mar.20381 Valette-Florence P, 1998, J BUS RES, V42, P161, DOI 10.1016/S0148-2963(97)00111-2 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Wansink B., 2005, CALIF MANAGE REV, V47, P1 White K, 2013, J MARKETING, V77, P78 White K, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P472 Zanoli R., 2002, British Food Journal, V104, P643, DOI 10.1108/00070700210425930 ZEITHAML VA, 1988, J MARKETING, V52, P2, DOI 10.2307/1251446 NR 73 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 6 U2 16 PU EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LIMITED PI BINGLEY PA HOWARD HOUSE, WAGON LANE, BINGLEY BD16 1WA, W YORKSHIRE, ENGLAND SN 0309-0566 EI 1758-7123 J9 EUR J MARKETING JI Eur. J. Market. PY 2015 VL 49 IS 9-10 BP 1645 EP 1665 DI 10.1108/EJM-08-2012-0483 PG 21 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA CY6CI UT WOS:000366494400013 ER PT J AU Love, E Okada, EM AF Love, Edwin Okada, Erica Mina TI Construal based marketing tactics for high quality versus low price market segments SO JOURNAL OF PRODUCT AND BRAND MANAGEMENT LA English DT Article DE Construal theory; High quality; Low price; Primary features; Product positioning; Secondary features ID PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; DUAL ROLE; ATTENTION; FUTURE; LEVEL AB Purpose - The purpose of this study is to propose differential marketing tactics for high-quality products versus low-price products by building on construal level theory. Design/methodology/approach - Two studies were conducted, one using students and another using data collected from more than 7,000 online auctions. Findings - When consumers consider high-quality products, they use more abstract mental models, and when they consider low-price products, they use more concrete mental models. Differentiation based on primary features product is more effective for products that are positioned on quality, while differentiation based on the secondary features is more effective for products that are positioned on price. Also, marketing efforts to attract attention are more effective for products positioned on quality than those positioned on price. Research limitations/implications - This research focused on how consumers use different mental models for considering high-quality versus low-price product offerings but did not examine whether a given segment/consumer uses different models in considering high-quality versus low-price alternatives. Practical implications - Managers wishing to reinforce a high-quality position should focus on marketing efforts compatible with consumers' high level construal by enhancing and highlighting the primary features, and drawing consumers' attention to their product offerings. Managers wishing to reinforce a low-price positioning should focus on marketing efforts that are compatible with consumers' low level construal by enhancing and highlighting secondary features. Originality/value - This research makes an important theoretical link between construal theory and brand positioning. C1 [Love, Edwin] Western Washington Univ, Dept Finance & Mkt, Bellingham, WA 98225 USA. [Okada, Erica Mina] Univ Hawaii, Dept Mkt, Minoa, HI USA. RP Love, E (reprint author), Western Washington Univ, Dept Finance & Mkt, Bellingham, WA 98225 USA. EM ed.love@wwu.edu CR Bornemann T, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P490, DOI 10.1086/659874 Bruner Ii G. C., 2007, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V35, P329 Chaudhuri A, 2001, J MARKETING, V65, P81, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.65.2.81.18255 Folkes V, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P390, DOI 10.1086/422117 Hamilton RW, 2008, J MARKETING RES, V45, P450, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.45.4.450 Holbrook M. B., 1985, PERCEIVED QUALITY CO, P32 Keller PA, 1997, J CONSUM RES, V24, P295, DOI 10.1086/209511 Kulviwat S, 2009, J BUS RES, V62, P706, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.04.014 Ledgerwood A, 2010, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P638, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.03.001 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Love Edwin, 2012, Journal of Product & Brand Management, V21, P61, DOI 10.1108/10610421211203150 Malkoc SA, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P411 MCGILL AL, 1989, J CONSUM RES, V16, P188, DOI 10.1086/209207 Muratore I., 2003, Journal of Product & Brand Management, V12, P251, DOI 10.1108/10610420310485050 Nowlis SM, 1996, J MARKETING RES, V33, P36, DOI 10.2307/3152011 Schindler RM, 1997, J CONSUM RES, V24, P192, DOI 10.1086/209504 Semin GR, 1999, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V76, P877, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.76.6.877 Steenkamp JBEM, 2010, J MARKETING RES, V47, P1011, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.47.6.1011 Stiving M, 1997, J CONSUM RES, V24, P57, DOI 10.1086/209493 Lichtenstein D., 2012, J MARKETING RES, P1 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Volckner F, 2008, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V36, P359, DOI 10.1007/s11747-007-0076-7 Yan DF, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P376, DOI 10.1086/659755 NR 27 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 3 U2 8 PU EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LIMITED PI BINGLEY PA HOWARD HOUSE, WAGON LANE, BINGLEY BD16 1WA, W YORKSHIRE, ENGLAND SN 1061-0421 J9 J PROD BRAND MANAG JI J. Prod. Brand Manag. PY 2015 VL 24 IS 2 BP 172 EP 181 DI 10.1108/JPBM-11-2013-0444 PG 10 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA CO8RG UT WOS:000359437500007 ER PT J AU Vilches-Montero, SN Spence, MT AF Vilches-Montero, Sonia Noemi Spence, Mark T. TI The effect of construal level on time perceptions, confidence in judgements and future preferences SO EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MARKETING LA English DT Article DE Memory; Confidence; Construal level; Future preferences; Time perceptions ID RETROSPECTIVE DURATION JUDGMENTS; WORD-OF-MOUTH; ATTENTIONAL RESOURCES; SUBJECTIVE EXPERIENCE; PERCEIVED DURATION; EVENT STRUCTURE; WORKING-MEMORY; BRIEF STIMULUS; TASK DURATION; WAITING TIME AB Purpose - This paper aims to examine how activating an abstract versus concrete construal as a retrieval cue - prior to providing estimates but after exposure to the stimulus - affects retrospective duration estimates of a hedonic experience, the kind of experience one might wish to repeat. Recent research has examined the effect of construal mindsets on prospective time perceptions (Hans and Trope, 2013) as well as the prediction of future durations (Kanten, 2011; Siddiqui et al., 2014). Design/methodology/approach - Two experiments are presented to test four hypotheses. The effect of construal level on time perceptions, confidence in duration judgments and future preferences using two different construal level manipulation techniques and a range of measures for the dependent variables is demonstrated. Findings - This research found that compared to a neutral experience, time perceptions of an enjoyable event are not explained by differences in the level of attention paid to the stimuli; that duration estimates elicited under abstract construals are shorter than those produced by concrete construals; and regardless of construal mindset, memory decay due to time delay appears to be at work. Hence duration estimates shorten. Moreover, abstract construals decrease confidence in duration judgments, but positively affect future preferences compared to a concrete mindset. Originality/value - This paper expands current knowledge by showing that construal mindsets can be used as retrieval cues to affect evaluations of past experiences and consumers' experience-based future preferences. C1 [Vilches-Montero, Sonia Noemi] Univ Newcastle, Newcastle Business Sch, Newcastle, NSW 2300, Australia. [Spence, Mark T.] Bond Univ, Sch Business, Gold Coast, Qld, Australia. RP Vilches-Montero, SN (reprint author), Univ Newcastle, Newcastle Business Sch, Newcastle, NSW 2300, Australia. EM sonia.vilches-montero@newcastle.edu.au CR ABBOTT V, 1985, J MEM LANG, V24, P179, DOI 10.1016/0749-596X(85)90023-3 Agrawal N, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P448, DOI 10.1086/597331 Ahn HK, 2009, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V19, P508, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2009.05.002 Alter AL, 2008, PSYCHOL SCI, V19, P161, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02062.x Alter AL, 2009, PERS SOC PSYCHOL REV, V13, P219, DOI 10.1177/1088868309341564 Antonides G, 2002, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V12, P193, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP1203_02 Areni C, 2009, ADV CONSUM RES, V36, P449 Ariely D, 2000, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V13, P191, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(200004/06)13:2<191::AID-BDM330>3.0.CO;2-A Bailey N, 2006, J RETAILING, V82, P189, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2006.05.003 Barker R. G., 1954, MIDWEST ITS CHILDREN Bates D., 2006, INT J MANAGEMENT, V23, P86 Billington E., 2006, J BEHAV ED, V15, P181, DOI 10.1007/s10864-006-9015-9 Block RA, 1997, PSYCHON B REV, V4, P184, DOI 10.3758/BF03209393 Block R. A., 1990, COGNITIVE MODELS PSY, P1 Brown SW, 1997, PERCEPT PSYCHOPHYS, V59, P1118, DOI 10.3758/BF03205526 Brown SW, 2002, J EXP PSYCHOL HUMAN, V28, P600, DOI 10.1037//0096-1523.28.3.600 BURT CDB, 1993, APPL COGNITIVE PSYCH, V7, P63, DOI 10.1002/acp.2350070107 Busey TA, 2000, PSYCHON B REV, V7, P26, DOI 10.3758/BF03210724 Cameron MA, 2003, J BUS RES, V56, P421, DOI 10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00244-2 Casini L, 1999, BEHAV PROCESS, V45, P73, DOI 10.1016/S0376-6357(99)00010-8 Chen Z, 2001, PERCEPT PSYCHOPHYS, V63, P1229, DOI 10.3758/BF03194536 Cowley E, 2004, J BUS RES, V57, P641, DOI 10.1016/S0148-2963(02)00307-7 Cowley E, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P494, DOI 10.1086/520072 Cowley E, 2014, J BUS RES, V67, P1522, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.01.013 Faro D, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P279, DOI 10.1086/651234 FORTIN C, 1995, PERCEPT PSYCHOPHYS, V57, P203, DOI 10.3758/BF03206507 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Gatrell C., 2009, ADV CONSUMER RES, V36 Germann F, 2014, MARKET LETT, V25, P179, DOI 10.1007/s11002-013-9250-5 Gibbs P., 1998, EUR J MARKETING, V32, P936 Gorn GJ, 2004, J MARKETING RES, V41, P215, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.41.2.215.28668 Hansen J, 2013, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V142, P336, DOI 10.1037/a0029283 Hemmes NS, 2004, PERCEPT PSYCHOPHYS, V66, P328, DOI 10.3758/BF03194882 INMAN JJ, 1994, J MARKETING RES, V31, P423, DOI 10.2307/3152229 Kanten AB, 2011, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P1037, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.04.005 KATZ KL, 1991, SLOAN MANAGE REV, V32, P44 KELLARIS JJ, 1994, ADV CONSUM RES, V21, P514 Kellaris J. J., 1992, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V1, P365, DOI DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(08)80060-5 Koriat A, 2000, ANNU REV PSYCHOL, V51, P481, DOI 10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.481 Liberman N, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P1201, DOI 10.1126/science.1161958 Lopez L., 1991, PSYCHOL STUD, V36, P203 Mantel SP, 2003, J CONSUM RES, V29, P531, DOI 10.1086/346248 Mattel M. S., 2000, BIOESSAYS, V22, P94 Mattes S, 1998, PERCEPT PSYCHOPHYS, V60, P1305, DOI 10.3758/BF03207993 May F, 2014, J CONSUM RES, V41, P624, DOI 10.1086/676981 Moore SG, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V38, P1140, DOI 10.1086/661891 Novemsky N, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P347, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.347 PARK CW, 1989, J CONSUM RES, V16, P289, DOI 10.1086/209215 Pouthas V, 2004, ACTA NEUROBIOL EXP, V64, P367 Preacher KJ, 2004, BEHAV RES METH INS C, V36, P717, DOI 10.3758/BF03206553 REISER BJ, 1985, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V17, P89, DOI 10.1016/0010-0285(85)90005-2 Rojas-Mendez JI, 2005, J ADVERTISING RES, V45, P34, DOI 10.1017/S0021849905050154 Shapiro S, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V28, P603, DOI 10.1086/338204 Siddarth S, 1998, MARKET SCI, V17, P124, DOI 10.1287/mksc.17.2.124 Siddiqui RA, 2014, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V50, P184, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2013.10.002 Spence MT, 1996, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V67, P271, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1996.0079 Staddon J., 2006, NATURE REV NEUROSCIE, V7, P764 Swain SD, 2006, ADV CONSUM RES, V33, P523 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Tsai CI, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P459, DOI 10.1086/659379 Tsai CI, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V37, P807, DOI 10.1086/655855 Ulrich R, 2006, PSYCHOL RES-PSYCH FO, V70, P77, DOI 10.1007/S00426-004-0195-4 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 Vohs KD, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V85, P217, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.217 Wan EW, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V39, P977, DOI 10.1086/666467 White K, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P472 Winkielman P, 2003, PSYCHOLOGY OF EVALUATION, P189 Wirtz D, 2003, PSYCHOL SCI, V14, P520, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.03455 Yalch Richard F., 1990, J CONSUMER MARKETING, V7, P55, DOI DOI 10.1108/EUM0000000002577 Yeung CWM, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P315, DOI 10.1086/519500 Zacks JM, 2001, PSYCHOL BULL, V127, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.127.1.3 Zacks JM, 2001, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V130, P29, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.130.1.29 Zakay D, 2004, ACTA NEUROBIOL EXP, V64, P319 Zimbardo PG, 1999, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V77, P1271, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1271 NR 75 TC 2 Z9 2 U1 3 U2 19 PU EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LIMITED PI BINGLEY PA HOWARD HOUSE, WAGON LANE, BINGLEY BD16 1WA, W YORKSHIRE, ENGLAND SN 0309-0566 EI 1758-7123 J9 EUR J MARKETING JI Eur. J. Market. PY 2015 VL 49 IS 5-6 BP 782 EP 805 DI 10.1108/EJM-04-2014-0232 PG 24 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA CK7TS UT WOS:000356436900007 ER PT J AU Hernandez, JMD Wright, SA Rodrigues, FF AF da Costa Hernandez, Jose Mauro Wright, Scott A. Rodrigues, Filipe Ferminiano TI Attributes Versus Benefits: The Role of Construal Levels and Appeal Type on the Persuasiveness of Marketing Messages SO JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING LA English DT Article ID PREFERENCE; FLUENCY; CHOICE; KNOWLEDGE; DISTANCE; MATTER; FUTURE AB When should marketers emphasize attributes or benefits in their communications? Grounded in construal-level theory, the results of four studies suggest that when a purchase is planned for the distant future or when construal levels are high, benefit-based appeals are more persuasive than attribute-based appeals. By contrast, when a purchase is planned for the near future or when consumers are predisposed to low construal levels, attribute-based appeals are equally as persuasive as benefit-based appeals. However, when low construal levels are temporarily induced using a mind-set manipulation, attribute-based appeals are found to be more persuasive than benefit-based appeals. Moreover, we demonstrate how these effects occur only when processing fluency is uninhibited. This research establishes an important link between these appeal types and construal levels, subsequently demonstrating when marketers should use these appeals. C1 [da Costa Hernandez, Jose Mauro] Ctr Univ FEI, BR-01525000 Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil. [da Costa Hernandez, Jose Mauro; Rodrigues, Filipe Ferminiano] Univ Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil. [Wright, Scott A.] Providence Coll, Providence, RI 02918 USA. RP Hernandez, JMD (reprint author), Ctr Univ FEI, Rua Tamandare 688, BR-01525000 Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil. EM jmhernandez@fei.edu.br CR Agrawal N, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P448, DOI 10.1086/597331 Alter AL, 2008, PSYCHOL SCI, V19, P161, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02062.x Amit E, 2009, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V138, P400, DOI 10.1037/a0015835 Eating Brand, 2012, NEWS BURG KING VAL M Dhar R, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P96, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70014-1 Fitzsimons GJ, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P5, DOI 10.1086/589561 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Fujita K, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P562, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2007.10.005 Graeff TR, 1997, PSYCHOL MARKET, V14, P163, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(199703)14:2<163::AID-MAR4>3.0.CO;2-B GUTMAN J, 1982, J MARKETING, V46, P60, DOI 10.2307/3203341 Hayes A. F., 2013, INTRO MEDIATION MODE Higgins ET, 2000, AM PSYCHOL, V55, P1217, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.55.11.1217 Hofstede Frenkel T., 1999, J MARKETING RES, V36, P1, DOI 10.2307/3151911 Kardes FR, 2006, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V16, P135, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1602_4 Khan U, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P62, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.48.1.62 Labroo AA, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P800, DOI 10.1086/593683 Lamberton CP, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V40, P393, DOI 10.1086/671103 Lancaster K., 1971, CONSUMER DEMAND NEW Lautman Martin R., 1984, ADV CONSUM RES, P11 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Lee Hyojin, 2014, MONOCHROME FOR UNPUB Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 MAHESWARAN D, 1990, J CONSUM RES, V17, P66, DOI 10.1086/208537 MITCHELL AA, 1981, J MARKETING RES, V18, P318, DOI 10.2307/3150973 Novemsky N, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P347, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.347 Peracchio LA, 1997, J CONSUM RES, V24, P178, DOI 10.1086/209503 PETTY RE, 1983, J CONSUM RES, V10, P135, DOI 10.1086/208954 Semin GR, 1999, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V76, P877, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.76.6.877 Stewart GL, 2006, PERS PSYCHOL, V59, P307, DOI 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2006.00016.x Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Tsai CI, 2011, PSYCHOL SCI, V22, P348, DOI 10.1177/0956797611398494 Wallacher Robin R., 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3 White K, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P472 Wright S, 2012, MARKET LETT, V23, P253, DOI 10.1007/s11002-011-9151-4 Wu Tsung W., 1988, Q J BUSINESS EC, V27, P88 [Anonymous], 2002, BIZJOURNALS 0912 NR 36 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 6 U2 25 PU ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD PI ABINGDON PA 4 PARK SQUARE, MILTON PARK, ABINGDON OX14 4RN, OXFORDSHIRE, ENGLAND SN 0091-3367 EI 1557-7805 J9 J ADVERTISING JI J. Advert. PY 2015 VL 44 IS 3 BP 243 EP 253 DI 10.1080/00913367.2014.967425 PG 11 WC Business; Communication SC Business & Economics; Communication GA CK7BS UT WOS:000356385800007 ER PT J AU Kulkarni, AA Yuan, H AF Kulkarni, Atul A. Yuan, Hong TI Effect of Ad-Irrelevant Distance Cues on Persuasiveness of Message Framing SO JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING LA English DT Article ID REGULATORY FOCUS; CONSTRUAL-LEVEL; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; CONSUMER RESPONSES; FRAMED MESSAGES; SELF-CONTROL; MIND-SETS; BEHAVIOR; INFORMATION; COGNITION AB This research suggests that the relative persuasiveness of message framing depends on psychological distance induced by seemingly irrelevant cues in the ad environment. Positively (negatively) framed messages are more persuasive when the ad-irrelevant cues induce psychological remoteness (proximity). Across four studies and two different product categories, participants evaluated positively (negatively) framed messages more favorably when induced with social remoteness (proximity), spatial remoteness (proximity), and an abstract (concrete) construal. The findings contribute theoretically to the extant literature on message framing and offer actionable implications to ad managers for strategically designing ad environments to enhance the effectiveness of message framing. C1 [Kulkarni, Atul A.] Univ Missouri, Henry W Bloch Sch Management, Mkt, Kansas City, MO 64110 USA. [Yuan, Hong] Univ Oregon, Lundquist Coll Business, Mkt, Eugene, OR 97403 USA. RP Kulkarni, AA (reprint author), Univ Missouri, Henry W Bloch Sch Management, Room 334E,5110 Cherry St, Kansas City, MO 64110 USA. EM kulkarnia@umkc.edu CR Aaker JL, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P33, DOI 10.1086/321946 Algom Daniel, 2007, J EXPT PSYCHOL GEN, V136, P610 Arnocky Steven, 2007, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V27, P255 Bar-Anan Yoav, 2006, J EXPT PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P609 Block Lauren G., 1998, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V28, P1548 Boroditsky L, 2007, COGNITION, V102, P118, DOI 10.1016/j.cognition.2002.08.001 Brown P., 1987, POLITENESS SOME UNIV CACIOPPO JT, 1983, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V45, P805, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.45.4.805 Coulter KS, 2007, J ADVERTISING, V36, P7, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367360101 Eyal T, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P781, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Fujita K, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P799, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02372.x GOLLWITZER PM, 1990, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V59, P1119, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.59.6.1119 Kareklas I, 2012, J ADVERTISING, V41, P25, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367410402 Kees J, 2010, J ADVERTISING, V39, P19, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367390102 Kim YJ, 2006, J ADVERTISING, V35, P143, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367350109 Levin IP, 1998, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V76, P149, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1998.2804 Liberman N, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P1201, DOI 10.1126/science.1161958 Lockwood P, 2002, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V83, P854, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.83.4.854 MACKENZIE SB, 1986, J MARKETING RES, V23, P130, DOI 10.2307/3151660 MAHESWARAN D, 1990, J MARKETING RES, V27, P361, DOI 10.2307/3172593 Mann T, 2004, HEALTH PSYCHOL, V23, P330, DOI 10.1037/0278-6133.23.3.330 MEYEROWITZ BE, 1987, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V52, P500, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.500 Mogilner C, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P670, DOI 10.1086/521901 MOONEY KM, 1992, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V22, P1442, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00959.x Pennington GL, 2003, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P563, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00058-1 Petty RE, 1981, ATTITUDES PERSUASION Putrevu S, 2010, J ADVERTISING, V39, P5, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367390301 Ross Lee, 1975, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V32, P380 Rothman AJ, 1997, PSYCHOL BULL, V121, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.121.1.3 Schneider TR, 2001, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V31, P667, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb01407.x SEMIN GR, 1988, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V54, P558, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.54.4.558 SHERMAN SJ, 1978, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V14, P340, DOI 10.1016/0022-1031(78)90030-6 Shiv B, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P199, DOI 10.1086/383435 Stephan E, 2010, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V98, P268, DOI 10.1037/a0016960 TAYLOR SE, 1979, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V37, P357, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.37.3.357 TROPE Y, 1989, SOC COGNITION, V7, P296, DOI 10.1521/soco.1989.7.3.296 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Tsai SP, 2007, J ADVERTISING RES, V47, P364, DOI 10.2501/S0021849907070377 Wakslak C, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P52, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02250.x Wanke Michaela, 2000, MESSAGE ROLE SUBJECT, P143 WELLS WD, 1964, J MARKETING, V28, P45, DOI 10.2307/1249570 White K, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P472 Williams LE, 2008, PSYCHOL SCI, V19, P302, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02084.x Xu AJ, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P556, DOI 10.1086/519293 Zhang M, 2009, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V19, P497, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2009.05.001 NR 48 TC 2 Z9 2 U1 3 U2 21 PU ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD PI ABINGDON PA 4 PARK SQUARE, MILTON PARK, ABINGDON OX14 4RN, OXFORDSHIRE, ENGLAND SN 0091-3367 EI 1557-7805 J9 J ADVERTISING JI J. Advert. PY 2015 VL 44 IS 3 BP 254 EP 263 DI 10.1080/00913367.2014.975877 PG 10 WC Business; Communication SC Business & Economics; Communication GA CK7BS UT WOS:000356385800008 ER PT J AU Wirtz, J Xiao, P Chiang, JW Malhotra, N AF Wirtz, Jochen Xiao, Ping Chiang, Jeongwen Malhotra, Naresh TI Contrasting the Drivers of Switching Intent and Switching Behavior in Contractual Service Settings SO JOURNAL OF RETAILING LA English DT Article DE Switching behavior; Switching intent; Construal level theory; Marketing-mix ID CUSTOMER SATISFACTION; DYNAMIC-MODEL; RETENTION; LOYALTY; CONTEXT; IMPACT; COSTS; TIME; ANTECEDENTS; PERCEPTIONS AB We examine consumer switching decisions in contractual service settings and contrast the drivers of actual switching with those of switching intent. We surveyed a panel of subscribers to all cell phone service providers in a market and recorded key marketing mix data. At four months intervals, we asked panel members about their switching intentions and then subsequently observed actual switching behavior. Consistent with construal level theory, our findings show that switching intent is explained by only a handful of desirability- or outcome-related variables (i.e., overall satisfaction, performance perceptions of important attributes, and monetary switching costs). In contrast, the results show that many more variable categories contributed to explain actual switching behavior. These findings confirm that switching intent is driven by a qualitatively different set of variables than switching behavior. Implications for theory, research and practice are discussed. (C) 2014 New York University. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. C1 [Wirtz, Jochen; Xiao, Ping] Natl Univ Singapore, Singapore 119245, Singapore. [Chiang, Jeongwen] China Europe Int Business Sch, Shanghai, Peoples R China. [Malhotra, Naresh] Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Univ, Port Elizabeth, South Africa. [Malhotra, Naresh] Georgia Inst Technol, Atlanta, GA 30332 USA. RP Wirtz, J (reprint author), Natl Univ Singapore, 15 Kent Ridge Dr, Singapore 119245, Singapore. EM jochen@nus.edu.sg; bizxp@nus.edu.sg; jwchiang@ceibs.edu; naresh.malhotra@scheller.gatech.edu RI Wirtz, Jochen/P-3235-2015; Xiao, Ping/B-7273-2016 OI Wirtz, Jochen/0000-0002-6297-4498; CR Bansal HS, 2005, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V33, P96, DOI 10.1177/0092070304267928 BEATTY SE, 1987, J CONSUM RES, V14, P83, DOI 10.1086/209095 BEATTY SE, 1994, J CONSUM RES, V21, P332, DOI 10.1086/209401 Bergkvist L, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P175, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.2.175 Blattberg R. C., 2008, DATABASE MARKETING A Bolton RN, 1998, MARKET SCI, V17, P45, DOI 10.1287/mksc.17.1.45 Bolton RN, 2000, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V28, P95, DOI 10.1177/0092070300281009 Bolton RN, 1999, J MARKETING RES, V36, P171, DOI 10.2307/3152091 Bolton RN, 2006, MANAGE SCI, V52, P1811, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0594 Burnham TA, 2003, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V31, P109, DOI 10.1177/0092070302250897 Capraro AJ, 2003, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V31, P164, DOI 10.1177/0092070302250900 Chandon P, 2005, J MARKETING, V69, P1, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.69.2.1.60755 CHURCHILL GA, 1982, J MARKETING RES, V19, P491, DOI 10.2307/3151722 Basu Kunal, 1994, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V22, P99, DOI DOI 10.1177/0092070394222001 Fornell C, 1996, J MARKETING, V60, P7, DOI 10.2307/1251898 Sullivan, 2010, 2010 N AM CONS MOB C Ganesh J, 2000, J MARKETING, V64, P65, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.64.3.65.18028 Grewal D, 1998, J MARKETING, V62, P46, DOI 10.2307/1252160 Gupta S, 2006, MARKET SCI, V25, P718, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1060.0221 Jones MA, 2000, J RETAILING, V76, P259, DOI 10.1016/S0022-4359(00)00024-5 Jones MA, 2007, J SERV RES-US, V9, P335, DOI 10.1177/1094670507299382 JONES TO, 1995, HARVARD BUS REV, V73, P88 Keaveney SM, 2001, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V29, P374, DOI 10.1177/03079450094225 KEAVENEY SM, 1995, J MARKETING, V59, P71, DOI 10.2307/1252074 Lehmann DR, 2011, J MARKETING, V75, P155 LIANG KY, 1986, BIOMETRIKA, V73, P13, DOI 10.1093/biomet/73.1.13 Lovelock Ch, 2011, SERVICES MARKETING P Malhotra NK, 2006, MANAGE SCI, V52, P1865, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0597 Mattila AS, 2002, INT J SERV IND MANAG, V13, P214, DOI 10.1108/09564230210431947 McCullagh P, 1989, GEN LINEAR MODELS Mittal V, 2001, J MARKETING RES, V38, P131, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.38.1.131.18832 Mittal V, 1999, J MARKETING, V63, P88, DOI 10.2307/1251947 Monroe Kent B., 2003, PRICING MAKING PROFI MORWITZ VG, 1992, J MARKETING RES, V29, P391, DOI 10.2307/3172706 Morwitz VG, 2007, INT J FORECASTING, V23, P347, DOI 10.1016/j.ijforecast.2007.05.015 OLIVER RL, 1989, J MARKETING, V53, P21, DOI 10.2307/1251411 Olsen SO, 2002, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V30, P240, DOI 10.1177/00970302030003005 Pan W, 2001, BIOMETRICS, V57, P120, DOI 10.1111/j.0006-341X.2001.00120.x Pick D, 2014, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V42, P186, DOI 10.1007/s11747-013-0349-2 PING RA, 1993, J RETAILING, V69, P320, DOI 10.1016/0022-4359(93)90010-G Polo Y, 2009, J SERV RES-US, V12, P119, DOI 10.1177/1094670509335771 Reinartz WJ, 2003, J MARKETING, V67, P77, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.67.1.77.18589 Roos Inger, 2004, J SERV RES-US, V6, P256, DOI 10.1177/1094670503255850 RUST RT, 1993, J RETAILING, V69, P193, DOI 10.1016/0022-4359(93)90003-2 Seiders K, 2005, J MARKETING, V69, P26, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.2005.69.4.26 Sun BH, 2010, INT J RES MARK, V27, P356, DOI 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2010.06.001 TEAS RK, 1992, J CONSUM RES, V18, P536, DOI 10.1086/209280 Matilla Anna S., 2003, J SERV MARK, V17, P649, DOI DOI 10.1108/08876040310501223 Zhao M, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P379, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.379 NR 49 TC 11 Z9 11 U1 4 U2 20 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 0022-4359 EI 1873-3271 J9 J RETAILING JI J. Retail. PD DEC PY 2014 VL 90 IS 4 BP 463 EP 480 DI 10.1016/j.jretai.2014.07.002 PG 18 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA AY7XH UT WOS:000347768700003 ER PT J AU Lee, H Deng, XY Unnava, HR Fujita, K AF Lee, Hyojin Deng, Xiaoyan Unnava, H. Rao Fujita, Kentaro TI Monochrome Forests and Colorful Trees: The Effect of Black-and-White versus Color Imagery on Construal Level SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID IMPLICIT ASSOCIATION TEST; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; SELF-CONTROL; ACTION IDENTIFICATION; RECOGNITION MEMORY; CONCRETE THINKING; ONGOING BEHAVIOR; DECISION-MAKING; BIG PICTURE; INFORMATION AB Marketing communications (e.g., advertising, packaging) can be either colorful or black and white. This research investigates how presence or absence of color affects consumer information processing. Drawing from construal-level and visual perception theory, five experiments test the hypothesis that black-and-white (BW) versus color imagery is cognitively associated with high-level versus low-level construal, respectively. Experiment 1 establishes this association via an Implicit Association Test. On the basis of this association, experiments 2 and 3 show that BW (vs. color) imagery promotes high-level (vs. low-level) construal, leading to sorting objects on the basis of high-level (vs. low-level) features, segmenting behaviors into broader (vs. narrower) units, and interpreting actions as ends (vs. means). Extending this effect into consumer decision making, experiments 4 and 5 further show that consumers presented with BW (vs. color) product pictures weight primary and essential (vs. secondary and superficial) product featuresmore and prefer an option that excels on those features. C1 [Lee, Hyojin; Deng, Xiaoyan; Unnava, H. Rao] Ohio State Univ, Fisher Coll Business, Dept Mkt & Logist, Columbus, OH 43210 USA. [Fujita, Kentaro] Ohio State Univ, Dept Psychol, Columbus, OH 43210 USA. RP Lee, H (reprint author), Ohio State Univ, Fisher Coll Business, Dept Mkt & Logist, 2100 Neil Ave, Columbus, OH 43210 USA. EM lee.4878@osu.edu; deng.84@osu.edu; unnava.1@osu.edu; fujita.5@osu.edu RI Fujita, Kentaro/G-2311-2011 CR Agrawal N, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P448, DOI 10.1086/597331 Alter Adam L, 2008, PERSONALITY SOCIAL P, V13, P219 Amit E, 2009, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V138, P400, DOI 10.1037/a0015835 Arnheim Rudolf, 1957, FILM ART Arnheim R, 1954, ART VISUAL PERCEPTIO Bar-Anan Y, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P609, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.609 Berdie Douglas R., 1992, YELLOW PAGES GUIDE C Beukeboom CJ, 2006, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V42, P553, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.09.005 Biederman, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P115 BIEDERMAN I, 1988, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V20, P38, DOI 10.1016/0010-0285(88)90024-2 Garcia Mario, 1986, ANN M ASS ED JOURN M, V69 Bray Simon, 2011, GETTING STARTED BLAC Brockmann R. J., 1991, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communications, V34, P153, DOI 10.1109/47.84109 Bruyneel SD, 2012, EUR J SOC PSYCHOL, V42, P763, DOI 10.1002/ejsp.1896 CLICK JW, 1976, JOURNALISM QUART, V53, P736 Davidoff J., 1991, COGNITION COLOR Detenber BH, 2000, MEDIA PSYCHOL, V2, P331, DOI 10.1207/S1532785XMEP0204_02 DOOLEY RP, 1970, PERCEPT MOTOR SKILL, V31, P851 Elliot AJ, 2014, ANNU REV PSYCHOL, V65, P95, DOI 10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115035 Epstude K, 2011, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P1017, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.03.019 Eyal T, 2010, PSYCHOL INQ, V21, P213, DOI 10.1080/1047840X.2010.503184 Eyal T, 2009, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V45, P35, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.07.023 Fernandez KV, 2000, J ADVERTISING, V29, P61 Fishbach A., 2010, SOCIAL PERSONALITY P, V4, P517, DOI [DOI 10.1111/J.1751-9004.2010.00285.X, DOI 10.1111/J.1751-9004.2010.00285.X]] Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Forster J, 2009, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V138, P383, DOI 10.1037/a0015748 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Fujita K., 2008, SOCIAL PERSONALITY P, V2, P1475, DOI DOI 10.1111/J.1751-9004.2008.00118.X Fujita K, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P562, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2007.10.005 Fujita K, 2012, CURR DIR PSYCHOL SCI, V21, P248, DOI 10.1177/0963721412449169 Fukukura J, 2013, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V142, P658, DOI 10.1037/a0030730 GARDNER BB, 1964, J MARKETING RES, V1, P68, DOI 10.2307/3149925 Gasper K, 2002, PSYCHOL SCI, V13, P34, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00406 Gegenfurtner K. R., 2001, COLOR VISION GENES P Greenleaf Eric A., 2010, SENSORY MARKETING RE, P241 Greenwald AG, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V85, P197, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.197 GRONHAUG K, 1991, J ADVERTISING RES, V31, P42 Heider F, 1944, AM J PSYCHOL, V57, P243, DOI 10.2307/1416950 Henderson MD, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V91, P845, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.91.5.845 Henderson MD, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V91, P712, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.712 Henderson MD, 2009, SOC COGNITION, V27, P402 HOMA D, 1988, MEM COGNITION, V16, P411, DOI 10.3758/BF03214221 Hornik Jacob, 1980, J ADVERTISING RES, V20, P43 Ijzerman H, 2010, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P867, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.07.015 Itti L, 2001, NAT REV NEUROSCI, V2, P194, DOI 10.1038/35058500 Janiszewski C, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V25, P290, DOI 10.1086/209540 Kaplan E., 1990, Progress in Retinal Research, V9, P273, DOI 10.1016/0278-4327(90)90009-7 Katzir M, 2010, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V36, P1314, DOI 10.1037/a0020120 Katzman Natan, 1972, ED TECHNOLOGY RES DE, V20 Kim HY, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P877, DOI 10.1086/593700 Kumata Hideya, 1960, IMPACT ED TELEVISION, P151 Labrecque LI, 2013, PSYCHOL MARKET, V30, P187, DOI 10.1002/mar.20597 Labroo AA, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P800, DOI 10.1086/593683 Ledgerwood A, 2010, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P638, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.03.001 Libby LK, 2009, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V138, P503, DOI 10.1037/a0016795 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Trope J., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, V2, P353 Liberman Nira, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P1204 Lohse GL, 1997, J ADVERTISING, V26, P61 Lowe D., 1984, PERCEPTUAL ORG VISUA Maglio SJ, 2011, PSYCHON B REV, V18, P165, DOI 10.3758/s13423-010-0025-1 Mapelli D, 1997, NEUROCASE, V3, P237 MARKUS H, 1985, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V49, P1494, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.49.6.1494 MEYERSLEVY J, 1995, J CONSUM RES, V22, P121, DOI 10.1086/209440 NEWTSON D, 1976, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V12, P436, DOI 10.1016/0022-1031(76)90076-7 NEWTSON D, 1973, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V28, P28, DOI 10.1037/h0035584 PALLAK SR, 1983, SOC COGNITION, V2, P158, DOI 10.1521/soco.1983.2.2.158 PERCY L, 1983, ADV CONSUM RES, V10, P17 Perse Elizabeth M., 1991, SPEECH COMM ASS CONV Rossiter John R., 1982, ADV CONSUM RES, V9, P396 Rowse Darren, 2007, WHY BLACK WHITE PHOT Schindler PS, 1986, PSYCHOL MARKET, V3, P69, DOI DOI 10.1002/MAR.4220030203 Schmeichel BJ, 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V96, P770, DOI 10.1037/a0014635 Singh S., 2006, MANAGE DECIS, V44, P783, DOI DOI 10.1108/00251740610673332 Steidle A, 2011, SOC PSYCHOL-GERMANY, V42, P174, DOI 10.1027/1864-9335/a000061 Suzuki K, 1997, JPN PSYCHOL RES, V39, P25, DOI 10.1111/1468-5884.00033 Thaler RH, 2008, NUDGE IMPROVING DECI Torelli CJ, 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V96, P231, DOI 10.1037/a0013836 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Tsai CI, 2011, PSYCHOL SCI, V22, P348, DOI 10.1177/0956797611398494 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Vandermeer A. W., 1954, AV COMMUN REV, V2 Wakslak CJ, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P641, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.641 Wan EW, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V39, P977, DOI 10.1086/666467 Wan EW, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P199, DOI 10.1086/658471 WATSON D, 1988, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V54, P1063, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063 Watson D., 1994, PANAS X MANUAL POSIT Wichmann FA, 2002, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V28, P509, DOI 10.1037//0278-7393.28.3.509 Zettl Herbert, 2014, SIGHT SOUND MOTION A NR 93 TC 4 Z9 5 U1 5 U2 67 PU OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC PI CARY PA JOURNALS DEPT, 2001 EVANS RD, CARY, NC 27513 USA SN 0093-5301 EI 1537-5277 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD DEC PY 2014 VL 41 IS 4 BP 1015 EP 1032 DI 10.1086/678392 PG 18 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA AT9DG UT WOS:000345227600008 ER PT J AU Han, D Duhachek, A Agrawal, N AF Han, Dahee Duhachek, Adam Agrawal, Nidhi TI Emotions Shape Decisions through Construal Level: The Case of Guilt and Shame SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID SELF-CONSCIOUS EMOTIONS; PROCESSING PERSPECTIVE; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; MESSAGES; BEHAVIOR; ANXIETY; REGRET; INFORMATION; PREDICTION; PREFERENCE AB Four experiments show that emotions systematically influence judgments and persuasion by altering construal levels. Guilt-laden consumers, relative to those who were shame-laden, adopted lower levels of construal. In subsequent unrelated judgments, guilt increased reliance on feasibility over desirability attributes and emphasized secondary rather than primary features. Shame led to the opposite pattern. Guilt's tendency to draw behavior-specific appraisals activates local appraisal tendencies and endows lower construal levels, whereas shame's tendency to implicate the entire self activates global appraisal tendencies and endows consumers with higher construal levels. As a boundary condition to the core effect, the results showed that the differences between guilt and shame only held when the emotions arose from actions rather than from inaction situations. These findings provide insight into when and why guilt and shame have different effects on subsequent decisions. C1 [Han, Dahee] McGill Univ, Desautels Fac Management, Dept Mkt, Montreal, PQ H3A 1G5, Canada. [Duhachek, Adam] Indiana Univ, Kelley Sch Business, Bloomington, IN 47405 USA. [Agrawal, Nidhi] Univ Washington, Foster Sch Business, Seattle, WA 98195 USA. RP Han, D (reprint author), McGill Univ, Desautels Fac Management, Dept Mkt, 1001 Sherbrooke St West, Montreal, PQ H3A 1G5, Canada. EM dahee.han@mcgill.ca; aduhache@indiana.edu; nidhia@uw.edu CR Agrawal N, 2013, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V120, P87, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.10.001 Agrawal N, 2010, J MARKETING RES, V47, P263 Agrawal N, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P448, DOI 10.1086/597331 Bar-Anan Y, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P609, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.609 Blum A., 2008, TRAUMATOLOGY, V14, P91, DOI [10.1177/1534765608321070, DOI 10.1177/1534765608321070] Brooks AW, 2011, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V115, P43, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.01.008 BROWN J, 1984, J EDUC PSYCHOL, V76, P146 Dahl DW, 2003, MARKET LETT, V14, P159, DOI 10.1023/A:1027492516677 Dearing RL, 2005, ADDICT BEHAV, V30, P1392, DOI 10.1016/j.addbeh.2005.02.002 Duhachek A, 2012, J MARKETING RES, V49, P928 Forster J, 2010, PSYCHOL INQ, V21, P175, DOI 10.1080/1047840X.2010.487849 Forster J, 2010, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P237, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.08.009 Friedman RS, 2003, CREATIVITY RES J, V15, P277, DOI 10.1207/S15326934CRJ152&3_18 GILOVICH T, 1995, PSYCHOL REV, V102, P379, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.102.2.379 Gino F, 2012, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V102, P497, DOI 10.1037/a0026413 Han Seunghee, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P156 Jain SP, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V26, P358, DOI 10.1086/209568 Kim HY, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P877, DOI 10.1086/593700 Labroo AA, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P800, DOI 10.1086/593683 LAZARUS RS, 1991, AM PSYCHOL, V46, P819, DOI 10.1037//0003-066X.46.8.819 Leach FR, 2009, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V35, P221, DOI 10.1177/0146167208327001 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Leith KP, 1998, J PERS, V66, P1, DOI 10.1111/1467-6494.00001 Lerner JS, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P184 Lerner JS, 2000, COGNITION EMOTION, V14, P473 Lerner JS, 2004, PSYCHOL SCI, V15, P337, DOI 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00679.x Lewis H. B., 1971, SHAME GUILT NEUROSIS LEWIS M, 1989, CHILD DEV, V60, P146, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1989.tb02704.x Lewis M., 1992, SHAME EXPOSED SELF Lewis Michael, 2000, HDB EMOTIONS, V2, P265 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Martindale C., 1995, CREATIVE COGNITION A, P249 Ngbala A, 1997, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V33, P324, DOI 10.1006/jesp.1996.1322 Nussbaum S, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P485, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.485 Pyone JS, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P532 Raghunathan R, 1999, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V79, P56, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1999.2838 Savitsky K, 1997, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V23, P248, DOI 10.1177/0146167297233004 SEMIN GR, 1988, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V54, P558, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.54.4.558 SMITH CA, 1985, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V48, P813, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.48.4.813 TANGNEY JP, 1992, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V62, P669, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.62.4.669 TANGNEY JP, 1995, AM BEHAV SCI, V38, P1132, DOI 10.1177/0002764295038008008 Tangney JP, 1996, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V70, P797, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.70.4.797 Tangney J. P., 2002, SHAME GUILT Tangney J. P., 2000, TEST SELF CONSCIOUS Tangney JP, 2007, ANNU REV PSYCHOL, V58, P345, DOI 10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070145 Tangney June Price, 1995, P343 Tiedens LZ, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V81, P973, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.81.6.973 Tracy Jessica L., 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440 Tracy JL, 2007, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V92, P506, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.92.3.506 Tracy JL, 2004, PSYCHOL INQ, V15, P103, DOI 10.1207/s15327965pli1502_01 Tracy Jessica L., 2002, 3 ANN M SOC PERS SOC Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Van Vliet KJ, 2009, PSYCHOL PSYCHOTHER-T, V82, P137, DOI 10.1348/147608308X389391 Wan EW, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P199, DOI 10.1086/658471 Yan DF, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P376, DOI 10.1086/659755 Zhang Y, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P129, DOI 10.1086/649912 Zhao XS, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P197, DOI 10.1086/651257 [Anonymous], 1823, HARMONICON, VI, P1 NR 61 TC 10 Z9 12 U1 9 U2 79 PU OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC PI CARY PA JOURNALS DEPT, 2001 EVANS RD, CARY, NC 27513 USA SN 0093-5301 EI 1537-5277 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD DEC PY 2014 VL 41 IS 4 BP 1047 EP 1064 DI 10.1086/678300 PG 18 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA AT9DG UT WOS:000345227600010 ER PT J AU Pfeiffer, BE Deval, H Kardes, FR Ewing, DR Han, XQ Cronley, ML AF Pfeiffer, Bruce E. Deval, Helene Kardes, Frank R. Ewing, Douglas R. Han, Xiaoqi Cronley, Maria L. TI Effects of Construal Level on Omission Detection and Multiattribute Evaluation SO PSYCHOLOGY & MARKETING LA English DT Article ID PRICE-QUALITY INFERENCE; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; CONTEXTUAL INFLUENCES; ACTION IDENTIFICATION; TEMPORAL DISTANCE; PRIOR KNOWLEDGE; INFORMATION; JUDGMENT; CHOICE; BELIEFS AB Research has demonstrated that consumers are commonly insensitive to missing information and that this insensitivity can lead them to form strong beliefs and evaluations on the basis of weak evidence. A growing body of research has shown that sensitivity to omissions can be heightened and that this increased sensitivity results in more appropriate evaluations. Expanding on this, the current research finds that the level of abstraction by which a situation is construed can influence the likelihood of omission detection and the resulting evaluative judgments. A series of studies reveal that people are more likely to spontaneously detect omissions in near vs. distant judgments, in concrete vs. abstract mindsets, and when they are inherently more likely to interpret actions in concrete vs. abstract terms. Further, although prior findings suggest that people may have differential sensitivity to primary and secondary missing features at different levels of construal, the current research finds no such difference. The results of this study indicate that people are more sensitive to all types of missing information when construal levels are low, and that this sensitivity leads to more moderate and appropriate judgments. C1 [Pfeiffer, Bruce E.] Univ New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824 USA. [Deval, Helene] Dalhousie Univ, Halifax, NS B3H 3J5, Canada. [Kardes, Frank R.] Univ Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221 USA. [Ewing, Douglas R.] Bowling Green State Univ, Bowling Green, OH 43403 USA. [Han, Xiaoqi] Univ Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK USA. [Cronley, Maria L.] Miami Univ, Oxford, OH 45056 USA. RP Pfeiffer, BE (reprint author), Univ New Hampshire, Dept Mkt, Peter T Paul Coll Business & Econ, Durham, NH 03824 USA. EM bruce.pfeiffer@unh.edu CR Anderson Norman, 1981, FDN INFORM INTEGRATI Burrus J, 2006, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V32, P1050, DOI 10.1177/0146167206288282 Caputo D, 2005, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V41, P488, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.09.006 Cohen J., 2003, APPL MULTIPLE REGRES Cronley ML, 2005, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V15, P159, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1502_8 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Forster J, 2009, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V35, P1479, DOI 10.1177/0146167209342755 Forster J, 2009, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V138, P88, DOI 10.1037/a0014484 Fox CR, 2002, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V88, P476, DOI 10.1006/obhd.2001.2990 Fujita K, 2011, SOC COGNITION, V29, P125 Gilbert D., 2007, STUMBLING HAPPINESS Graeff TR, 1997, PSYCHOL MARKET, V14, P163, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(199703)14:2<163::AID-MAR4>3.0.CO;2-B Henderson MD, 2010, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V36, P975, DOI 10.1177/0146167210367490 Henderson MD, 2009, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V35, P1330, DOI 10.1177/0146167209340905 Henderson MD, 2009, SOC COGNITION, V27, P402 KAMINS MA, 1989, J ADVERTISING, V18, P4 KARDES FR, 1994, J BUS RES, V29, P219, DOI 10.1016/0148-2963(94)90006-X KARDES FR, 1992, J MARKETING RES, V29, P343, DOI 10.2307/3172744 Kardes FR, 2006, J BUS RES, V59, P786, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.01.016 Kardes FR, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P368, DOI 10.1086/422115 Kardes FR, 2004, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V14, P230, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1403_6 Kardes F. R., 1993, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V2, P39, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp0201_03 Keppel G., 1991, DESIGN ANAL RES HDB Kim H, 2008, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V18, P116, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2008.01.006 Kim YJ, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P634, DOI 10.1086/599765 Kivetz R, 2000, J MARKETING RES, V37, P427, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.37.4.427.18796 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P1201, DOI 10.1126/science.1161958 Liberman N, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P143, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.12.009 Liberman N, 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V97, P203, DOI 10.1037/a0015671 Lile J., 2009, J EXPT SOCIAL PSYCHO, V45, P1127 Malkoc SA, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P411 Mantel S. P., 2014, IGNORANCE IS B UNPUB Martin BAS, 2009, J ADVERTISING, V38, P5, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367380301 Masuda T, 2006, COGNITIVE SCI, V30, P381, DOI 10.1207/s15516709cog0000_63 McElroy T, 2007, SOC COGNITION, V25, P495, DOI 10.1521/soco.2007.25.4.495 Meyers-Levy J, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P174, DOI 10.1086/519146 NEWMAN J, 1980, J EXP PSYCHOL-HUM L, V6, P630, DOI 10.1037//0278-7393.6.5.630 Peterman ML, 1997, PSYCHOL MARKET, V14, P561, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(199709)14:6<561::AID-MAR3>3.0.CO;2-5 Preacher KJ, 2008, BEHAV RES METHODS, V40, P879, DOI 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 Reb J, 2008, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V105, P169, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.08.006 Rosenthal R., 1985, CONTRAST ANAL FOCUSE ROSNOW RL, 1995, PSYCHOL SCI, V6, P3, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1995.tb00297.x SANBONMATSU DM, 1991, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V61, P546, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.61.4.546 Sanbonmatsu DM, 1998, PSYCHON B REV, V5, P197, DOI 10.3758/BF03212944 Sanbonmatsu DM, 1997, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V69, P251, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1997.2686 Sanbonmatsu DM, 2003, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V13, P289, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP1303_10 SANBONMATSU DM, 1992, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V51, P76, DOI 10.1016/0749-5978(92)90005-R Schmeichel BJ, 2011, SOC PSYCHOL PERS SCI, V2, P182, DOI 10.1177/1948550610385955 Silvera DH, 2005, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V15, P117, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1502_4 Smith PK, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P578, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.578 Tangari AH, 2012, PSYCHOL MARKET, V29, P198, DOI 10.1002/mar.20515 Tormala ZL, 2007, SOC COGNITION, V25, P536, DOI 10.1521/soco.2007.25.4.536 TREISMAN A, 1985, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V114, P285, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.114.3.285 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Tsai CI, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V37, P807, DOI 10.1086/655855 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 vansDijk E., 2007, J EXPT SOCIAL PSYCHO, V43, P656 Wakslak CJ, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P641, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.641 ZAICHKOWSKY JL, 1994, J ADVERTISING, V23, P59 Zhang S, 2002, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V12, P303, DOI 10.1207/15327660260382342 Zhao XS, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P197, DOI 10.1086/651257 NR 66 TC 3 Z9 3 U1 2 U2 15 PU WILEY-BLACKWELL PI HOBOKEN PA 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA SN 0742-6046 EI 1520-6793 J9 PSYCHOL MARKET JI Psychol. Mark. PD NOV PY 2014 VL 31 IS 11 BP 992 EP 1007 DI 10.1002/mar.20748 PG 16 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA AR8AP UT WOS:000343798300005 ER PT J AU Maier, E Wilken, R AF Maier, Erik Wilken, Robert TI The Impact of Stress on Consumers' Willingness to Pay SO PSYCHOLOGY & MARKETING LA English DT Article ID CONSTRUAL LEVEL; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; MARKETING-RESEARCH; PRICE SENSITIVITY; SELF-EFFICACY; BEHAVIOR; AROUSAL; MODEL; PREFERENCES; JUDGMENTS AB Stress is a companion in most consumers' lives and as such should impact purchase behavior in many ways. Drawing on construal-level theory, which relates to information processing on different levels of abstraction, the authors propose that consumers' stress deteriorates their evaluation of products. The latter effect results from a stress-induced focus shift, from product characteristics with high levels of construal to those with low levels of construal (Study 1). This shift also decreases the price that consumers are willing to pay (Study 2), though the product category moderates the impact of stress on willingness to pay (WTP), such that the decline in consumers' WTP is smaller for products characterized by lower levels of construal (Study 3). This research extends existing knowledge on the impact of relaxation on consumers' WTP by including stress in the analysis. Effect sizes are similar to those in related studies. In terms of managerial implications, this study recommends decreasing consumers' stress levels at the point of purchase and tailoring marketing mix activities to match prevalent stress levels, if firms hope to mitigate the negative effect of stress. (C) 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. C1 [Maier, Erik; Wilken, Robert] ESCP Europe Business Sch Berlin, D-14059 Berlin, Germany. RP Maier, E (reprint author), ESCP Europe Business Sch Berlin, Heubnerweg 8-10, D-14059 Berlin, Germany. EM emaier@escpeurope.eu; rwilken@escpeurope.eu CR AAKER DA, 1986, J CONSUM RES, V12, P365, DOI 10.1086/208524 American Psychological Association, 2012, STRESS AM OUR HLTH R ANDREASEN AR, 1984, J CONSUM RES, V11, P784, DOI 10.1086/209014 ANGLIN LK, 1994, ADV CONSUM RES, V21, P126 BANDURA A, 1977, PSYCHOL REV, V84, P191, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.84.2.191 BECKER GM, 1964, BEHAV SCI, V9, P226, DOI 10.1002/bs.3830090304 Benson H, 2001, RELAXATION RESPONSE Bolls PD, 2001, COMMUN RES, V28, P627, DOI 10.1177/009365001028005003 Boucsein W, 2012, ELECTRODERMAL ACTIVITY, SECOND EDITION, P1, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4614-1126-0 CELUCH KG, 1991, ADV CONSUM RES, V18, P284 Cohen J., 1988, STAT POWER ANAL BEHA Dimsdale JE, 2008, J AM COLL CARDIOL, V51, P1237, DOI 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.12.024 Duhachek Adam, 2008, HDB CONSUMER PSYCHOL, P1057 EASTERBROOK JA, 1959, PSYCHOL REV, V66, P183, DOI 10.1037/h0047707 European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, 2009, OSH FIG STRESS WORK Eyal T, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P781, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781 Eysenck M. W., 1985, ATTENTION AROUSAL CO Fiedler K, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P101, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70015-3 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 GARDNER DG, 1986, J APPL PSYCHOL, V71, P411, DOI 10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.411 GARDNER MP, 1984, ADV CONSUM RES, V11, P525 Goodman JK, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V39, P751, DOI 10.1086/665047 Gorn G, 2001, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V11, P43, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP1101_4 Gorn GJ, 1997, MANAGE SCI, V43, P1387, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.43.10.1387 Groeppel-Klein A, 2001, ADV CONSUM RES, V28, P412 Hair J. F., 2008, MULTIVARIATE DATA AN Han SM, 2001, J RETAILING, V77, P435, DOI 10.1016/S0022-4359(01)00057-4 Hansen J, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V39, P1154, DOI 10.1086/667691 Herr PM, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V38, P833, DOI 10.1086/660844 HERSHEY M, 1979, GIFTED CHILD QUART, V23, P71 HILL RP, 1989, J MARKETING RES, V26, P97, DOI 10.2307/3172672 Hong JW, 2010, J MARKETING RES, V47, P301 European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 2007, 4 EUROPEAN WORKING C Jia L, 2009, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V45, P1127, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.05.015 Kalia M, 2002, METABOLISM, V51, P49, DOI 10.1053/meta.2002.33193 Kim H, 2008, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V18, P116, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2008.01.006 Krampen G, 1997, EUR J PERSONALITY, V11, P83 KROEBERRIEL W, 1979, J CONSUM RES, V5, P240, DOI 10.1086/208736 Lazarus R. S., 1984, STRESS APPRAISAL COP Keller P. A., 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735 LEPISTO LR, 1991, ADV CONSUM RES, V18, P296 Maier E, 2012, MARKET LETT, V23, P1005, DOI 10.1007/s11002-012-9200-7 Mathur A., 2003, J CONSUM BEHAV, V3, P129, DOI 10.1002/cb.128 Moschis G. P., 2006, J CONSUM BEHAV, V5, P193, DOI 10.1002/cb.171 Mehrabian A., 1974, APPROACH ENV PSYCHOL Miller KM, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P172, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.48.1.172 MOGG K, 1990, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V59, P1230, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.59.6.1230 Moschis GP, 2007, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V35, P430, DOI 10.1007/s11747-007-0035-3 Nussbaum S, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P152, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.2.152 Oakes S, 2003, PSYCHOL MARKET, V20, P685, DOI 10.1002/mar.10092 Oliver G, 2000, PSYCHOSOM MED, V62, P853 PARK CW, 1989, J CONSUM RES, V15, P422, DOI 10.1086/209182 PAULHUS DL, 1994, EUR J SOC PSYCHOL, V24, P89, DOI 10.1002/ejsp.2420240107 Pham MT, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P814 RUSSELL JA, 1980, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P1161, DOI 10.1037/h0077714 Shani Y, 2009, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V110, P36, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.05.005 Steiger JH, 2004, PSYCHOL METHODS, V9, P164, DOI 10.1037/1082-989X.9.2.164 THOITS PA, 1995, J HLTH SOCIAL BEHAV, P53, DOI DOI 10.2307/2626957 Todorov A, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P473, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.002 Liberman N., 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P402 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Tsai CI, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V37, P807, DOI 10.1086/655855 Tsiros M, 2005, J MARKETING, V69, P114, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.69.2.114.60762 Voelckner F, 2006, MARKET LETT, V17, P137, DOI 10.1007/s11002-006-5147-x Rucker D. D., 2012, J CONSUM RES, V39, P977 Wang GP, 2002, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V30, P217, DOI 10.1177/0092070302303003 Wang YJ, 2008, PSYCHOL MARKET, V25, P197, DOI 10.1002/mar.20206 Wertenbroch K, 2002, J MARKETING RES, V39, P228, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.39.2.228.19086 Wilcox K, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P151, DOI 10.1086/657606 Yan DF, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V39, P931, DOI 10.1086/666596 Yan DF, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P376, DOI 10.1086/659755 NR 72 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 3 U2 41 PU WILEY-BLACKWELL PI HOBOKEN PA 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA SN 0742-6046 EI 1520-6793 J9 PSYCHOL MARKET JI Psychol. Mark. PD SEP PY 2014 VL 31 IS 9 BP 774 EP 785 DI 10.1002/mar.20733 PG 12 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA AN2NL UT WOS:000340422400006 ER PT J AU Mehta, R Zhu, R Meyers-Levy, J AF Mehta, Ravi Zhu, Rui (Juliet) Meyers-Levy, Joan TI When Does a Higher Construal Level Increase or Decrease Indulgence? Resolving the Myopia versus Hyperopia Puzzle SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID SELF-CONTROL; CONSUMER-BEHAVIOR AB Existing inquiry on self-control reveals an inconsistency. The mainstream research on myopic behavior suggests that consumers' use of a high versus low construal level should lead them to exhibit less indulgence. However, more recent work on hyperopia implies the opposite. This research attempts to resolve this discrepancy. In particular, it is proposed and demonstrated that the level at which a consumer construes information (i.e., abstract vs. concrete), interacts with his or her self-focus, and both factors jointly determine a consumer's indulgence level. When the self is not salient, outcomes implied by the myopia literature ensue. But when the self is focal, the opposite outcomes anticipated by the hyperopia literature obtain. C1 [Mehta, Ravi] Univ Illinois, Champaign, IL 61820 USA. [Zhu, Rui (Juliet)] Cheung Kong Grad Sch Business, Beijing 100738, Peoples R China. [Meyers-Levy, Joan] Univ Minnesota, Carlson Sch Management, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA. RP Mehta, R (reprint author), Univ Illinois, 350 Wohlers Hall, Champaign, IL 61820 USA. EM mehtar@illinois.edu; rzhu@ckgsb.edu.cn; jmeyers@umn.edu CR Agrawal N, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P448, DOI 10.1086/597331 Bem Daryl J., 1965, J EXPT SOCIAL PSYCHO, V74, P199 Duval S., 1972, THEORY OBJECTIVE SEL Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Fujita K, 2010, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P1049, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.05.013 Fujita K, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P799, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02372.x Haws KL, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P680, DOI 10.1086/592129 HOCH SJ, 1991, J CONSUM RES, V17, P492, DOI 10.1086/208573 Keinan A, 2008, J MARKETING RES, V45, P676, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.45.6.676 Kivetz R, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V29, P199, DOI 10.1086/341571 Kivetz R, 2006, J CONSUM RES, V33, P273, DOI 10.1086/506308 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Liberman N., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, P353 Liberman N, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P113, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7 Malkoc SA, 2010, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V113, P112, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.07.003 MARKUS H, 1987, ANNU REV PSYCHOL, V38, P299, DOI 10.1146/annurev.psych.38.1.299 MARKUS H, 1977, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V35, P63, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.35.2.63 Mukhopadhyay A, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V31, P779, DOI 10.1086/426611 Patrick VM, 2009, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V19, P537, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2009.05.006 Preacher KJ, 2007, MULTIVAR BEHAV RES, V42, P185, DOI 10.1080/00273170701341316 Rick SI, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P767, DOI 10.1086/523285 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P493, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.79.4.493 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Verplanken B, 2002, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V82, P434, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.82.3.434 Vohs KD, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V33, P537, DOI 10.1086/510228 Wilcox K, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P151, DOI 10.1086/657606 Winer B. J., 1971, STAT PRINCIPLES EXPT NR 30 TC 1 Z9 1 U1 2 U2 26 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 EI 1537-5277 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD AUG PY 2014 VL 41 IS 2 BP 475 EP 488 DI 10.1086/676968 PG 14 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA AL5KB UT WOS:000339171400014 ER PT J AU Silvera, DH Pfeiffer, BE Kardes, FR Arsena, A Goss, RJ AF Silvera, David H. Pfeiffer, Bruce E. Kardes, Frank R. Arsena, Ashley Goss, R. Justin TI Using imagine instructions to induce consumers to generate ad-supporting content SO JOURNAL OF BUSINESS RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE Implicit arguments; Explicit arguments; Need for cognitive closure; Construal level; Regulatory fit; Imagine instructions; Imagine strategy ID CONSTRUAL LEVEL; REGULATORY FIT; CONCLUSION; ATTITUDES; DECISION; BEHAVIOR; MEMORY AB Some recent advertisements attempt to increase persuasiveness by directly asking consumers to imagine arguments supporting the ad's message. This research provides a critical test of the effectiveness of this imagine strategy, while also identifying specific situations in which this technique can be most effective in increasing persuasion. Three studies reveal that imagine instructions are most effective when there is a lack of fit between consumers' regulatory orientation and the ad content, when consumers are dispositionally oriented toward a high need for cognitive closure, and when consumers are at a high construal level. These results are consistent with the possibility that the imagine strategy is most effective when used to enhance the motivation level of otherwise unmotivated consumers. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. C1 [Silvera, David H.; Arsena, Ashley] Univ Texas San Antonio, Coll Business, Dept Mkt, San Antonio, TX 78249 USA. [Pfeiffer, Bruce E.] Univ New Hampshire, Dept Mkt, Paul Coll Business & Econ, Durham, NH 03824 USA. [Kardes, Frank R.] Univ Cincinnati, Dept Mkt, Carl H Lindner Coll Business, Cincinnati, OH 45221 USA. [Goss, R. Justin] Colorado State Univ Pueblo, Hasan Sch Business, Pueblo, CO 81001 USA. RP Silvera, DH (reprint author), Univ Texas San Antonio, Coll Business, Dept Mkt, One UTSA Circle, San Antonio, TX 78249 USA. EM david.silvera@utsa.edu; bruce.pfeiffer@unh.edu; kardesfr@ucmail.uc.edu; ashley.arsena@gmail.com; justin.goss@colostate-pueblo.edu CR Farrelly MC, 2005, AM J PUBLIC HEALTH, V95, P425, DOI 10.2105/AJPH.2004.049692 FAZIO RH, 1990, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V23, P75, DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60318-4 Fitzsimons GJ, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P5, DOI 10.1086/589561 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Henderson MD, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V91, P712, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.712 Higgins ET, 2000, AM PSYCHOL, V55, P1217, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.55.11.1217 HIGGINS ET, 1994, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V66, P276, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.66.2.276 Higgins ET, 1997, AM PSYCHOL, V52, P1280, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280 Hong JW, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P682, DOI 10.1086/521902 Hong JW, 2010, J MARKETING RES, V47, P301 HOVLAND CI, 1952, J ABNORM SOC PSYCH, V47, P581, DOI 10.1037/h0059833 Kardes FR, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P368, DOI 10.1086/422115 Keppel G., 1991, DESIGN ANAL RES HDB Kruglanski AW, 1996, PSYCHOL REV, V103, P263, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.103.2.263 Lee AY, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P205, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.205 LINDER DE, 1970, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V6, P432, DOI 10.1016/0022-1031(70)90054-5 McCrea SM, 2008, PSYCHOL SCI, V19, P1308, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02240.x PETTY RE, 1983, J CONSUM RES, V10, P135, DOI 10.1086/208954 Pfeiffer B. E., 2013, WORKING PAPER RAAIJMAKERS JGW, 1981, PSYCHOL REV, V88, P93, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.88.2.93 Rosenthal R., 1985, CONTENT ANAL FORCED SAWYER AG, 1991, J MARKETING RES, V28, P467, DOI 10.2307/3172786 Schwarz N, 2004, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V14, P332, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1404_2 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X WALSTER E, 1962, J ABNORM PSYCHOL, V65, P395, DOI 10.1037/h0041172 Wanke M, 1997, J CONSUM RES, V24, P170, DOI 10.1086/209502 WEBSTER DM, 1994, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V67, P1049, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.67.6.1049 White K, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P472 Young CJ, 2004, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V30, P909, DOI 10.1037/0278-7393.30.4.909 NR 29 TC 0 Z9 0 U1 2 U2 13 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 0148-2963 EI 1873-7978 J9 J BUS RES JI J. Bus. Res. PD JUL PY 2014 VL 67 IS 7 BP 1567 EP 1572 DI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.01.017 PG 6 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA AI2NW UT WOS:000336696200032 ER PT J AU Pizzi, G Scarpi, D Marzocchi, GL AF Pizzi, Gabriele Scarpi, Daniele Marzocchi, Gian Luca TI Showing a tree to sell the forest: The impact of attribute- and alternative-based information presentation on consumers' choices SO JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article DE Information presentation; Construal-level; Consumer choice; Attribute-based information; Alternative-based information ID DECISION-MAKING AB Consumers can be provided with information in either an attribute- or an alternative-based way. We consider the literature on information presentation through the theoretical lenses of the Construal Level Theory. We propose and find that providing product-related information in an attribute- rather than an alternative-based way shifts choices. The attribute-based pattern leads to high construal levels and choices driven by desirability-related, high-level attributes (e.g., design). But when the same information is acquired following the alternative-based pattern, it leads to low construal levels and choices driven by feasibility-related, low-level attributes (e.g., price). As a consequence, choice shares for products whose strength lies in convenience and other feasibility-related features are boosted by the presentation of alternative-based information. Conversely, choice shares for products whose strength lies in design and other desirability-related features are increased by the presentation of attribute-based information. We further find that consumers acquiring information in an alternative-based way envision consumption much closer in the future than those acquiring information in an attribute-based way. Finally, we find that attribute-based information leads to more clicking. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. C1 [Pizzi, Gabriele; Scarpi, Daniele; Marzocchi, Gian Luca] Univ Bologna, Dept Management, I-40126 Bologna, Italy. RP Pizzi, G (reprint author), Via Capo di Lucca 34, I-40126 Bologna, Italy. EM gabriele.pizzi@unibo.it; daniele.scarpi@unibo.it; gianluca.marzocchi@unibo.it OI Pizzi, Gabriele/0000-0002-7531-9003 CR BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 Bettman JR, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V25, P187, DOI 10.1086/209535 Bettman J. R., 1979, INFORM PROCESSING TH Bickart B., 2001, J INTERACT MARK, V15, P31, DOI DOI 10.1002/DIR.1014 Borovoi L, 2010, JUDGM DECIS MAK, V5, P102 Chernev A, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V85, P151, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.85.1.151 Dhar R, 2000, J MARKETING RES, V37, P60, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.37.1.60.18718 FISHBEIN M, 1963, HUM RELAT, V16, P233, DOI 10.1177/001872676301600302 Hsee C., 1999, PSYCHOL BULL, V125, P06 Iacobucci D, 2012, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V22, P582, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2012.03.006 Jepsen AL, 2007, J INTERACT MARK, V21, P21, DOI 10.1002/dir.20083 Tybout A. M., 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P897 Kim YJ, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P634, DOI 10.1086/599765 Leiser D, 2008, J ECON PSYCHOL, V29, P762, DOI 10.1016/j.joep.2008.08.002 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Lynch JG, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P107, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70016-5 Malkoc SA, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P411 Moon B. J., 2004, International Journal of Internet Marketing and Advertising, V1, P104, DOI 10.1504/IJIMA.2004.003692 PAYNE JW, 1988, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V14, P534, DOI 10.1037//0278-7393.14.3.534 RUSSO JE, 1983, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V9, P676 Sagristano MD, 2002, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V131, P364, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.131.3.364 Simon HA, 1955, Q J ECON, V69, P99, DOI 10.2307/1884852 Soman D, 2004, J ECON PSYCHOL, V25, P153, DOI 10.1016/j.joep.2003.09.002 Soman D., 2004, HDB JUDGMENT DECISIO, P379 Strahilevitz M, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V24, P434, DOI 10.1086/209519 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 TVERSKY A, 1969, PSYCHOL REV, V76, P31, DOI 10.1037/h0026750 TVERSKY A, 1972, PSYCHOL REV, V79, P281, DOI 10.1037/h0032955 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 NR 31 TC 4 Z9 5 U1 3 U2 10 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV PI AMSTERDAM PA PO BOX 211, 1000 AE AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS SN 0167-4870 EI 1872-7719 J9 J ECON PSYCHOL JI J. Econ. Psychol. PD JUN PY 2014 VL 42 BP 41 EP 51 DI 10.1016/j.joep.2013.12.001 PG 11 WC Economics; Psychology, Multidisciplinary SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA AJ7ER UT WOS:000337860500004 ER PT J AU Lee, KK Zhao, M AF Lee, Kelly Kiyeon Zhao, Min TI The Effect of Price on Preference Consistency Over Time SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID SELF-CONTROL; MONEY; BEHAVIOR; INCONSISTENCY; INTENTIONS; ATTRIBUTES; CONSUMERS; DISTANCE; ACCOUNT; SEARCH AB Construal level theory indicates that consumers tend to prefer products high in desirability (greater functionality) for distant-future decisions but switch their preferences toward products high in feasibility (greater usage convenience) for near-future decisions. The current research demonstrates that price information, traditionally considered as a feasibility cue, can increase consumers' near-future preference toward products with greater functionality despite their low convenience, leading to preference consistency over time. As the underlying mechanism, price information increases the functionality importance for near-future decisions due to consumers' enhanced value-seeking tendency when seeing price and their lay belief that greater functionality represents higher value. Further, when consumers are led to believe that greater convenience represents higher value, price and the value-seeking tendency result in a greater preference toward easy-to-use products for the distant future and lead to preference consistency across time as well. Theoretical implications are discussed. C1 [Lee, Kelly Kiyeon] Washington Univ, Olin Business Sch, St Louis, MO 63130 USA. [Zhao, Min] Univ Toronto, Rotman Sch Management, Toronto, ON M5S 3E6, Canada. RP Lee, KK (reprint author), Washington Univ, Olin Business Sch, One Brookings Dr,Campus Box 1133, St Louis, MO 63130 USA. EM kelly.lee@wustl.edu; min.zhao@rotman.utoronto.ca CR Alexander DL, 2008, J MARKETING RES, V45, P307, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.45.3.307 Brown CL, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V26, P372, DOI 10.1086/209569 CARLSON JA, 1983, J CONSUM RES, V9, P357, DOI 10.1086/208930 CARPENTER GS, 1994, J MARKETING RES, V31, P339, DOI 10.2307/3152221 Fiske A. P., 1991, STRUCTURES SOCIAL LI Gollwitzer PM, 1999, AM PSYCHOL, V54, P493, DOI 10.1037//0003-066X.54.7.493 HOCH SJ, 1991, J CONSUM RES, V17, P492, DOI 10.1086/208573 Hsee CK, 1999, PSYCHON B REV, V6, P555, DOI 10.3758/BF03212963 Karmarkar Uma, 2010, THESIS STANFORD U ST, P94305 Kim K, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P706, DOI 10.1086/592131 Lee Leonard, 2013, WORKING PAPER, P10027 Lee L, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P173, DOI 10.1086/597160 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Loewenstein G, 1996, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V65, P272, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1996.0028 MARMORSTEIN H, 1992, J CONSUM RES, V19, P52, DOI 10.1086/209285 MISCHEL W, 1989, SCIENCE, V244, P933, DOI 10.1126/science.2658056 Plassmann H, 2008, P NATL ACAD SCI USA, V105, P1050, DOI 10.1073/pnas.0706929105 Preacher KJ, 2008, BEHAV RES METHODS, V40, P879, DOI 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 RACHLIN H, 1995, BEHAV BRAIN SCI, V18, P109 Soman D, 2004, J ECON PSYCHOL, V25, P153, DOI 10.1016/j.joep.2003.09.002 Tanner RJ, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P810, DOI 10.1086/593690 THALER R, 1981, ECON LETT, V8, P201, DOI 10.1016/0165-1765(81)90067-7 Thaler R., 1985, MARKET SCI, V4, P199, DOI DOI 10.1287/MKSC.4.3.199 Thompson DV, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P555 Thompson DV, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P431, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.2005.42.4.431 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 TVERSKY A, 1974, SCIENCE, V185, P1124, DOI 10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 TVERSKY A, 1973, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V5, P207, DOI 10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9 Vohs KD, 2006, SCIENCE, V314, P1154, DOI 10.1126/science.1132491 Wathieu L, 2007, MARKET SCI, V26, P118, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1060.0222 Yang Q, 2013, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V104, P473, DOI 10.1037/a0030596 Yeung CWM, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P315, DOI 10.1086/519500 Zauberman G, 2005, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V134, P23, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.134.1.23 Zhao M, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P379, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.379 Zhao M, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P486 Zhao XS, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P197, DOI 10.1086/651257 Zhou XY, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P700, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02353.x NR 37 TC 2 Z9 2 U1 6 U2 33 PU OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC PI CARY PA JOURNALS DEPT, 2001 EVANS RD, CARY, NC 27513 USA SN 0093-5301 EI 1537-5277 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD JUN PY 2014 VL 41 IS 1 BP 109 EP 118 DI 10.1086/675219 PG 10 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA AI3XI UT WOS:000336798600008 ER PT J AU Lekakos, G Vlachos, P Koritos, C AF Lekakos, George Vlachos, Pavlos Koritos, Christos TI Green is good but is usability better? Consumer reactions to environmental initiatives in e-banking services SO ETHICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY LA English DT Article DE Ethical consumerism; Corporate social responsibility; Green websites; Attitudes; Sustainability ID CORPORATE SOCIAL-RESPONSIBILITY; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELS; INFORMATION-TECHNOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; CUSTOMER SATISFACTION; PERCEIVED USEFULNESS; PRODUCT FEATURES; USER ACCEPTANCE; CONSTRUAL-LEVEL AB There is an emerging consensus in the corporate social responsibility (CSR) literature suggesting that the quest for the so-called business case for CSR should be abandoned. In the same vein, several researchers have suggested that future research should start examining not whether, but rather when CSR is likely to have strengthened, weakened or even nullified effects on organizational outcomes (e.g. Margolis et al. in Does it pay to be good? A meta-analysis and redirection of research on corporate social and financial performance. Working Paper, Harvard Business School, 2007; Kiron et al. in MIT Sloan Manag Rev 53(2):69-74, 2012). Using perspectives from several theoretical frameworks (Needs Theory, Technology Acceptance Theory, and Psychological Distance Theory), we contribute to the literature by empirically examining the tension between functional and sustainability attributes in a novel context, namely that of green e-banking services. The findings indicate that the positive effect of CSR on users' attitudes towards green e-banking services is moderated by two primarily utilitarian information systems factors-namely perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness-and an important utilitarian individual difference variable-namely perceived self-efficacy with technology. Our findings are also important if interpreted within the context of the ethical decision-making literature (e.g. O'Fallon and Butterfield in J Bus Ethics 59(4):375-413, 2005), as they indicate that the linkage between moral judgment and moral outcomes is unlikely to be that straightforward. C1 [Lekakos, George] Athens Univ Econ & Business, Dept Management Sci & Technol, Athens 11362, Greece. [Vlachos, Pavlos; Koritos, Christos] Amer Coll Greece, ALBA Grad Business Sch, Athens 11528, Greece. RP Lekakos, G (reprint author), Athens Univ Econ & Business, Dept Management Sci & Technol, 28 Ydras Str, Athens 11362, Greece. EM glekakos@aueb.gr; pvlachos@alba.edu.gr; ckoritos@alba.edu.gr CR Agarwal R, 2000, MIS QUART, V24, P665, DOI 10.2307/3250951 AGB Nielsen, 2008, E METR ONL SURV Al-Saggaf Y., 2012, COMPUTER SCI ED, V22, P237 Auger P, 2003, J BUS ETHICS, V42, P281, DOI 10.1023/A:1022212816261 Auger P, 2008, INT J RES MARK, V25, P183, DOI 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2008.03.005 Auger P, 2007, J BUS ETHICS, V70, P299, DOI 10.1007/s10551-006-9112-7 BABIN BJ, 1994, J CONSUM RES, V20, P644, DOI 10.1086/209376 Bar-Anan Y, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P609, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.609 Barone MJ, 2000, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V28, P248, DOI 10.1177/0092070300282006 Belk R. W., 2005, CONSUMP MARK CULT, V8, P275, DOI DOI 10.1080/10253860500160411 Berens G, 2007, J BUS ETHICS, V74, P233, DOI 10.1007/s10551-006-9232-0 Berglind M., 2005, BUS HORIZONS, V48, P443, DOI DOI 10.1016/J.BUSH0R2005.04.008 Bhattacharya CB, 2009, J BUS ETHICS, V85, P257, DOI 10.1007/s10551-008-9730-3 Boulstridge E., 2000, J COMMUNICATION MANA, V4, P355, DOI DOI 10.1108/EB023532 Bray J, 2011, J BUS ETHICS, V98, P597, DOI 10.1007/s10551-010-0640-9 Brown SP, 2004, DECISION SCI, V35, P527, DOI 10.1111/j.0011-7315.2004.02534.x Buttner OB, 2013, PSYCHOL MARKET, V30, P779, DOI 10.1002/mar.20645 Busch T, 2011, ETHICS INF TECHNOL, V13, P339, DOI 10.1007/s10676-010-9261-3 Carrigan M, 2001, J CONSUM MARK, V18, P560, DOI 10.1108/07363760110410263 Carrington MJ, 2010, J BUS ETHICS, V97, P139, DOI 10.1007/s10551-010-0501-6 Cassidy S., 2002, Journal of Educational Computing Research, V26, P133, DOI 10.2190/JGJR-0KVL-HRF7-GCNV Chatzidakis A, 2007, J BUS ETHICS, V74, P89, DOI 10.1007/s10551-006-9222-2 Chau P. T. K., 1996, Journal of Management Information Systems, V13, P185 Childers TL, 2001, J RETAILING, V77, P511, DOI 10.1016/S0022-4359(01)00056-2 Chin WW, 1999, STAT STRATEGIES SMAL, V1, P307 Connelly BL, 2011, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V39, P86, DOI 10.1007/s11747-010-0199-0 Cronin JJ, 2000, J RETAILING, V76, P193, DOI 10.1016/S0022-4359(00)00028-2 DAVIS FD, 1989, MIS QUART, V13, P319, DOI 10.2307/249008 De Pelsmacker P, 2005, J CONSUM AFF, V39, P363, DOI 10.1111/j.1745-6606.2005.00019.x Devinney Timothy M., 2010, MYTH ETHICAL CONSUME Du SL, 2010, INT J MANAG REV, V12, P8, DOI 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00276.x Echambadi R., 2006, J MANAGE STUD, V43, P393 Eckhardt GM, 2010, J CONSUM BEHAV, V9, P426, DOI 10.1002/cb.332 Folkes V. S., 1999, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V8, P243, DOI DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP0803_ Follows S.B., 2000, EUR J MARKETING, V34, P723, DOI DOI 10.1108/03090560010322009 FORNELL C, 1982, J MARKETING RES, V19, P440, DOI 10.2307/3151718 FORNELL C, 1981, J MARKETING RES, V18, P39, DOI 10.2307/3151312 Greenwashing Index, 2012, HELP KEEP ADV HON Groza MD, 2011, J BUS ETHICS, V102, P639, DOI 10.1007/s10551-011-0834-9 Handeman JM, 1999, J MARKETING, V63, P33, DOI 10.2307/1251774 Hardy SA, 2010, J ADOLESCENCE, V33, P111, DOI 10.1016/j.adolescence.2009.04.008 Herzberg F., 1966, WORK NATURE MAN HOLBROOK MB, 1982, J CONSUM RES, V9, P132, DOI 10.1086/208906 Hult GTM, 2011, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V39, P1, DOI 10.1007/s11747-010-0223-4 Karahanna E, 1999, INFORM MANAGE-AMSTER, V35, P237, DOI 10.1016/S0378-7206(98)00096-2 Karnani A, 2011, CALIF MANAGE REV, V53, P69, DOI 10.1525/cmr.2011.53.2.69 Kiron D, 2012, MIT SLOAN MANAGE REV, V53, P69 Kronrod A, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V40, P726, DOI 10.1086/671998 Laufer WS, 2003, J BUS ETHICS, V43, P253, DOI 10.1023/A:1022962719299 Trope J., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, V2, P353 Lichtenstein DR, 2004, J MARKETING, V68, P16, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.68.4.16.42726 Lii YS, 2012, J BUS ETHICS, V105, P69, DOI 10.1007/s10551-011-0948-0 Luo XM, 2006, J MARKETING, V70, P1, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.70.4.1 Luo XM, 2009, J MARKETING, V73, P198 Malar L, 2011, J MARKETING, V75, P35 Margolis J. D., 2007, WORKING PAPER Maslow AH, 1943, PSYCHOL REV, V50, P370, DOI 10.1037/h0054346 McKay RB, 2000, J BUS ETHICS, V26, P289, DOI 10.1023/A:1006345600415 Melville NP, 2010, MIS QUART, V34, P1 Mill JS, 2010, UTILITARIANISM LIBER Oberseder M, 2011, J BUS ETHICS, V104, P449, DOI 10.1007/s10551-11-0925-7 O'Fallon M.J., 2005, JOURNAL OF BUSINESS, V59, P375 Okada EM, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P43, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.42.1.43.56889 Parasuraman A, 2000, J SERV RES-US, V2, P307, DOI DOI 10.1177/109467050024001 Pikkarainen T, 2004, INTERNET RES, V14, P224, DOI [10.1108/10662240410542652, 10.1109/10662240410542652] Ping R. A, 1998, INTERACTIONS NONLINE Porter M. E., 2006, HARVARD BUS REV, V84, P5 Progressive Grocer, 2008, SPEC REP ENV SUST Rawls J, 1971, THEORY JUSTICE Reich R., 2008, GSPP08003 Reuters, 2008, CONS PUT ADS GREEN W Ringle C. M., 2011, SMARTPLS 2 0 M3 BETA Rokka J, 2008, INT J CONSUM STUD, V32, P516, DOI 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2008.00710.x Rupp DE, 2013, PERS PSYCHOL, V66, P895, DOI 10.1111/peps.12030 Schulze C., 2013, J MARKETING IN PRESS Sen S, 2001, J MARKETING RES, V38, P225, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.38.2.225.18838 Shaw D., 2006, J STRATEGIC MARKETIN, V14, P427, DOI DOI 10.1080/09652540600956426 Sheth JN, 2011, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V39, P21, DOI 10.1007/s11747-010-0216-3 Stanaland AJS, 2011, J BUS ETHICS, V102, P47, DOI 10.1007/s10551-011-0904-z STRAUB D, 1995, MANAGE SCI, V41, P1328, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.41.8.1328 SYKES GM, 1957, AM SOCIOL REV, V22, P664, DOI 10.2307/2089195 Tenbrunsel AE, 2008, ACAD MANAG ANN, V2, P545, DOI 10.1080/19416520802211677 Tenenhaus M, 2005, COMPUT STAT DATA AN, V48, P159, DOI 10.1016/j.csda.2004.03.005 Triandis HC, 1971, ATTITUDE ATTITUDE CH Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Tsikriktsis N, 2004, J SERV RES-US, V7, P42, DOI 10.1177/1094670504266132 Turk V., 2003, ENV SOCIAL IMPACTS E Umphress EE, 2011, ORGAN SCI, V22, P621, DOI 10.1287/orsc.1100.0559 Vaccaro A, 2009, ETHICS INF TECHNOL, V11, P113, DOI 10.1007/s10676-009-9190-1 Venkatesh V, 2003, MIS QUART, V27, P425 Venkatesh V, 2008, DECISION SCI, V39, P273, DOI 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x Voss KE, 2003, J MARKETING RES, V40, P310, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.40.3.310.19238 Wagner T, 2009, J MARKETING, V73, P77 Watson RT, 2010, MIS QUART, V34, P23 Watson RT, 2008, INFORM SYSTEMS World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), 1987, OUR COMMON FUTURE Werther W, 2011, STRATEGIC CORPORATE Westbrook R. A., 1985, J RETAILING, V61, P78 White Chris J., 2003, J MARKETING, V67, P63 White K, 2012, J MARKETING, V76, P103 Xiaoli N., 2007, J ADVERTISING, V36, P63 NR 101 TC 1 Z9 1 U1 3 U2 54 PU SPRINGER PI DORDRECHT PA VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS SN 1388-1957 EI 1572-8439 J9 ETHICS INF TECHNOL JI Ethics Inf. Technol. PD JUN PY 2014 VL 16 IS 2 BP 103 EP 117 DI 10.1007/s10676-014-9337-6 PG 15 WC Ethics; Information Science & Library Science; Philosophy SC Social Sciences - Other Topics; Information Science & Library Science; Philosophy GA AH8TC UT WOS:000336410100003 ER PT J AU Lee, L Tsai, CI AF Lee, Leonard Tsai, Claire I. TI How Price Promotions Influence Postpurchase Consumption Experience over Time SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID MARKETING ACTIONS; DECISION-MAKING; CONSTRUAL LEVEL; PRODUCT; CHOICE; IMPACT; SATISFACTION; INFORMATION; PSYCHOLOGY; CONSUMERS AB The current research examines how price promotions influence postpurchase hedonic consumption experience. On the one hand, getting a good deal can elevate moods and dampen the "pain of payment," thus enhancing consumption enjoyment. On the other hand, discounts also reduce sunk-cost considerations and the need to recover one's spending. As a result, price promotions can lower attention during consumption, which in turn diminishes consumption enjoyment. The authors posit that the time delay between payment and consumption plays an important role in determining the relative strength of these competing effects. Four experiments involving real spending and consumption demonstrate that when consumption occurs immediately after payment, discounts make consumption more enjoyable; however, this pattern reverses when consumption is delayed. The experiments provide support for the roles of feelings and attention, respectively, in accounting for these effects while ruling out several alternative explanations, including perceived quality, absolute paid price, and a direct sunk-cost account. C1 [Lee, Leonard] Columbia Univ, Columbia Business Sch, New York, NY 10027 USA. [Lee, Leonard] Inst Asian Consumer Insight, Singapore, Singapore. [Tsai, Claire I.] Univ Toronto, Joseph L Rotman Sch Management, Toronto, ON M5S 3E6, Canada. RP Lee, L (reprint author), Columbia Univ, Columbia Business Sch, Uris 508, New York, NY 10027 USA. EM leonardlee@columbia.edu; claire.tsai@rotman.utoronto.ca RI Lee, Leonard/B-3623-2016 CR ARKES HR, 1985, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V35, P124, DOI 10.1016/0749-5978(85)90049-4 Bar-Anan Y, 2009, EMOTION, V9, P123, DOI 10.1037/a0014607 Bonanno GA, 2002, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V83, P1150, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.83.5.1150 Holbrook Morris B., 2001, J MARKETING, V65, P81 Chandon P, 2000, J MARKETING, V64, P65, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.64.4.65.18071 Clore G. L., 1994, HDB SOCIAL COGNITION, V1, P323 Cohen JB, 2008, HDB CONSUMER PSYCHOL, P297 DAVIS S, 1992, J MARKETING RES, V29, P143, DOI 10.2307/3172499 DODSON JA, 1978, J MARKETING RES, V15, P72, DOI 10.2307/3150402 Drolet A, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P63, DOI 10.1086/383424 Epstein S, 1996, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V71, P390, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.390 Frederik S, 1999, WELL BEING FDN HEDON, P302 GARDNER MP, 1985, J CONSUM RES, V12, P281, DOI 10.1086/208516 Gilbert DT, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P617, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.3.617 Gourville J, 2002, HARVARD BUS REV, V80, P90 Gourville JT, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V25, P160, DOI 10.1086/209533 GUPTA S, 1988, J MARKETING RES, V25, P342, DOI 10.2307/3172945 Heilman CM, 2002, J MARKETING RES, V39, P242, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.39.2.242.19081 Hsee C.K., 2008, HDB CONSUMER PSYCHOL, P639 Irmak CS, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P406, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.2005.42.4.406 Jedidi K, 1999, MARKET SCI, V18, P1, DOI 10.1287/mksc.18.1.1 Kahneman D, 2006, J ECON PERSPECT, V20, P221, DOI 10.1257/089533006776526076 Kahneman D, 2004, SCIENCE, V306, P1776, DOI 10.1126/science.1103572 KALWANI MU, 1992, J MARKETING RES, V29, P90, DOI 10.2307/3172495 Kardes FR, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P368, DOI 10.1086/422115 Knutson B, 2007, NEURON, V53, P147, DOI 10.1016/j.neuron.2006.11.010 Lalwani AK, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V40, P255, DOI 10.1086/670034 Lee L, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P1054, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01829.x Lee L, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P173, DOI 10.1086/597160 LEVIN IP, 1988, J CONSUM RES, V15, P374, DOI 10.1086/209174 Liberman N, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P1201, DOI 10.1126/science.1161958 LICHTENSTEIN DR, 1990, J MARKETING, V54, P54, DOI 10.2307/1251816 Litt Ab, 2011, THESIS STANFORD U Litt A, 2012, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V22, P55, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2011.11.007 LOEWENSTEIN G, 1987, ECON J, V97, P666, DOI 10.2307/2232929 Loewenstein G, 1996, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V65, P272, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1996.0028 Loewenstein G., 2004, WORKING PAPER Mela F. Carl, 1997, J MARKETING RES, V34, P248 Metcalfe J, 1999, PSYCHOL REV, V106, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.106.1.3 Naylor RW, 2006, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V16, P295, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1603_11 Neslin S., 2002, SALES PROMOTION Nowlis SM, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P157, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.42.2.157.62287 Nowlis SM, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P502, DOI 10.1086/425085 OLIVER RL, 1983, ADV CONSUM RES, V10, P250 Ortony A., 1990, COGNITIVE STRUCTURE Papatla P, 1996, J MARKETING RES, V33, P20, DOI 10.2307/3152010 Patrick VM, 2006, J RETAILING, V82, P165, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2006.06.002 Pessoa L, 2002, COGNITIVE BRAIN RES, V15, P31, DOI 10.1016/S0926-6410(02)00214-8 Pham MT, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V25, P144, DOI 10.1086/209532 Plassmann H, 2008, P NATL ACAD SCI USA, V105, P1050, DOI 10.1073/pnas.0706929105 Pocheptsova A, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P992, DOI 10.1086/644760 Preacher KJ, 2008, BEHAV RES METHODS, V40, P879, DOI 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 Prelec D, 1998, MARKET SCI, V17, P4, DOI 10.1287/mksc.17.1.4 RAO AR, 1989, J MARKETING RES, V26, P351, DOI 10.2307/3172907 Rescorla Robert A., 1972, CLASSICAL CONDITION, P64, DOI DOI 10.1016/J.COGPSYCH.2004.11.001 RICHINS ML, 1991, J BUS RES, V23, P145, DOI 10.1016/0148-2963(91)90025-S Rottenstreich Y, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V33, P461, DOI 10.1086/510219 Schrift RY, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P308 SCHWARZ N, 1983, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V45, P513, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.45.3.513 Shen LX, 2012, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V25, P512, DOI 10.1002/bdm.746 Shiv B, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P383, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.2005.42.4.383 Shiv B, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V27, P202, DOI 10.1086/314320 Shiv B, 1999, J CONSUM RES, V26, P278, DOI 10.1086/209563 Small DA, 2007, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V102, P143, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.01.005 Smith DM, 2009, HEALTH PSYCHOL, V28, P787, DOI 10.1037/a0016624 Thaler R., 1985, MARKET SCI, V4, P199, DOI DOI 10.1287/MKSC.4.3.199 Tsai CI, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V37, P807, DOI 10.1086/655855 Wathieu L, 2007, MARKET SCI, V26, P118, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1060.0222 WEGNER DM, 1994, PSYCHOL REV, V101, P34, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.101.1.34 WESTBROOK RA, 1987, J MARKETING RES, V24, P258, DOI 10.2307/3151636 Wilson TD, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V88, P5, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.88.1.5 WILSON TD, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V56, P519, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.56.4.519 Wilson TD, 2008, PERSPECT PSYCHOL SCI, V3, P370, DOI 10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00085.x Yan DF, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P376, DOI 10.1086/659755 Zhao M, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P525, DOI 10.1086/660114 Zhao XS, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P197, DOI 10.1086/651257 NR 76 TC 5 Z9 5 U1 8 U2 77 PU OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC PI CARY PA JOURNALS DEPT, 2001 EVANS RD, CARY, NC 27513 USA SN 0093-5301 EI 1537-5277 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD FEB PY 2014 VL 40 IS 5 BP 943 EP 959 DI 10.1086/673441 PG 17 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA AB3QP UT WOS:000331705600011 ER PT J AU Lee, S Oh, H AF Lee, Seonjeong (Ally) Oh, Haemoon TI Effective Communication Strategies for Hotel Guests' Green Behavior SO CORNELL HOSPITALITY QUARTERLY LA English DT Article DE message framing; information processing; green; hotel; sustainability ID CONSTRUAL-LEVEL THEORY; REGULATORY FOCUS; PROCESSING FLUENCY; PERSONAL RELEVANCE; CONSUMER-BEHAVIOR; DECISION-MAKING; REUSE PROGRAMS; PERSUASION; IMPACT; SELF AB Green marketing in hotel rooms relies particularly on the hotel's communication to the guest, with a goal of gaining the guest's voluntary participation in sustainable programs. Developing a persuasive message, therefore, is critical to the effectiveness of the hotel's green efforts. To explore effective in-room green communication strategies of the hotel industry, we propose application of several widely adopted information processing theories. We review relevant theories, develop key propositions for the hotel industry, and offer a theoretical framework and propositions for future research. Our content analysis of the contents of thirty-six guestroom message cards finds that many hotels are using some of these information theories, but a more scientific approach is indicated. C1 [Lee, Seonjeong (Ally)] Univ Massachusetts, Dept Hospitality & Tourism Management, Amherst, MA 01003 USA. [Oh, Haemoon] Univ Massachusetts, Dept Hospitality & Tourism Management, Isenberg Sch Management, Amherst, MA 01003 USA. RP Lee, S (reprint author), Univ Massachusetts, Flint Lab 012, Amherst, MA 01003 USA. EM seonjeon@som.umass.edu; oh@isenberg.umass.edu RI Liu, Stephanie/L-2232-2016 OI Liu, Stephanie/0000-0001-6346-4249 CR Aaker JL, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P15, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.1.15 Ajzen I., 1980, UNDERSTANDING ATTITU Alsmadi S, 2007, J PROMOTION MANAGEME, V13, P339, DOI DOI 10.1080/10496490802306905 Andersen SM, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P845, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.4.845 Arnold MJ, 2009, J RETAILING, V85, P308, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2009.05.004 BANDURA A, 1977, PSYCHOL REV, V84, P191, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.84.2.191 Berelson B., 1952, CONTENT ANAL COMMUNI BLOCK LG, 1995, J MARKETING RES, V32, P192, DOI 10.2307/3152047 Bordia P, 2005, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V35, P1301, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02172.x Buller DB, 1998, HUM COMMUN RES, V24, P433, DOI 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1998.tb00424.x BURNKRANT RE, 1995, J CONSUM RES, V22, P17, DOI 10.1086/209432 BURNKRANT RE, 1989, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V15, P628, DOI 10.1177/0146167289154015 Carvalho SW, 2008, INT J RES MARK, V25, P319, DOI 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2008.06.005 Cesario J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P388, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.3.388 Cesario J., 2008, SOCIAL PERSONALITY P, V2, P444, DOI [10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00055.x, DOI 10.1111/J.1751-9004.2007.00055.X] Cesario J, 2008, PSYCHOL SCI, V19, P415, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02102.x Chang CT, 2009, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P2910 Cho H, 2008, J COMMUN, V58, P428, DOI 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00393.x Chong D, 2007, ANNU REV POLIT SCI, V10, P103, DOI 10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.072805.103054 Crowe E, 1997, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V69, P117, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1996.2675 DAVIS JJ, 1995, JOURNALISM MASS COMM, V72, P285 Dhar R, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P96, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70014-1 Dijkstra A, 2011, PSYCHOL HEALTH, V26, P1036, DOI 10.1080/08870446.2010.526715 Dillard JP, 2007, HUM COMMUN RES, V33, P467, DOI 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00308.x Ebert J., 2005, ADV CONSUM RES, V32, P182 Fiedler K, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P101, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70015-3 Fishbein M., 1975, BELIEF ATTITUDE INTE Fraj E, 2006, J CONSUM MARK, V23, P133, DOI 10.1108/07363760610663295 Freitas AL, 2002, PSYCHOL SCI, V13, P1, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00401 Gleim MR, 2013, J RETAILING, V89, P44, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2012.10.001 Goldstein NJ, 2007, CORNELL HOTEL REST A, V48, P145, DOI 10.1177/0010880407299542 Grau SL, 2007, J ADVERTISING, V36, P19, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367360402 Hanggli R, 2010, POLIT COMMUN, V27, P141, DOI 10.1080/10584600903501484 Higgins ET, 2005, CURR DIR PSYCHOL SCI, V14, P209 Higgins ET, 1997, AM PSYCHOL, V52, P1280, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280 Hong T., 2012, COMMUNICATION RES Invernizzi F, 2003, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V33, P1818, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb02082.x Kahneman D, 1996, PSYCHOL REV, V103, P582, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.103.3.582 KAHNEMAN D, 1979, ECONOMETRICA, V47, P263, DOI 10.2307/1914185 Kahneman D., 2000, CHOICE VALUES FRAMES KASSARJIAN HH, 1977, J CONSUM RES, V4, P8, DOI 10.1086/208674 Kees J, 2010, J ADVERTISING, V39, P19, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367390102 Kim YJ, 2006, J ADVERTISING, V35, P143, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367350109 Klein SB, 2012, PERS SOC PSYCHOL REV, V16, P283, DOI 10.1177/1088868311434214 Kollmuss A., 2002, ENVIRON EDUC RES, V8, P239, DOI DOI 10.1080/13504620220145401 Krippendorff K, 2012, CONTENT ANAL INTRO I Lee AY, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P205, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.205 Trope J., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, V2, P353 Lord Kenneth R., 1994, PSYCHOL MARKET, V11, P341, DOI 10.1002/mar.4220110404 Loroz PS, 2007, PSYCHOL MARKET, V24, P1001, DOI 10.1002/mar.20193 Lutchyn Y, 2011, J HEALTH COMMUN, V16, P595, DOI 10.1080/10810730.2011.551991 MAHESWARAN D, 1990, J MARKETING RES, V27, P361, DOI 10.2307/3172593 McCarthy RJ, 2011, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P1304, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.05.017 McKay-Nesbitt J, 2013, J BUS RES, V66, P2245, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.02.004 Meijers MHC, 2011, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V31, P14, DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.06.002 Meyers-Levy J, 2004, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V14, P159, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1401&2_18 Micu C. C., 2010, J MARKETING THEORY P, V18, P181 Nan XL, 2007, HUM COMMUN RES, V33, P489, DOI 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00309.x O'Keefe DJ, 2006, COMM YEARB, V30, P1, DOI 10.1207/s15567419cy3001_1 Park HS, 2007, HUM COMMUN RES, V33, P81, DOI 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00290.x Pelletier LG, 2008, CAN PSYCHOL, V49, P304, DOI 10.1037/a0013658 Pelletier LG, 2008, CAN PSYCHOL, V49, P210, DOI 10.1037/a0012755 Pervan S. J., 2008, MARKETING INTELLIGEN, V26, P634, DOI 10.1108/02634500810902875 Rabinovich A, 2009, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V29, P391, DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.09.004 Reber R, 2004, PERS SOC PSYCHOL REV, V8, P364, DOI 10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_3 Rothman AJ, 1997, PSYCHOL BULL, V121, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.121.1.3 ROTHMAN AJ, 1993, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V29, P408, DOI 10.1006/jesp.1993.1019 Rothman A., 2006, J COMMUN, V56, P5202 Rucker DD, 2008, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V18, P137, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2008.01.008 Scannell L, 2013, ENVIRON BEHAV, V45, P60, DOI 10.1177/0013916511421196 Shang JZ, 2010, J BUS RES, V63, P166, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.02.012 Smith SM, 1996, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V22, P257, DOI 10.1177/0146167296223004 TAYLOR SE, 1991, PSYCHOL BULL, V110, P67, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.110.1.67 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Tsai CI, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V37, P807, DOI 10.1086/655855 Wang A., 2011, J FINANCIAL SERVICES, V16, P50 White K, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P472 Wirtz J, 2009, J SERV RES-US, V12, P190, DOI 10.1177/1094670509335772 Yan DF, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P376, DOI 10.1086/659755 Young W, 2010, SUSTAIN DEV, V18, P20, DOI 10.1002/sd.394 Zhao GZ, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P671, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.4.671 NR 82 TC 7 Z9 7 U1 14 U2 46 PU SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC PI THOUSAND OAKS PA 2455 TELLER RD, THOUSAND OAKS, CA 91320 USA SN 1938-9655 EI 1938-9663 J9 CORNELL HOSP Q JI Cornell Hosp. Q. PD FEB PY 2014 VL 55 IS 1 BP 52 EP 63 DI 10.1177/1938965513504029 PG 12 WC Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism; Management; Sociology SC Social Sciences - Other Topics; Business & Economics; Sociology GA 291OQ UT WOS:000329838500008 ER PT J AU Wiebenga, JH Fennis, BM AF Wiebenga, Jacob H. Fennis, Bob M. TI The road traveled, the road ahead, or simply on the road? When progress framing affects motivation in goal pursuit SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article DE Goals; Motivation; Construal level; Progress framing; Distance perception; Loyalty programs ID CONSTRUAL-LEVEL THEORY; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; REGULATORY FOCUS; ACTION IDENTIFICATION; GRADIENT HYPOTHESIS; CONCRETE MINDSETS; SELF; PERCEPTION; COMMITMENT; BEHAVIOR AB The present research examined the dynamic interplay between the framing of one's progress from an initial state toward an end state (i.e., framed as the distance traveled from the initial state to the current state -'to-date' versus framed as the distance left from the current state to the end state -'to-go') and construal level in influencing motivation in goal pursuit. In three experiments we found that both state and chronic differences in experienced construal level modulate the impact of progress framing on motivation at a specific stage in goal pursuit, i.e., when consumers are halfway between the initial and end state, but is less consequential at the initial or end stages. This modulation shows that type of framing only affected motivation of people with an abstract, but not a concrete mindset. Under these conditions, progress framed in terms of to-date produced increased motivation compared to a to-go frame. Moreover, perceived goal distance was found to mediate the impact of progress framing on motivation for individuals with an abstract, but not a concrete mindset. (C) 2013 Society for Consumer Psychology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. C1 [Wiebenga, Jacob H.; Fennis, Bob M.] Univ Groningen, NL-9700 AV Groningen, Netherlands. [Fennis, Bob M.] Norwegian Business Sch BI, Oslo, Norway. RP Wiebenga, JH (reprint author), Univ Groningen, Dept Mkt, POB 800, NL-9700 AV Groningen, Netherlands. EM j.h.wiebenga@rug.nl CR Aarts H, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P23, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.1.23 Aiken L.S., 1991, MULTIPLE REGRESSION ARKES HR, 1985, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V35, P124, DOI 10.1016/0749-5978(85)90049-4 Aronson Elliot, 1997, MESSAGE SOCIAL PSYCH, P20 ATKINSON JW, 1957, PSYCHOL REV, V64, P359, DOI 10.1037/h0043445 Atkinson J. W., 1978, PERSONALITY MOTIVATI Bar-Anan Y, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P609, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.609 Bem DJ., 1972, ADV EXPT SOCIAL PSYC, V6, P1, DOI DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60024-6 Bonezzi A, 2011, PSYCHOL SCI, V22, P607, DOI 10.1177/0956797611404899 Brendl CM, 1996, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V28, P95, DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60237-3 Capizzi MT, 2005, J CONSUM MARK, V22, P72, DOI 10.1108/07363760510589235 Carver C. S., 1998, SELF REGULATION BEHA CIALDINI RB, 1995, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V69, P318, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.69.2.318 Custers R, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P129, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.2.129 Dhar R, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P96, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70014-1 Fazio R. H., 1990, REV PERSONALITY SOCI, V11, P74 Feather N.T., 1990, HDB MOTIVATION COGNI, V2, P151 Festinger L., 1957, THEORY COGNITIVE DIS Fiedler K, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P101, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70015-3 Fishbach A, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P370, DOI 10.1086/497548 Fishbach A., 2008, HDB CONSUMER PSYCHOL, P611 Fitzsimons GM, 2010, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V98, P535, DOI 10.1037/a0018581 Forster J, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P1115, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.75.5.1115 Forster J, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P631, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01586.x FREEDMAN JL, 1966, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V4, P195, DOI 10.1037/h0023552 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Freitas AL, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V80, P410, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.80.3.410 FRIEDRICH RJ, 1982, AM J POLIT SCI, V26, P797, DOI 10.2307/2110973 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Fujita K., 2008, SOCIAL PERSONALITY P, V2, P1475, DOI DOI 10.1111/J.1751-9004.2008.00118.X Garland H, 1998, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V28, P2025, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1998.tb01359.x Heyman J, 2004, PSYCHOL SCI, V15, P787, DOI 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00757.x Higgins ET, 1998, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V30, P1 Higgins ET, 2001, EUR J SOC PSYCHOL, V31, P3, DOI 10.1002/ejsp.27 Huang SC, 2012, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V103, P225, DOI [10.1037/a0028443, 10.1037/a0023443] Hull CL, 1932, PSYCHOL REV, V39, P25, DOI 10.1037/h0072640 Judd CM, 2009, DATA ANALYSIS: A MODEL COMPARISON APPROACH, 2ND EDITION, P1 Kanten AB, 2011, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P1037, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.04.005 Karevold KI, 2010, J ECON PSYCHOL, V31, P719, DOI 10.1016/j.joep.2010.05.005 Kivetz R, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P39, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.1.39 Koo M, 2008, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V94, P183, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.94.2.183 Koo M, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V39, P493, DOI 10.1086/663827 Kyung EJ, 2010, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P217, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.09.003 Lewin K., 1938, CONCEPTUAL REPRESENT Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P143, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.12.009 Liberman N, 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V97, P203, DOI 10.1037/a0015671 Locke E. A, 1990, THEORY GOAL SETTING Lonto J. R., 2004, TRADING STAMP STORY Louro MJ, 2007, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V93, P174, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.93.2.174 Maglio SJ, 2011, PSYCHON B REV, V18, P165, DOI 10.3758/s13423-010-0025-1 Muller D, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P852, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.852 NAVON D, 1977, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V9, P353, DOI 10.1016/0010-0285(77)90012-3 Norton MI, 2012, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V22, P453, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2011.08.002 Nunes JC, 2006, J CONSUM RES, V32, P504, DOI 10.1086/500480 Oppenheimer DM, 2009, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V45, P867, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.03.009 Preacher KJ, 2007, MULTIVAR BEHAV RES, V42, P185, DOI 10.1080/00273170701341316 STAW BM, 1976, ORGAN BEHAV HUM PERF, V16, P27, DOI 10.1016/0030-5073(76)90005-2 Stephan E, 2010, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V98, P268, DOI 10.1037/a0016960 Torelli CJ, 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V96, P231, DOI 10.1037/a0013836 Toure-Tillery M, 2012, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V141, P570, DOI 10.1037/a0025928 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Vroom V., 1964, WORK MOTIVATION Wakslak C, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P52, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02250.x Zhang Y, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P641, DOI 10.1086/655417 NR 69 TC 5 Z9 5 U1 4 U2 29 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 1057-7408 EI 1532-7663 J9 J CONSUM PSYCHOL JI J. Consum. Psychol. PD JAN PY 2014 VL 24 IS 1 BP 49 EP 62 DI 10.1016/j.jcps.2013.06.002 PG 14 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA 303OC UT WOS:000330682800005 ER PT J AU van Dam, YK van Trijp, HCM AF van Dam, Ynte K. van Trijp, Hans C. M. TI Relevant or determinant: Importance in certified sustainable food consumption SO FOOD QUALITY AND PREFERENCE LA English DT Article DE Relevance; Determinance; Sustainability; Construal level theory ID SOCIAL VALUE ORIENTATION; CONSTRUAL-LEVEL THEORY; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; FUTURE CONSEQUENCES; ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN; CONSCIOUS CONSUMER; VALUE ELICITATION; TIME PERSPECTIVE; SELF-CONTROL; BEHAVIOR AB Perceived relevance and determinance are two distinct constructs, underlying the overall concept of attribute importance. The present study proposes a survey based measure of attribute determinance. Based on construal level theory it is argued and empirically shown that actual choices of certified "sustainable" food products among light users of those products are better predicted from attribute determinance than from attribute relevance. In an empirical survey (N = 1543) determinance of sustainability related product attributes is measured through a set of forced choice items and contrasted to self-reported relevance of those attributes. In line with expectations, a priori determinance predicts sustainable food choice more efficiently than perceived relevance. Determinance of sustainability related product attributes can be predicted by Future Temporal Orientation, independently of relevance of these attributes. Understanding of the drivers of determinance of sustainability, rather than of self-reported relevance of sustainability may improve our understanding of sustainable food consumption. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. C1 [van Dam, Ynte K.; van Trijp, Hans C. M.] Wageningen Univ, Mkt & Consumer Behav Grp, NL-6706 KN Wageningen, Netherlands. RP van Dam, YK (reprint author), Wageningen Univ, Mkt & Consumer Behav Grp, Hollandseweg 1, NL-6706 KN Wageningen, Netherlands. EM Ynte.vandam@wur.nl FU Dutch Innovation Program Transforum FX This research was supported by grants from the Dutch Innovation Program Transforum (Veldkamp et al., 2009). CR Abalo J, 2007, J BUS RES, V60, P115, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.10.009 ADELMAN L, 1984, ORGAN BEHAV HUM PERF, V33, P243, DOI 10.1016/0030-5073(84)90023-0 Agerstrom J, 2009, SOC COGNITION, V27, P261 AKAAH IP, 1983, J MARKETING RES, V20, P187, DOI 10.2307/3151685 Ares G, 2010, FOOD QUAL PREFER, V21, P286, DOI 10.1016/j.foodqual.2009.05.006 Bar-Anan Y, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P609, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.609 Barlas S, 2003, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V91, P310, DOI 10.1016/S0749-5978(02)00515-0 BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 Bullock JG, 2010, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V98, P550, DOI 10.1037/a0018933 Cameron A., 1998, REGRESSION ANAL COUN Carlson KA, 2006, MANAGE SCI, V52, P410, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.1050.0434 Crouch GI, 2011, J TRAVEL RES, V50, P27, DOI 10.1177/0047287510362776 Dagupen MKT, 2009, ACTA HORTIC, V831, P185 de Dreu CKW, 2010, GROUP PROCESS INTERG, V13, P701, DOI 10.1177/1368430210377332 De Pelsmacker P, 2005, J CONSUM AFF, V39, P363, DOI 10.1111/j.1745-6606.2005.00019.x Dholakia UA, 2006, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V16, P163, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1602_7 Eyal T, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P781, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781 Fisher R.A, 1915, BIOMETRIKA, V10, P507, DOI 10.2307/2331838 Fisher R. A., 1921, METRON, V1, P3 Franses PH, 1996, INT J FORECASTING, V12, P283, DOI 10.1016/0169-2070(95)00629-X Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x GOLDSTEIN WM, 1992, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V51, P382, DOI 10.1016/0749-5978(92)90019-4 Henderson MD, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V91, P712, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.712 Horsky D, 2004, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V14, P132, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1401&2_15 Hussain SS, 2000, J AGR ECON, V51, P77 Joireman J, 2005, PERS INDIV DIFFER, V39, P1159, DOI 10.1016/j.paid.2005.05.002 Joireman JA, 2004, ENVIRON BEHAV, V36, P187, DOI 10.1177/0013916503251476 Joireman JA, 2001, BRIT J SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P133, DOI 10.1348/014466601164731 Kaiser FG, 2011, INT J PSYCHOL, V46, P71, DOI 10.1080/00207594.2010.516830 Kardes FR, 2006, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V16, P135, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1602_4 Kornelis M, 2008, INT J RES MARK, V25, P173, DOI 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2008.01.003 Koster EP, 2003, FOOD QUAL PREFER, V14, P359, DOI 10.1016/S0950-3293(03)00017-X Kray LJ, 2000, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V83, P82, DOI 10.1006/obhd.2000.2903 Laran J, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P967, DOI 10.1086/593293 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Liberman N, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P113, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7 Liberman N, 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V97, P203, DOI 10.1037/a0015671 Lindeman M, 2000, APPETITE, V34, P55, DOI 10.1006/appe.1999.0293 Liu W, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P640, DOI 10.1086/592126 Luce MF, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V24, P409, DOI 10.1086/209518 Milfont TL, 2006, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V26, P72, DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.03.001 Mueller S, 2010, MARKET LETT, V21, P335, DOI 10.1007/s11002-009-9098-x Myers J. H., 1977, ADV CONSUM RES, V4, P106 NEFF WS, 1967, PSYCHOL BULL, V68, P361, DOI 10.1037/h0025109 Nussbaum S, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P485, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.485 Poyhonen M, 2001, EUR J OPER RES, V129, P569, DOI 10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00467-1 Poynor C, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P772, DOI 10.1086/595581 Rabinovich A, 2009, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V29, P391, DOI 10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.09.004 REILLY BA, 1989, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V44, P123, DOI 10.1016/0749-5978(89)90038-1 [Anonymous], 1981, J CONSUM RES Roberts JA, 1997, J BUS RES, V40, P79, DOI 10.1016/S0148-2963(96)00280-9 Sanna LJ, 2010, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P1126, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.05.018 Sanna L.J., 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P1319 SCHOEMAKER PJH, 1982, MANAGE SCI, V28, P182, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.28.2.182 Schultz PW, 2001, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V21, P327 Smith R, 2009, J CONSUM MARK, V26, P28, DOI 10.1108/07363760910927028 SRIVASTAVA J, 1995, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V63, P112, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1995.1066 STEPTOE A, 1995, APPETITE, V25, P267, DOI 10.1006/appe.1995.0061 Stewart A. M., 2000, J ENVIRON SYST, V28, P293 STRATHMAN A, 1994, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V66, P742, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.66.4.742 Taylor SL, 1996, HEALTH CARE MANAGE R, V21, P33 Todorov A, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P473, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.002 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Tubillejas B, 2011, NONPROF VOLUNT SEC Q, V40, P356, DOI 10.1177/0899764009344883 Uusitalo Liisa, 1990, SCANDINAVIAN POLITIC, V13, P211, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9477.1990.tb00437.x van Dam YK, 2011, J ECON PSYCHOL, V32, P726, DOI 10.1016/j.joep.2011.06.002 Van Ittersum K, 2007, J BUS RES, V60, P1177, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.04.001 Van Dam Y. K., 1991, EMAC DUBL VANLANGE PAM, 1992, SOCIAL DILEMMAS THEO, P3 VERHALLEN TMM, 1981, J CONSUM RES, V8, P253, DOI 10.1086/208862 WEBSTER FE, 1975, J CONSUM RES, V2, P188 Yagci MI, 2009, J BUS RES, V62, P768, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.03.005 NR 74 TC 7 Z9 7 U1 3 U2 82 PU ELSEVIER SCI LTD PI OXFORD PA THE BOULEVARD, LANGFORD LANE, KIDLINGTON, OXFORD OX5 1GB, OXON, ENGLAND SN 0950-3293 J9 FOOD QUAL PREFER JI Food. Qual. Prefer. PD DEC PY 2013 VL 30 IS 2 BP 93 EP 101 DI 10.1016/j.foodqual.2013.05.001 PG 9 WC Food Science & Technology SC Food Science & Technology GA 212UP UT WOS:000324008600003 ER PT J AU Lamberton, CP Diehl, K AF Lamberton, Cait Poynor Diehl, Kristin TI Retail Choice Architecture: The Effects of Benefit- and Attribute-Based Assortment Organization on Consumer Perceptions and Choice SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID GOAL-DERIVED CATEGORIES; CONSTRUAL-LEVEL; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; PRODUCT CATEGORIZATION; TEMPORAL DISTANCE; MODERATING ROLE; VARIETY; FOCUS; SIMILARITY; QUALITY AB This article explores the effects of two distinct retail choice architectures-those that organize assortments by attributes and those that organize items by benefits. Relative to attribute-based organizations, benefit-based organizations lead to more abstract construal and heighten similarity perceptions among items in an assortment. Such changes in similarity perceptions alter consumers' strength of preference among items: when choosing from benefit-as opposed to attribute-based organizations, consumers select lower-priced items and are more similarly satisfied with their top choice as with a lower-ranked option. Further, consumers' internal shopping objectives and orientations cued by the external organization may interact in ways that heighten similarity perceptions. Results suggest that abstract construal cues, regardless of whether they arise internally or externally, may dominate concrete cues in the type of shopping context under consideration. C1 [Lamberton, Cait Poynor] Univ Pittsburgh, Katz Grad Sch Business, Pittsburgh, PA 15260 USA. [Diehl, Kristin] Univ So Calif, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA. RP Lamberton, CP (reprint author), Univ Pittsburgh, Katz Grad Sch Business, Pittsburgh, PA 15260 USA. EM clamberton@katz.pitt.edu; kdiehl@marshall.usc.edu CR BOULDING W, 1994, J MARKETING RES, V31, P159, DOI 10.2307/3152191 Broniarczyk SM, 1998, J MARKETING RES, V35, P166, DOI 10.2307/3151845 CALANTONE RJ, 1978, J MARKETING RES, V15, P395, DOI 10.2307/3150588 Carlson KA, 2013, J CONSUM RES, V39, P918, DOI 10.1086/666471 Chartrand TL, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P189, DOI 10.1086/588685 Chernev A, 2006, J CONSUM RES, V33, P50, DOI 10.1086/504135 DAY GS, 1979, J MARKETING, V43, P8, DOI 10.2307/1250266 Dhar R, 1997, J CONSUM RES, V24, P215, DOI 10.1086/209506 Diehl K, 2003, J CONSUM RES, V30, P56, DOI 10.1086/374698 Diehl Kristin, 2012, WORKING PAPER DREZE X, 1994, J RETAILING, V70, P301, DOI 10.1016/0022-4359(94)90002-7 Forster J, 2008, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V94, P579, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.94.4.579 Forster J, 2010, PSYCHOL INQ, V21, P175, DOI 10.1080/1047840X.2010.487849 Forster J, 2009, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V138, P88, DOI 10.1037/a0014484 Fox CR, 2005, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V134, P538, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.134.4.538 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Goldsmith Kelly, 2013, WORKING PAPER Goodman JK, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V39, P751, DOI 10.1086/665047 GUTMAN J, 1982, J MARKETING, V46, P60, DOI 10.2307/3203341 HALEY RI, 1968, J MARKETING, V32, P30, DOI 10.2307/1249759 Hamilton R, 2011, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V115, P13, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.11.005 Hand Leslie, 2009, RETAILERS SURVEYED R Hansen J, 2010, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V36, P1576, DOI 10.1177/0146167210386238 Hoch SJ, 1999, MARKET SCI, V18, P527, DOI 10.1287/mksc.18.4.527 Hong JW, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P456, DOI 10.1086/653492 HUFFMAN C, 1993, J CONSUM RES, V20, P190, DOI 10.1086/209343 Huffman C, 1998, J RETAILING, V74, P491, DOI 10.1016/S0022-4359(99)80105-5 Kahn BE, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V30, P519, DOI 10.1086/380286 Kaul A, 1995, MARKET SCI, V14, P151, DOI DOI 10.1287/MKSC.14.3.G151 Khan U, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P62, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.48.1.62 Kim YJ, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P634, DOI 10.1086/599765 Kotler P, 2002, PRINCIPLES MARKETING Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Lee AY, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P205, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.205 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Liberman N., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, P353 Lisjak M, 2012, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V102, P889, DOI 10.1037/a0027594 Macrae CN, 2002, PSYCHOL SCI, V13, P194, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00436 Malkoc SA, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P411 MEDIN DL, 1993, PSYCHOL REV, V100, P254, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.100.2.254 Meyvis T, 2012, J MARKETING RES, V49, P206 MITRA A, 1995, J CONSUM RES, V21, P644, DOI 10.1086/209425 Mogilner C, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P202, DOI 10.1086/588698 Morales A, 2005, J RETAILING, V81, P159, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2005.03.007 NAVON D, 1977, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V9, P353, DOI 10.1016/0010-0285(77)90012-3 Nenkov GY, 2012, MARKET LETT, V23, P615, DOI 10.1007/s11002-012-9166-5 Novemsky N, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P119, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.42.2.119.62292 PARASURAMAN A, 1985, J MARKETING, V49, P41, DOI 10.2307/1251430 Poynor C, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P159, DOI 10.1086/649906 Preacher KJ, 2008, BEHAV RES METHODS, V40, P879, DOI 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 Ratner RK, 1999, J CONSUM RES, V26, P1, DOI 10.1086/209547 RATNESHWAR S, 1991, J MARKETING RES, V28, P281, DOI 10.2307/3172864 Ratneshwar S, 1996, J CONSUM RES, V23, P240, DOI 10.1086/209480 Ratneshwar S, 2001, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V10, P147, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1003_3 Rosch E, 1978, COGNITION CATEGORIZA, P27 Spencer SJ, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P845, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.845 SUJAN M, 1987, J CONSUM RES, V14, P372, DOI 10.1086/209120 Thaler RH, 2008, NUDGE IMPROVING DECI Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 TVERSKY A, 1977, PSYCHOL REV, V84, P327, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.84.4.327 van Herpen E, 2002, MARKET SCI, V21, P331, DOI 10.1287/mksc.21.3.331.144 Van Osselaer SMJ, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V39, P260, DOI 10.1086/662643 Viswanathan M, 1999, J MARKETING RES, V36, P75, DOI 10.2307/3151916 Wakslak C, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P52, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02250.x White K, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P472 Wright S, 2012, MARKET LETT, V23, P253, DOI 10.1007/s11002-011-9151-4 Wyer RS, 2010, PSYCHOL INQ, V21, P250, DOI 10.1080/1047840X.2010.496653 Zhao M, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P486 NR 69 TC 14 Z9 15 U1 7 U2 50 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 EI 1537-5277 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD OCT PY 2013 VL 40 IS 3 BP 393 EP 411 DI 10.1086/671103 PG 19 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA AB3PB UT WOS:000331701600001 ER PT J AU Lambrecht, A Tucker, C AF Lambrecht, Anja Tucker, Catherine TI When Does Retargeting Work? Information Specificity in Online Advertising SO JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE retargeting; online advertising; field experiments; online decision process; construal level theory ID MODEL; RECOMMENDATION; ENVIRONMENTS; BEHAVIOR; SEARCH AB Firms can now offer personalized recommendations to consumers who return to their website, using consumers' previous browsing history on that website. In addition, online advertising has greatly improved in its use of external browsing data to target Internet ads. Dynamic retargeting integrates these two advances by using information from the browsing history on the firm's website to improve advertising content on external websites. When surfing the Internet, consumers who previously viewed products on the firm's website are shown ads with images of those same products. To examine whether this is more effective than simply showing generic brand ads, the authors use data from a field experiment conducted by an online travel firm. Surprisingly, the data suggest that dynamic retargeted ads are, on average, less effective than their generic equivalents. However, when consumers exhibit browsing behavior that suggests their product preferences have evolved (e.g., visiting review websites), dynamic retargeted ads no longer underperform. One explanation for this finding is that when consumers begin a product search, their preferences are initially construed at a high level. As a result, they respond best to higher-level product information. Only when they have narrowly construed preferences do they respond positively to ads that display detailed product information. This finding suggests that in evaluating how best to reach consumers through ads, managers should be aware of the multistage nature of consumers' decision processes and vary advertising content along these stages. C1 [Lambrecht, Anja] London Business Sch, London, England. [Tucker, Catherine] MIT, MIT Sloan Sch Management, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA. [Tucker, Catherine] Natl Bur Econ Res, Cambridge, MA 02138 USA. RP Lambrecht, A (reprint author), London Business Sch, London, England. EM alambrecht@london.edu; cetucker@mit.edu RI Lambrecht, Anja/C-6300-2014; Tucker, Catherine/H-4878-2011 OI Lambrecht, Anja/0000-0001-6766-1602; Tucker, Catherine/0000-0002-1847-4832 CR Agarwal N, 2009, AM ECON REV, V99, P441, DOI 10.1257/aer.99.2.441 Ai CR, 2003, ECON LETT, V80, P123, DOI 10.1016/S0165-1765(03)00032-6 Allison PD, 1982, SOCIOL METHODOL, V13, P61, DOI DOI 10.2307/270718 Ansari A, 2003, J MARKETING RES, V40, P131, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.40.2.131.19224 Ascarza Eva, 2013, J MARKETING RES, V49, P882 Bakshy E., 2009, P 10 ACM C EL COMM, P325, DOI 10.1145/1566374.1566421 BEALES HOWARD, 2011, VALUE BEHAV TARGETIN Buhrmester M, 2011, PERSPECT PSYCHOL SCI, V6, P3, DOI 10.1177/1745691610393980 Chen Y, 2009, KDD-09: 15TH ACM SIGKDD CONFERENCE ON KNOWLEDGE DISCOVERY AND DATA MINING, P209 Cialdini RB, 2004, ANNU REV PSYCHOL, V55, P591, DOI 10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142015 COX DR, 1972, J R STAT SOC B, V34, P187 Dalessandro B., 2012, CBA1202 NYU Dias MB, 2008, RECSYS'08: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2008 ACM CONFERENCE ON RECOMMENDER SYSTEMS, P291 Edwards SM, 2002, J ADVERTISING, V31, P83 Gatarski Richard, 2002, J INTERACT MARK, V16, P2, DOI 10.1002/dir.10002 Goldfarb A, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P207 Goldfarb A, 2011, MARKET SCI, V30, P389, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1100.0583 Goldfarb A, 2011, MANAGE SCI, V57, P57, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.1100.1246 Hargrave Sean, 2011, MARKETING WEEK Haubl G, 2000, MARKET SCI, V19, P4, DOI 10.1287/mksc.19.1.4.15178 Hauser JR, 2009, MARKET SCI, V28, P202, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1080.0459 HAUSER JR, 1990, J CONSUM RES, V16, P393, DOI 10.1086/209225 Hoeffler S., 1999, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V8, P113, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp0802_01 Hoffman DL, 1996, J MARKETING, V60, P50, DOI 10.2307/1251841 Hunter A., 2010, MONEY MOVES DIGITAL JAIN DC, 1991, MARKET SCI, V10, P1, DOI 10.1287/mksc.10.1.1 Joshi Amruta, 2011, P 5 INT WORKSH DAT M, P53 Komiak SYX, 2006, MIS QUART, V30, P941 Lambrecht A, 2007, MARKET SCI, V26, P698, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1070.0283 Lambrecht A, 2011, MARKET SCI, V30, P355, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1100.0613 LAVIDGE RJ, 1961, J MARKETING, V25, P59, DOI 10.2307/1248516 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Rao Justin M., 2011, P INT C WORLD WID WE, P156 Linden G, 2003, IEEE INTERNET COMPUT, V7, P76, DOI 10.1109/MIC.2003.1167344 Malthouse E. C., 2006, J DATABASE MARKETING, V14, P4 Manchanda P, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P98, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.1.98 PETTY RE, 1983, J CONSUM RES, V10, P135, DOI 10.1086/208954 Macmillan D., 2013, WALL STREET J Rutz OJ, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P87, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.48.1.87 Seetharaman PB, 2003, J BUS ECON STAT, V21, P368, DOI 10.1198/073500103288619025 Simonson I, 2005, J MARKETING, V69, P32, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.69.1.32.55512 Tellis GJ, 2006, MARKET SCI, V25, P217, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1050.0178 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Tucker Catherine, 2011, 485110 MIT Weiman Lori, 2010, IS LAST CLICK WINS M Wu JN, 2003, MARKET SCI, V22, P411, DOI 10.1287/mksc.22.3.411.17738 Xu H., 2007, P 28 ANN INT C INF S Jun Yan, 2009, P 18 INT C WORLD WID [Anonymous], 2010, TARG RET INT CRIT NR 49 TC 53 Z9 54 U1 10 U2 131 PU AMER MARKETING ASSOC PI CHICAGO PA 311S WACKER DR, STE 5800, CHICAGO, IL 60606-6629 USA SN 0022-2437 J9 J MARKETING RES JI J. Mark. Res. PD OCT PY 2013 VL 50 IS 5 BP 561 EP 576 DI 10.1509/jmr.11.0503 PG 16 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 225PU UT WOS:000324975600001 ER PT J AU Irmak, C Wakslak, CJ Trope, Y AF Irmak, Caglar Wakslak, Cheryl J. Trope, Yaacov TI Selling the Forest, Buying the Trees: The Effect of Construal Level on Seller-Buyer Price Discrepancy SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; CONSUMER CHOICE; REPRESENTATION; WILLINGNESS; PERCEPTION; PREFERENCE; DECISIONS; ENDOWMENT; ACCEPT; PAY AB Four studies demonstrate that selling and buying prices are differentially influenced by the value of products' low- and high-level construal features. The study shows that sellers construe products at a higher level than do buyers and owners. Based on this, this study predicts and demonstrates that selling prices exceed buying prices when (1) the object's primary aspects are superior and the object's secondary aspects are inferior but not vice versa, (2) individuals focus on a product's desirability-related aspects rather than the same product's feasibility-related aspects, (3) individuals are in a "why" mind-set but not when they are in a "how" mind-set, and (4) the product's desirability aspects are superior and its feasibility aspects inferior but not vice versa. Further, sellers' and buyers' differential construal mediates the difference between seller and buyer prices, which emerges when a product's value derives from high-level features but not from low-level features. C1 [Irmak, Caglar] Univ S Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208 USA. [Wakslak, Cheryl J.] Univ So Calif, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA. [Trope, Yaacov] NYU, New York, NY 10012 USA. RP Irmak, C (reprint author), Univ S Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208 USA. EM caglar.irmak@moore.sc.edu; wakslak@marshall.usc.edu; yaacov.trope@nyu.edu CR ANDERSON NH, 1965, J EXP PSYCHOL, V70, P394, DOI 10.1037/h0022280 Ariely D, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P134, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.42.2.134.62283 Ariely D, 2003, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V13, P113, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP13-1&2_10 BarHillel M, 1996, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V70, P17 Baskin Ernest, 2012, WORKING PAPER BEGGAN JK, 1992, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V62, P229, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.62.2.229 BOYCE RR, 1992, AM ECON REV, V82, P1366 Carmon Z, 2003, J CONSUM RES, V30, P15, DOI 10.1086/374701 Carmon Z, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V27, P360, DOI 10.1086/317590 Chatterjee Promothesh, J CONSUMER IN PRESS COASE RH, 1960, J LAW ECON, V3, P1, DOI 10.1086/466560 Dhar R, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P96, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70014-1 Eagly A. H., 1993, PSYCHOL ATTITUDES Eyal T., 2010, HERZL S PERS SOC PSY Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Gail Tom, 2004, J PSYCHOL INTERDISCI, V138, P160 Hamilton RW, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P546, DOI 10.1086/520073 HANEMANN WM, 1991, AM ECON REV, V81, P635 Hayes A. F., 2012, PROCESS VERSATILE CO IRWIN JR, 1994, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V60, P431, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1994.1093 Johnson EJ, 2007, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V33, P461, DOI 10.1037/0278-7393.33.3.461 Kahneman D., 1990, J POLITICAL EC, V98, P1352 Kivetz Y, 2007, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V102, P193, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.07.002 Lerner JS, 2004, PSYCHOL SCI, V15, P337, DOI 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00679.x Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P143, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.12.009 Liersch Michael J., 2011, WORKING PAPER Liviatan I, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1256, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.007 LOEWENSTEIN G, 1994, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V7, P157, DOI 10.1002/bdm.3960070302 Monga A, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V39, P185, DOI 10.1086/662039 Morewedge CK, 2009, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V45, P947, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.05.014 Nayakankuppam D, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P390, DOI 10.1086/497550 Novemsky N, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P119, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.42.2.119.62292 ROWE RD, 1980, J ENVIRON ECON MANAG, V7, P1, DOI 10.1016/0095-0696(80)90018-2 Sagristano MD, 2002, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V131, P364, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.131.3.364 SHOGREN JF, 1994, AM ECON REV, V84, P255 THALER R, 1980, J ECON BEHAV ORGAN, V1, P39, DOI 10.1016/0167-2681(80)90051-7 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Wakslak CJ, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P641, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.641 WILLIG RD, 1976, AM ECON REV, V66, P589 YADAV MS, 1994, J CONSUM RES, V21, P342, DOI 10.1086/209402 Yan DF, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P376, DOI 10.1086/659755 NR 47 TC 7 Z9 7 U1 5 U2 40 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 EI 1537-5277 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD AUG PY 2013 VL 40 IS 2 BP 284 EP 297 DI 10.1086/670020 PG 14 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 181WW UT WOS:000321701800006 ER PT J AU Cho, EK Khan, U Dhar, R AF Cho, Eunice Kim Khan, Uzma Dhar, Ravi TI Comparing Apples to Apples or Apples to Oranges: The Role of Mental Representation in Choice Difficulty SO JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE choice difficulty; mental representation; choice satisfaction; mindsets; construal; choice comparability ID NONCOMPARABLE ALTERNATIVES; ATTRIBUTE ALIGNABILITY; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; ACTION IDENTIFICATION; CONSUMER CHOICE; RESPONSE-TIME; DECISION; SELF; SATISFACTION; PREFERENCES AB Contrary to the general view that decision difficulty is a stable characteristic of specific choice sets, the authors propose that decision difficulty depends on how the choice set is mentally represented. Comparing the difficulty associated with comparable and noncomparable choice sets, the authors find that changes in mental representation can make the same choice feel more or less difficult. They propose that the representation level influences the type of decision criterion that becomes readily available; whether this available criterion is appropriate for comparing the options in turn affects choice difficulty. Four studies demonstrate the proposed effect of representation level on the difficulty of comparable and noncomparable choices and its downstream implications for decision satisfaction. C1 [Cho, Eunice Kim] Penn State Univ, Smeal Coll Business, University Pk, PA 16802 USA. [Khan, Uzma] Stanford Univ, Grad Sch Business, Stanford, CA 94305 USA. [Dhar, Ravi] Yale Univ, Sch Management, New Haven, CT 06520 USA. RP Cho, EK (reprint author), Penn State Univ, Smeal Coll Business, University Pk, PA 16802 USA. EM eyk2@psu.edu; uzmakhan@stanford.edu; ravi.dhar@yale.edu CR Baskin Ernest, 2012, WORKING PAPER BETTMAN JR, 1990, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V45, P111, DOI 10.1016/0749-5978(90)90007-V BETTMAN JR, 1987, J CONSUM RES, V14, P141, DOI 10.1086/209102 Dahl DW, 2004, J PROD INNOVAT MANAG, V21, P259, DOI 10.1111/j.0737-6782.2004.00077.x Dhar R, 1997, J CONSUM RES, V24, P215, DOI 10.1086/209506 Dhar R, 2004, J MARKETING RES, V41, P423, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.41.4.423.47016 Dhar R, 2003, J MARKETING RES, V40, P146, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.40.2.146.19229 DHAR R, 1992, J MARKETING RES, V29, P430, DOI 10.2307/3172709 Dhar R., 1997, MARKET LETT, V8, P119, DOI 10.1023/A:1007997613607 Eyal T, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P781, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781 Eyal T, 2009, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V45, P35, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.07.023 Fitzsimons GJ, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V27, P249, DOI 10.1086/314323 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Goodman JK, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V39, P751, DOI 10.1086/665047 Hamilton R, 2011, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V115, P13, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.11.005 Iyengar SS, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P995, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.995 JOHNSON MD, 1984, J CONSUM RES, V11, P741, DOI 10.1086/209010 Khan U, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P62, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.48.1.62 Liberman N, 2006, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V42, P290, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.04.007 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Liberman N, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P1201, DOI 10.1126/science.1161958 Luce MF, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V24, P409, DOI 10.1086/209518 Luce Mary Frances, 2000, MARKET LETT, V11, P103, DOI 10.1023/A:1008159022055 Malkoc SA, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P411 MARKMAN AB, 1995, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V63, P117, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1995.1067 Nowlis SM, 2010, J MARKETING RES, V47, P725 Otter T, 2008, J MARKETING RES, V45, P593, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.45.5.593 PAYNE JW, 1976, ORGAN BEHAV HUM PERF, V16, P366, DOI 10.1016/0030-5073(76)90022-2 Preacher KJ, 2008, BEHAV RES METHODS, V40, P879, DOI 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 Sobel M.E., 1982, SOCIOL METHODOL, V13, P290, DOI DOI 10.2307/270723 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X TVERSKY A, 1992, PSYCHOL SCI, V3, P358, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00047.x TYEBJEE TT, 1979, J CONSUM RES, V6, P295, DOI 10.1086/208770 Valenzuela A, 2009, J MARKETING RES, V46, P754 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Zhang S, 1999, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V77, P192, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1999.2821 Zhang S, 2001, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V11, P13, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP1101_2 NR 40 TC 4 Z9 4 U1 4 U2 40 PU AMER MARKETING ASSOC PI CHICAGO PA 311S WACKER DR, STE 5800, CHICAGO, IL 60606-6629 USA SN 0022-2437 EI 1547-7193 J9 J MARKETING RES JI J. Mark. Res. PD AUG PY 2013 VL 50 IS 4 BP 505 EP 516 PG 12 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 184HO UT WOS:000321880900006 ER PT J AU Xu, J Jiang, ZX Dhar, R AF Xu, Jing Jiang, Zixi Dhar, Ravi TI Mental Representation and Perceived Similarity: How Abstract Mindset Aids Choice from Large Assortments SO JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE assortment; mental representation; choice difficulty; trade-offs; perceived similarity ID CONSUMER CHOICE; CONSTRUAL LEVEL; VARIETY; COST; PREFERENCE; MEDIATION; OVERLOAD; THINKING; IMPACT; MATTER AB A recent meta-analysis has found that an increase in the size of an assortment has no reliable impact on choice difficulty. Building on a fundamental property of cognition, the authors investigate the link between mental representation and the choice overload effect based on the size of the assortment. They propose that the mental representation of a large assortment changes the perceived similarity of the assortment and consequently affects the degree of choice difficulty. Specifically, when choosing from a large assortment, consumers with an abstract representation perceive the options in the assortment as being more similar and accordingly experience less choice difficulty than those with a concrete representation of the assortment. The authors discuss theoretical and practical implications of the findings. C1 [Xu, Jing] Peking Univ, Guanghua Sch Management, Beijing, Peoples R China. [Jiang, Zixi] Univ New S Wales, Australian Sch Business, Sch Mkt, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia. [Dhar, Ravi] Yale Univ, Sch Management, New Haven, CT 06520 USA. RP Xu, J (reprint author), Peking Univ, Guanghua Sch Management, Beijing, Peoples R China. EM jingx@gsm.pku.edu.cn; zixi.jiang@gmail.com; ravi.dhar@yale.edu CR Aiken L.S., 1991, MULTIPLE REGRESSION BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 Botti S, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P312, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.3.312 Broniarczyk SM, 1998, J MARKETING RES, V35, P166, DOI 10.2307/3151845 Chernev A, 2003, J CONSUM RES, V30, P170, DOI 10.1086/376808 Chernev A, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P426, DOI 10.1086/655200 Dhar R, 1997, J CONSUM RES, V24, P215, DOI 10.1086/209506 Dhar R, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P96, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70014-1 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Forster J, 2009, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V138, P88, DOI 10.1037/a0014484 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Gourville JT, 2005, MARKET SCI, V24, P382, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1040.0109 Hoch SJ, 1999, MARKET SCI, V18, P527, DOI 10.1287/mksc.18.4.527 Hong JW, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P456, DOI 10.1086/653492 Irwin JR, 2001, J MARKETING RES, V38, P100, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.38.1.100.18835 Iyengar SS, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P995, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.995 Kahn BE, 1998, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V26, P45, DOI 10.1177/0092070398261005 Khan U, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P62, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.48.1.62 Kim K, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P706, DOI 10.1086/592131 Liberman N, 2006, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V42, P290, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.04.007 Trope J., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, V2, P353 Lipowsky Zbigniew J, 1970, AM J PSYCHIAT, V127, P49 LOUVIERE JJ, 1987, J RETAILING, V63, P25 LYNCH JG, 1982, J CONSUM RES, V9, P18 Mishra A, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P73, DOI 10.1086/595716 Muller D, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P852, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.852 Novemsky N, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P347, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.347 Sagi A, 2007, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V93, P515, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.93.4.515 Scheibehenne B, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P409, DOI 10.1086/651235 Schwartz B, 2002, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V83, P1178, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.83.5.1178 Schwartz B., 2004, PARADOX CHOICE WHY M SHUGAN SM, 1980, J CONSUM RES, V7, P99, DOI 10.1086/208799 TIMMERMANS D, 1993, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V6, P95, DOI 10.1002/bdm.3960060203 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 TVERSKY A, 1981, SCIENCE, V211, P453, DOI 10.1126/science.7455683 TYEBJEE TT, 1979, J CONSUM RES, V6, P295, DOI 10.1086/208770 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Zhao XS, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P197, DOI 10.1086/651257 NR 39 TC 5 Z9 6 U1 1 U2 24 PU AMER MARKETING ASSOC PI CHICAGO PA 311S WACKER DR, STE 5800, CHICAGO, IL 60606-6629 USA SN 0022-2437 EI 1547-7193 J9 J MARKETING RES JI J. Mark. Res. PD AUG PY 2013 VL 50 IS 4 BP 548 EP 559 PG 12 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 184HO UT WOS:000321880900009 ER PT J AU Jin, LY He, YQ AF Jin, Liyin He, Yanqun TI Designing Service Guarantees With Construal Fit: Effects of Temporal Distance on Consumer Responses to Service Guarantees SO JOURNAL OF SERVICE RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE service guarantee; temporal distance; construal levels; construal fit ID PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; REGULATORY FIT; LEVEL THEORY; PREDICTION; DECISION; BEHAVIOR; FLUENCY AB This article examines the influence of temporal distance on consumer responses to different types of service guarantees. Four studies revealed that the effectiveness of service guarantees depends on whether their elements match the time frame of consumer purchase decisions. Full-satisfaction guarantees more strongly influence decisions in the distant future, while attribute-specific guarantees more strongly influence decisions in the near future. Combined guarantees are as effective as attribute-specific guarantees for temporally close consumer decisions, but less effective than full-satisfaction guarantees for temporally distant decisions. Attribute-specific guarantees that are easy to invoke are more persuasive for purchases in the near future, while full-satisfaction guarantees with high compensation are more effective for purchases in the distant future. The finding that the construal fit between guarantee elements and the purchase time frame significantly enhances a guarantee's effectiveness contributes to the service literature by identifying the time-contingent effects of service guarantees. Service firms can improve a guarantee's effectiveness by ensuring that its scope, compensation level, and invocation process match the consumer's purchase time frame. C1 [Jin, Liyin; He, Yanqun] Fudan Univ, Dept Mkt, Sch Management, Shanghai 200433, Peoples R China. RP He, YQ (reprint author), Fudan Univ, Dept Mkt, Sch Management, Shanghai 200433, Peoples R China. EM rachel.hehe@gmail.com CR Avnet T, 2003, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P525, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00027-1 BITNER MJ, 1992, J MARKETING, V56, P57, DOI 10.2307/1252042 BOULDING W, 1993, J CONSUM RES, V20, P111, DOI 10.1086/209337 Carnaghi A, 2008, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V94, P839, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.94.5.839 Dhar R, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P96, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70014-1 GILOVICH T, 1993, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V64, P552, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.64.4.552 HART CWL, 1988, HARVARD BUS REV, V66, P54 HART CWL, 1992, SLOAN MANAGE REV, V33, P19 Higgins ET, 2000, AM PSYCHOL, V55, P1217, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.55.11.1217 Higgins ET, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P1140, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.6.1140 Hogreve J, 2009, J SERV RES-US, V11, P322, DOI 10.1177/1094670508329225 Labroo AA, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P374, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.3.374 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Lee AY, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P205, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.205 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 McColugh M. A., 2004, MANAG SERV QUAL, V14, P58, DOI 10.1108/09604520410513677 McDougall G H G, 1998, J SERV MARK, V12, P278, DOI 10.1108/08876049810226955 Nenkov GY, 2012, MARKET LETT, V23, P615, DOI 10.1007/s11002-012-9166-5 Nussbaum S, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P485, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.485 Ostrom A., 2000, HDB SERVICES MARKETI, P299 PETTY R, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V24, P227 Preacher KJ, 2007, MULTIVAR BEHAV RES, V42, P185, DOI 10.1080/00273170701341316 Shugan SM, 2005, INT J RES MARK, V22, P351, DOI 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2004.11.004 SPERBER AD, 1994, J CROSS CULT PSYCHOL, V25, P501, DOI 10.1177/0022022194254006 Thomas M., 2007, WORKING PAPER Thompson DV, 2006, J CONSUM RES, V32, P530, DOI 10.1086/500483 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Wan EW, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P1027, DOI 10.1086/593949 Wirtz J, 2001, J SERV MARK, V15, P282, DOI 10.1108/EUM0000000005507 Wirtz J D K., 2000, J SERV MARK, V14, P502, DOI 10.1108/08876040010347615 Zhao M, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P486 Zhao XS, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P197, DOI 10.1086/651257 NR 35 TC 7 Z9 7 U1 0 U2 15 PU SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC PI THOUSAND OAKS PA 2455 TELLER RD, THOUSAND OAKS, CA 91320 USA SN 1094-6705 EI 1552-7379 J9 J SERV RES-US JI J. Serv. Res. PD MAY PY 2013 VL 16 IS 2 BP 202 EP 215 DI 10.1177/1094670512468330 PG 14 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 298FC UT WOS:000330308500007 ER PT J AU Ein-Gar, D Levontin, L AF Ein-Gar, Danit Levontin, Liat TI Giving from a distance: Putting the charitable organization at the center of the donation appeal SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article DE Donations; Construal level; Psychological distance; Pro-social behavior; Temporal distance; Social distance ID CONSTRUAL-LEVEL THEORY; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; TEMPORAL DISTANCE; SOCIAL DISTANCE; MORAL IDENTITY; 1000 WORDS; BEHAVIOR; RESPONSES; EMPATHY; VICTIM AB Past research has shown repeatedly that people prefer donating to a single identified human victim rather than to unidentified or abstract donation targets. In the current research we show results countering the identifiable victim effect, wherein people prefer to donate to charitable organizations rather than to an identifiable victim. In a series of five studies, we manipulate temporal and social distance, examine a variety of donation targets, and measure intention to donate time or money as well as actual donations of money. We show that people are more willing to donate to a charitable organization when they are temporally or socially distant from the population in need. Willingness to donate to a specific person in need is higher when donors are temporally or socially close to the donation target. Furthermore, we demonstrate that (a) empathy mediates donations to a single victim, yet does not mediate donations to charitable organizations; (b) that donation giving to charitable organizations is unique and is not similar to donations to a group of victims. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed. Crown Copyright (C) 2012 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of Society for Consumer Psychology. All rights reserved. C1 [Ein-Gar, Danit] Tel Aviv Univ, Recanati Grad Sch Business, IL-69978 Ramat Aviv, Israel. [Levontin, Liat] Interdisciplinary Ctr Herzliya, Dept Psychol, Herzliyya, Israel. RP Ein-Gar, D (reprint author), Tel Aviv Univ, Recanati Grad Sch Business, IL-69978 Ramat Aviv, Israel. EM danite@post.tau.ac.il CR AUNE RK, 1994, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V24, P546, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb00598.x Bar-Anan Y, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P609, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.609 Basil DZ, 2008, PSYCHOL MARKET, V25, P1, DOI 10.1002/mar.20200 Bendapudi N, 1996, J MARKETING, V60, P33, DOI 10.2307/1251840 BENSON PL, 1978, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V8, P84, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1978.tb00767.x Brunel FF, 2000, J ADVERTISING, V29, P15 Chang CT, 2009, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P2910 Choi SY, 2012, J HEALTH PSYCHOL, V17, P590, DOI 10.1177/1359105311421048 COKE JS, 1978, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V36, P752, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.36.7.752 Dhar R, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P96, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70014-1 EISENBERG N, 1987, PSYCHOL BULL, V101, P91, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.101.1.91 Ford JB, 2010, J ADVERTISING RES, V50, P450, DOI 10.2501/S0021849910091592 FREEDMAN JL, 1966, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V4, P195, DOI 10.1037/h0023552 Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x Fujita K, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P562, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2007.10.005 Holmes JG, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P144, DOI 10.1006/jesp.2001.1494 Hong JW, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P456, DOI 10.1086/653492 Howard J. D., 1990, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V20, P1185 Iredale W, 2008, EVOL PSYCHOL, V6, P386 ISEN AM, 1979, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V9, P426, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1979.tb02716.x Jenni KE, 1997, J RISK UNCERTAINTY, V14, P235, DOI 10.1023/A:1007740225484 Kim K, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P706, DOI 10.1086/592131 Kogut T, 2005, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V18, P157, DOI 10.1002/bdm.492 Kogut T, 2005, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V97, P106, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.02.003 Kogut T, 2007, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V104, P150, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.04.006 Kogut T, 2011, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P748, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.02.011 Krishna A, 2011, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V21, P338, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2011.02.001 Laufer D, 2010, EUR J MARKETING, V44, P1322, DOI 10.1108/03090561011062862 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2008, SOC COGNITION, V26, P515, DOI 10.1521/soco.2008.26.5.515 Liberman N, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P113, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7 Liu W, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P543, DOI 10.1086/588699 Liviatan I, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1256, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.007 Loewenstein G, 2007, REV GEN PSYCHOL, V11, P112, DOI 10.1037/1089-2680.11.2.112 Lynch JG, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P107, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70016-5 Malhotra D, 2010, JUDGM DECIS MAK, V5, P138 Mount J., 1988, PHILANTHROPIST, V8, P56 National Philanthropic Trust, 2007, PHIL STAT Nathan Amber, 2009, INT J NONPROFIT VOLU, V14, P317 Nelson MR, 2006, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V16, P45, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1601_7 Perrine RM, 2000, PSYCHOL REP, V86, P551, DOI 10.2466/PR0.86.2.551-559 Peter E. W., 1991, BRIT J SOC PSYCHOL, V30, P325 Reed A, 2007, J MARKETING, V71, P178, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.71.1.178 Shang J, 2008, J MARKETING RES, V45, P351, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.45.3.351 Small DA, 2003, J RISK UNCERTAINTY, V26, P5, DOI 10.1023/A:1022299422219 Small DA, 2007, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V102, P143, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.01.005 Small DA, 2009, J MARKETING RES, V46, P777 Smith RW, 2012, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V22, P558, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2012.01.001 Spreng RN, 2009, J PERS ASSESS, V91, P62, DOI 10.1080/00223890802484381 Stephan E, 2011, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P397, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.11.001 Strahilevitz Michal, 1999, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V8, P215, DOI DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP0803_02 THORNTON B, 1991, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V21, P433, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1991.tb00529.x Thomton J. D., 2006, J ADOLESCENT HEALTH, V39, P266 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Wakslak C, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P52, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02250.x White K, 2009, J MARKETING, V73, P109 Winterich KP, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P199, DOI 10.1086/596720 Zagefka H, 2013, APPL PSYCHOL-INT REV, V62, P640, DOI 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2012.00501.x Zauberman G, 2005, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V134, P23, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.134.1.23 Zhao M, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P486 NR 61 TC 11 Z9 11 U1 7 U2 95 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 1057-7408 J9 J CONSUM PSYCHOL JI J. Consum. Psychol. PD APR PY 2013 VL 23 IS 2 BP 197 EP 211 DI 10.1016/j.jcps.2012.09.002 PG 15 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA 123FN UT WOS:000317373900004 ER PT J AU Hansen, J Kutzner, F Wanke, M AF Hansen, Jochim Kutzner, Florian Waenke, Michaela TI Money and Thinking: Reminders of Money Trigger Abstract Construal and Shape Consumer Judgments SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; ACTION IDENTIFICATION; BEHAVIOR; LEVEL; TIME; CONCRETENESS; ASSIMILATION; INFORMATION; PERCEPTION; PREFERENCE AB The idea of money reminds consumers of personal strength and resources. Such cues have been found to increase the level of mental construal. Consequently, it was hypothesized and found in five experiments that reminders of money trigger abstract (vs. concrete) mental construals. Participants were primed with money or money-unrelated concepts. Money primes caused a preference for abstract over concrete action identifications (experiment 1), instigated the formation of broader categories (experiment 2), and facilitated the identification of global (vs. local) aspects of visual patterns (experiment 3). This effect extended to consumer judgments: money primes caused a focus on central (vs. peripheral) aspects of products (experiment 4) and increased the influence of quality of parent brands in evaluations of brand extensions. Priming with a little money (experiment 3) or expenditures (experiment 5) did not trigger abstract construals, indicating that the association between money and resources drives the effect. C1 [Hansen, Jochim] Salzburg Univ, A-5020 Salzburg, Austria. [Kutzner, Florian] Heidelberg Univ, Dept Psychol, D-69117 Heidelberg, Germany. [Waenke, Michaela] Univ Mannheim, D-68131 Mannheim, Germany. RP Hansen, J (reprint author), Salzburg Univ, Hellbrunnerstr 34, A-5020 Salzburg, Austria. EM jochim.hansen@sbg.ac.at; florian.kutzner@psychologie.uni-heidelberg.de; michaela.waenke@uni-mannheim.de CR Aaker JL, 2011, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V21, P126, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2011.01.004 Bless H., 2009, SOCIAL PSYCHOL CONSU, P109 Bless H, 2010, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V42, P319, DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(10)42006-7 Kofos Monthe N., 2012, J EXPT SOCIAL PSYCHO, V48, P795 Bless Herbert, 2011, 12 ANN M SOC PERS SO CHAPMAN GB, 1995, MED DECIS MAKING, V15, P373, DOI 10.1177/0272989X9501500408 Dewitte S, 2006, BEHAV BRAIN SCI, V29, P184 Eyal T, 2009, SOCIAL PSYCHOL CONSU, P61 Fazio R. H., 1990, REV PERSONALITY SOCI, V11, P74 Forster J, 2006, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V42, P133, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.02.004 Forster J, 2008, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V94, P579, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.94.4.579 Frederick S, 2002, J ECON LIT, V40, P351, DOI 10.1257/002205102320161311 Friedman RS, 2010, PSYCHOL BULL, V136, P875, DOI 10.1037/a0020495 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Fujita K, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P562, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2007.10.005 Gasper K, 2002, PSYCHOL SCI, V13, P34, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00406 Goldberg H, 1978, MONEY MADNESS PSYCHO Hamilton RW, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P546, DOI 10.1086/520073 Hansen J, 2013, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V142, P336, DOI 10.1037/a0029283 Hansen J, 2011, J ECON PSYCHOL, V32, P789, DOI 10.1016/j.joep.2011.05.005 Hansen J, 2010, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V36, P1576, DOI 10.1177/0146167210386238 Ledgerwood A, 2010, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P257, DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(10)43006-3 Lee L., 2010, PRICE MUDDLES THINKI Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Trope J., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, V2, P353 Liberman N, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P1201, DOI 10.1126/science.1161958 Liberman N, 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V97, P203, DOI 10.1037/a0015671 Liu J, 2012, J CONSUM RES, V38, P1030, DOI 10.1086/661553 Nayakankuppam Dhananjay, 2010, ADV CONSUMER RES, V38 Maier MA, 2008, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V34, P1530, DOI 10.1177/0146167208323104 Malkoc SA, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P618, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.4.618 Malkoc SA, 2010, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V113, P112, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.07.003 Matthews A., 1991, I THINK MONEY SO MUC Mogilner C, 2010, PSYCHOL SCI, V21, P1348, DOI 10.1177/0956797610380696 NAVON D, 1977, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V9, P353, DOI 10.1016/0010-0285(77)90012-3 Reutner L, 2013, SOC PSYCHOL PERS SCI, V4, P220, DOI 10.1177/1948550612450052 ROSNOW RL, 1989, PSYCHOL BULL, V105, P143, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.105.1.143 Schwarz N., 2002, WISDOM FEELINGS, P144 Schwarz N., 1992, CONSTRUCTION SOCIAL, V8, P217 Smith ER, 2007, CURR DIR PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P132, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00490.x Smith ER, 2004, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V36, P53, DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(04)36002-8 Srivastava A, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V80, P959, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.80.6.959 SRULL TK, 1979, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V37, P1660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.37.10.1660 THALER R, 1981, ECON LETT, V8, P201, DOI 10.1016/0165-1765(81)90067-7 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Vallacher R. R., 1985, THEORY ACTION IDENTI Vohs KD, 2008, CURR DIR PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P208, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00576.x Vohs KD, 2006, SCIENCE, V314, P1154, DOI 10.1126/science.1132491 Wegner D. M., 1986, HDB MOTIVATION COGNI, V1, P550 Zhou XY, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P700, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02353.x NR 55 TC 16 Z9 17 U1 4 U2 77 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD APR PY 2013 VL 39 IS 6 BP 1154 EP 1166 DI 10.1086/667691 PG 13 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 104OM UT WOS:000316003900002 ER PT J AU Yan, DF Sengupta, J AF Yan, Dengfeng Sengupta, Jaideep TI The Influence of Base Rate and Case Information on Health-Risk Perceptions: A Unified Model of Self-Positivity and Self-Negativity SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID CONSTRUAL-LEVEL; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; SOCIAL DISTANCE; JUDGMENTS; PREDICTION; AVERAGE; OPTIMISM; EVENTS; BIAS AB This research examines how consumers use base rate (e.g., disease prevalence in a population) and case information (e.g., an individual's disease symptoms) to estimate health risks. Drawing on construal level theory, we propose that consumers' reliance on base rate (case information) will be enhanced (weakened) by psychological distance. A corollary of this premise is that self-positivity (i.e., underestimating self-risk vs. other-risk) is likely when the disease base rate is high but the case information suggests low risk. In contrast, self-negativity (i.e., overestimating self-risk vs. other-risk) is likely when the disease base rate is low, but case information implies high risk. Six experiments provide convergent support for this thesis, using different operationalizations of construal level, base rate, and case risk across multiple health domains. Our findings inform the extant literature on health-risk perception and also provide theoretical implications for research on social comparisons, as well as that on the use of base rate versus case information. C1 [Yan, Dengfeng] Univ Texas San Antonio, San Antonio, TX USA. [Sengupta, Jaideep] HKUST, Kowloon, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. RP Yan, DF (reprint author), HKUST, Kowloon, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. EM dengfeng@ust.hk; mkjaisen@ust.hk OI Sengupta, Jaideep/0000-0001-6118-5895 CR Agrawal N, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P100, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.1.100 Agrawal N, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P448, DOI 10.1086/597331 AJZEN I, 1977, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V35, P303, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.35.5.303 BARHILLEL M, 1981, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V41, P671, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.41.4.671 BARHILLEL M, 1980, ACTA PSYCHOL, V44, P211, DOI 10.1016/0001-6918(80)90046-3 Chandran S, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P375, DOI 10.1086/422116 Dunning David, 2004, Psychol Sci Public Interest, V5, P69, DOI 10.1111/j.1529-1006.2004.00018.x Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Higgins E. Tory, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P314 KAHNEMAN D, 1973, PSYCHOL REV, V80, P237, DOI 10.1037/h0034747 Kardes Frank R., 1988, ADV CONSUM RES, V15, P96 Keller Punam Anand, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V29, P57, DOI 10.1086/339921 Kim HY, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P877, DOI 10.1086/593700 Kim K, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P706, DOI 10.1086/592131 Klar Y, 1997, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V73, P885, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.73.5.885 Kruger J, 1999, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V77, P221, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.77.2.221 Leahy R. L., 2006, WORRY CURE 7 STEPS S Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Lin CH, 2004, ADV CONSUM RES, V31, P523 Lin YC, 2003, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V13, P464, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP1304_13 Liviatan I, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1256, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.007 LYNCH JG, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V56, P170, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.56.2.170 LYON D, 1976, ACTA PSYCHOL, V40, P287, DOI 10.1016/0001-6918(76)90032-9 Menon G, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V28, P533, DOI 10.1086/338203 Menon G, 2009, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V108, P39, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.05.001 Moore DA, 2007, JUDGM DECIS MAK, V2, P277 Nisbett R. E., 1980, HUMAN INFERENCE STRA Nisbett R.E., 1982, JUDGMENT UNCERTAINTY, P101 PERLOFF LS, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V50, P502, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.50.3.502 Poisal JA, 2007, HEALTH AFFAIR, V26, pW242, DOI 10.1377/hlthaff.26.2.w242 Raghubir P, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V25, P52, DOI 10.1086/209526 Raghubir P, 2008, INT J RES MARK, V25, P327, DOI 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2008.07.006 TAYLOR SE, 1988, PSYCHOL BULL, V103, P193, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.103.2.193 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Wegner Daniel M., 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660 Wakslak C, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P52, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02250.x WEINSTEIN ND, 1980, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P806, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.39.5.806 Yan DF, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P376, DOI 10.1086/659755 Yan Dengfeng, 2012, THESIS HONG KONG U S NR 41 TC 10 Z9 12 U1 2 U2 50 PU OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC PI CARY PA JOURNALS DEPT, 2001 EVANS RD, CARY, NC 27513 USA SN 0093-5301 EI 1537-5277 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD FEB PY 2013 VL 39 IS 5 BP 931 EP 946 DI 10.1086/666596 PG 16 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 078LF UT WOS:000314099700003 ER PT J AU Chung, S Park, J AF Chung, Sunghun Park, Jooyoung TI EFFECTS OF SOCIAL AND TEMPORAL DISTANCE ON EVALUATION OF CORPORATE AMBIVALENT BEHAVIOR SO SOCIAL BEHAVIOR AND PERSONALITY LA English DT Article DE ambivalent behavior; morality; competence; social distance; temporal distance ID PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; COMPANY; PRODUCT AB Based on construal level theory and subadditivity effect, in this study we examined the joint impacts of multiple dimensions of psychological distance (i.e., social and temporal distance) on consumer evaluations of a company in which the behavior was ambivalent in terms of morality or competence. The findings indicated that consumers perceiving the company as both socially and temporally close evaluated it more favorably when ambivalence concerned morality. However, when 1 or more dimensions of psychological distance extended, consumers tended to evaluate the company more favorably when the source of ambivalence concerned competence. These findings suggest that consumer evaluations of a company are influenced by not only which aspect of company behavior is ambivalent, but also by whether or not it is a single dimension or multiple dimensions of psychological distance being considered. Theoretical and practical implications are also discussed. C1 [Chung, Sunghun] McGill Univ, Desautels Fac Management, Montreal, PQ H3A 1G5, Canada. [Park, Jooyoung] Univ Iowa, Henry B Tippie Coll Business, Iowa City, IA 52242 USA. RP Chung, S (reprint author), McGill Univ, Desautels Fac Management, 1001 Sherbrooke St West, Montreal, PQ H3A 1G5, Canada. EM sunghun.chung@mcgill.ca CR Brown TJ, 1997, J MARKETING, V61, P68, DOI 10.2307/1252190 Conner M., 2002, EUROPEAN REV SOCIAL, V12, P37, DOI DOI 10.1080/14792772143000012 DOWLING GR, 1993, LONG RANGE PLANN, V26, P101, DOI 10.1016/0024-6301(93)90141-2 Eyal T, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1204, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.03.012 Kim K, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P706, DOI 10.1086/592131 Klein J, 2004, INT J RES MARK, V21, P203, DOI 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2003.12.003 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V97, P203, DOI 10.1037/a0015671 Sunstein CR, 2005, BEHAV BRAIN SCI, V28, P531 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Tsai CI, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V37, P807, DOI 10.1086/655855 Wojciszke B, 1998, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V24, P1251, DOI 10.1177/01461672982412001 WOJCISZKE B, 1994, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V67, P222, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.67.2.222 Zhao XS, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P197, DOI 10.1086/651257 NR 14 TC 1 Z9 1 U1 5 U2 16 PU SOC PERSONALITY RES INC PI PALMERSTON NORTH PA P O BOX 1539, PALMERSTON NORTH 5330, NEW ZEALAND SN 0301-2212 J9 SOC BEHAV PERSONAL JI Soc. Behav. Pers. PY 2013 VL 41 IS 7 BP 1219 EP 1224 DI 10.2224/sbp.2013.41.7.1219 PG 6 WC Psychology, Social SC Psychology GA 199NC UT WOS:000323000600015 ER PT J AU Lii, YS Wu, KW Ding, MC AF Lii, Yuan-Shuh Wu, Kuang-Wen Ding, May-Ching TI Doing Good Does Good? Sustainable Marketing of CSR and Consumer Evaluations SO CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT LA English DT Article DE sustainable marketing; corporate social responsibility; sponsorship; cause-related marketing; philanthropy; psychological distance; social distance ID CORPORATE SOCIAL-RESPONSIBILITY; CONSTRUAL LEVEL THEORY; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; ADVERTISING EFFECTIVENESS; PERIPHERAL ROUTES; MODERATING ROLE; MEDIATING ROLE; BRAND EQUITY; ATTITUDE; PERFORMANCE AB This study focuses on the effect of the sustainable marketing of three types of corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives sponsorship, cause-related marketing, and philanthropy on consumer evaluations with the moderating effect of psychological distance (social distance and spatial distance). Four hundred and eighty subjects participated in a 3x2x2 between-subjects factorial design experiment. The results of the analyses were significant and in the direction hypothesized. Philanthropy was found to have a stronger effect on consumer evaluations, followed by sponsorship and cause-related marketing. However, the relationship between CSR initiatives and consumer evaluations was significantly stronger when consumers perceived the focal brand with low social distance as well as the cause with low spatial distance. The findings thus provide support for the importance of psychological distance in moderating CSR initiatives. Copyright (C) 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment. C1 [Lii, Yuan-Shuh; Ding, May-Ching] Feng Chia Univ, Dept Mkt, Taichung 407, Taiwan. [Wu, Kuang-Wen] Feng Chia Univ, Dept Int Trade, Taichung 407, Taiwan. RP Ding, MC (reprint author), Feng Chia Univ, Dept Mkt, 100 Wenhwa Rd, Taichung 407, Taiwan. EM vian0520@yahoo.com.tw CR Anderson EW, 2004, J MARKETING, V68, P172, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.68.4.172.42723 Angelidis J.P, 1993, REV BUSINESS, V15, P7 Baghi I, 2009, CORP SOC RESP ENV MA, V16, P15, DOI 10.1002/csr.174 BAGOZZI RP, 1979, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V37, P913, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.37.6.913 BAGOZZI RP, 1980, J MARKETING, V44, P65, DOI 10.2307/1249978 Bakar A., 2011, CORPORATE SOCIAL RES, V18, P50, DOI DOI 10.1002/CSR.240 Barone MJ, 2007, J RETAILING, V83, P437, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2007.03.006 Becker-Olsen KL, 2006, J SERV RES-US, V9, P73, DOI 10.1177/1094670506289532 Bettencourt LA, 1997, J RETAILING, V73, P383, DOI 10.1016/S0022-4359(97)90024-5 Bhattacharya CB, 2004, CALIF MANAGE REV, V47, P9 Blau P. M., 1964, EXCHANGE POWER SOCIA Bronn P. S., 2001, INT J ADVERT, V20, P207 BROWN SP, 1992, J CONSUM RES, V19, P34, DOI 10.1086/209284 Brown TJ, 1997, J MARKETING, V61, P68, DOI 10.2307/1252190 Carroll A.B., 1996, ETHICS STAKEHOLDER M Carroll A. B., 1979, ACAD MANAGE REV, V4, P497, DOI DOI 10.5465/AMR.1979.4498296 Carroll A.B., 1991, BUS HORIZONS, V34, P39, DOI DOI 10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G Cerin P, 2003, CORPORATE SOCIAL RES, V10, P175, DOI 10.1002/csr.44 Charter M., 2002, MARKETING SUSTAINABI Collins M., 1994, EUROPEAN MANAGEMENT, V12, P226, DOI 10.1016/0263-2373(94)90014-0 Cornwell B. T., 2005, J BUS RES, V58, P268 d'Astous A., 1995, EUR J MARKETING, V29, P6, DOI DOI 10.1108/03090569510102504 de Matos CA, 2009, J SERV MARK, V23, P462, DOI 10.1108/08876040910995257 Dow D, 2000, J INT MARKETING, V8, P51, DOI 10.1509/jimk.8.1.51.19563 Dyllick T., 2002, BUSINESS STRATEGY EN, V11, P130, DOI DOI 10.1002/BSE.323 Eagly A. H., 1993, PSYCHOL ATTITUDE Edwards S M, 2009, J INTERACTIVE ADVERT, V10, P35 ELKINGTON J, 1994, CALIF MANAGE REV, V36, P90 Enderle G, 1998, J BUS ETHICS, V17, P1129, DOI 10.1023/A:1005746212024 Erdem T, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P191, DOI 10.1086/383434 Fiedler K, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P101, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70015-3 FOMBRUN C, 1990, ACAD MANAGE J, V33, P233, DOI 10.2307/256324 Fombrun CJ., 1996, REPUTATION REALIZING FORNELL C, 1981, J MARKETING RES, V18, P39, DOI 10.2307/3151312 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x GOULDNER AW, 1960, AM SOCIOL REV, V25, P161, DOI 10.2307/2092623 Groth M, 2005, J MANAGE, V31, P7, DOI 10.1177/0149206304271375 GWINNER K., 2003, J SERV MARK, V17, P275, DOI DOI 10.1108/08876040310474828 Gwinner K, 2008, J SPORT MANAGE, V22, P410 Hair J. F., 2006, MULTIVARIATE DATA AN Harvey B, 2001, J ADVERTISING RES, V41, P59 Hess JA, 2002, J SOC PERS RELAT, V19, P663, DOI 10.1177/0265407502195007 Hoeffler S, 2002, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V21, P78, DOI 10.1509/jppm.21.1.78.17600 HOMER PM, 1990, J MARKETING RES, V27, P78, DOI 10.2307/3172553 Joreskog K.G., 1988, LISREL 7 GUIDE PROGR KLEIN B, 1981, J POLIT ECON, V89, P615, DOI 10.1086/260996 KREILKAMP T, 1984, AM BEHAV SCI, V27, P771, DOI 10.1177/000276484027006008 Lachowetz T, 2002, AM MARKETING ASS C P, V13, P14 LAROCHE M, 1994, J BUS RES, V29, P1, DOI 10.1016/0148-2963(94)90022-1 Lerner DL, 1988, J BUS ETHICS, V7, P951 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P113, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7 Lichtenthal J.D., 2001, J PERSONAL SELLING S, V21, P1 Liviatan I, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1256, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.007 MACKENZIE SB, 1986, J MARKETING RES, V23, P130, DOI 10.2307/3151660 MACKENZIE SB, 1989, J MARKETING, V53, P48, DOI 10.2307/1251413 Marrewijk M. V., 2003, J BUS ETHICS, V44, P95, DOI [DOI 10.1023/A:1023331212247, 10.1023/A:1023331212247] Shipley D., 1999, EUR J MARKETING, V33, P328, DOI DOI 10.1108/03090569910253170 MILGROM P, 1986, RAND J ECON, V17, P18, DOI 10.2307/2555625 Nan XL, 2007, J ADVERTISING, V36, P63, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367360204 Nordstrom K., 1994, INT TRADE REGIONAL G, P41 Nunnally J.C., 1978, PSYCHOMETRIC THEORY OHANIAN R, 1991, J ADVERTISING RES, V31, P46 OSTROM TM, 1969, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V5, P12, DOI 10.1016/0022-1031(69)90003-1 Peattie K., 2001, BUSINESS STRATEGY EN, V10, P187, DOI DOI 10.1002/BSE.292 PETTY RE, 1984, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P69, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.46.1.69 PETTY RE, 1983, J CONSUM RES, V10, P135, DOI 10.1086/208954 Polonsky M. J., 2001, EUR J MARKETING, V35, P1361, DOI DOI 10.1108/EUM0000000006484 Porter ME, 2006, HARVARD BUS REV, V84, P78 Porter ME, 2011, HARVARD BUS REV, V89, P62 PUTREVU S, 1994, J ADVERTISING, V23, P77 Rifon NJ, 2004, J ADVERTISING, V33, P29 Rodriguez M.A., 2002, CREATIVITY INNOVATIO, V11, P135, DOI DOI 10.1111/1467-8691.00246 Ross J. K., 1992, J ACADEMY MARKETING, V20, P93, DOI 10.1007/BF02723480 Roy DP, 2004, PSYCHOL MARKET, V21, P185, DOI 10.1002/mar.20001 Schaltegger S, 2002, J ENVIRON MANAGE, V65, P339, DOI 10.1006/jema.2002.0555 Schantz C, 2005, BUS ENV C SEPT 5 6 2 Sen S, 2001, J MARKETING RES, V38, P225, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.38.2.225.18838 SHAW B, 1993, J BUS ETHICS, V12, P745, DOI 10.1007/BF00881305 Shimp T. A., 1981, J ADVERTISING, V10, P9 Small DA, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P532, DOI 10.1086/527268 Small DA, 2007, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V102, P143, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.01.005 Smallbone T, 2004, BUSINESS STRATEGY EN, V13, P96, DOI 10.1002/bse.397 Smith Scott M., 1991, J SERV MARK, V5, P21, DOI DOI 10.1108/08876049110035639 Smith V, 2009, J MANAGE ORGAN, V15, P97, DOI 10.5172/jmo.837.15.1.97 STERNTHAL B, 1978, PUBLIC OPIN QUART, V42, P285, DOI 10.1086/268454 Stigler G.J., 1962, J POLITICAL EC, V70, P49 Szykman R., 1997, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V16, P228 Teng LF, 2007, J CONSUM MARK, V24, P27, DOI 10.1108/07363760710720966 Todorov A, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P473, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.002 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Wakslak C. J., 2006, J EXPT PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P341 Webb DJ, 1998, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V17, P226 Welford R., 2006, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, V13, P166, DOI 10.1002/csr.121 NR 96 TC 9 Z9 9 U1 16 U2 71 PU WILEY-BLACKWELL PI HOBOKEN PA 111 RIVER ST, HOBOKEN 07030-5774, NJ USA SN 1535-3958 J9 CORP SOC RESP ENV MA JI Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. PD JAN-FEB PY 2013 VL 20 IS 1 BP 15 EP 28 DI 10.1002/csr.294 PG 14 WC Business; Environmental Studies; Management SC Business & Economics; Environmental Sciences & Ecology GA 079OZ UT WOS:000314181600002 ER PT J AU Goodman, JK Malkoc, SA AF Goodman, Joseph K. Malkoc, Selin A. TI Choosing Here and Now versus There and Later: The Moderating Role of Psychological Distance on Assortment Size Preferences SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID CONSUMER CHOICE; TEMPORAL DISTANCE; VARIETY; TIME; DECISIONS; LEVEL; PERCEPTIONS; SIMILARITY; RETAILERS; QUANTITY AB Consumers prefer larger assortments, despite the negative consequences associated with choosing from these sets. This article examines the role of psychological distance (temporal and geographical) in consumers' assortment size decisions and rectifies contradicting hypotheses produced by construal level theory. Six studies demonstrate that while consumers prefer larger assortments when the choice takes place in the here and now, they are more likely to prefer small assortments when choices pertain to distant locations and times. This decrease in preference for large assortments is due to psychological distance increasing the similarity of the options in a category, making them appear more substitutable. This effect of psychological distance reverses when consumers consider desirability/feasibility trade-off information inherent in the assortment size decision. These findings point to important outcomes of psychological distance, resolving opposing predictions of construal level theory, and identify boundary conditions for the well-established notion that consumers are attracted to large assortments. C1 [Goodman, Joseph K.; Malkoc, Selin A.] Washington Univ, John M Olin Sch Business, St Louis, MO 63130 USA. RP Goodman, JK (reprint author), Washington Univ, John M Olin Sch Business, St Louis, MO 63130 USA. EM goodman@wustl.edu; malkoc@wustl.edu CR ARNOLD SJ, 1983, J MARKETING RES, V20, P149, DOI 10.2307/3151681 BAUMOL WJ, 1956, MANAGE SCI, V3, P93, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.3.1.93 Berger J, 2007, MARKET SCI, V26, P460, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1060.0253 Botti S, 2006, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V25, P24, DOI 10.1509/jppm.25.1.24 Boyd DE, 2009, J RETAILING, V85, P288, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2009.05.008 Broniarczyk SM, 1998, J MARKETING RES, V35, P166, DOI 10.2307/3151845 Broniarczyk S. M., 2008, HDB CONSUMER PSYCHOL, P755 Chernev A, 2006, J CONSUM RES, V33, P50, DOI 10.1086/504135 Chernev A, 2003, J CONSUM RES, V30, P170, DOI 10.1086/376808 Chernev A, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P426, DOI 10.1086/655200 Chernev A, 2009, J MARKETING RES, V46, P410 DAY GS, 1979, J MARKETING, V43, P8, DOI 10.2307/1250266 Day SB, 2008, COGNITION, V106, P1504, DOI 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.05.013 Dhar R, 1999, J CONSUM RES, V26, P293, DOI 10.1086/209564 Diehl K, 2010, J MARKETING RES, V47, P312 Eyal T, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P781, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781 Forster J, 2008, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V94, P579, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.94.4.579 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Fujita Kentaro, 2008, J Exp Soc Psychol, V227, P9044 Goodman Joseph K., 2012, HELP HINDER RE UNPUB Goodman J. K., 2012, J BEHAV DEC IN PRESS Gourville JT, 2005, MARKET SCI, V24, P382, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1040.0109 Hoch SJ, 1999, MARKET SCI, V18, P527, DOI 10.1287/mksc.18.4.527 Huffman C, 1998, J RETAILING, V74, P491, DOI 10.1016/S0022-4359(99)80105-5 Inbar Yoel, 2010, J EXPT SOCIAL PSYCHO, V47, P533 Iyengar Sheena, 2010, ART CHOOSING Iyengar SS, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P995, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.995 KAHN B, 1987, J CONSUM RES, V14, P96, DOI 10.1086/209096 KAHN BE, 1991, J RETAILING, V67, P274 Khan U, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P62, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.48.1.62 Kuksov D, 2010, MARKET SCI, V29, P507, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1090.0535 Levy M., 2001, RETAILING MANAGEMENT Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Liviatan I, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1256, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.007 Malkoc SA, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P411 Malkoc SA, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P618, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.4.618 Malkoc SA, 2010, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V113, P112, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.07.003 MCALISTER L, 1982, J CONSUM RES, V9, P311, DOI 10.1086/208926 Mogilner Cassie, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V35, P202 Morales A, 2005, J RETAILING, V81, P159, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2005.03.007 Nowlis SM, 2010, J MARKETING RES, V47, P725 Preacher KJ, 2008, BEHAV RES METHODS, V40, P879, DOI 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 Ratner RK, 1999, J CONSUM RES, V26, P1, DOI 10.1086/209547 RATNESHWAR S, 1991, J MARKETING RES, V28, P281, DOI 10.2307/3172864 Redden JP, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P624, DOI 10.1086/521898 Redden JP, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P406, DOI 10.1086/598971 ROSCH E, 1975, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V7, P573, DOI 10.1016/0010-0285(75)90024-9 Scheibehenne B, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P409, DOI 10.1086/651235 Schwartz B, 2002, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V83, P1178, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.83.5.1178 SCHWARTZ B., 2004, PARADOX CHOICE Sood S, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P17, DOI 10.1086/383420 SRIVASTAVA RK, 1984, J MARKETING, V48, P32, DOI 10.2307/1251212 Todorov A, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P473, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.002 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Zauberman G, 2005, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V134, P23, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.134.1.23 Zhu Meng, 2012, LIMITING SUPPLY ONE NR 59 TC 29 Z9 32 U1 6 U2 87 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD DEC PY 2012 VL 39 IS 4 BP 751 EP 768 DI 10.1086/665047 PG 18 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 038BD UT WOS:000311149300006 ER PT J AU Mehta, R Zhu, R Cheema, A AF Mehta, Ravi Zhu, Rui (Juliet) Cheema, Amar TI Is Noise Always Bad? Exploring the Effects of Ambient Noise on Creative Cognition SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID INTELLECTUAL-PERFORMANCE; CONSUMER CREATIVITY; ROMANTIC MOTIVES; PRODUCT; TASK; FLUENCY; INNOVATIVENESS; ATTENTION; THINKING; CONSEQUENCES AB This paper examines how ambient noise, an important environmental variable, can affect creativity. Results from five experiments demonstrate that a moderate (70 dB) versus low (50 dB) level of ambient noise enhances performance on creative tasks and increases the buying likelihood of innovative products. A high level of noise (85 dB), on the other hand, hurts creativity. Process measures reveal that a moderate (vs. low) level of noise increases processing difficulty, inducing a higher construal level and thus promoting abstract processing, which subsequently leads to higher creativity. A high level of noise, however, reduces the extent of information processing and thus impairs creativity. C1 [Mehta, Ravi] Univ Illinois, Champaign, IL 61820 USA. [Zhu, Rui (Juliet)] Univ British Columbia, Sauder Sch Business, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z2, Canada. [Cheema, Amar] Univ Virginia, McIntire Sch Commerce, Charlottesville, VA 22904 USA. RP Mehta, R (reprint author), Univ Illinois, 350 Wohlers Hall, Champaign, IL 61820 USA. EM mehtar@illinois.edu; juliet.zhu@sauder.ubc.ca; cheema@virginia.edu CR Aiken L.S., 1991, MULTIPLE REGRESSION Alba JW, 2000, ADV CONSUM RES, V27, P1 Alter AL, 2008, PSYCHOL SCI, V19, P161, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02062.x Amabile T. M., 1983, SOCIAL PSYCHOL CREAT Burroughs JE, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P402, DOI 10.1086/422118 Burroughs JE, 2008, HDB CONSUMER PSYCHOL, P1011 Dahl DW, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P357, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.357 Dahl DW, 2002, J MARKETING RES, V39, P47, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.39.1.47.18930 Dahl DW, 1999, J MARKETING RES, V36, P18, DOI 10.2307/3151912 Fink A, 2010, NEUROIMAGE, V52, P1687, DOI 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.05.072 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Friedman RS, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V81, P1001, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.81.6.1001 Goldenberg J, 1999, J MARKETING RES, V36, P200, DOI 10.2307/3152093 Griskevicius V, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V91, P63, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.91.1.63 Griskevicius V, 2007, ADV CONSUM RES, V34, P15 HAMILTON P, 1970, BRIT J PSYCHOL, V61, P149 Hayes AF, 2011, COMMUN SER, P434 Hillier A, 2006, NEUROCASE, V12, P228, DOI 10.1080/13554790600878887 HIRSCHMAN EC, 1980, J CONSUM RES, V7, P283, DOI 10.1086/208816 HOCKEY GRJ, 1970, BRIT J PSYCHOL, V61, P473 HOCKEY GRJ, 1970, Q J EXP PSYCHOL, V22, P28, DOI 10.1080/14640747008401898 Hockey G. R. J., 1969, NEW SCI, V1, P244 HOUSTON JP, 1963, J ABNORM PSYCHOL, V66, P137 Hygge S, 2002, PSYCHOL SCI, V13, P469, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00483 Im S, 2003, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V31, P61, DOI 10.1177/0092070302238602 JACOBY LL, 1988, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V14, P240, DOI 10.1037//0278-7393.14.2.240 Kasof J, 1997, CREATIVITY RES J, V10, P303, DOI 10.1207/s15326934crj1004_2 Lubart T. I., 1994, HDB PERCEPTION COGNI, P289 MacKinnon DP, 2004, MULTIVAR BEHAV RES, V39, P99, DOI 10.1207/s15327906mbr3901_4 Maddux WW, 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V96, P1047, DOI 10.1037/a0014861 MARTINDA.C, 1973, J GENET PSYCHOL, V123, P329 MEDNICK SA, 1962, PSYCHOL REV, V69, P220, DOI 10.1037/h0048850 Mehta R, 2009, SCIENCE, V323, P1226, DOI 10.1126/science.1169144 Meyers-Levy J, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P174, DOI 10.1086/519146 Moreau P. C., 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P13 NAGAR D, 1987, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V17, P147, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1987.tb00306.x OMALLEY JJ, 1971, PERCEPT MOTOR SKILL, V33, P887 Oppenheimer DM, 2008, TRENDS COGN SCI, V12, P237, DOI 10.1016/j.tics.2008.02.014 Preacher KJ, 2008, BEHAV RES METHODS, V40, P879, DOI 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 PRICE LL, 1983, ADV CONSUM RES, V10, P679 Schwarz N, 2004, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V14, P332, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1404_2 SMITH SM, 1993, MEM COGNITION, V21, P837, DOI 10.3758/BF03202751 Smith S. M, 1995, CREATIVE COGNITION A, P135 Song HJ, 2008, PSYCHOL SCI, V19, P986, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02189.x Thompson DV, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P431, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.2005.42.4.431 Toplyn G., 1991, CREATIVITY RES J, V4, P337 Tsai CI, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V37, P807, DOI 10.1086/655855 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 Van den Bergh B, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P85, DOI 10.1086/525505 WEINSTEIN ND, 1974, J APPL PSYCHOL, V59, P548, DOI 10.1037/h0037338 WOODMAN RW, 1993, ACAD MANAGE REV, V18, P293, DOI 10.2307/258761 NR 51 TC 18 Z9 18 U1 5 U2 69 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD DEC PY 2012 VL 39 IS 4 BP 784 EP 799 DI 10.1086/665048 PG 16 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 038BD UT WOS:000311149300008 ER PT J AU Ronteltap, A Sijtsema, SJ Dagevos, H de Winter, MA AF Ronteltap, Amber Sijtsema, Siet J. Dagevos, Hans de Winter, Mariet A. TI Construal levels of healthy eating. Exploring consumers' interpretation of health in the food context SO APPETITE LA English DT Article DE Consumer; Healthy eating; Interpretation; Representation; Construal level theory; Abstract; Concrete ID MEDIATING ROLE; SELF-CONTROL; ATTITUDES; BEHAVIOR; MOTIVES; CHOICE; CONSUMPTION; NUTRITION; VALUES; CONSEQUENCES AB Although many studies consider health and food, little is known about consumers' actual interpretation of healthy eating. This study aims to explore, operationalise, and test consumers' interpretation of healthy eating by using insights from construal level theory. In this exploratory research three consecutive studies Were executed, applying focus group (n = 35) and two quasi-experimental studies with, respectively 97 and 235 respondents. Respondents appeared to use different levels for their judgment of food products' healthiness. Thinking about healthy eating can take place at a concrete representation level (e.g. "an apple contains vitamins"), but also at an abstract representation level (e.g. "it depends how much you eat"). The main yield of this paper is the coding scheme with exemplary phrasings used by consumers for different representations of healthy eating. This study shows that healthy eating does not always mean the same for different individuals, it depends at least partly on the representation level they are reasoning from. Both in academic reasoning and public health interventions health and healthy eating are usually discussed as universal and univocal concepts. However, this paper argues that healthy eating is not as clear-cut for consumers, and is not understood and interpreted identically by everybody. This paper suggests to take this insight into account in both future research and in the design of any communication message on healthy eating. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. C1 [Ronteltap, Amber; Sijtsema, Siet J.; Dagevos, Hans; de Winter, Mariet A.] LEI, NL-6700 AA Wageningen, Netherlands. RP Ronteltap, A (reprint author), LEI, POB 35, NL-6700 AA Wageningen, Netherlands. EM amber.ronteltap@wur.nl CR Ares G, 2008, APPETITE, V51, P663, DOI 10.1016/j.appet.2008.05.061 Bower JA, 2003, FOOD QUAL PREFER, V14, P65, DOI 10.1016/S0950-3293(02)00019-8 Chapman GE, 2003, J NUTR EDUC BEHAV, V35, P135, DOI 10.1016/S1499-4046(06)60197-8 Charles Nickie, 1988, WOMEN FOOD FAMILIES Delpeuch F., 2009, GLOBESITY PLANET OUT Eyal T, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1204, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.03.012 Falk LW, 2001, HEALTH EDUC BEHAV, V28, P425, DOI 10.1177/109019810102800405 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Geeroms N, 2008, APPETITE, V51, P704, DOI 10.1016/j.appet.2008.06.011 Geeroms N, 2008, FOOD QUAL PREFER, V19, P481, DOI 10.1016/j.foodqual.2008.02.004 Givens DI, 2010, ANIMAL, V4, P1941, DOI 10.1017/S1751731110001503 Green L. W., 2005, HLTH PROGRAM PLANNIN Grunert KG, 2010, APPETITE, V55, P177, DOI 10.1016/j.appet.2010.05.045 Honkanen P, 2009, APPETITE, V52, P363, DOI 10.1016/j.appet.2008.11.009 Hughner RS, 2004, HEALTH, V8, P395, DOI 10.1177/1363459304045696 Kahkonen P, 1997, FOOD QUAL PREFER, V8, P125, DOI 10.1016/S0950-3293(96)00032-8 Keane A., 1996, CONCEPTS HLTH EATING Lake AA, 2007, APPETITE, V48, P176, DOI 10.1016/j.appet.2006.08.065 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P1201, DOI 10.1126/science.1161958 Liberman N, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P113, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7 Lindholm L, 1997, SCAND J CARING SCI, V11, P81 Lobstein T, 2009, PUBLIC HEALTH NUTR, V12, P331, DOI 10.1017/S1368980008002541 Lusk JL, 2011, FOOD QUAL PREFER, V22, P452, DOI 10.1016/j.foodqual.2011.02.009 Lusk JL, 2009, AM J AGR ECON, V91, P184, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-8276.2008.01175.x Maddock S., 1999, Nutrition & Food Science, P270, DOI 10.1108/00346659910290141 Magnusson MK, 2003, APPETITE, V40, P109, DOI 10.1016/S0195-6663(03)00002-3 Margetts BM, 1997, EUR J CLIN NUTR, V51, pS23 Miller AM, 2002, HEALTH EDUC BEHAV, V29, P249, DOI 10.1177/109019810202900209 Oakes ME, 2002, APPETITE, V38, P91, DOI 10.1006/appe.2001.0444 Ogden Jane, 2007, HLTH PSYCHOL TXB Olsen SO, 2003, FOOD QUAL PREFER, V14, P199, DOI 10.1016/S0950-3293(02)00055-1 Popkin B.M., 2009, WORLD IS FAT FADS TR Povey R, 1998, HEALTH EDUC RES, V13, P171, DOI 10.1093/her/13.2.171 Ristovski-Slijepcevic S, 2008, APPETITE, V50, P167, DOI 10.1016/j.appet.2007.07.001 Roininen K, 1999, APPETITE, V33, P71, DOI 10.1006/appe.1999.0232 Roininen K, 2001, APPETITE, V37, P33, DOI 10.1006/appe.2001.0414 Santich B., 1994, AUSTR J NUTR DIETETI, V51, P68 Schifferstein HNJ, 1998, FOOD QUAL PREFER, V9, P119, DOI 10.1016/S0950-3293(97)00044-X Schmeichel BJ, 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V96, P770, DOI 10.1037/a0014635 Sijtsema S, 2009, BRIT FOOD J, V111, P207, DOI 10.1108/00070700910941426 Sobal J, 2006, FRONT NUTR SCI, P1, DOI 10.1079/9780851990323.0001 STEPTOE A, 1995, APPETITE, V25, P267, DOI 10.1006/appe.1995.0061 Sun YHC, 2008, APPETITE, V51, P42, DOI 10.1016/j.appet.2007.11.004 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Tudoran A, 2009, APPETITE, V52, P568, DOI 10.1016/j.appet.2009.01.009 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 Verbeke W, 2008, P NUTR SOC, V67, P281, DOI 10.1017/S0029665108007179 Wandel M, 1997, FOOD QUAL PREFER, V8, P19, DOI 10.1016/S0950-3293(96)00004-3 WHO, 2003, DIET NUTR PREV CHRON NR 51 TC 18 Z9 18 U1 4 U2 61 PU ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD PI LONDON PA 24-28 OVAL RD, LONDON NW1 7DX, ENGLAND SN 0195-6663 J9 APPETITE JI Appetite PD OCT PY 2012 VL 59 IS 2 BP 333 EP 340 DI 10.1016/j.appet.2012.05.023 PG 8 WC Behavioral Sciences; Nutrition & Dietetics SC Behavioral Sciences; Nutrition & Dietetics GA 013MR UT WOS:000309310000020 PM 22641147 ER PT J AU Benning, TM Breugelmans, E Dellaert, BGC AF Benning, Tim M. Breugelmans, Els Dellaert, Benedict G. C. TI Consumers' evaluation of allocation policies for scarce health care services: Vested interest activation trumps spatial and temporal distance SO MARKETING LETTERS LA English DT Article DE Allocation policy evaluations; Individual vs. collective outcomes; Construal level theory; Vested interest theory; Consumer decision making ID CONSTRUAL-LEVEL THEORY; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; SOCIAL DISTANCE; MORAL CONCERNS; BEHAVIOR; CONSISTENCY; EVENTS; TIME AB The allocation of scarce health care service resources often requires trade-offs between individual and collective outcomes (e.g., when some individuals benefit more strongly from a given policy than others). Based on construal level theory, one would expect that consumers cognitively represent the individual and collective outcomes of an allocation policy at different levels of abstraction and that they evaluate allocation policies more positively when there is congruency between the cognitive representation of the policy's focal outcome and the spatial and temporal distance inherently present in the policy's decision context (e.g., allocation decisions on a future policy). However, we hypothesize that this congruency effect can be overruled by a high vested interest mindset that is activated by an individual's recent personal experience with a health care service provider. Since a high vested interest mindset increases the relevance of the allocation policy implementation for the individual because s/he perceives strong personal consequences, we propose that for consumers with recent experience the evaluation of an allocation policy that focuses on individual outcomes is higher than that of a policy that focuses on collective outcomes irrespective of the spatial and temporal distance in the decision context. Results of a hypothetical experiment among a representative sample of the general population confirm the congruency effects in the new domain of health care service allocation policies, and provide support for the proposed overruling effect of the activation of a high vested interest mindset by recent personal experience on spatial and temporal distance. C1 [Benning, Tim M.] Erasmus Univ, Inst Hlth Policy Management, Inst Hlth Policy & Management, NL-3000 DR Rotterdam, Netherlands. [Breugelmans, Els] Lessius Univ Coll, Dept Business Studies, B-2000 Antwerp, Belgium. [Breugelmans, Els] Catholic Univ Louvain, Fac Business & Econ, B-3000 Louvain, Belgium. [Dellaert, Benedict G. C.] Erasmus Univ, Erasmus Sch Econ, Dept Business Econ, Mkt Sect, NL-3000 DR Rotterdam, Netherlands. RP Benning, TM (reprint author), Erasmus Univ, Inst Hlth Policy Management, Inst Hlth Policy & Management, POB 1738, NL-3000 DR Rotterdam, Netherlands. EM benning@bmg.eur.nl; els.breugelmans@lessius.eu; dellaert@ese.eur.nl RI dellaert, benedict/D-1020-2010 OI dellaert, benedict/0000-0003-4637-1192 CR Agerstrom J, 2009, SOC COGNITION, V27, P261 Agerstrom J, 2009, BASIC APPL SOC PSYCH, V31, P49, DOI 10.1080/01973530802659885 Brouwer WBF, 1999, HEALTH ECON, V8, P65, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199902)8:1<65::AID-HEC397>3.0.CO;2-G CRANO WD, 1995, BASIC APPL SOC PSYCH, V17, P1, DOI 10.1207/s15324834basp1701&2_1 Crano W., 1995, ATTITUDE STRENGTH AN, P131 Dabholkar Pratibha A., 1996, INT J RES MARK, V13, P29, DOI DOI 10.1016/0167-8116(95)00027-5 Eyal T., 2010, HERZL S PERS SOC PSY Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Kahneman D., 1986, J BUS, P285, DOI DOI 10.1086/296367 Kardes FR, 2006, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V16, P135, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1602_4 Kim HY, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P877, DOI 10.1086/593700 Kim K, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P706, DOI 10.1086/592131 Lehman BJ, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P101, DOI 10.1006/jesp.2001.1489 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P113, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7 Lindholm LA, 1997, EUR J PUBLIC HEALTH, V7, P405, DOI 10.1093/eurpub/7.4.405 Liviatan I, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1256, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.007 Milkman KL, 2010, MARKET LETT, V21, P17, DOI 10.1007/s11002-009-9087-0 Morwitz V. G., 1997, MARKET LETT, V8, P57, DOI 10.1023/A:1007937327719 Novemsky N, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P347, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.347 Persad G, 2009, LANCET, V373, P423, DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60137-9 Reinhardt UE, 2004, HEALTH AFFAIR, V23, P10, DOI 10.1377/hlthaff.23.3.10 Sanna LJ, 2010, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P1126, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.05.018 Soman D, 2005, MARKET LETT, V16, P347, DOI 10.1007/s11002-005-5897-x Thornton B, 2002, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V32, P2554, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb02756.x Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2004, PERS SOC PSYCHOL REV, V8, P193, DOI 10.1207/s15327957pspr0802_13 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 WAGSTAFF A, 1991, J HEALTH ECON, V10, P21, DOI 10.1016/0167-6296(91)90015-F Weiss C. H., 1999, EVALUATION, V5, P468, DOI DOI 10.1177/135638909900500408 White K, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P472 Zhang M, 2009, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V19, P497, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2009.05.001 Zhao M, 2011, J MARKETING RES, V48, P486 NR 34 TC 2 Z9 2 U1 1 U2 18 PU SPRINGER PI DORDRECHT PA VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS SN 0923-0645 J9 MARKET LETT JI Mark. Lett. PD SEP PY 2012 VL 23 IS 3 BP 531 EP 543 DI 10.1007/s11002-011-9158-x PG 13 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 978IL UT WOS:000306733900003 ER PT J AU Monga, A Bagchi, R AF Monga, Ashwani Bagchi, Rajesh TI Years, Months, and Days versus 1, 12, and 365: The Influence of Units versus Numbers SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID ACTION IDENTIFICATION; GRAPHICAL DISPLAYS; I SPEND; TIME; RISK; PREFERENCE; DECISIONS; BEHAVIOR; MONEY; INFORMATION AB Quantitative changes may be conveyed to consumers using small units (e. g., change in delivery time from 7 to 21 days) or large units (1-3 weeks). Numerosity research suggests that changes are magnified by small (vs. large) units because a change from 7 to 21 (vs. 1-3) seems larger. We introduce a reverse effect that we term unitosity: changes are magnified by large (vs. small) units because a change of weeks (vs. days) seems larger. We show that numerosity reverses to unitosity when relative salience shifts from numbers to units (study 1). Then, arguing that numbers (units) represent a low-level (high-level) construal of quantities, we show this reversal when mind-set shifts from concrete to abstract (studies 2-4). These results emerge for several quantities-height of buildings, time of maturity of financial instruments, weight of nutrients, and length of tables-and have significant implications for theory and practice. C1 [Monga, Ashwani] Univ S Carolina, Darla Moore Sch Business, Columbia, SC 29208 USA. [Bagchi, Rajesh] Virginia Tech, Pamplin Coll Business, Blacksburg, VA 24061 USA. RP Monga, A (reprint author), Univ S Carolina, Darla Moore Sch Business, 1705 Coll St, Columbia, SC 29208 USA. EM ashwani@moore.sc.edu; rbagchi@vt.edu CR Davis Derick F., 2012, J CONSUMER RES, V39 Bagchi R, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V37, P888, DOI 10.1086/656392 Brannon EM, 1998, SCIENCE, V282, P746, DOI 10.1126/science.282.5389.746 Burson KA, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P1074, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02394.x Chandran S, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P375, DOI 10.1086/422116 Elster J., 1992, CHOICE TIME, P213 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Frederick S, 2002, J ECON LIT, V40, P351, DOI 10.1257/002205102320161311 FREDRICKSON BL, 1993, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V65, P45, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.65.1.45 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x GABRIELI JDE, 1995, PSYCHOL SCI, V6, P76, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1995.tb00310.x Gourville JT, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V24, P395, DOI 10.1086/209517 Grice H. P., 1975, SPEECH ACTS, P41 Helson H, 1964, ADAPTATION LEVEL THE KAHNEMAN D, 1979, ECONOMETRICA, V47, P263, DOI 10.2307/1914185 Kim B. K., 2009, J NEUROSCI PSYCHOL E, V2, P91, DOI DOI 10.1037/A0017686 Krider RE, 2001, MARKET SCI, V20, P405, DOI 10.1287/mksc.20.4.405.9756 LeBoeuf RA, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P59, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.1.59 Lynch JG, 2006, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V25, P67, DOI 10.1509/jppm.25.1.67 LYNCH JG, 1982, J CONSUM RES, V9, P225 Malkoc SA, 2010, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V113, P112, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.07.003 MEDIN DL, 1989, AM PSYCHOL, V44, P1469, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.44.12.1469 Mogilner C, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P277, DOI 10.1086/597161 Monga A, 2009, J RETAILING, V85, P245, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2009.04.005 Muller D, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P852, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.852 Nayak S, 2001, REV FINANC STUD, V14, P1083, DOI 10.1093/rfs/14.4.1083 Pandelaere M, 2011, J CONSUM RES, V38, P308, DOI 10.1086/659000 Parkhurst D, 2002, VISION RES, V42, P107, DOI 10.1016/S0042-6989(01)00250-4 PELHAM BW, 1994, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V26, P103, DOI 10.1006/cogp.1994.1004 Peter J. P., 2008, CONSUMER BEHAV MARKE Raghubir P, 1999, J MARKETING RES, V36, P313, DOI 10.2307/3152079 Rosch E, 1978, COGNITION CATEGORIZA, P27 Saini R, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P914, DOI 10.1086/525503 Stone ER, 2003, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V90, P19, DOI 10.1016/S0749-5978(03)00003-7 Stone ER, 1997, J EXP PSYCHOL-APPL, V3, P243, DOI 10.1037//1076-898X.3.4.243 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X TVERSKY A, 1981, SCIENCE, V211, P453, DOI 10.1126/science.7455683 TVERSKY A, 1973, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V5, P207, DOI 10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9 Ulkumen G, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P245, DOI 10.1086/587627 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 van Osselaer SMJ, 2004, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V14, P257, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1403_7 Varey C., 1992, Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, V5, P169, DOI 10.1002/bdm.3960050303 Wertenbroch K, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P1, DOI 10.1086/513041 Zauberman G, 2009, J MARKETING RES, V46, P543 [Anonymous], 2010, TIME 1206, P20 NR 49 TC 21 Z9 22 U1 4 U2 46 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD JUN PY 2012 VL 39 IS 1 BP 185 EP 198 DI 10.1086/662039 PG 14 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 946SW UT WOS:000304376200013 ER PT J AU Janakiraman, N Ordonez, L AF Janakiraman, Narayan Ordonez, Lisa TI Effect of effort and deadlines on consumer product returns SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article DE Product Returns; Procrastination; Deadlines; Effort; Return Policy ID MONEY-BACK GUARANTEES; PROCRASTINATION; CONSEQUENCES; POLICIES; CHOICE AB While extant research has examined return policies as a combination of time and effort, we investigate both the independent and interactive impacts of time and effort on consumer decisions to return or retain products. We find that decreasing return deadlines can have the counterintuitive effect of increasing return rates under some conditions. Using construal level theory, we propose that perceived effort (both physical and cognitive) mediates the effect of return policy on return rates leading to suppressed returns. Further, when deadlines are framed as durations between store visits, overall product returns are exacerbated except when perceived effort is high. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of Society for Consumer Psychology. C1 [Janakiraman, Narayan; Ordonez, Lisa] Univ Arizona, Eller Coll Management, Tucson, AZ 85721 USA. RP Janakiraman, N (reprint author), Univ Arizona, Eller Coll Management, 320L McClelland Hall,1130 E Helen St, Tucson, AZ 85721 USA. EM narayanj@email.arizona.edu; lordonez@u.arizona.edu CR AKERLOF GA, 1991, AM ECON REV, V81, P1 BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 BUCKLIN RE, 1991, MARKET SCI, V10, P24, DOI 10.1287/mksc.10.1.24 Chain Store Age, 2006, CHAIN STORE AGE, V82, P26 Che YK, 1996, J IND ECON, V44, P17, DOI 10.2307/2950557 DAVIS S, 1995, J RETAILING, V71, P7, DOI 10.1016/0022-4359(95)90010-1 Davis S., 1998, J ECON BUS, V50, P445, DOI 10.1016/S0148-6195(98)00013-7 FIRTH D, 1993, BIOMETRIKA, V80, P27, DOI 10.1093/biomet/80.1.27 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Garbarino EC, 1997, J CONSUM RES, V24, P147, DOI 10.1086/209500 GOLLWITZER PM, 1990, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V59, P1119, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.59.6.1119 Gourville JT, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V25, P160, DOI 10.1086/209533 Chu W., 1996, MARKET LETT, V7, P307, DOI 10.1007/BF00435538 Krishnan H. S., 1999, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V8, P141, DOI [10.1207/s15327663jcp0802_02, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP0802_02] Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 MACKINNON DP, 1993, EVALUATION REV, V17, P144, DOI 10.1177/0193841X9301700202 Malkoc SA, 2010, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V113, P112, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.07.003 McCrea SM, 2008, PSYCHOL SCI, V19, P1308, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02240.x Merrick A., 2005, WALL STREET J 1215, pD MSNBC, 2007, COSTC TIGHT RET POL PADMANABHAN V, 1995, SLOAN MANAGE REV, V37, P65 Pennington GL, 2003, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P563, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00058-1 Petersen JA, 2009, J MARKETING, V73, P35 Posselt T, 2008, J SERV RES-US, V10, P207, DOI 10.1177/1094670507306684 Shu SB, 2010, J MARKETING RES, V47, P933 Silk T., GETTING STARTE UNPUB Stock J, 2002, HARVARD BUS REV, V80, P16 Su X., 2009, MANUFACTURING SERVIC, V4, P595 Tang S., 2006, FINANCIAL TIMES 0210 Wood SL, 2001, J MARKETING RES, V38, P157, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.38.2.157.18847 NR 31 TC 10 Z9 10 U1 6 U2 36 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 1057-7408 J9 J CONSUM PSYCHOL JI J. Consum. Psychol. PD APR PY 2012 VL 22 IS 2 BP 260 EP 271 DI 10.1016/j.jcps.2011.05.002 PG 12 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA 946UM UT WOS:000304383000013 ER PT J AU Wright, S Manolis, C Brown, D Guo, XN Dinsmore, J Chiu, CYP Kardes, FR AF Wright, Scott Manolis, Chris Brown, Drew Guo, Xiaoning Dinsmore, John Chiu, C. -Y. Peter Kardes, Frank R. TI Construal-level mind-sets and the perceived validity of marketing claims SO MARKETING LETTERS LA English DT Article DE Construal-level theory; Mind-sets; Truth ratings ID PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; TRUTH; FIT; REPRESENTATION; PROBABILITY; FAMILIARITY; REPETITION; PERCEPTION; PERSUASION; DECISION AB Prior research shows that the repetition of unfamiliar statements increases their subjective truthfulness. The present research shows that truth ratings can also be increased without repetition. Several different manipulations of low-construal-level mind-sets increased the perceived validity of a wide variety of marketing claims across a broad spectrum of products and industries. Mismatched construals reduced this effect. The results suggest that concrete construals enhance truth ratings when consumers focus on their intuitive feelings and impressions but not when they process marketing claims analytically. C1 [Wright, Scott; Guo, Xiaoning; Dinsmore, John; Kardes, Frank R.] Univ Cincinnati, Dept Mkt, Cincinnati, OH 45221 USA. [Brown, Drew; Chiu, C. -Y. Peter] Univ Cincinnati, Dept Psychol, Cincinnati, OH 45221 USA. [Manolis, Chris] Xavier Univ, Dept Mkt, Cincinnati, OH 45207 USA. RP Wright, S (reprint author), Univ Cincinnati, Dept Mkt, Cincinnati, OH 45221 USA. EM Wrighso@mail.uc.edu CR Alter AL, 2007, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V136, P569, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.136.4.569 Alter AL, 2009, PERS SOC PSYCHOL REV, V13, P219, DOI 10.1177/1088868309341564 Campbell Margaret C., 2008, HDB CONSUMER PSYCHOL, P549 Dechene A, 2010, PERS SOC PSYCHOL REV, V14, P238, DOI 10.1177/1088868309352251 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 FRIESTAD M, 1994, J CONSUM RES, V21, P1, DOI 10.1086/209380 Gilbert DT, 2000, PSYCHOL SCI, V11, P394, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00276 Hansen J, 2010, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V36, P1576, DOI 10.1177/0146167210386238 HAWKINS SA, 1992, J CONSUM RES, V19, P212, DOI 10.1086/209297 Hawkins SA, 2001, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V11, P1, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP1101_1 HERR PM, 1991, J CONSUM RES, V17, P454, DOI 10.1086/208570 Higgins ET, 2000, AM PSYCHOL, V55, P1217, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.55.11.1217 Higgins ET, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P1140, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.6.1140 Johar GV, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P118 JOHNSON MK, 1993, PSYCHOL BULL, V114, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.114.1.3 Kardes FR, 2006, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V16, P135, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1602_4 Law S, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V25, P91, DOI 10.1086/209529 Liberman N, 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V97, P203, DOI 10.1037/a0015671 McGlone MS, 2000, PSYCHOL SCI, V11, P424, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00282 NAVON D, 1977, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V9, P353, DOI 10.1016/0010-0285(77)90012-3 Nisbett R. E., 1980, HUMAN INFERENCE STRA Reber R, 1999, CONSCIOUS COGN, V8, P338, DOI 10.1006/ccog.1999.0386 REYES RM, 1980, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P2, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.39.1.2 Roggeveen AL, 2002, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V12, P81, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP1202_02 Schwarz N, 2004, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V14, P332, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1404_2 Skurnik I, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V31, P713, DOI 10.1086/426605 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Wakslak C, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P52, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02250.x Wakslak CJ, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P641, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.641 Wyer RS, 2010, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V20, P107, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2010.01.003 Zhang M, 2009, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V19, P497, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2009.05.001 NR 33 TC 12 Z9 13 U1 0 U2 26 PU SPRINGER PI DORDRECHT PA VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS SN 0923-0645 J9 MARKET LETT JI Mark. Lett. PD MAR PY 2012 VL 23 IS 1 BP 253 EP 261 DI 10.1007/s11002-011-9151-4 PG 9 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 946BU UT WOS:000304324500017 ER PT J AU Chou, HY Lien, NH AF Chou, Hsuan-Yi Lien, Nai-Hwa TI The effects of incentive types and appeal regulatory framing in travel advertising SO SERVICE INDUSTRIES JOURNAL LA English DT Article DE advertising; construal-level theory; spatial distance; incentive types ID CONSUMER EVALUATIONS; DISTANCE; FOCUS; PREVENTION; PROMOTION; ORIENTATION; PERSUASION; PLEASURE; BEHAVIOR; TIME AB What types of incentives and regulatory-framed advertising appeals are preferable when the promoted travel destination in a travel advert is spatially distant vs. near? Based on construal-level theory, this paper addresses this question by investigating whether there is a matching effect between the spatial distance of the travel destination and the incentives or the regulatory-framed appeals in ads. The experimental results indicate that when the promoted travel destination is spatially distant, consumers prefer non-monetary incentives and promotion-framed appeals. When the travel destination is spatially near, however, monetary incentives and prevention-framed appeals can generate better advertising effectiveness. C1 [Chou, Hsuan-Yi; Lien, Nai-Hwa] Natl Taiwan Univ, Grad Inst Business Adm, Taipei 106, Taiwan. RP Chou, HY (reprint author), Natl Taiwan Univ, Grad Inst Business Adm, 1,Sec 4,Roosevelt Rd, Taipei 106, Taiwan. EM takki_1112@yahoo.com.tw CR Aaker JL, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P15, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.1.15 Assael H, 2004, CONSUMER BEHAV STRAT BERKOWITZ EN, 1980, J MARKETING RES, V17, P349, DOI 10.2307/3150533 CAMPBELL L., 1990, J CONSUMER MARKETING, V7, P25, DOI 10.1108/EUM0000000002586 Cesario J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P388, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.3.388 Chandran S, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P375, DOI 10.1086/422116 Dehaene S, 2003, TRENDS COGN SCI, V7, P145, DOI 10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00055-X Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x Hanley M., 2006, INT J MOBILE MARKETI, V1, P50 Higgins ET, 1998, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V30, P1 Higgins ET, 1997, AM PSYCHOL, V52, P1280, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280 Idson LC, 2000, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V36, P252, DOI 10.1006/jesp.1999.1402 JOHNSON RR, 1991, J ADVERTISING RES, V31, P18 Kim HY, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P877, DOI 10.1086/593700 Kim K, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P706, DOI 10.1086/592131 Kotler P., 2003, MARKETING MANAGEMENT Kung C.-Y., 2008, MARKETING REV, V5, P249 Laskey H. A., 1994, Journal of Travel Research, V32, P13, DOI 10.1177/004728759403200403 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Liberman N, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P113, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7 Lin CT, 2008, SERV IND J, V28, P1265, DOI 10.1080/02642060802230239 MacKay KJ, 2006, ANN TOURISM RES, V33, P7, DOI 10.1016/j.annals.2005.07.002 Martin BAS, 2009, J ADVERTISING, V38, P5, DOI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367380301 Meng Z., 2009, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V19, P497 Mogilner C, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P670, DOI 10.1086/521901 Pennington GL, 2003, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P563, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00058-1 Petty RE, 1998, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V24, P227, DOI 10.1177/0146167298243001 Reber R, 2004, PERS SOC PSYCHOL REV, V8, P364, DOI 10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_3 Semin GR, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P36, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.1.36 Shi Y.-Z., 2005, INT J ADVERT, V24, P467 Smith M. C., 2001, Journal of Travel Research, V39, P261 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Wang KC, 2007, J BUS RES, V60, P382, DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.09.024 Wang KC, 2009, INT J ADVERT, V28, P843, DOI 10.2501/S0265048709200928 Wolfe C., 2008, J INFORM SYSTEMS, V22, P53, DOI 10.2308/jis.2008.22.2.53 Yahoo News, 2007, YAHOO NEWS 0606 Yan J, 2009, NOW NEWS 0730 NR 38 TC 6 Z9 6 U1 2 U2 11 PU ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD PI ABINGDON PA 4 PARK SQUARE, MILTON PARK, ABINGDON OX14 4RN, OXFORDSHIRE, ENGLAND SN 0264-2069 J9 SERV IND J JI Serv. Ind. J. PY 2012 VL 32 IS 6 BP 883 EP 897 DI 10.1080/02642069.2010.545878 PG 15 WC Management SC Business & Economics GA 931PV UT WOS:000303232700003 ER PT J AU Yang, XJ Ringberg, T Mao, HF Peracchio, LA AF Yang, Xiaojing Ringberg, Torsten Mao, Huifang Peracchio, Laura A. TI The Construal (In)compatibility Effect: The Moderating Role of a Creative Mind-Set SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID ACTION IDENTIFICATION; THINK DIFFERENT; BEHAVIOR; DETERMINANTS; DECISIONS; EXPOSURE; CONTEXT; DONT AB This research examines how consumers with a creative mind-set are persuaded by advertising claims construed at different levels (i.e., abstract vs. concrete ad claims). Across four experiments, we show that consumers with a creative mind-set are more persuaded by ad claims construed at a level incompatible with their mental construal, while ad claims construed at a level compatible with consumers' mental construal are more effective for those who possess a less creative mind-set. We document that such differences in persuasion are driven by the fact that consumers with a creative (less creative) mind-set prefer information that is more remotely (closely) associated with their mental construal and appears novel (familiar). C1 [Yang, Xiaojing; Peracchio, Laura A.] Univ Wisconsin Milwaukee, Sheldon B Lubar Sch Business, Milwaukee, WI 53201 USA. [Ringberg, Torsten] Copenhagen Sch Econ & Business Adm, DK-2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark. [Mao, Huifang] Univ Cent Florida, Coll Business Adm, Orlando, FL 32816 USA. RP Yang, XJ (reprint author), Univ Wisconsin Milwaukee, Sheldon B Lubar Sch Business, Milwaukee, WI 53201 USA. EM yangxiao@uwm.edu; tri.marktg@cbs.dk; hmao@bus.ucf.edu; LPeracch@uwm.edu CR Aaker JL, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V25, P241, DOI 10.1086/209537 Aiken L.S., 1991, MULTIPLE REGRESSION Burroughs JE, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P402, DOI 10.1086/422118 Burroughs JE, 2008, HDB CONSUMER PSYCHOL, P1011 Finke R. A., 1992, CREATIVE COGNITION T Fitzsimons GJ, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P5, DOI 10.1086/589561 Fitzsimons GM, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P21, DOI 10.1086/527269 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Friedman RS, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P41, DOI 10.1006/jesp.2001.1488 George JM, 2002, J APPL PSYCHOL, V87, P687, DOI 10.1037//0021-9010.87.4.687 Guilford JP, 1967, NATURE HUMAN INTELLI Guilford J. P., 1968, INTELLIGENCE CREATIV Hamilton RW, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P546, DOI 10.1086/520073 Kardes FR, 2006, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V16, P135, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1602_4 Rao Akshay R., 2009, Journal of Consumer Research, V35, P877 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Martindale Colin, 1995, The Creative Cognition Approach, P248 Mogilner C, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P670, DOI 10.1086/521901 Moreau CP, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P13, DOI 10.1086/429597 Muller D, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P852, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.852 Petty R. E., 1986, COMMUNICATION PERSUA Ramaswamy V., 2010, POWER COCREATION BUI Sassenberg K, 2005, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V41, P506, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.10.002 Smith R. E., 2004, MARKETING THEORY, V4, P29 Smith RE, 2007, MARKET SCI, V26, P819, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1070.0272 Smith S. M, 1995, CREATIVE COGNITION A, P135 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Ulkumen G, 2010, J MARKETING RES, V47, P659 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 WATSON D, 1988, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V54, P1063, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063 Wheeler SC, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V31, P787, DOI 10.1086/426613 Yang XJ, 2009, MARKET SCI, V28, P935, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1080.0460 Cronley Maria L., 2008, P141 NR 34 TC 2 Z9 3 U1 2 U2 28 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD DEC PY 2011 VL 38 IS 4 BP 681 EP 696 DI 10.1086/660118 PG 16 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 859AO UT WOS:000297846300007 ER PT J AU Ulkumen, G Cheema, A AF Uelkuemen, Guelden Cheema, Amar TI Framing Goals to Influence Personal Savings: The Role of Specificity and Construal Level SO JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE goals; saving; financial decision making; goal specificity; construal level ID SELF-SET GOALS; LIFE-CYCLE; ACTION IDENTIFICATION; PERFORMANCE; COMMITMENT; BEHAVIOR; FUTURE; HYPOTHESIS; DECISIONS; MEDIATION AB In four studies, the authors show that consumers' savings can be increased or decreased merely by changing the way consumers think about their saving goals. Consumers can (1) either specify or not specify an exact amount to save (goal specificity) and (2) focus on either how to save or why to save (construal level). The results illustrate that specific goals help consumers save more when the saving goal is construed at a high level but that nonspecific goals help consumers save more when the saving goal is construed at a low level. The same pattern of results occurs with anticipated saving success and actual savings. Mediation analyses reveal that for high-level construers, specific (vs. nonspecific) goals lead to success because they are perceived as more important. However, specific (vs. nonspecific) goals are also perceived as more difficult, which is more discouraging for low-level construers. C1 [Uelkuemen, Guelden] Univ So Calif, Marshall Sch Business, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA. [Cheema, Amar] Univ Virginia, McIntire Sch Commerce, Charlottesville, VA 22903 USA. RP Ulkumen, G (reprint author), Univ So Calif, Marshall Sch Business, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA. EM ulkumen@marshall.usc.edu; cheema@virginia.edu CR Ainslie G., 1992, CHOICE TIME, P177 Amit E, 2009, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V138, P400, DOI 10.1037/a0015835 Bandura A, 1977, COGNITIVE THERAPY RE, V1, P177, DOI DOI 10.1007/BF01186792 Baumeister RF, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V28, P670, DOI 10.1086/338209 BEM DJ, 1967, PSYCHOL REV, V74, P183, DOI 10.1037/h0024835 Benartzi S., 2004, J POLITICAL EC, V112, P164 Bertrand M, 2006, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V25, P8, DOI 10.1509/jppm.25.1.8 Botti S, 2006, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V25, P24, DOI 10.1509/jppm.25.1.24 Briley DA, 2006, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V25, P53, DOI 10.1509/jppm.25.1.53 Canova L, 2005, J ECON PSYCHOL, V26, P21, DOI 10.1016/j.joep.2003.08.007 CARTER DB, 1979, COGNITIVE THER RES, V3, P407, DOI 10.1007/BF01184456 Carver C. S., 1981, ATTENTION SELF REGUL Cheema A, 2008, J MARKETING RES, V45, P462, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.45.4.462 DIENER E, 1995, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V69, P851, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.69.5.851 Escalas JE, 2003, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V13, P246, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP1303_06 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 GARLAND H, 1983, J APPL PSYCHOL, V68, P20, DOI 10.1037/0021-9010.68.1.20 HALL RE, 1978, J POLIT ECON, V86, P971, DOI 10.1086/260724 Harkins SG, 2000, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V30, P1, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02303.x Hinsz VB, 1997, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V71, P287, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1997.2723 HOLLENBECK JR, 1987, J APPL PSYCHOL, V72, P212, DOI 10.1037/0021-9010.72.2.212 Our Huberman, 2004, NEW LESSONS BEHAV FI, P83 KIRSCHENBAUM DS, 1981, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P941, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.40.5.941 KOTLIKOFF LJ, 1982, AM ECON REV, V72, P1056 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 LOCKE EA, 1989, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V43, P270, DOI 10.1016/0749-5978(89)90053-8 Locke E. A, 1990, THEORY GOAL SETTING Locke EA, 2006, CURR DIR PSYCHOL SCI, V15, P265, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2006.00449.x Lynch JG, 2006, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V25, P67, DOI 10.1509/jppm.25.1.67 Madrian BC, 2001, Q J ECON, V116, P1149, DOI 10.1162/003355301753265543 MISCHEL W, 1976, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V34, P942 MODIGLIANI F, 1986, AM ECON REV, V76, P297 Muller D, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P852, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.852 NAYLOR JC, 1984, RES ORGAN BEHAV, V6, P95 Pham LB, 1999, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V25, P250, DOI 10.1177/0146167299025002010 Preacher KJ, 2008, BEHAV RES METHODS, V40, P879, DOI 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 Preacher KJ, 2007, MULTIVAR BEHAV RES, V42, P185, DOI 10.1080/00273170701341316 Semin GR, 1999, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V76, P877, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.76.6.877 SHEFRIN HM, 1988, ECON INQ, V26, P609 Soman D, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P52, DOI 10.1086/383423 Thaler RH, 2008, NUDGE IMPROVING DECI Thompson DV, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P562, DOI 10.1086/599325 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Ulkumen G, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P245, DOI 10.1086/587627 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 WILSON TD, 1993, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V19, P331, DOI 10.1177/0146167293193010 WRIGHT PM, 1994, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V59, P242, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1994.1059 NR 50 TC 10 Z9 11 U1 2 U2 32 PU AMER MARKETING ASSOC PI CHICAGO PA 311S WACKER DR, STE 5800, CHICAGO, IL 60606-6629 USA SN 0022-2437 J9 J MARKETING RES JI J. Mark. Res. PD DEC PY 2011 VL 48 IS 6 BP 958 EP 969 PG 12 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 850ZS UT WOS:000297238700004 ER PT J AU Bornemann, T Homburg, C AF Bornemann, Torsten Homburg, Christian TI Psychological Distance and the Dual Role of Price SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID CONSUMER DECISION-MAKING; PRODUCT EVALUATIONS; TEMPORAL DISTANCE; QUALITY; PERCEPTIONS; JUDGMENTS; BEHAVIOR; MODEL AB When evaluating a product, consumers may interpret price information as either an indicator of quality or an indicator of monetary sacrifice. On the basis of construal level theory, we propose that psychological distance alters the weight consumers attach to these opposing roles of price. Four experiments show (1) that from both a temporally and a socially distant perspective, the price-perceived quality relationship is more pronounced; (2) that from a temporally proximal perspective, the price-perceived sacrifice relationship is more pronounced; (3) that these effects stem from differences in the way consumers mentally construe price information; and (4) that when people initially use price to judge a product for distant future consumption, it receives less attention as an indicator of sacrifice in a later evaluation for near future consumption. These findings have implications for prelaunch communication activities and preference elicitation methods such as conjoint analysis. C1 [Bornemann, Torsten; Homburg, Christian] Univ Mannheim, Mkt Dept 1, D-68131 Mannheim, Germany. [Homburg, Christian] Univ Mannheim, Dept Mkt, D-68131 Mannheim, Germany. [Homburg, Christian] Univ Melbourne, Dept Management & Mkt, Melbourne, Vic 3010, Australia. RP Bornemann, T (reprint author), Univ Mannheim, Mkt Dept 1, L5,1, D-68131 Mannheim, Germany. EM tbornemann@bwl.uni-mannheim.de; homburg@bwl.uni-mannheim.de CR AHTOLA OT, 1984, ADV CONSUM RES, V11, P623 BAGOZZI RP, 1990, J CONSUM RES, V17, P127, DOI 10.1086/208543 Castano R, 2008, J MARKETING RES, V45, P320, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.45.3.320 Chandran S, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P375, DOI 10.1086/422116 Ding M, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P67, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.42.1.67.56890 Ding M, 2010, J RETAILING, V86, P69, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2010.01.002 ERICKSON GM, 1985, J CONSUM RES, V12, P195, DOI 10.1086/208508 Eyal T, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P781, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781 Fujita K, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P562, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2007.10.005 GREENLEAF EA, 1995, J CONSUM RES, V22, P186, DOI 10.1086/209444 HEELER RM, 1979, J MARKETING RES, V16, P60, DOI 10.2307/3150875 Kardes FR, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P368, DOI 10.1086/422115 KARDES FR, 1986, J CONSUM RES, V13, P1, DOI 10.1086/209043 Kim K, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P706, DOI 10.1086/592131 Kim YJ, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P634, DOI 10.1086/599765 Leavitt HJ, 1954, J BUS, V27, P205, DOI 10.1086/294039 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P113, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7 LICHTENSTEIN DR, 1993, J MARKETING RES, V30, P234, DOI 10.2307/3172830 LYNCH JG, 1988, J CONSUM RES, V15, P169 Lynch JG, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P107, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70016-5 Magee JC, 2010, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V36, P354, DOI 10.1177/0146167209360418 MEYERSLEVY J, 1992, J CONSUM RES, V19, P424, DOI 10.1086/209312 Miyazaki AD, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P146, DOI 10.1086/429606 Monroe Kent B., 2003, PRICING MAKING PROFI Peterman ML, 1997, PSYCHOL MARKET, V14, P561, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(199709)14:6<561::AID-MAR3>3.0.CO;2-5 Preacher KJ, 2008, BEHAV RES METHODS, V40, P879, DOI 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 RAO AR, 1988, J CONSUM RES, V15, P253, DOI 10.1086/209162 Suri R, 2003, J CONSUM RES, V30, P92, DOI 10.1086/374696 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Volckner F, 2008, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V36, P359, DOI 10.1007/s11747-007-0076-7 Volckner F, 2007, MARKET LETT, V18, P181, DOI 10.1007/s11002-007-9013-2 ZEITHAML VA, 1988, J MARKETING, V52, P2, DOI 10.2307/1251446 Zhao XS, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P197, DOI 10.1086/651257 NR 35 TC 21 Z9 23 U1 7 U2 61 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD OCT PY 2011 VL 38 IS 3 BP 490 EP 504 DI 10.1086/659874 PG 15 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 859AG UT WOS:000297845400007 ER PT J AU Winterich, KP Haws, KL AF Winterich, Karen Page Haws, Kelly L. TI Helpful Hopefulness: The Effect of Future Positive Emotions on Consumption SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID APPRAISAL-TENDENCY FRAMEWORK; SELF-CONTROL; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; EVOLUTIONARY APPROACH; COGNITIVE APPRAISAL; PRODUCT EVALUATION; CONSTRUAL LEVELS; IMPULSE CONTROL; HAPPINESS; MOOD AB Although positive affect may enhance self-control, some research suggests that this is not always the case. To clarify this relationship, we investigate the role of temporal focus on the effect of specific positive emotions on self-control dilemmas in snack consumption. In four studies, we demonstrate that participants experiencing a future-focused positive emotion (i.e., hopefulness) consume less unhealthy food and have lower preferences for unhealthy snacks than those in a past-or present-focused emotional state (i.e., pride, happiness). We demonstrate the role of temporal focus through its natural occurrence in emotion-induction essays (study 1), chronic temporal focus (study 2), and manipulation of anticipated versus retrospective emotional states (study 3). A fourth study demonstrates that self-control benefits do not arise from future-focused negative emotions (i.e., fear) as they do from future-focused positive emotions. These results suggest that consumers may benefit from adapting the temporal focus of positive emotions to the future. C1 [Winterich, Karen Page] Penn State Univ, Smeal Coll Business, University Pk, PA 16802 USA. [Haws, Kelly L.] Texas A&M Univ, Mays Business Sch, College Stn, TX 77843 USA. RP Winterich, KP (reprint author), Penn State Univ, Smeal Coll Business, 449 Business Bldg, University Pk, PA 16802 USA. EM kpw2@psu.edu; khaws@mays.tamu.edu RI Winterich, Karen/N-2397-2015 OI Winterich, Karen/0000-0002-4190-4036 CR Agrawal Nidhi, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V34, P100 Aiken L.S., 1991, MULTIPLE REGRESSION Andrade EB, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P355, DOI 10.1086/497546 Aspinwall LG, 1998, MOTIV EMOTION, V22, P1, DOI 10.1023/A:1023080224401 BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 Baumgartner Hans, 2007, EUROPEAN J SOCIAL PS, V38, P685 Blaine B., 1993, SELF ESTEEM PUZZLE L, P55 BLESS H, 1990, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V16, P331, DOI 10.1177/0146167290162013 Brinol P, 2007, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V93, P711, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.711 Cavanaugh LA, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P169, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70024-4 Clark M. S., 1982, COGNITIVE SOCIAL PSY, P73 Cohen JB, 2008, HDB CONSUMER PSYCHOL, P297 COOLS J, 1992, J ABNORM PSYCHOL, V101, P348, DOI 10.1037/0021-843X.101.2.348 Cryder CE, 2008, PSYCHOL SCI, V19, P525, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02118.x DeSteno D, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V78, P397, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.78.3.397 ELLSWORTH P. S., 1998, COGNITION EMOTION, V2, P301, DOI DOI 10.1080/02699938808412702 ELLSWORTH PC, 2003, HDB AFFECTIVE SCI, P572 Fedorikhin A, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P698, DOI 10.1086/655665 Fishbach A, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P370, DOI 10.1086/497548 Fishbach A, 2007, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V93, P158, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.93.2.158 Fitzsimons GJ, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P5, DOI 10.1086/589561 Fredrickson B. L., 2001, AM PSYCHOL, V56, P216 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Galuska DA, 1999, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V282, P1576, DOI 10.1001/jama.282.16.1576 Garg N, 2007, J MARKETING, V71, P194, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.71.1.194 Gasper K, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V74, P1350, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1350 Giner-Sorolla R, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V80, P206, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.80.2.206 Grady Denise, 2010, NY TIMES 0803 Griskevicius V, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V37, P238, DOI 10.1086/651442 Griskevicius V, 2010, EMOTION, V10, P190, DOI 10.1037/a0018421 Han S, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P158, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70023-2 Haws KL, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P680, DOI 10.1086/592129 Haws Kelly L, 2011, J ACAD MARKETING SCI HOCH SJ, 1991, J CONSUM RES, V17, P492, DOI 10.1086/208573 Isen AM, 2005, MOTIV EMOTION, V29, P297, DOI 10.1007/s11031-006-9019-8 Isen Alice M., 2003, EMERGING PERSPECTIVE, P365 Katzir M, 2010, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V36, P1314, DOI 10.1037/a0020120 KELTNER D, 1993, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V64, P740, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.64.5.740 Kemper T. D., 1978, SOCIAL INTERACTIONAL Kim H, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P983, DOI 10.1086/644763 Labroo AA, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P242, DOI 10.1086/597159 Labroo AA, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P800, DOI 10.1086/593683 Lazarus R. S., 1991, EMOTION ADAPTATION Lerner JS, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V81, P146, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.81.1.146 Lerner JS, 2004, PSYCHOL SCI, V15, P337, DOI 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00679.x Liu W, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P543, DOI 10.1086/588699 Lyubomirsky S, 2005, PSYCHOL BULL, V131, P803, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.131.6.803 MacInnis DJ, 2006, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V16, P224, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1603_4 MacInnis DJ, 2005, J MARKETING, V69, P1, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.69.1.1.55513 McGregor I, 2010, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V99, P133, DOI 10.1037/a0019701 Mukhopadhyay Anirban, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V19, P334 Nenkov Gergana, 2010, ADV CONSUMER RES, V37 Ortony A., 1988, COGNITIVE STRUCTURE Patrick VM, 2009, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V19, P537, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2009.05.006 Pham MT, 2004, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V14, P360 Pocheptsova A, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P992, DOI 10.1086/644760 Raghunathan R, 2006, J CONSUM RES, V32, P596, DOI 10.1086/500491 Raghunathan R, 2002, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V83, P510, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.83.3.510 Raghunathan Rajagopal, 1999, ORG BEHA HUMAN DECIS, V79, P1465 Ramanathan S, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P212, DOI 10.1086/519149 REISENZEIN R, 1990, MOTIV EMOTION, V14, P1, DOI 10.1007/BF00995546 Roseman I. J., 1984, REV PERSONALITY SOCI, V5, P11 Roseman IJ, 2004, COGNITION EMOTION, V18, P1, DOI 10.1080/02699930244000390 RUSSELL JA, 1980, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P1161, DOI 10.1037/h0077714 Sagristano MD, 2002, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V131, P364, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.131.3.364 Shipp AJ, 2009, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V110, P1, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.05.001 SMITH CA, 1985, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V48, P813, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.48.4.813 SNYDER CR, 1991, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V60, P570, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.60.4.570 Spencer SJ, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P845, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.845 Tangney JP, 2004, J PERS, V72, P271, DOI 10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00263.x Tice DM, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V80, P53, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.80.1.53 Tiedens LZ, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V81, P973, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.81.6.973 Tracy JL, 2004, PSYCHOL SCI, V15, P194, DOI 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.01503008.x Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 TROPE Y, 1994, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V66, P646, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.66.4.646 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 Wilcox Keith, 2011, J CONSUMER RES, V38 Williams LA, 2008, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V94, P1007, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.94.6.1007 Winterich KP, 2010, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V36, P1467, DOI 10.1177/0146167210384710 Zhang YL, 2010, J MARKETING RES, V47, P945 NR 81 TC 42 Z9 42 U1 7 U2 77 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD OCT PY 2011 VL 38 IS 3 BP 505 EP 524 DI 10.1086/659873 PG 20 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 859AG UT WOS:000297845400008 ER PT J AU Hansen, J Wanke, M AF Hansen, Jochim Waenke, Michaela TI The abstractness of luxury SO JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article DE Luxury; Language; Abstractness; Construal level theory; Linguistic category model ID IMPLICIT ASSOCIATION TEST; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; CONSTRUAL-LEVEL; COGNITION; LANGUAGE AB The purchase of luxury goods is relatively exclusive, limited, and often merely hypothetical. Thus, luxury goods may be perceived as more psychologically distant than ordinary goods. Based on the link between psychological distance and abstract mental representation, we hypothesized and found in three studies that both consumers and advertisers describe luxury products in more abstract language than they describe ordinary products, and that abstract product descriptions are perceived as more luxurious than concrete product descriptions. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. C1 [Hansen, Jochim] Univ Basel, Dept Psychol, CH-4055 Basel, Switzerland. [Waenke, Michaela] Univ Mannheim, Dept Psychol, D-68131 Mannheim, Germany. RP Hansen, J (reprint author), Univ Basel, Dept Psychol, Missionsstr 62-64, CH-4055 Basel, Switzerland. EM jochim.hansen@nyu.edu; michaela.waenke@uni-mannheim.de CR Bar-Anan Y, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P609, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.609 Dubois B., 2001, 736 HEC SCH MAN Eyal T, 2009, SOCIAL PSYCHOL CONSU, P61 Fiedler K, 2008, J LANG SOC PSYCHOL, V27, P182, DOI 10.1177/0261927X07313656 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Forster J, 2008, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V94, P579, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.94.4.579 Gasper K, 2002, PSYCHOL SCI, V13, P34, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00406 Greenwald AG, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V74, P1464, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.74.6.1464 Hagtvedt H, 2009, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V19, P608, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2009.05.007 Hansen J, 2010, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V36, P1576, DOI 10.1177/0146167210386238 The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 2000, AM HER DICT ENGL LAN Kemp S, 1998, J ECON PSYCHOL, V19, P591, DOI 10.1016/S0167-4870(98)00026-9 Kivetz R, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V29, P199, DOI 10.1086/341571 Ledgerwood A, 2010, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P638, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.03.001 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Trope J., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, V2, P353 Liberman N, 2009, COGNITIVE SCI, V33, P1330, DOI 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01061.x Liviatan I, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1256, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.007 Miyazaki AD, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P146, DOI 10.1086/429606 NUEMO JL, 1998, BUS HORIZONS, V41, P61 SEMIN GR, 1988, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V54, P558, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.54.4.558 Semin G. R., 1991, EUROPEAN REV SOCIAL, V2, P1, DOI 10.1080/14792779143000006 Semin GR, 2008, J LANG SOC PSYCHOL, V27, P197, DOI 10.1177/0261927X07313664 Silverstein M., 2003, TRADING NEW AM LUXUR Stephan E, 2010, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V98, P268, DOI 10.1037/a0016960 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 NR 29 TC 9 Z9 9 U1 3 U2 26 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV PI AMSTERDAM PA PO BOX 211, 1000 AE AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS SN 0167-4870 J9 J ECON PSYCHOL JI J. Econ. Psychol. PD OCT PY 2011 VL 32 IS 5 BP 789 EP 796 DI 10.1016/j.joep.2011.05.005 PG 8 WC Economics; Psychology, Multidisciplinary SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA 830KB UT WOS:000295654800015 ER PT J AU Yan, DF Sengupta, J AF Yan, Dengfeng Sengupta, Jaideep TI Effects of Construal Level on the Price-Quality Relationship SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID PRODUCT QUALITY; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; SOCIAL DISTANCE; HEALTH-RISK; INFORMATION; CUES; PERSUASION; SELF; JUDGMENTS; OTHERS AB Drawing on construal level theory, this research proposes that consumers' reliance on price (vs. feature-specific product attributes) for making quality inferences will be enhanced when the judgment is psychologically distant (vs. close). For example, the impact of price (attributes) on quality inferences should increase (decrease) when these inferences are made with regard to another person rather than oneself. A series of experiments provides support for this thesis. In addition, we (a) document a theoretically derived reversal of the core pattern, (b) reconcile the current findings with seemingly opposed results in the construal literature, and (c) rule out several alternative explanations for the obtained effects. The insights obtained in this work enrich our understanding of three different areas of research: the price-quality link, construal level theory, and the self-other distinction. C1 [Yan, Dengfeng; Sengupta, Jaideep] Hong Kong Univ Sci & Technol, Sch Business & Management, Kowloon, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. RP Yan, DF (reprint author), Hong Kong Univ Sci & Technol, Sch Business & Management, Kowloon, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. EM dengfeng@ust.hk; mkjaisen@ust.hk OI Sengupta, Jaideep/0000-0001-6118-5895 CR Aaker JL, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P33, DOI 10.1086/321946 Agrawal N., 2006, VALUE HIGHLIGH UNPUB Agrawal N, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P448, DOI 10.1086/597331 ALBA JW, 1985, J MARKETING RES, V22, P340, DOI 10.2307/3151430 BAUMGARTNER H, 1995, J CONSUM RES, V21, P634, DOI 10.1086/209424 BEALES H, 1981, J CONSUM RES, V8, P11, DOI 10.1086/208836 BRONIARCZYK SM, 1994, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V57, P117, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1994.1007 CHAIKEN S, 1980, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P752, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.39.5.752 Chandran S, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P375, DOI 10.1086/422116 Chandran S, 2005, ADV CONSUM RES, V32, P182 CONNOLLY T, 1995, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V64, P219, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1995.1101 Elder RS, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P748, DOI 10.1086/605327 Erdem Tulin, 1998, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V7, P131, DOI DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP0702_02 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Garner W. R., 1978, COGNITION CATEGORIZA, P99 HERR PM, 1991, J CONSUM RES, V17, P454, DOI 10.1086/208570 Holbrook M. B., 1985, PERCEIVED QUALITY CO, P32 JACOBY J, 1971, J APPL PSYCHOL, V55, P570, DOI 10.1037/h0032045 JOHNSON MD, 1989, J CONSUM RES, V16, P300, DOI 10.1086/209216 Jones E. E., 1971, ATTRIBUTION PERCEIV, P79 Kardes FR, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P368, DOI 10.1086/422115 Kardes FR, 2008, HDB CONSUMER PSYCHOL, P165 Keller Punam Anand, 1994, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V3, P29, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(08)80027-7 Kim HY, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P877, DOI 10.1086/593700 Kim K, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P706, DOI 10.1086/592131 Kray L, 1999, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V12, P207, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199909)12:3<207::AID-BDM322>3.0.CO;2-P Krishna A, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P807, DOI 10.1086/523286 KUNDA Z, 1990, PSYCHOL BULL, V108, P480, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.108.3.480 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Liviatan I, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1256, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.007 MCCONNELL JD, 1968, J APPL PSYCHOL, V52, P331, DOI 10.1037/h0026040 MILLER DT, 1975, PSYCHOL BULL, V82, P213, DOI 10.1037/h0076486 Monroe Kent B., 2003, PRICING MAKING PROFI NISBETT RE, 1973, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V27, P154, DOI 10.1037/h0034779 PECHMANN C, 1992, J CONSUM RES, V19, P373, DOI 10.1086/209308 Pronin E, 2004, PSYCHOL REV, V111, P781, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.111.3.781 Pronin E, 2009, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V41, P1, DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)00401-2 Raghubir P, 2004, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMEN, V46, P1 Raghubir P, 2008, INT J RES MARK, V25, P327, DOI 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2008.07.006 Rao AR, 1999, J MARKETING RES, V36, P258, DOI 10.2307/3152097 RAO AR, 1988, J CONSUM RES, V15, P253, DOI 10.1086/209162 Sanbonmatsu DM, 1997, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V69, P251, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1997.2686 SZYBILLO GJ, 1974, J APPL PSYCHOL, V59, P74, DOI 10.1037/h0035796 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Trope Y, 2010, PSYCHOL REV, V117, P440, DOI 10.1037/a0018963 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 WIENER JL, 1985, J CONSUM RES, V12, P245, DOI 10.1086/208513 Zhou KZ, 2002, INT J RES MARK, V19, P349, DOI 10.1016/S0167-8116(02)00096-4 NR 51 TC 27 Z9 28 U1 6 U2 51 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD AUG PY 2011 VL 38 IS 2 BP 376 EP 389 DI 10.1086/659755 PG 14 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 858ZZ UT WOS:000297844600011 ER PT J AU Arts, JWC Frambach, RT Bijmolt, THA AF Arts, Joep W. C. Frambach, Ruud T. Bijmolt, Tammo H. A. TI Generalizations on consumer innovation adoption: A meta-analysis on drivers of intention and behavior SO INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN MARKETING LA English DT Article DE Innovation adoption; Intention versus behavior; Meta-analysis ID PURCHASE INTENTIONS; INFORMATION-TECHNOLOGY; PRODUCT EVALUATION; META-ANALYSIS; TIME; ACCEPTANCE; SALES; LEVEL; MODEL; TRIAL AB Previous research has shown that consumer intentions to adopt innovations are often poor predictors of adoption behavior. An important reason for this may be that the evaluative criteria consumers use in both stages of the adoption process weigh differently. Using construal level theory, we develop expectations on the influence of innovation characteristics across the intention and behavior stages of the adoption process. Using meta-analysis, we derive generalizations on drivers of intentions and actual innovation adoption behavior. The results show important differences across both stages. Consumers show higher levels of adoption intention for innovations that are more complex, better match their needs, and involve lower uncertainty. However, consumers are found to actually adopt innovations with less complexity and higher relative advantages. Adopter demographics are found to explain little variance in adoption intention and behavior, whereas adopter psychographics are found to be influential in both stages. These findings have implications for innovation adoption theory, for managers involved in new product and service marketing, and for future research on innovation adoption. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. C1 [Frambach, Ruud T.] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Fac Econ & Business Adm, NL-1081 HV Amsterdam, Netherlands. [Bijmolt, Tammo H. A.] Univ Groningen, NL-9700 AB Groningen, Netherlands. RP Frambach, RT (reprint author), Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Fac Econ & Business Adm, Boelelaan 1105, NL-1081 HV Amsterdam, Netherlands. EM rframbach@feweb.vu.nl RI Frambach, Ruud/A-4624-2011; Alves, Luciano/G-3655-2011; Bijmolt, Tammo/C-1159-2012 CR AJZEN I, 1985, ACTION CONTROL COGNI, V2 Alexander DL, 2008, J MARKETING RES, V45, P307, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.45.3.307 ASSMUS G, 1984, J MARKETING RES, V21, P65, DOI 10.2307/3151793 BEMMAOR AC, 1995, J MARKETING RES, V32, P176, DOI 10.2307/3152046 Berger J, 2008, J MARKETING RES, V45, P1, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.45.1.1 Berlyne D.E., 1971, AESTHETICS PSYCHOBIO Bettman J. R., 1979, INFORM PROCESSING TH Bijmolt THA, 2001, MARKET LETT, V12, P157, DOI 10.1023/A:1011117103381 Castano R, 2008, J MARKETING RES, V45, P320, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.45.3.320 Cooper H., 1994, HDB RES SYNTHESIS DARDEN WR, 1974, J MARKETING RES, V11, P79, DOI 10.2307/3150996 DAVIS FD, 1989, MIS QUART, V13, P319, DOI 10.2307/249008 Demoulin NTM, 2009, J RETAILING, V85, P391, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2009.05.007 Fishbein M., 1975, BELIEF ATTITUDE INTE GARDIAL SF, 1994, J CONSUM RES, V20, P548, DOI 10.1086/209369 GATIGNON H, 1985, J CONSUM RES, V11, P849, DOI 10.1086/209021 Geyskens I, 1998, INT J RES MARK, V15, P223, DOI 10.1016/S0167-8116(98)00002-0 Goldenberg J, 2009, J MARKETING, V73, P1 Gollwitzer PM, 1999, AM PSYCHOL, V54, P493, DOI 10.1037//0003-066X.54.7.493 Gutman J., 1982, J MARKETING, V46, P66 Hauser JR, 2006, MARKET SCI, V25, P687, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1050.0144 Hedges L. V., 1985, STAT METHODS METAANA Henard DH, 2001, J MARKETING RES, V38, P362, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.38.3.362.18861 Herzenstein M, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P251, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.2.251 HIRSCHMAN EC, 1980, J CONSUM RES, V7, P283, DOI 10.1086/208816 Hoeffler S, 2003, J MARKETING RES, V40, P406, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.40.4.406.19394 HOLAK SL, 1990, J PROD INNOVAT MANAG, V7, P59, DOI 10.1111/1540-5885.710059 Howell D., 2001, STAT METHODS PSYCHOL Hox J., 2002, MULTILEVEL ANAL TECH HUEDOMEDINA, 2006, PSYCHOL METHODS, V11, P193 Hunter John E., 2004, METHODS METAANALYSIS Im S, 2003, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V31, P61, DOI 10.1177/0092070302238602 Infosino W. J., 1986, MARKET SCI, V5, P372, DOI 10.1287/mksc.5.4.372 JAMIESON LF, 1989, J MARKETING RES, V26, P336, DOI 10.2307/3172905 JAN H, 2007, INT DIRECTOR INNOVAT KAHNEMAN D, 1979, ECONOMETRICA, V47, P263, DOI 10.2307/1914185 Karahanna E, 1999, MIS QUART, V23, P183, DOI 10.2307/249751 Lambert-Pandraud R, 2010, J MARKETING, V74, P104 Lynch JG, 2006, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V25, P67, DOI 10.1509/jppm.25.1.67 MESSINGER, 1998, J PSYCHOL, V132, P558 Meuter ML, 2005, J MARKETING, V69, P61, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.69.2.61.60759 Mittal V, 1999, J MARKETING, V63, P88, DOI 10.2307/1251947 Moreau P. C., 2001, J MARKETING RES, V38, P14 MORRISON DG, 1979, J MARKETING, V43, P65, DOI 10.2307/1250742 Morwitz VG, 2007, INT J FORECASTING, V23, P347, DOI 10.1016/j.ijforecast.2007.05.015 OSTLUND LE, 1974, J CONSUM RES, V1, P23, DOI 10.1086/208587 PROCHASKA JO, 1994, HEALTH PSYCHOL, V13, P39, DOI 10.1037/0278-6133.13.1.39 RAJU PS, 1980, J CONSUM RES, V7, P272, DOI 10.1086/208815 Rogers E, 2003, DIFFUSION INNOVATION ROOK DW, 1987, J CONSUM RES, V14, P189, DOI 10.1086/209105 Rosenthal Robert, 1991, METAANALYTIC PROCEDU Schnaars S, 2004, TECHNOL FORECAST SOC, V71, P197, DOI 10.1016/S0040-1625(02)00410-9 SHEPPARD BH, 1988, J CONSUM RES, V15, P325, DOI 10.1086/209170 Sriram S, 2010, MARKET SCI, V29, P291, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1090.0506 STEENKAMP, 2003, J CONSUM RES, V30, P368 SUMMERS JO, 1971, J MARKETING RES, V8, P313, DOI 10.2307/3149568 Sun BH, 2010, INT J RES MARK, V27, P356, DOI 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2010.06.001 Sutton AJ, 2000, METHODS METANALYSIS Taylor S., 1995, INT J RES MARK, V12, P137, DOI DOI 10.1016/0167-8116(94)00019-K Thompson DV, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P431, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.2005.42.4.431 Tornatzky L.G., 1982, ENGINEERING, V29, P28 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 Van Ittersum K, 2010, J MARKETING RES, V47, P808 VANDECASTEELE, 2010, RES MARKETING, V27, P308 WILTON PC, 1981, J CONSUM RES, V8, P162, DOI 10.1086/208852 Wood SL, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V29, P416, DOI 10.1086/344425 Wood SL, 2006, J MARKETING, V70, P44, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.70.3.44 Young MR, 1998, MANAGE SCI, V44, P188, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.44.2.188 NR 69 TC 72 Z9 73 U1 12 U2 108 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV PI AMSTERDAM PA PO BOX 211, 1000 AE AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS SN 0167-8116 J9 INT J RES MARK JI Int. J. Res. Mark. PD JUN PY 2011 VL 28 IS 2 BP 134 EP 144 DI 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2010.11.002 PG 11 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 795BM UT WOS:000292946500007 ER PT J AU White, K MacDonnell, R Dahl, DW AF White, Katherine MacDonnell, Rhiannon Dahl, Darren W. TI It's the Mind-Set That Matters: The Role of Construal Level and Message Framing in Influencing Consumer Efficacy and Conservation Behaviors SO JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE recycling; message framing; loss frame; gain frame; construal level; abstract thinking; concrete thinking ID SELF-EFFICACY; REGULATORY FOCUS; BRAND EVALUATION; DISTANT FUTURE; FLUENCY; PERSUASION; IDENTIFICATION; INTENTIONS; MECHANISMS; DECISIONS AB Across three studies, this research elucidates when loss- versus gain-framed messages are most effective in influencing consumer recycling by examining the moderating role of whether a more concrete or abstract mind-set is activated. First, in a field study, the authors demonstrate that loss frames are more efficacious when paired with low-level, concrete mind-sets, whereas gain frames are more effective when paired with high-level, abstract mind-sets. This is an important, substantive finding that persisted over a significant time span. In addition, in two additional laboratory studies, they find further evidence for this matching hypothesis, in which a pairing of loss- (gain-) framed messages that activates more concrete (abstract) mind-sets leads to enhanced processing fluency, increased efficacy, and, as a result, more positive recycling intentions. The findings have implications for marketers, consumers, and society as a whole. C1 [White, Katherine; MacDonnell, Rhiannon] Univ Calgary, Haskayne Sch Business, Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada. [Dahl, Darren W.] Univ British Columbia, Sauder Sch Business, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada. RP White, K (reprint author), Univ Calgary, Haskayne Sch Business, Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada. EM kate.white@haskayne.ucalgary.ca; rmacdonn@ucalgary.ca; darren.dahl@sauder.ubc.ca CR BANDURA A, 1983, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V45, P1017, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.45.5.1017 BANDURA A, 1977, PSYCHOL REV, V84, P191, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.84.2.191 BANDURA A, 1982, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P5, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.43.1.5 BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 Baumeister R. F., 2001, REV GEN PSYCHOL, V5, P323, DOI [10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.323, DOI 10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.323] BERNIER M, 1986, COGNITIVE THER RES, V10, P319, DOI 10.1007/BF01173469 BLOCK LG, 1995, J MARKETING RES, V32, P192, DOI 10.2307/3152047 BRENDL CM, 1995, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V69, P1028, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.69.6.1028 Cesario J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P388, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.3.388 DICLEMENTE CC, 1981, COGNITIVE THER RES, V5, P175, DOI 10.1007/BF01172525 EPA, 2009, MUN SOL WAST GEN REC Forster J, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P1115, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.75.5.1115 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 HOEGG JA, 2009, LEARNING CONTEXT ROL Iacobucci Dawn, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P130 Keller PA, 2003, J MARKETING RES, V40, P54, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.40.1.54.19133 Labroo AA, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P374, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.3.374 Labroo AA, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P800, DOI 10.1086/593683 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Lee AY, 2004, J MARKETING RES, V41, P151, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.41.2.151.28665 Lee AY, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P205, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.205 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Lindsay JJ, 1997, J APPL SOC PSYCHOL, V27, P1799, DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1997.tb01626.x Lockwood P, 2002, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V83, P854, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.83.4.854 Lord Kenneth R., 1994, PSYCHOL MARKET, V11, P341, DOI 10.1002/mar.4220110404 MAHESWARAN D, 1990, J MARKETING RES, V27, P361, DOI 10.2307/3172593 Mazar N, 2010, PSYCHOL SCI, V21, P494, DOI 10.1177/0956797610363538 MEYEROWITZ BE, 1987, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V52, P500, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.500 Meyers-Levy J, 2004, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V14, P159, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1401&2_18 Monga A, 2005, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V15, P325, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1504_7 NEWCOMB MD, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P564, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.3.564 Novemsky N, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P347, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.347 OBERMILLER C, 1995, J ADVERTISING, V24, P55 RAY ML, 1970, J MARKETING, V34, P54, DOI 10.2307/1250296 Rothman AJ, 1997, PSYCHOL BULL, V121, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.121.1.3 Rozin P, 2001, PERS SOC PSYCHOL REV, V5, P296, DOI 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0504_2 SCHULTZ PW, 1995, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V15, P105, DOI 10.1016/0272-4944(95)90019-5 Schultz PW, 1999, BASIC APPL SOC PSYCH, V21, P25, DOI 10.1207/s15324834basp2101_3 Schwarz N., 1991, EMOTION SOCIAL JUDGM, P55 Shiv B, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P199, DOI 10.1086/383435 Shiv B, 1997, J CONSUM RES, V24, P285, DOI 10.1086/209510 Sobel ME, 1982, SOCIOL METHODOL, P290, DOI DOI 10.2307/270723 TAYLOR SE, 1991, PSYCHOL BULL, V110, P67, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.110.1.67 TROPE Y, 1986, PSYCHOL REV, V93, P239, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.93.3.239 TROPE Y, 1989, SOC COGNITION, V7, P296, DOI 10.1521/soco.1989.7.3.296 TVERSKY A, 1981, SCIENCE, V211, P453, DOI 10.1126/science.7455683 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 Wakslak CJ, 2008, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V95, P757, DOI 10.1037/a0012939 WEGENER DT, 1994, EUR J SOC PSYCHOL, V24, P25, DOI 10.1002/ejsp.2420240103 White K, 2009, J MARKETING, V73, P109 White K, 2009, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V19, P73, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2008.12.010 WOOD R, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V56, P407, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.56.3.407 Zumbo B., 2007, SOCIAL INDICATORS RE, V87, P367, DOI 10.1007/s11205-007-9143-1 NR 55 TC 66 Z9 72 U1 4 U2 73 PU AMER MARKETING ASSOC PI CHICAGO PA 311S WACKER DR, STE 5800, CHICAGO, IL 60606-6629 USA SN 0022-2437 J9 J MARKETING RES JI J. Mark. Res. PD JUN PY 2011 VL 48 IS 3 BP 472 EP 485 PG 14 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 770HF UT WOS:000291076900005 ER PT J AU Zhao, M Xie, JH AF Zhao, Min Xie, Jinhong TI Effects of Social and Temporal Distance on Consumers' Responses to Peer Recommendations SO JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE preference over time; construal level; recommendation; word of mouth; consumer reviews ID WORD-OF-MOUTH; PREFERENCE; TIME AB This article examines the interplay of social and temporal distance on consumers' responses to others' recommendations. Drawing on research on psychological distance and the "fit" literature, the authors hypothesize that others' recommendations are more persuasive when the construal levels associated with both social distance and temporal distance are congruent. Specifically, the authors first demonstrate a time-contingent effect of recommendation: Others' recommendations lead to a greater preference shift when people make decisions for distant-future consumption than for near-future consumption (Studies 1 and 2). Second, contrary to conventional wisdom, the authors find that close others do not always have a greater impact than distant others. Instead, recommendations from close others are more influential in shifting near-future preferences than those from distant others, whereas recommendations from distant others are more influential than those from close others in shifting distant-future preferences (Study 3). The authors demonstrate that others' recommendations are perceived to be more relevant as the underlying mechanism when there is a match of construal levels between the social and temporal distance. Research and managerial implications are discussed. C1 [Zhao, Min] Univ Toronto, Rotman Sch Management, Toronto, ON M5S 1A1, Canada. [Xie, Jinhong] Univ Florida, Warrington Coll Business, Gainesville, FL 32611 USA. RP Zhao, M (reprint author), Univ Toronto, Rotman Sch Management, Toronto, ON M5S 1A1, Canada. EM min.zhao@rotman.utoronto.ca; jinhong.xie@cba.ufl.edu CR Ariely D, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V27, P279, DOI 10.1086/317585 BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 CASTANO R, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V45, P320 Chen Y., 2010, ONLINE SOCIAL INTERA Chen YB, 2005, MARKET SCI, V24, P218, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1040.0089 Chen YB, 2008, MANAGE SCI, V54, P477, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.1070.0810 Duhan DF, 1997, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V25, P283, DOI 10.1177/0092070397254001 FIEDLER K, 1995, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V21, P525, DOI 10.1177/0146167295215010 Gershoff AD, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P418, DOI 10.1086/323730 GINO F, 2006, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V20, P21 Godes D, 2005, MARKET LETT, V16, P415, DOI 10.1007/s11002-005-5902-4 Higgins T., 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P1140 Higgins Tory, 2000, AM PSYCHOL, V55, P1217 Hoeffler S, 2003, J MARKETING RES, V40, P406, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.40.4.406.19394 Jones E. E., 1972, ATTRIBUTION PERCEIV, P79 Kim Hakkyun, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P877 Kim K, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P706, DOI 10.1086/592131 Lee AY, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P205, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.205 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Linville PW, 1996, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V70, P421, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.421 MISCHEL W, 1989, SCIENCE, V244, P933, DOI 10.1126/science.2658056 PETTY R, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V24, P227 QUATTRONE GA, 1980, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P141, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.38.1.141 RACHLIN H, 1995, BEHAV BRAIN SCI, V18, P109 Shugan SM, 2005, INT J RES MARK, V22, P351, DOI 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2004.11.004 SHUGAN SM, 1980, J CONSUM RES, V7, P99, DOI 10.1086/208799 THALER R, 1981, ECON LETT, V8, P201, DOI 10.1016/0165-1765(81)90067-7 Thomas M., 2007, EFFECTS INFORM TYPE Thompson DV, 2006, J CONSUM RES, V32, P530, DOI 10.1086/500483 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X West PM, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V25, P38, DOI 10.1086/209525 Xie JH, 2001, MARKET SCI, V20, P219, DOI 10.1287/mksc.20.3.219.9765 Yaniv I, 2003, ORG BEHAV HUMAN DECI, V93, P1 Zhao M, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P379, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.379 NR 36 TC 34 Z9 35 U1 7 U2 60 PU AMER MARKETING ASSOC PI CHICAGO PA 311S WACKER DR, STE 5800, CHICAGO, IL 60606-6629 USA SN 0022-2437 J9 J MARKETING RES JI J. Mark. Res. PD JUN PY 2011 VL 48 IS 3 BP 486 EP 496 PG 11 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 770HF UT WOS:000291076900006 ER PT J AU Pyone, JS Isen, AM AF Pyone, Jin Seok Isen, Alice M. TI Positive Affect, Intertemporal Choice, and Levels of Thinking: Increasing Consumers' Willingness to Wait SO JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE intertemporal choice; self-control; positive affect; cognitive flexibility; construal level; action identification; time perspective ID SELF-REGULATION; ACTION IDENTIFICATION; BEHAVIOR; MOTIVATION; TIME; ACHIEVEMENT; CONSUMPTION; IMPATIENCE; DEPLETION; STIMULI AB Six studies examine the influence of positive affect on self-control in intertemporal choice (consumers' willingness to wait for desired rewards) and the cognitive processes underlying this effect. Two studies measure participants' levels of thinking in two different ways, showing that positive affect can promote forward-looking, high-level thinking. Two studies using a delay-of-gratification paradigm demonstrate this forward-looking thinking and show it to be a mindful process. Participants in positive (vs. neutral) affect were more likely to choose a larger mail-in rebate over a smaller instant rebate when the reward differences were moderate (but not when they were small). Two studies demonstrate the impact of positive affect on intertemporal preference in another way, showing that participants in positive affect do not discount the value of delayed outcomes as much as people in neutral affect do (decreased present bias). Together, the results indicate that positive affect promotes cognitive flexibility and fosters a higher level of thinking and a more future-oriented time perspective, without obscuring practical considerations and other needed detail, including context and opportunity costs, when evaluating intertemporal options. C1 [Pyone, Jin Seok; Isen, Alice M.] Cornell Univ, Johnson Grad Sch Management, Ithaca, NY 14853 USA. [Isen, Alice M.] Cornell Univ, Coll Arts & Sci, Ithaca, NY 14853 USA. RP Pyone, JS (reprint author), Cornell Univ, Johnson Grad Sch Management, Ithaca, NY 14853 USA. EM jp436@cornell.edu; ami4@cornell.edu CR Ashby FG, 1999, PSYCHOL REV, V106, P529, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.106.3.529 Aspinwall LG, 1998, MOTIV EMOTION, V22, P1, DOI 10.1023/A:1023080224401 Aspinwall LG, 2005, MOTIV EMOTION, V29, P203, DOI 10.1007/s11031-006-9013-1 Carstensen LL, 2006, SCIENCE, V312, P1913, DOI 10.1126/science.1127488 Carstensen L. L., 1996, FUTURE TIME PERSPECT Erez A, 2002, J APPL PSYCHOL, V87, P1055, DOI 10.1037//0021-9010.87.6.1055 Estrada CA, 1997, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V72, P117, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1997.2734 Frederick S, 2002, J ECON LIT, V40, P351, DOI 10.1257/002205102320161311 Fredrickson BL, 2005, COGNITION EMOTION, V19, P313, DOI 10.1080/02699930441000238 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Gervey B, 2005, MOTIV EMOTION, V29, P269, DOI 10.1007/s11031-006-9011-3 Isen AM, 2005, MOTIV EMOTION, V29, P297, DOI 10.1007/s11031-006-9019-8 ISEN AM, 1984, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P1206, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.47.6.1206 ISEN AM, 1985, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V48, P1413, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.48.6.1413 ISEN AM, 1987, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V52, P1122, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.52.6.1122 Isen A., 2007, PERSONS CONTEXT BUIL, P130 Isen A. M., 2007, OXFORD HDB METHODS P, P250 Johnson KJ, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P875, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01631.x Kazen M, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P426, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.3.426 Li XP, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P649, DOI 10.1086/521900 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Loewenstein G, 1996, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V65, P272, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1996.0028 Malkoc S, 2007, ADV CONSUM RES, V34, P654 Malkoc SA, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P618, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.4.618 MISCHEL W, 1975, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V31, P254, DOI 10.1037/h0076272 MISCHEL W, 1989, SCIENCE, V244, P933, DOI 10.1126/science.2658056 Nadler RT, 2010, PSYCHOL SCI, V21, P1770, DOI 10.1177/0956797610387441 O'Donoghue T, 1999, AM ECON REV, V89, P103, DOI 10.1257/aer.89.1.103 STAW BM, 1993, ADMIN SCI QUART, V38, P304, DOI 10.2307/2393415 Taylor SE, 1998, AM PSYCHOL, V53, P429, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.53.4.429 THALER R, 1981, ECON LETT, V8, P201, DOI 10.1016/0165-1765(81)90067-7 Tice DM, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P379, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.05.007 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Wan EW, 2008, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V34, P32, DOI 10.1177/0146167207306756 NR 36 TC 31 Z9 33 U1 4 U2 47 PU AMER MARKETING ASSOC PI CHICAGO PA 311S WACKER DR, STE 5800, CHICAGO, IL 60606-6629 USA SN 0022-2437 J9 J MARKETING RES JI J. Mark. Res. PD JUN PY 2011 VL 48 IS 3 BP 532 EP 543 PG 12 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 770HF UT WOS:000291076900009 ER PT J AU Roehm, ML Roehm, HA AF Roehm, Michelle L. Roehm, Harper A., Jr. TI The influence of redemption time frame on responses to incentives SO JOURNAL OF THE ACADEMY OF MARKETING SCIENCE LA English DT Article DE Incentives; Construal level; Promotions ID CONSUMER PERCEPTIONS; TEMPORAL DISTANCE; PRICE INFORMATION; SEMANTIC CUES; INTENTIONS; IMPACT; FUTURE; GOAL; ADVERTISEMENTS; CONGRUENCY AB In the present research, Construal Level Theory is used to predict that consumers will mentally characterize incentive offers differently as a function of their redemption time frames. Data from two experiments indicate that concrete features, such as the face value of an offer or its mode of presentation (as a dollar figure or as a percentage discount), are prominent for incentives with short time frames but not for incentives with long ones. In the latter case, abstract features, such as the incentive's goal congruity or fit with personal values, are more likely to influence responses. C1 [Roehm, Michelle L.] Wake Forest Univ, Sch Business, Winston Salem, NC 27109 USA. [Roehm, Harper A., Jr.] Univ N Carolina, Bryan Sch Business & Econ, Greensboro, NC 27492 USA. RP Roehm, ML (reprint author), Wake Forest Univ, Sch Business, POB 7659, Winston Salem, NC 27109 USA. EM Michelle.Roehm@mba.wfu.edu; haroehm@uncg.edu CR Ainslie G. W., 1992, CHOICE TIME, P57 BLAIR EA, 1981, J MARKETING, V45, P61, DOI 10.2307/1251665 Blattberg R. C., 1990, SALES PROMOTION CONC Braunsberger K, 2005, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V33, P620, DOI 10.1177/0092070305279613 Briesch RA, 1997, J CONSUM RES, V24, P202, DOI 10.1086/209505 Chen SFS, 1998, J RETAILING, V74, P353, DOI 10.1016/S0022-4359(99)80100-6 Compeau LD, 1998, J PUBLIC POLICY MARK, V17, P257 DELLABITTA AJ, 1981, J MARKETING RES, V18, P416 Dhar SK, 1996, J MARKETING, V60, P17, DOI 10.2307/1251885 Elster J., 1992, CHOICE TIME, P213 Eyal T, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P781, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781 Eyal T, 2009, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V45, P35, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.07.023 Grewal D, 1996, J CONSUM RES, V23, P148, DOI 10.1086/209473 HUFFMAN C, 1993, J CONSUM RES, V20, P190, DOI 10.1086/209343 KAHLE LR, 1986, J CONSUM RES, V13, P405, DOI 10.1086/209079 KLEIN RL, 1985, HDB SALES PROMOTION Krishna A, 2002, J RETAILING, V78, P101, DOI 10.1016/S0022-4359(02)00072-6 LANDIS JR, 1977, BIOMETRICS, V33, P159, DOI 10.2307/2529310 Leone RP, 1996, J RETAILING, V72, P273, DOI 10.1016/S0022-4359(96)90030-5 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Liberman N, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P143, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.12.009 LICHTENSTEIN DR, 1991, J CONSUM RES, V18, P380, DOI 10.1086/209267 Martin IM, 2001, J MARKETING RES, V38, P471, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.38.4.471.18912 Mazumdar T, 2005, J MARKETING, V69, P84, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.2005.69.4.84 MOBLEY MF, 1988, J CONSUM RES, V15, P273, DOI 10.1086/209164 Monroe KB, 1999, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V27, P207, DOI 10.1177/0092070399272006 MOORMAN C, 1993, J CONSUM RES, V20, P208, DOI 10.1086/209344 Murphy WH, 2004, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V32, P127, DOI 10.1177/0092070303261582 Rokeach M., 1973, NATURE HUMAN VALUES Schindler R. M., 1992, PSYCHOL MARKET, V9, P431, DOI DOI 10.1002/MAR.4220090603 Sela A, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P418, DOI 10.1086/598612 Soman D, 2004, J ECON PSYCHOL, V25, P153, DOI 10.1016/j.joep.2003.09.002 Soman D, 1998, J MARKETING RES, V35, P427, DOI 10.2307/3152162 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 WARD RW, 1978, J ADVERTISING RES, V18, P51 YADAV MS, 1993, J MARKETING RES, V30, P350, DOI 10.2307/3172886 NR 38 TC 8 Z9 8 U1 2 U2 15 PU SPRINGER PI NEW YORK PA 233 SPRING ST, NEW YORK, NY 10013 USA SN 0092-0703 J9 J ACAD MARKET SCI JI J. Acad. Mark. Sci. PD JUN PY 2011 VL 39 IS 3 BP 363 EP 375 DI 10.1007/s11747-010-0201-x PG 13 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 753AE UT WOS:000289735800002 ER PT J AU Kohler, CF Breugelmans, E Dellaert, BGC AF Koehler, Clemens F. Breugelmans, Els Dellaert, Benedict G. C. TI Consumer Acceptance of Recommendations by Interactive Decision Aids: The Joint Role of Temporal Distance and Concrete Versus Abstract Communications SO JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS LA English DT Article DE construal level theory; consumer behavior; e-commerce; interactive decision aids; recommenders ID PRODUCT RECOMMENDATION; E-COMMERCE; AGENTS; BEHAVIOR; SYSTEMS; TASK; SENSITIVITY; CHOICE; LEVEL; REPRESENTATION AB Interactive decision aids (IDAs) typically use concrete, feature based approaches to interact with consumers. Recently, however, interaction designs that focus on communicating abstract consumer needs have been suggested as a promising alternative. This paper investigates how temporal distance moderates the effectiveness of these two competing IDA communication designs by its effect on consumers' mental representation of the product decision problem. Temporal distance is inherently connected to IDAs in two ways. Congruency between consumption timing (immediate versus distant) and IDA communication design (concrete versus abstract, respectively) increases the likelihood to accept the IDA's advice. This effect is also achieved by congruency between IDA process timing (immediate versus delayed delivery of recommendations) and IDA communication design (concrete versus abstract, respectively). We further show that this process is mediated by the perceived transparency of the IDA process. Managers and researchers need to take into account the importance of congruency between the user and the interface through which companies interact with their users and can further optimize IDAs so that they better match consumers' mental representations. C1 [Koehler, Clemens F.] Maastricht Univ, Dept Mkt & Supply Chain Management, Fac Econ & Business Adm, Maastricht, Netherlands. [Breugelmans, Els] Katholieke Univ Leuven, Dept Mkt & Org, Louvain, Belgium. [Dellaert, Benedict G. C.] Erasmus Univ, Erasmus Sch Econ, Rotterdam, Netherlands. RP Kohler, CF (reprint author), Maastricht Univ, Dept Mkt & Supply Chain Management, Fac Econ & Business Adm, Maastricht, Netherlands. RI dellaert, benedict/D-1020-2010 OI dellaert, benedict/0000-0003-4637-1192 FU Netspar FX The third author gratefully acknowledges the support from a Netspar grant for a part of this research. CR Ahn HJ, 2006, INT J ELECTRON COMM, V11, P59, DOI 10.2753/JEC1086-4415110203 Ansari A, 2000, J MARKETING RES, V37, P363, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.37.3.363.18779 Ariely D, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V27, P233, DOI 10.1086/314322 BAINBRIDGE A, 2007, DESTINATION DECISION BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 BEATTY SE, 1994, J CONSUM RES, V21, P332, DOI 10.1086/209401 Bodapati AV, 2008, J MARKETING RES, V45, P77, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.45.1.77 CROMPTON J, 1992, ANN TOURISM RES, V19, P420, DOI 10.1016/0160-7383(92)90128-C Dellaert BGC, 2008, J RETAILING, V84, P219, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2008.02.001 Dellaert BGC, 2009, INT J ELECTRON COMM, V13, P43, DOI 10.2753/JEC1086-4415130302 Diehl K, 2003, J CONSUM RES, V30, P56, DOI 10.1086/374698 FELIX D, 2001, ESOCIETY ECOMMERCE E, P399 FOERSTER J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Gershoff AD, 2003, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V13, P161, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP13-1&2_14 Gershoff AD, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P418, DOI 10.1086/323730 Gretzel U, 2006, INT J ELECTRON COMM, V11, P81, DOI 10.2753/JEC1086-4415110204 Haubl G, 2000, MARKET SCI, V19, P4, DOI 10.1287/mksc.19.1.4.15178 Hess TJ, 2005, J MANAGE INFORM SYST, V22, P15 Hong W, 2004, J MANAGE INFORM SYST, V21, P149 Huber J, 2002, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V87, P66, DOI 10.1006/obhd.2001.2955 Kardes FR, 2006, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V16, P135, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1602_4 Kim Hakkyun, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P877 Kim YJ, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P634, DOI 10.1086/599765 Komiak SYX, 2006, MIS QUART, V30, P941 Kramer T, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P224, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.2.224 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Liang T., 2007, J MANAGEMENT INFORM, V23, P9, DOI 10.2753/MIS0742-1222230301 Liang TP, 2006, J MANAGE INFORM SYST, V23, P45, DOI 10.2753/MIS0742-1222230303 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Liberman N, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P113, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7 LYNCH JG, 1982, J CONSUM RES, V9, P225 Malkoc SA, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P618, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.4.618 Marcon JL, 2009, PSYCHON B REV, V16, P99, DOI 10.3758/PBR.16.1.99 Murray KB, 2008, INT SER OPER RES MAN, V121, P55, DOI 10.1007/978-0-387-78213-3_3 Novemsky N, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P347, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.347 Pan B, 2006, ANN TOURISM RES, V33, P809, DOI 10.1016/j.annals.2006.03.006 Preacher KJ, 2004, BEHAV RES METH INS C, V36, P717, DOI 10.3758/BF03206553 Qiu LY, 2009, J MANAGE INFORM SYST, V25, P145, DOI 10.2753/MIS0742-1222250405 Randall T, 2007, MARKET SCI, V26, P268, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1050.0116 Reber R, 1998, PSYCHOL SCI, V9, P45, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00008 SCHWARTZ B., 2004, PARADOX CHOICE TINA S, 1996, J TRAVEL RES, V35, P34 Toothaker L. E., 1992, MULTIPLE COMP PROCED Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Wang WQ, 2008, J MANAGE INFORM SYST, V24, P249, DOI 10.2753/MIS0742-1222240410 Wang WQ, 2007, J MANAGE INFORM SYST, V23, P217, DOI [10.2753/MIS0742-1222230410, 10.2753/MIS0742-122230410] Wang WQ, 2009, MIS QUART, V33, P293 Xiao B, 2007, MIS QUART, V31, P137 NR 50 TC 6 Z9 6 U1 1 U2 22 PU M E SHARPE INC PI ARMONK PA 80 BUSINESS PARK DR, ARMONK, NY 10504 USA SN 0742-1222 J9 J MANAGE INFORM SYST JI J. Manage. Inform. Syst. PD SPR PY 2011 VL 27 IS 4 BP 231 EP 260 DI 10.2753/MIS0742-1222270408 PG 30 WC Computer Science, Information Systems; Information Science & Library Science; Management SC Computer Science; Information Science & Library Science; Business & Economics GA 763IK UT WOS:000290549800009 ER PT J AU Khan, U Zhu, M Kalra, A AF Khan, Uzma Zhu, Meng Kalra, Ajay TI When Trade-Offs Matter: The Effect of Choice Construal on Context Effects SO JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE context effects; construal levels; mind-sets; preference construction; trade-offs ID DECISION-MAKING; CONSUMER CHOICE; ATTRACTION; REASONS; COMPROMISE; DISTANCE; PEOPLE AB Everyday decisions present consumers with several trade-offs. In turn, these trade-offs can influence the decision outcome. The authors show that the level at which people construe a choice can affect trade-off making, such that a high construal of a choice decreases comparative trade-offs relative to a low construal. They use six studies to illustrate the idea in three important trade-off-relevant context effects. The results show that a high (versus a low) construal decreases the compromise and background-contrast effects and increases the attraction effect by reducing attribute-level trade-offs. C1 [Khan, Uzma] Stanford Univ, Grad Sch Business, Stanford, CA 94305 USA. [Zhu, Meng] Carnegie Mellon Univ, Tepper Sch Business, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA. [Kalra, Ajay] Rice Univ, Jesse H Jones Grad Sch Business, Houston, TX 77251 USA. RP Khan, U (reprint author), Stanford Univ, Grad Sch Business, Stanford, CA 94305 USA. EM uzmakhan@stanford.edu; mzhu@cmu.edu; ajay.kalra@rice.edu CR Bettman JR, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V25, P187, DOI 10.1086/209535 Briley DA, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V27, P157, DOI 10.1086/314318 Chernev A, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P213, DOI 10.1086/432231 Dhar R, 2000, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V9, P189, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP0904_1 Dhar R, 2003, J MARKETING RES, V40, P146, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.40.2.146.19229 Dhar R, 2000, J MARKETING RES, V37, P60, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.37.1.60.18718 Drolet A, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P137, DOI 10.1086/596305 FIEDLER K, 1995, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V21, P525, DOI 10.1177/0146167295215010 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x Payne John W., 1982, J CONSUM RES, V9, P105 Idson LC, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V80, P585, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.80.4.585 Kahneman D, 2002, HEURISTICS BIASES PS, P49, DOI DOI 10.1017/CB09780511808098.004 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Malkoc SA, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P411 MISHRA S, 1993, J MARKETING RES, V30, P331, DOI 10.2307/3172885 Mourali M, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P234, DOI 10.1086/519151 NISBETT RE, 1973, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V27, P155 Nussbaum S, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P485, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.485 PAYNE JW, 1988, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V14, P534, DOI 10.1037//0278-7393.14.3.534 Pocheptsova A, 2009, J MARKETING RES, V46, P344 SIMONSON I, 1992, J MARKETING RES, V29, P281, DOI 10.2307/3172740 SIMONSON I, 1989, J CONSUM RES, V16, P158, DOI 10.1086/209205 Simonson I, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V27, P49, DOI 10.1086/314308 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Tversky B, 2003, ENVIRON BEHAV, V35, P66, DOI 10.1177/0013916502238865 NR 27 TC 24 Z9 26 U1 2 U2 30 PU AMER MARKETING ASSOC PI CHICAGO PA 311S WACKER DR, STE 5800, CHICAGO, IL 60606-6629 USA SN 0022-2437 J9 J MARKETING RES JI J. Mark. Res. PD FEB PY 2011 VL 48 IS 1 BP 62 EP 71 DI 10.1509/jmkr.48.1.62 PG 10 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 715GA UT WOS:000286867600005 ER PT J AU Tsai, CI McGill, AL AF Tsai, Claire I. McGill, Ann L. TI No Pain, No Gain? How Fluency and Construal Level Affect Consumer Confidence SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID ATTITUDE CERTAINTY; SELF-VALIDATION; DECISION-MAKING; INFORMATION; JUDGMENT; PERSUASION; AVAILABILITY; MEMORY; EASE; CONSEQUENCES AB Choice confidence is affected by fluency and moderated by construal levels that evoke different theories to interpret the feelings of fluency. At lower construal levels, fluency informs the feasibility of completing the concrete steps of the decision process to choose well, but at higher construal levels, fluency informs (insufficient) effort invested for the desirability of the outcome. We manipulated fluency by varying the font of product descriptions or the number of thoughts we asked participants to recall. Our studies showed that fluency increased confidence for people processing at lower construal levels but decreased confidence for those processing at higher construal levels. Construal level does not affect the persuasiveness of consumers' thoughts, supporting the hypothesis that it is the interpretation of fluency experienced during judgment, not the thought content, that leads to the moderating effects of construal level. C1 [Tsai, Claire I.] Univ Toronto, Rotman Sch Management, Toronto, ON M5S 3E6, Canada. [McGill, Ann L.] Univ Chicago, Booth Sch Business, Chicago, IL 60637 USA. RP Tsai, CI (reprint author), Univ Toronto, Rotman Sch Management, 105 St George St, Toronto, ON M5S 3E6, Canada. EM claire.tsai@rotman.utoronto.ca; ann.mcgill@chicagogsb.edu CR Alba JW, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V27, P123, DOI 10.1086/314317 Alter AL, 2009, PERS SOC PSYCHOL REV, V13, P219, DOI 10.1177/1088868309341564 ARKES HR, 1985, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V35, P124, DOI 10.1016/0749-5978(85)90049-4 ARONSON E, 1959, J ABNORM SOC PSYCH, V59, P177, DOI 10.1037/h0047195 BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 Bassili JN, 1996, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V71, P637, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.71.4.637 Bassili J., 1996, ANSWERING QUESTIONS, P319 BEM DJ, 1965, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V1, P199, DOI 10.1016/0022-1031(65)90026-0 Bem DJ., 1972, ADV EXPT SOCIAL PSYC, V6, P1, DOI DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60024-6 Bizer GY, 2006, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V42, P646, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.09.002 Brinol P, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P200, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01686.x Brinol P, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V30, P559 Busey TA, 2000, PSYCHON B REV, V7, P26, DOI 10.3758/BF03210724 Chen S., 1999, DUAL PROCESS THEORIE, P41 DODSON JA, 1978, J MARKETING RES, V15, P72, DOI 10.2307/3150402 EPLEY N, 2009, CONFIDENCE INF UNPUB FESTINGER L, 1959, J ABNORM SOC PSYCH, V58, P203, DOI 10.1037/h0041593 Festinger L., 1957, THEORY COGNITIVE DIS Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Gerrard H.B, 1966, J EXPT SOCIAL PSYCHO, V2, P278 GIGERENZER G, 1991, PSYCHOL REV, V98, P506, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.98.4.506 Gill MJ, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P1101, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.75.5.1101 Gollwitzer PM, 1999, DUAL-PROCESS THEORIES IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, P403 GOLLWITZER PM, 1990, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V59, P1119, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.59.6.1119 Gollwitzer P. M., 1990, HDB MOTIVATION COGNI, V2, P53 GREENLEAF EA, 1995, J CONSUM RES, V22, P186, DOI 10.1086/209444 GRIFFIN D, 1992, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V24, P411, DOI 10.1016/0010-0285(92)90013-R Haddock G, 1999, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V25, P771, DOI 10.1177/0146167299025007001 Harmon-Jones E, 2009, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V41, P119, DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)00403-6 HEATH C, 1991, J RISK UNCERTAINTY, V4, P5, DOI 10.1007/BF00057884 Jacoby L. L., 1989, VARIETIES MEMORY CON, P391 Juslin P, 1997, PSYCHOL REV, V104, P344, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.104.2.344 Kelley CM, 2002, PSYCHOL LEARN MOTIV, V41, P293, DOI 10.1016/S0079-7421(02)80010-X Klayman J, 2006, INFORMATION SAMPLING AND ADAPTIVE COGNITION, P153 Kruger J, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P91, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00065-9 Labroo AA, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P127, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02264.x Luce MF, 2003, J CONSUM RES, V30, P464, DOI 10.1086/378622 MAZUMDAR T, 1993, J CONSUM RES, V20, P441, DOI 10.1086/209360 Muller D, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P852, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.852 Novemsky N, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P347, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.347 Petty RE, 2002, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V82, P722, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.82.5.722 Rothman AJ, 1997, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V23, P123, DOI 10.1177/0146167297232002 Rothman AJ, 1998, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V24, P1053 Rucker DD, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P219, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.219 Sagristano MD, 2002, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V131, P364, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.131.3.364 Schwarz N, 2004, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V14, P332, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1404_2 SCHWARZ N, 1991, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V61, P195, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.61.2.195 SCHWARZ N, 2008, CONSTRUCTING H UNPUN Simmons JP, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P409, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.3.409 Taylor SE, 1998, AM PSYCHOL, V53, P429, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.53.4.429 Thomas M, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P401, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.401 Tormala ZL, 2004, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V30, P1446, DOI 10.1177/0146167204264251 Tormala ZL, 2002, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V83, P1298, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.83.6.1298 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Tsai CI, 2008, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V107, P97, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.01.005 TYBOUT AM, 1983, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P474 Ulkumen G, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P245, DOI 10.1086/587627 URBANY JE, 1991, J CONSUM RES, V18, P45, DOI 10.1086/209239 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Wakslak C, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P52, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02250.x Wanke M, 1996, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V22, P1105 WHITTLESEA BWA, 1993, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V19, P1235, DOI 10.1037//0278-7393.19.6.1235 Wicklund R., 1976, PERSPECTIVES COGNITI Winkielman P, 2003, PSYCHOLOGY OF EVALUATION, P189 NR 64 TC 38 Z9 40 U1 4 U2 58 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD FEB PY 2011 VL 37 IS 5 BP 807 EP 821 DI 10.1086/655855 PG 15 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 708OO UT WOS:000286373300006 ER PT J AU Malkoc, SA Zauberman, G Bettman, JR AF Malkoc, Selin A. Zauberman, Gal Bettman, James R. TI Unstuck from the concrete: Carryover effects of abstract mindsets in intertemporal preferences SO ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES LA English DT Article DE Intertemporal preferences; Mindset abstraction; Present-bias; Discounting; Decision-making ID CONSUMER CHOICE; NONCOMPARABLE ALTERNATIVES; LINGUISTIC CATEGORIES; ACTION IDENTIFICATION; TEMPORAL DISTANCE; DISCOUNT RATES; SELF-CONTROL; TIME; PERCEPTION; INCONSISTENCY AB Prior research has demonstrated that individuals show decreasing levels of impatience as the delay of consumption gets longer (i.e., present-bias). We examine the psychological underpinnings of such present-biased preferences by conceptualizing timing decisions as part of a series of judgments. We propose that shifts in the abstractness of processing (focusing on details vs. broad aspects) triggered by aspects of an earlier (related or unrelated) decision systematically influence the degree of present-bias in subsequent decisions. The results of five studies show that the processing mindset (concrete vs. abstract) evoked in previous related and unrelated decisions influences the level of construal evoked in subsequent decisions and moderates the extent of present-bias without changes in affect. We further show the default mindset is concrete (displaying high present-bias) and thus the effect of construal is eliminated when the subsequent intertemporal task is inherently more abstract. Published by Elsevier Inc. C1 [Malkoc, Selin A.] Washington Univ, John M Olin Sch Business, St Louis, MO 63130 USA. [Zauberman, Gal] Univ Penn, Wharton Sch, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA. [Bettman, James R.] Duke Univ, Fuqua Sch Business, Durham, NC 27706 USA. RP Malkoc, SA (reprint author), Washington Univ, John M Olin Sch Business, CB 1133,1 Brookings Dr, St Louis, MO 63130 USA. EM malkoc@wustl.edu CR AINSLIE G, 1981, ANIM LEARN BEHAV, V9, P476, DOI 10.3758/BF03209777 Bar-Anan Y, 2007, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V136, P610, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.136.4.610 Bargh JA, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V81, P1014, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.81.6.1014 Bargh J. A, 2000, HDB RES METHODS SOCI, P253 BETTMAN JR, 1987, J CONSUM RES, V14, P141, DOI 10.1086/209102 Binder JR, 2005, J COGNITIVE NEUROSCI, V17, P905, DOI 10.1162/0898929054021102 Brown R., 1958, WORDS THINGS CUSTERS R, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P142 Dhar R, 2000, J MARKETING RES, V37, P60, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.37.1.60.18718 Dhar R, 1999, J MARKETING RES, V36, P29, DOI 10.2307/3151913 Dhar R, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P370, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.370 Finger K, 2002, APPL COGNITIVE PSYCH, V16, P887, DOI 10.1002/acp.922 Forster J, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P631, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01586.x Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Frederick S, 2002, J ECON LIT, V40, P351, DOI 10.1257/002205102320161311 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Gollwitzer PM, 1999, DUAL-PROCESS THEORIES IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, P403 GOLLWITZER PM, 1990, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V59, P1119, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.59.6.1119 Hamilton DL, 1996, PSYCHOL REV, V103, P336, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.103.2.336 Henderson MD, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V91, P845, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.91.5.845 Higgins T., 1997, AM PSYCHOL, V52, P1280 HOCH SJ, 1991, J CONSUM RES, V17, P492, DOI 10.1086/208573 Hsee CK, 1999, PSYCHOL BULL, V125, P576, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.125.5.576 HUBER J, 1982, J CONSUM RES, V9, P90, DOI 10.1086/208899 JOHNSON MD, 1984, J CONSUM RES, V11, P741, DOI 10.1086/209010 Judd CM, 2001, PSYCHOL METHODS, V6, P115, DOI 10.1037/1082-989X.6.2.115 Khan U, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P259, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.2.259 KIM B, 2010, ROLE SPECIAL DATES I KIRBY KN, 1995, PSYCHOL SCI, V6, P83, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1995.tb00311.x LeBoeuf RA, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P59, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.1.59 LEBOEUF RA, 2004, ALTERNATING SELVES C Levy SR, 2002, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V83, P1224, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.83.5.1224 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Liberman N., 2007, HDB BASIC PRINCIPLES, P353 Liberman N, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P143, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.12.009 Loewenstein G, 1996, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V65, P272, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1996.0028 Luchins A. S., 1942, PSYCHOL MONOGR, V54, P248 Luchins A. S., 1959, RIGIDITY BEHAV VARIA Malkoc SA, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P411 Malkoc SA, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P618, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.4.618 METCALFE J, 1990, PSYCHOL REV, V106, P3 NAVON D, 1977, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V9, P353, DOI 10.1016/0010-0285(77)90012-3 Novemsky N, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P396, DOI 10.1086/497551 Paivio A., 1971, IMAGERY VERBAL PROCE Rachlin H, 1992, CHOICE TIME, P93 Read D, 2005, MANAGE SCI, V51, P1326, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.1050.0412 ROSCH E, 1975, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V104, P192, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.104.3.192 SEMIN GR, 1988, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V54, P558, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.54.4.558 SEMIN GR, 1991, EUROPEAN REV SOCIAL, V230, P1 Sheeran P, 2005, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V31, P87, DOI 10.1177/0146167204271308 SHELLEY MK, 1993, MANAGE SCI, V39, P806, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.39.7.806 SIMONSON I, 1989, J CONSUM RES, V16, P158, DOI 10.1086/209205 Smith E. R., 1994, HDB SOCIAL COGNITION, V1, P101 Smith PK, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P578, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.578 Spencer SJ, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P845, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.845 Stapel DA, 2007, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V93, P23, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.93.1.23 STRAIN E, 1995, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V21, P1140, DOI 10.1037/0278-7393.21.5.1140 Strotz RH, 1955, REV ECON STUD, V23, P165, DOI 10.2307/2295722 THALER R, 1981, ECON LETT, V8, P201, DOI 10.1016/0165-1765(81)90067-7 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 WATSON D, 1988, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V54, P1063, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063 Wyer RS, 2010, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V20, P107, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2010.01.003 Xu AJ, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P556, DOI 10.1086/519293 Zauberman G, 2005, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V134, P23, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.134.1.23 Zauberman G, 2009, J MARKETING RES, V46, P543 Zhang S, 2001, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V11, P13, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP1101_2 NR 70 TC 30 Z9 33 U1 2 U2 38 PU ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE PI SAN DIEGO PA 525 B ST, STE 1900, SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-4495 USA SN 0749-5978 J9 ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC JI Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. PD NOV PY 2010 VL 113 IS 2 BP 112 EP 126 DI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.07.003 PG 15 WC Psychology, Applied; Management; Psychology, Social SC Psychology; Business & Economics GA 677EG UT WOS:000283971300005 ER PT J AU Hong, JW Lee, AY AF Hong, Jiewen Lee, Angela Y. TI Feeling Mixed but Not Torn: The Moderating Role of Construal Level in Mixed Emotions Appeals SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID UNDERSTANDING UNFAMILIAR WORDS; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; TEMPORAL DISTANCE; SELF; CONSEQUENCES; THINKING; TIME; AMBIVALENCE; PLEASURES; COGNITION AB This research examines how construal level (i.e., how abstractly or concretely people represent information in memory) affects consumers' responses to mixed emotions appeals. The results of five studies show that, consistent with prior research, participants experienced discomfort when they encountered mixed emotions appeals and developed less favorable attitudes toward the ad relative to pure positive emotional appeals, but this was the case only for those who construed information at a concrete, low level. Participants who construed information at an abstract, high level did not experience much discomfort; hence, they found mixed emotions and pure positive emotional appeals equally persuasive. We further demonstrate that the chronic construal level associated with people's age and cultural background underlies the moderating effects of age and culture on consumers' attitudes toward mixed emotions appeals documented in prior research. C1 [Hong, Jiewen] Hong Kong Univ Sci & Technol, Sch Business & Management, Kowloon, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. [Lee, Angela Y.] Northwestern Univ, Kellogg Sch Management, Evanston, IL 60208 USA. RP Hong, JW (reprint author), Hong Kong Univ Sci & Technol, Sch Business & Management, Kowloon, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. EM mkjiewen@ust.hk; aylee@kellogg.northwestern.edu CR Aaker JL, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P33, DOI 10.1086/321946 Abelson R. P., 1959, J CONFLICT RESOLUT, V3, P343, DOI DOI 10.1177/002200275900300403 Andrade EB, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P283, DOI 10.1086/519498 BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 Cacioppo JT, 1999, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V76, P839, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.76.5.839 Eyal T, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P781, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781 Festinger L., 1957, THEORY COGNITIVE DIS FISCHER E, 1993, ADV CONSUM RES, V20, P320 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Hemenover SH, 2007, COGNITION EMOTION, V21, P1102, DOI 10.1080/02699930601057037 Hunter PG, 2008, COGNITION EMOTION, V22, P327, DOI 10.1080/02699930701438145 Koutstaal W, 1997, J MEM LANG, V37, P555, DOI 10.1006/jmla.1997.2529 Kuhnen U, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P492, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00011-2 LABOUVIEVIEF G, 1989, PSYCHOL AGING, V4, P425, DOI 10.1037/0882-7974.4.4.425 Larsen JT, 2004, PSYCHOL SCI, V15, P325, DOI 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00677.x Larsen JT, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V81, P684, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.81.4.684 Lee AY, 2010, J CONSUM RES, V36, P735, DOI 10.1086/605591 Lee AY, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V78, P1122, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.78.6.1122 Lee A. Y., 2009, SOCIAL PSYCHOL CONSU, P319 LEE S, EUROPEAN J IN PRESS Levy SR, 2002, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V83, P1224, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.83.5.1224 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Liberman N., 2007, HDB BASIC PRINCIPLES, P353 Liberman N, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P143, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.12.009 Liberman N, 2009, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V97, P203, DOI 10.1037/a0015671 Loewenstein G, 1996, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V65, P272, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1996.0028 McGinnis D, 2000, PSYCHOL AGING, V15, P335, DOI 10.1037/0882-7974.15.2.335 McGinnis D, 2003, PSYCHOL AGING, V18, P497, DOI 10.1037/0882-7974.18.3.497 Newby-Clark IR, 2002, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V82, P157, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.82.2.157 Nisbett RE, 2001, PSYCHOL REV, V108, P291, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.108.2.291 Nussbaum S, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P485, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.485 Otnes C, 1997, J CONSUM RES, V24, P80, DOI 10.1086/209495 Price LL, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V27, P179, DOI 10.1086/314319 Ramanathan S, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P212, DOI 10.1086/519149 ROOK DW, 1987, J CONSUM RES, V14, P189, DOI 10.1086/209105 RUSSELL JA, 1979, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V37, P345, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.37.3.345 Sagristano MD, 2002, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V131, P364, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.131.3.364 Thompson CJ, 1999, J CONSUM RES, V26, P214, DOI 10.1086/209560 Zanna M., 1995, ATTITUDE STRENGTH AN, P361, DOI DOI 10.4324/9781315807041 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Yaacov, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P401 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Williams P, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V28, P636, DOI 10.1086/338206 Wong NY, 2005, J BUS RES, V58, P533, DOI 10.1016/S0148-2963(03)00144-9 NR 46 TC 34 Z9 36 U1 6 U2 57 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD OCT PY 2010 VL 37 IS 3 BP 456 EP 472 DI 10.1086/653492 PG 17 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 646ZB UT WOS:000281583600008 ER PT J AU Ledgerwood, A Wakslak, CJ Wang, MA AF Ledgerwood, Alison Wakslak, Cheryl J. Wang, Margery A. TI Differential information use for near and distant decisions SO JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article DE Temporal distance; Construal level; Social influence; Base rates ID PROBABILITY; PSYCHOLOGY; PREDICTION; PERSUASION; PREFERENCE; JUDGMENTS AB Whether choosing a cell phone, a senator, or a kitchen appliance, consumers today quickly find themselves awash in information from commercials, magazines, and websites Whereas some of this information is broad, decontextualized, and abstracted across multiple individuals and instances, other information is more closely tied to a single experience within one specific context The present research asks under what circumstances do people rely on abstracted averages, and when are they swayed by another individual's particular experience, Across three studies, we show that temporal distance increases the relative weight placed on aggregate vs individualized information when participants are asked to choose between two sleeping pills, migraine medications, or kitchen appliances, and that this process impacts not only evaluation but also willingness to pay and choice Potential implications for evaluation, decision-making, and base-rate utilization are discussed (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc All rights reserved C1 [Ledgerwood, Alison; Wang, Margery A.] Univ Calif Davis, Dept Psychol, Davis, CA 95616 USA. [Wakslak, Cheryl J.] Univ So Calif, Marshall Sch Business, Los Angeles, CA USA. RP Ledgerwood, A (reprint author), Univ Calif Davis, Dept Psychol, 1 Shields Ave, Davis, CA 95616 USA. CR BARHILLEL M, 1980, ACTA PSYCHOL, V44, P211, DOI 10.1016/0001-6918(80)90046-3 BARHILLEL M, 1990, INSIGHTS DECISION MA Brinol P, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P1123, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.6.1123 Darke PR, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P864, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.864 DAWES RM, 1989, SCIENCE, V243, P1668, DOI 10.1126/science.2648573 Frederick S, 2002, J ECON LIT, V40, P351, DOI 10.1257/002205102320161311 Fujita K., 2008, SOCIAL PERSONALITY P, V2, P1475, DOI DOI 10.1111/J.1751-9004.2008.00118.X FUJITA K, 2009, PROMOTING PROS UNPUB Fujita K, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P562, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2007.10.005 GIGERENZER G, 1988, J EXP PSYCHOL HUMAN, V14, P513, DOI 10.1037/0096-1523.14.3.513 Green L, 2004, PSYCHOL BULL, V130, P769, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.130.5.769 Grove WM, 1996, PSYCHOL PUBLIC POL L, V2, P293, DOI 10.1037/1076-8971.2.2.293 KAHNEMAN D, 1973, PSYCHOL REV, V80, P237, DOI 10.1037/h0034747 Klar Y, 1996, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V67, P229, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1996.0076 LEDGERWOOD A, ADV EXPT SO IN PRESS LEDGERWOOD A, J PERSONALI IN PRESS LEDGERWOOD A, HDB SELF RE IN PRESS LIBERMAN N, COGNITIVE S IN PRESS Liberman N, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P1201, DOI 10.1126/science.1161958 Liviatan I, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1256, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.007 NISBETT RE, 1975, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V32, P932, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.32.5.932 NISBETT RE, 1980, HUMAN REFERENCE STRA PETTY RE, 1984, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P69, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.46.1.69 REEVES T, 1993, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V122, P207, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.122.2.207 Small DA, 2003, J RISK UNCERTAINTY, V26, P5, DOI 10.1023/A:1022299422219 Swets J A, 2000, Psychol Sci Public Interest, V1, P1, DOI 10.1111/1529-1006.001 TAYLOR SE, 1982, PSYCHOL REV, V89, P155, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.89.2.155 TROPE V, PSYCHOL REV IN PRESS Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Wakslak CJ, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P641, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.641 NR 31 TC 21 Z9 24 U1 1 U2 16 PU ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE PI SAN DIEGO PA 525 B ST, STE 1900, SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-4495 USA SN 0022-1031 J9 J EXP SOC PSYCHOL JI J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. PD JUL PY 2010 VL 46 IS 4 BP 638 EP 642 DI 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.03.001 PG 5 WC Psychology, Social SC Psychology GA 596JU UT WOS:000277681900008 ER PT J AU Laran, J AF Laran, Juliano TI Choosing Your Future: Temporal Distance and the Balance between Self-Control and Indulgence SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID CONSTRUAL LEVELS; CONSUMER CHOICE; GOAL ACTIVATION; TIME; CONSUMPTION; PREFERENCE; DYNAMICS; ACCESSIBILITY; INFORMATION; CONSISTENCY AB This article investigates how temporal distance influences consumers' self-control. We demonstrate that self-control is dependent on the content of currently active information in decisions for the future. When indulgence information is currently active, decisions for the future tend to be oriented toward self-control. When self-control information is currently active, decisions for the future tend to be oriented toward indulgence. In four experiments investigating two self-control domains (healthy eating and saving money), we find evidence for an information activation/inhibition account of the influence of temporal distance on self-control decisions. C1 Univ Miami, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA. RP Laran, J (reprint author), Univ Miami, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA. EM laran@miami.edu CR AINSLIE G, 1975, PSYCHOL BULL, V82, P463, DOI 10.1037/h0076860 ANDERSON MC, 1995, PSYCHOL REV, V102, P68, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.102.1.68 Bargh J. A, 2000, HDB RES METHODS SOCI, P253 BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 Baumeister RF, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V74, P1252, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1252 Chartrand TL, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P189, DOI 10.1086/588685 Chartrand TL, 1996, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V71, P464, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.71.3.464 Fazio R. H., 1990, REV PERSONALITY SOCI, V11, P74 Fishbach A, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P370, DOI 10.1086/497548 Fishbach A, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P296, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.2.296 Fishbach A, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V91, P232, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.91.2.232 Fitzsimons GJ, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P224, DOI 10.1086/322899 Forster J, 2007, ASSIMILATION AND CONTRAST IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, P269 Frederick S, 2002, J ECON LIT, V40, P351, DOI 10.1257/002205102320161311 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Fujita K, 2009, PSYCHOL SCI, V20, P799, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02372.x Geyskens K, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P600, DOI 10.1086/591106 Inman JJ, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P105, DOI 10.1086/321950 Keinan A, 2008, J MARKETING RES, V45, P676, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.45.6.676 Khan U, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P259, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.2.259 Kivetz R, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V29, P199, DOI 10.1086/341571 Kivetz R, 2006, J CONSUM RES, V33, P273, DOI 10.1086/506308 Kruglanski AW, 2002, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V34, P331, DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(02)80008-9 LARAN J, 2010, J PERSONALI IN PRESS Laran J, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P653, DOI 10.1086/592127 Laran J, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P967, DOI 10.1086/593293 Loewenstein G, 2003, Q J ECON, V118, P1209, DOI 10.1162/003355303322552784 LOEWENSTEIN G, 1992, Q J ECON, V107, P573, DOI 10.2307/2118482 Louro MJ, 2007, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V93, P174, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.93.2.174 MacKinnon DP, 2007, ANNU REV PSYCHOL, V58, P593, DOI 10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085542 MACRAE CN, 1994, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V67, P808, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.67.5.808 Malkoc SA, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P618, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.4.618 Metcalfe J, 1999, PSYCHOL REV, V106, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.106.1.3 Mukhopadhyay A, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P586, DOI 10.1086/591105 Muller D, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P852, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.852 Ratner RK, 1999, J CONSUM RES, V26, P1, DOI 10.1086/209547 Read D, 1999, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V12, P257, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199912)12:4<257::AID-BDM327>3.0.CO;2-6 Shah JY, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P1109, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.6.1109 Shah JY, 2002, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V83, P1261, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.83.6.1261 SRULL TK, 1979, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V37, P1660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.37.10.1660 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Vohs KD, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V33, P537, DOI 10.1086/510228 Wadhwa M, 2008, J MARKETING RES, V45, P403, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.45.4.403 Wertenbroch K, 1998, MARKET SCI, V17, P317, DOI 10.1287/mksc.17.4.317 Zhao M, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P379, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.379 NR 48 TC 35 Z9 35 U1 2 U2 54 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD APR PY 2010 VL 36 IS 6 BP 1002 EP 1015 DI 10.1086/648380 PG 14 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 563WO UT WOS:000275167000009 ER PT J AU Hong, JW Sternthal, B AF Hong, Jiewen Sternthal, Brian TI The Effects of Consumer Prior Knowledge and Processing Strategies on Judgments SO JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE prior knowledge; expertise; fluency; construal level; processing mode ID INFORMATION SEARCH BEHAVIOR; REGULATORY FIT; DECISION-MAKING; EXPERTISE; CHOICE; ACCESSIBILITY; PERSUASION; LOCOMOTION; EXPERIENCE; RETRIEVAL AB Four studies examine how consumers' prior knowledge of a product category and the way they process product information affect evaluation. Consumers with extensive prior knowledge of a category evaluate the brand more favorably when the presentation of the product information prompts a sense of progress rather than facilitating a detailed assessment (Studies 1 and 2), as well as when the information presentation involves a high level of construal rather than a low level (Studies 3 and 4). Consumers with limited domain knowledge exhibit opposite outcomes. The subjective experience of processing fluency mediates these effects. The findings suggest that evaluations are more favorable when there is a fit between prior knowledge and message processing than when fit is absent. C1 [Hong, Jiewen] Hong Kong Univ Sci & Technol, Sch Business & Management, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. [Sternthal, Brian] Northwestern Univ, Kellogg Sch Management, Evanston, IL 60208 USA. RP Hong, JW (reprint author), Hong Kong Univ Sci & Technol, Sch Business & Management, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. EM mkjiewen@ust.hk; bst047@kellogg.northwestern.edu CR ALBA JW, 1987, J CONSUM RES, V13, P411, DOI 10.1086/209080 Alba JW, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V27, P123, DOI 10.1086/314317 Avnet T, 2003, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P525, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00027-1 BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 BETTMAN JR, 1980, J CONSUM RES, V7, P234, DOI 10.1086/208812 BETTMAN JR, 1987, J CONSUM RES, V14, P141, DOI 10.1086/209102 BRUCKS M, 1985, J CONSUM RES, V12, P1, DOI 10.1086/209031 Camacho CJ, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P498, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.498 Cesario J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P388, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.3.388 Chi M., 1982, ADV PSYCHOL HUMAN IN, V1, P11 CHI MTH, 1973, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V4, P55 FERRARI M, 1991, PERCEPT MOTOR SKILL, V72, P139, DOI 10.2466/PMS.72.1.139-150 Higgins ET, 2000, AM PSYCHOL, V55, P1217, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.55.11.1217 Hinds PJ, 2001, J APPL PSYCHOL, V86, P1232, DOI 10.1037//0021-9010.86.6.1232 HONECK RP, 1987, B PSYCHONOMIC SOC, V25, P431 JOHNSON EJ, 1984, J CONSUM RES, V11, P542, DOI 10.1086/208990 Kruglanski AW, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P793, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.793 LANGER EJ, 1979, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V37, P2014, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.37.11.2014 Lee AY, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P205, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.205 Lewandowsky S, 2000, MEM COGNITION, V28, P295, DOI 10.3758/BF03213807 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P113, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7 MAHESWARAN D, 1990, J CONSUM RES, V17, P66, DOI 10.1086/208537 Malkoc SA, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P411 Mandel N, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V29, P235, DOI 10.1086/341573 Menon G, 2003, J CONSUM RES, V30, P230, DOI 10.1086/376804 Mitchell AA, 1996, J CONSUM RES, V23, P219, DOI 10.1086/209479 Novemsky N, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P347, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.347 RADECKI CM, 1995, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V31, P107, DOI 10.1006/jesp.1995.1006 Roehm ML, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P257, DOI 10.1086/322901 SCHOENFELD AH, 1982, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V8, P484, DOI 10.1037//0278-7393.8.5.484 SCHRAAGEN JM, 2001, LINKING EXPERTISE NA, P263 Schwarz N, 2004, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V14, P332, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1404_2 SHANTEAU J, 1992, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V53, P252, DOI 10.1016/0749-5978(92)90064-E Sobel ME, 1982, SOCIOL METHODOL, P290, DOI DOI 10.2307/270723 Spence MT, 1997, J MARKETING RES, V34, P233, DOI 10.2307/3151861 SUJAN M, 1985, J CONSUM RES, V12, P31, DOI 10.1086/209033 Thunholm P, 2005, EXP RES APPL, P43 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Tybout AM, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P76, DOI 10.1086/426617 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 Wiley J, 1998, MEM COGNITION, V26, P716, DOI 10.3758/BF03211392 Wood SL, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V29, P416, DOI 10.1086/344425 WRISBERG CA, 1990, PERCEPT MOTOR SKILL, V70, P427, DOI 10.2466/PMS.70.2.427-432 NR 44 TC 20 Z9 22 U1 2 U2 44 PU AMER MARKETING ASSOC PI CHICAGO PA 311S WACKER DR, STE 5800, CHICAGO, IL 60606-6629 USA SN 0022-2437 J9 J MARKETING RES JI J. Mark. Res. PD APR PY 2010 VL 47 IS 2 BP 301 EP 311 PG 11 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 574DC UT WOS:000275967700009 ER PT J AU Lee, AY Keller, PA Sternthal, B AF Lee, Angela Y. Keller, Punam Anand Sternthal, Brian TI Value from Regulatory Construal Fit: The Persuasive Impact of Fit between Consumer Goals and Message Concreteness SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID ACTION IDENTIFICATION; TEMPORAL DISTANCE; BRAND EVALUATION; SELF-REGULATION; POSITIVE AFFECT; FOCUS; PREVENTION; PROMOTION; DECISION; DISTINCTION AB This research investigates the relationship between regulatory focus and construal level. The findings indicate that promotion-focused individuals are more likely to construe information at abstract, high levels, whereas those with a prevention focus are more likely to construe information at concrete, low levels (experiments 1 and 2). Further, such fit (vs. nonfit) between an individual's regulatory focus and the construal level at which information is represented leads to more favorable attitudes (experiments 3 and 4) and enhances performance on a subsequent task (experiment 3). These outcomes occur because fit enhances engagement that in turn induces processing fluency and intensifies reactions. C1 [Lee, Angela Y.; Sternthal, Brian] Northwestern Univ, Kellogg Sch Management, Evanston, IL 60208 USA. [Keller, Punam Anand] Dartmouth Coll, Tuck Sch Business, Hanover, NH 03755 USA. RP Lee, AY (reprint author), Northwestern Univ, Kellogg Sch Management, Evanston, IL 60208 USA. EM aylee@kellogg.northwestern.edu; punam.keller@dartmouth.edu; bst047@kellogg.northwestern.edu RI Claus, Bart/I-3780-2014 OI Claus, Bart/0000-0002-8642-9240 CR Aaker JL, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P33, DOI 10.1086/321946 Avnet T, 2003, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P525, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00027-1 BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 BRENDL CM, 1996, ADV EXPT SOCIAL PSYC, V28, P85 Camacho CJ, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P498, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.498 Carnaghi A, 2008, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V94, P839, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.94.5.839 Cesario J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P388, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.3.388 Crowe E, 1997, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V69, P117, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1996.2675 Eyal T, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P781, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781 Forster J, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P1115, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.75.5.1115 Freitas AL, 2002, PSYCHOL SCI, V13, P1, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00401 Freitas AL, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V80, P410, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.80.3.410 Friedman RS, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V81, P1001, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.81.6.1001 Herzenstein M, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P251, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.2.251 Higgins ET, 2000, AM PSYCHOL, V55, P1217, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.55.11.1217 Higgins ET, 2006, PSYCHOL REV, V113, P439, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.113.3.439 Higgins ET, 1997, AM PSYCHOL, V52, P1280, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280 Higgins ET, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P1140, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.6.1140 Hong JW, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P682, DOI 10.1086/521902 Idson LC, 2004, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V30, P926, DOI 10.1177/0146167204264334 ISEN AM, 1987, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V52, P1122, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.52.6.1122 KAHN BE, 1993, J CONSUM RES, V20, P257, DOI 10.1086/209347 Keller PA, 2006, J CONSUM RES, V33, P109, DOI 10.1086/504141 Labroo AA, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P374, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.3.374 Lee AY, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P205, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.205 Lee AY, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V78, P1122, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.78.6.1122 Lee AY, 1999, J CONSUM RES, V26, P115, DOI 10.1086/209554 Lee A. Y, 2009, FRONTIERS SOCIAL PSY, P319 Levine JM, 2000, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V82, P88, DOI 10.1006/obhd.2000.2889 Liberman N, 1999, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V77, P1135, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.77.6.1135 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Liberman N, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P113, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7 Malaviya P, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V36, P112, DOI 10.1086/595717 Mogilner C, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P670, DOI 10.1086/521901 MORRIS MW, 1994, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V67, P949, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.67.6.949 MURRAY N, 1990, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V59, P411, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.59.3.411 Pennington GL, 2003, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P563, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00058-1 Roehm ML, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P257, DOI 10.1086/322901 Shah J, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V74, P285, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.74.2.285 Sobel M.E., 1982, SOCIOLOGICAL METHODO TRAFIMOW D, 1991, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V60, P649, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.60.5.649 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Vallacher R. R., 1985, THEORY ACTION IDENTI Wan EW, 2009, J CONSUM RES, V35, P1027, DOI 10.1086/593949 Wang J, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P28, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.1.28 NR 47 TC 114 Z9 124 U1 45 U2 168 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD FEB PY 2010 VL 36 IS 5 BP 735 EP 747 DI 10.1086/605591 PG 13 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 540AJ UT WOS:000273302200003 ER PT J AU Kim, YJ Park, J Wyer, RS AF Kim, Yeung-Jo Park, Jongwon Wyer, Robert S., Jr. TI Effects of Temporal Distance and Memory on Consumer Judgments SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID CONSTRUAL LEVEL THEORY; DECISION-MAKING; PERSON MEMORY; PRODUCT JUDGMENTS; SOCIAL DISTANCE; BEHAVIOR; PREFERENCE; RETRIEVAL; RECALL; ACCESSIBILITY AB Once a product has been evaluated for use, the circumstances can change and it must be reevaluated for use at a different time. Four experiments investigated processes underlying these reevaluations. Participants received information about a product that had implications for both desirability and the feasibility of using it, while anticipating either its immediate or future use. They were later asked to reevaluate the product for use at either the same or a different point in time. Participants who reevaluated the product for future use based their judgments on desirability considerations regardless of when they had considered using it initially. However, participants who reevaluated the product for immediate use also based their judgments on desirability considerations unless they had initially considered immediate use as well. These results were consistent with a conceptualization of consumer judgment processes that incorporated implications of research on construal level theory and on person memory and judgments. C1 [Kim, Yeung-Jo; Park, Jongwon] Korea Univ, Sch Business, Seoul, South Korea. [Wyer, Robert S., Jr.] Univ Illinois, Champaign, IL 61820 USA. RP Kim, YJ (reprint author), Korea Univ, Sch Business, 1 Anam Dong, Seoul, South Korea. EM kyjo2001@naver.com; amadeus@korea.ac.kr; mkwyer@ust.hk CR CARLSTON DE, 1980, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V16, P303, DOI 10.1016/0022-1031(80)90025-6 Castano R, 2008, J MARKETING RES, V45, P320, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.45.3.320 CRAIK FIM, 1972, J VERB LEARN VERB BE, V11, P671, DOI 10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X DICK A, 1990, J CONSUM RES, V17, P82, DOI 10.1086/208539 Eyal T, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P781, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781 Eyal T, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1204, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.03.012 Fiedler K, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P101, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70015-3 Fujita K, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P562, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2007.10.005 Henderson MD, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V91, P712, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.712 Herzog SM, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P483, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.05.008 HIGGINS ET, 1983, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V15, P525, DOI 10.1016/0010-0285(83)90018-X Kardes FR, 2006, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V16, P135, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1602_4 KARDES FR, 1986, J CONSUM RES, V13, P1, DOI 10.1086/209043 Kim K, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V35, P706, DOI 10.1086/592131 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, P353 Liberman N, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P113, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7 LINGLE JH, 1979, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V37, P180, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.37.2.180 Liviatan I, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1256, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.007 Nisbett R. E., 1980, HUMAN INFERENCE STRA Park J, 2005, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V15, P94, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1502_2 PARK JW, 1994, J CONSUM RES, V21, P534, DOI 10.1086/209416 Park JW, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V81, P405, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.81.3.405 Park Y. M., 1993, Postharvest Biology and Technology, V2, P329, DOI 10.1016/0925-5214(93)90037-4 SANBONMATSU DM, 1990, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V59, P614, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.59.4.614 Schwarz N, 2004, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V14, P332, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1404_2 SRULL TK, 1980, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P841, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.38.6.841 SRULL TK, 1989, PSYCHOL REV, V96, P58, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.96.1.58 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X WYER RS, 1987, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V53, P14, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.53.1.14 WYER RS, 1985, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V48, P533, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.48.3.533 WYER RS, 1984, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V20, P29, DOI 10.1016/0022-1031(84)90010-6 Wyer R. S., 1989, MEMORY COGNITION ITS ZHANG M, 2009, PSYCHOL DISTAN UNPUB NR 36 TC 16 Z9 16 U1 1 U2 29 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD DEC PY 2009 VL 36 IS 4 BP 634 EP 645 DI 10.1086/599765 PG 12 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 514WE UT WOS:000271426000009 ER PT J AU Agrawal, N Wan, EW AF Agrawal, Nidhi Wan, Echo Wen TI Regulating Risk or Risking Regulation? Construal Levels and Depletion Effects in the Processing of Health Messages SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID SELF-CONTROL STRENGTH; COMPARATIVE FRAMES; LIMITED RESOURCES; TIME; MECHANISMS; DECISIONS; JUDGMENTS; FOCUS AB The depletion effect occurs when individuals who exert self-control in a previous task (i.e., depleted individuals) exhibit less self-control on a subsequent task relative to individuals who did not previously exert self-control. This article presents two experiments that implicate construal levels to understand the processes underlying depletion effects in the context of consumer health. At low-level construals, individuals rely on resource accessibility cues (e.g., feelings of tiredness) to determine self-control. Hence, they exert less self-control only when they assess themselves as depleted, manifesting the depletion effect. High-level construals reduce the resource focus and enhance a goal focus, which diminishes and even reverses the depletion effect. C1 [Agrawal, Nidhi] Northwestern Univ, Kellogg Sch Management, Evanston, IL 60208 USA. [Wan, Echo Wen] Univ Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. RP Agrawal, N (reprint author), Northwestern Univ, Kellogg Sch Management, 2001 Sheridan Rd, Evanston, IL 60208 USA. EM nidhi-agrawal@kellogg.northwestern.edu; ewan@business.hku.hk CR AGRAWAL N, 2008, EMOTIONAL COMPATIBIL AGRAWAL N, 2008, HARBORING HOPE ACCEP AGRAWAL N, 2008, VALUE HIGHLIGHTING T Agrawal N, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P100, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.1.100 BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 Baumeister RF, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V74, P1252, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1252 Chandran S, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P375, DOI 10.1086/422116 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Gailliot MT, 2007, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V92, P325, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.92.2.325 Gailliot MT, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V91, P49, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.91.1.49 Giner-Sorolla R, 1999, DUAL-PROCESS THEORIES IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, P441 Gollwitzer PM, 1999, AM PSYCHOL, V54, P493, DOI 10.1037//0003-066X.54.7.493 Jain SP, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V34, P57, DOI 10.1086/513046 Jain SP, 2006, J CONSUM RES, V33, P91, DOI 10.1086/504139 Kahn BE, 2003, MARKET SCI, V22, P393, DOI 10.1287/mksc.22.3.393.17737 Keller PA, 2003, J MARKETING RES, V40, P54, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.40.1.54.19133 Kruger J, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P91, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00065-9 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Menon G, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V28, P533, DOI 10.1086/338203 Menon Geeta, 2007, HDB CONSUMER PSYCHOL, P981 Menon G, 2009, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V108, P39, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.05.001 Muller D, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P852, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.852 Muraven M, 2000, PSYCHOL BULL, V126, P247, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.126.2.247 Muraven M, 2003, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V29, P894, DOI 10.1177/0146167203253209 Muraven M, 2002, PSYCHOL ADDICT BEHAV, V16, P113, DOI 10.1037//0893-164X.16.2.113 Muraven M, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V74, P774, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.74.3.774 Muraven M, 1999, J SOC PSYCHOL, V139, P446 Mussweiler T, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P472, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.472 Novemsky N, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P396, DOI 10.1086/497551 Sagristano MD, 2002, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V131, P364, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.131.3.364 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 VALLEE JP, 1987, ASTRON J, V94, P1, DOI 10.1086/114439 Vohs KD, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V33, P537, DOI 10.1086/510228 Vohs KD, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V88, P632, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.88.4.632 Vohs KD, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V85, P217, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.217 Wan E. W., 2008, PERSONALITY SOCIAL P, V34, P47 WAN EW, 2008, INFLUENCE POSITIVE A NR 41 TC 40 Z9 41 U1 3 U2 43 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD OCT PY 2009 VL 36 IS 3 BP 448 EP 462 DI 10.1086/597331 PG 15 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 491FV UT WOS:000269564400009 ER PT J AU Martin, BAS Gnoth, J Strong, C AF Martin, Brett A. S. Gnoth, Juergen Strong, Carolyn TI TEMPORAL CONSTRUAL IN ADVERTISING The Moderating Role of Temporal Orientation and Attribute Importance in Consumer Evaluations SO JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING LA English DT Article ID TIME PERSPECTIVE; INDIVIDUAL-DIFFERENCES; DISTANT FUTURE; BEHAVIOR; MOTIVATION; PREFERENCE; PREDICTOR; SUBSTANCE; KNOWLEDGE; LEVEL AB In two experiments, we study how the temporal orientation of consumers (i.e., future-oriented or present-oriented), temporal construal (distant future, near future), and product attribute importance (primary, secondary) influence advertisement evaluations. Data suggest that future-oriented consumers react most favorably to ads that feature a product to be released in the distant future and that highlight primary product attributes. In contrast, present-oriented consumers prefer near-future ads that highlight secondary product attributes. Study 2 shows that consumer attitudes are mediated by perceptions of attribute diagnosticity (i.e., the perceived usefulness of the attribute information). Together, these experiments shed light on how individual differences, Such as temporal orientation, offer valuable insights into temporal construal effects in advertising. C1 [Martin, Brett A. S.] Queensland Univ Technol, Brisbane, Qld 4001, Australia. [Gnoth, Juergen] Univ Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. [Strong, Carolyn] Univ Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, Avon, England. RP Martin, BAS (reprint author), Queensland Univ Technol, Brisbane, Qld 4001, Australia. RI Martin, Brett/J-1287-2012 CR Ahluwalia R, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V29, P270, DOI 10.1086/341576 Bar-Anan Y, 2007, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V136, P610, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.136.4.610 BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 BERGADAA MM, 1990, J CONSUM RES, V17, P289, DOI 10.1086/208558 BLOCK LG, 1995, J MARKETING RES, V32, P192, DOI 10.2307/3152047 BRUCKS M, 1985, J CONSUM RES, V12, P1, DOI 10.1086/209031 Chandran S, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P375, DOI 10.1086/422116 Day E, 1997, J RETAILING, V73, P211, DOI 10.1016/S0022-4359(97)90004-X DICK A, 1990, J CONSUM RES, V17, P82, DOI 10.1086/208539 Eyal T, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P781, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781 FELDMAN JM, 1988, J APPL PSYCHOL, V73, P421, DOI 10.1037//0021-9010.73.3.421 Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 GRAHAM RJ, 1981, J CONSUM RES, V7, P335, DOI 10.1086/208823 Gurhan-Canli Z, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V27, P96, DOI 10.1086/314311 HAIR J, 1998, MULTIVARIATE DATA AN Harber KD, 2003, BASIC APPL SOC PSYCH, V25, P255, DOI 10.1207/S15324834BASP2503_08 Henderson MD, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V91, P712, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.712 HOLBROOK MB, 1991, ADV CONSUM RES, V18, P330 Holman EA, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V74, P1146, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1146 HOLSTEDE G, 2005, CULTURES ORG SOFTWAR Kardes FR, 2006, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V16, P135, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1602_4 Keough KA, 1999, BASIC APPL SOC PSYCH, V21, P149, DOI 10.1207/S15324834BA210207 Krishnamurthy P, 1999, J CONSUM RES, V26, P55, DOI 10.1086/209550 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Durairaj Maheswaran, 1992, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V1, P317, DOI DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(08)80058-7 Martin B.A.S., 2004, J ADVERTISING, V32, P57 Mendoza NA, 1997, ADV CONSUM RES, V24, P499 Nussbaum S, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P152, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.2.152 Nussbaum S, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P485, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.485 PERDUE BC, 1986, J MARKETING RES, V23, P317, DOI 10.2307/3151807 PETTY RE, 1983, J CONSUM RES, V10, P135, DOI 10.1086/208954 Phalet K, 2004, EDUC PSYCHOL REV, V16, P59, DOI 10.1023/B:EDPR.0000012345.71645.d4 Pham MT, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V30, P503, DOI 10.1086/380285 Robinson JP, 1991, MEASURES PERSONALITY Rojas-Mendez JI, 2005, J ADVERTISING RES, V45, P34, DOI 10.1017/S0021849905050154 Roy DP, 2004, PSYCHOL MARKET, V21, P185, DOI 10.1002/mar.20001 Simons J, 2004, EDUC PSYCHOL REV, V16, P121, DOI 10.1023/B:EDPR.0000026609.94841.2f SUJAN M, 1989, J MARKETING RES, V26, P454, DOI 10.2307/3172765 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2004, PERS SOC PSYCHOL REV, V8, P193, DOI 10.1207/s15327957pspr0802_13 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 UNNAVA HR, 1991, J MARKETING RES, V28, P226, DOI 10.2307/3172811 Walsh PA, 1995, ADV CONSUM RES, V22, P311 Wooten DB, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P551, DOI 10.1086/425089 Zimbardo PG, 1997, PERS INDIV DIFFER, V23, P1007, DOI 10.1016/S0191-8869(97)00113-X Zimbardo PG, 1999, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V77, P1271, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1271 NR 47 TC 23 Z9 24 U1 4 U2 24 PU M E SHARPE INC PI ARMONK PA 80 BUSINESS PARK DR, ARMONK, NY 10504 USA SN 0091-3367 J9 J ADVERTISING JI J. Advert. PD FAL PY 2009 VL 38 IS 3 BP 5 EP 19 DI 10.2753/JOA0091-3367380301 PG 15 WC Business; Communication SC Business & Economics; Communication GA 495MR UT WOS:000269897700001 ER PT J AU Forster, J Liberman, N Shapira, O AF Forster, Jens Liberman, Nira Shapira, Oren TI Preparing for Novel Versus Familiar Events: Shifts in Global and Local Processing SO JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-GENERAL LA English DT Article DE novelty; procedural priming; processing styles; construal level; conceptual scope ID SELECTIVE ATTENTION; VISUAL INFORMATION; RECOGNITION-MEMORY; MENTAL CATEGORIES; SPATIAL DISTANCE; FACE RECOGNITION; REGULATORY FOCUS; SOCIAL JUDGMENT; NOVELTY; PERCEPTION AB Six experiments examined whether novelty versus familiarity influences global versus local processing styles. Novelty and familiarity were manipulated by either framing a task as new versus familiar or by asking participants to reflect upon novel versus familiar events prior to the task (i.e., procedural priming). In Experiments 1-3, global perception was enhanced after novelty priming or framing, whereas familiarity priming facilitated local perception relative to a control group. In Experiment 4, participants used more inclusive categories under novelty priming and narrower categories under familiarity priming. In Experiments 5-6, participants construed actions and products more abstractly when these were framed as novel as compared to familiar. These results support the construal level theory (N. Liberman & Y. Trope, 2008; Y. Trope & N. Liberman, 2003) contention that having less direct experience is associated with using higher construal levels. Implications of the findings for research on mood, processing styles, stereotypes, and consumer research are discussed. C1 [Forster, Jens] Univ Amsterdam, Social Psychol Dept, NL-1018 WB Amsterdam, Netherlands. [Forster, Jens] Jacobs Univ Bremen, Sch Humanities & Social Sci, Bremen, Germany. [Liberman, Nira; Shapira, Oren] Tel Aviv Univ, Social Psychol Dept, IL-69978 Tel Aviv, Israel. RP Forster, J (reprint author), Univ Amsterdam, Social Psychol Dept, Roetersstr 15, NL-1018 WB Amsterdam, Netherlands. EM j.a.forster@uva.nl RI Liberman, Nira /D-7994-2011; Claus, Bart/I-3780-2014 OI Claus, Bart/0000-0002-8642-9240 CR ANDERSON MC, 1995, PSYCHOL REV, V102, P68, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.102.1.68 Baas M, 2008, PSYCHOL BULL, V134, P779, DOI 10.1037/a0012815 Bar-Anan Y, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P609, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.609 Bargh J. A., 1994, HDB SOCIAL COGNITION, V1, P1 Barsalou LW, 1999, BEHAV BRAIN SCI, V22, P577 Beeman M, 1998, RIGHT HEMISPHERE LANGUAGE COMPREHENSION, P255 BERLYNE DE, 1971, PSYCHON SCI, V25, P349 Berlyne D. E., 1960, CONFLICT AROUSAL CUR Bianchi M, 1998, ACTIVE CONSUMER NOVE, P64 BORNSTEIN RF, 1989, PSYCHOL BULL, V106, P265, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.106.2.265 BRADLEY MM, 1993, BEHAV NEUROSCI, V107, P970, DOI 10.1037/0735-7044.107.6.970 BURGESS C, 1988, BRAIN LANG, V33, P86, DOI 10.1016/0093-934X(88)90056-9 BURKE A, 1992, MEM COGNITION, V20, P277, DOI 10.3758/BF03199665 Burns LH, 1996, BEHAV NEUROSCI, V110, P60, DOI 10.1037/0735-7044.110.1.60 Cacioppo J. T., 1996, HDB BASIC PRINCIPLES, P72 CLONINGER CR, 1991, AM PSYCHOP, P183 Crockenberg SC, 2004, DEV PSYCHOL, V40, P1123, DOI 10.1037/0012-1649.40.6.1123 Derryberry D, 1998, PERS INDIV DIFFER, V25, P745, DOI 10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00117-2 EASTERBROOK JA, 1959, PSYCHOL REV, V66, P183, DOI 10.1037/h0047707 Ekstrom R., 1976, MANUAL KIT FACTOR RE Eysenck H. J, 1985, PERSONALITY INDIVIDU Fazio R. H., 1990, REV PERSONALITY SOCI, V11, P74 FINKE RA, 1985, PSYCHOL BULL, V98, P236, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.98.2.236 Fiore SM, 1998, RIGHT HEMISPHERE LANGUAGE COMPREHENSION, P349 FISKE ST, 1990, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V23, P1, DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60317-2 Fiske S. T., 1991, SOCIAL COGNITION Forster J, 2006, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V42, P133, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.02.004 Forster J, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P631, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01586.x Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Forster J, 2000, SOC COGNITION, V18, P178, DOI 10.1521/soco.2000.18.2.178 Forster Jens A., 2007, HDB BASIC PRINCIPLES, P201 FORSTER J, 2004, SOC COGNITION, V22, P63 FORSTER J, 2008, NOVELTY INFLUE UNPUB FORSTER J, 2008, CREATIVITY TAS UNPUB FORSTER J, 2008, GLOBAL VERSUS UNPUB Forster J, 2008, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V94, P579, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.94.4.579 Forster J, 2009, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V138, P88, DOI 10.1037/a0014484 Friedman RS, 2008, HANDBOOK OF APPROACH AND AVOIDANCE MOTIVATION, P235 Friedman RS, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V88, P263, DOI 10.1067/0022-3514.88.2.263 Friedman RS, 2003, CREATIVITY RES J, V15, P277, DOI 10.1207/S15326934CRJ152&3_18 Friedman RS, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V81, P1001, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.81.6.1001 Friedman RS, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P477, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.4.477 Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x Gable PA, 2008, PSYCHOL SCI, V19, P476, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02112.x Gasper K, 2002, PSYCHOL SCI, V13, P34, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00406 Gasper K, 2004, COGNITION EMOTION, V18, P405, DOI 10.1080/02699930341000068 GATI I, 1990, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V119, P251, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.119.3.251 GILBERT DT, 1991, AM PSYCHOL, V46, P107, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.46.2.107 GREEN DM, 1966, SIGNAL DETECTION THE Hekkert P, 2003, BRIT J PSYCHOL, V94, P111, DOI 10.1348/000712603762842147 Henderson MD, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V91, P845, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.91.5.845 Idson LC, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V80, P585, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.80.4.585 ISEN AM, 1984, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P1206, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.47.6.1206 Kanazawa S, 2004, PSYCHOL REV, V111, P512, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.111.2.512 KIMCHI R, 1992, PSYCHOL BULL, V112, P24, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.24 Liberman N, 1999, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V77, P1135, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.77.6.1135 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N., 2002, J EXPT SOCIAL PSYCHO, V38, P524 Liberman N., 2007, HDB BASIC PRINCIPLES, P353 Liberman N, 2008, SCIENCE, V322, P1201, DOI 10.1126/science.1161958 Liviatan I, 2008, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V44, P1256, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.007 Love BC, 1999, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V38, P291, DOI 10.1006/cogp.1998.0697 MAASS A, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P981, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.981 Macrae CN, 2002, PSYCHOL SCI, V13, P194, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00436 MASSON MEJ, 1995, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V21, P3, DOI 10.1037/0278-7393.21.1.3 McKone E, 2004, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V30, P181, DOI 10.1037/0278-7393.30.1.181 MIKULINCER M, 1990, PERS INDIV DIFFER, V11, P805, DOI 10.1016/0191-8869(90)90189-X MIKULINCER M, 1990, PERS INDIV DIFFER, V11, P815, DOI 10.1016/0191-8869(90)90190-3 NAVON D, 1977, COGNITIVE PSYCHOL, V9, P353, DOI 10.1016/0010-0285(77)90012-3 NEILL WT, 1987, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V13, P327, DOI 10.1037/0278-7393.13.2.327 Neumann Ewald, 1992, CAN J PSYCHOL, V46, P11, DOI DOI 10.1037/H0084309 Piaget J., 1952, ORIGINS INTELLIGENCE Piaget J., 1980, ADAPTATION INTELLIGE POSNER MI, 1987, TRENDS NEUROSCI, V10, P13, DOI 10.1016/0166-2236(87)90116-0 Richards JE, 1997, DEV PSYCHOL, V33, P22 ROSCH E, 1975, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V104, P192, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.104.3.192 RoveeCollier C, 1996, J EXP PSYCHOL HUMAN, V22, P1178 Scherer K. R., 2001, APPRAISAL PROCESSES, P92 Schooler JW, 2002, APPL COGNITIVE PSYCH, V16, P989, DOI 10.1002/acp.930 SCHOOLER JW, 1993, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V122, P166, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.122.2.166 Schooler J. W., 1997, PSYCHOL LEARN MOTIV, P293 Schooler J., 1995, CREATIVE COGNITION A, P97 Schwarz N., 1992, CONSTRUCTION SOCIAL, V8, P217 Schwetz I, 2007, WIEN KLIN WOCHENSCHR, V119, P1 Silvia PJ, 2005, EMOTION, V5, P89, DOI 10.1037/1528-3542.5.1.89 SNODGRASS JG, 1988, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V117, P34, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.117.1.34 Stephan Elena, 2007, POLITENESS ITS UNPUB STRACK F, 1985, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V49, P1460, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.49.6.1460 TANAKA JW, 1993, Q J EXP PSYCHOL-A, V46, P225 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 TUCKER DM, 1984, PSYCHOL REV, V91, P185, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.91.2.185 Tuinstra T, 2002, BEHAV NEUROSCI, V116, P1084, DOI 10.1037//0735-7044.116.6.1084 Urban Glen L., 1993, DESIGNING MARKETING VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Wakslak CJ, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P641, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.641 ZAJONC RB, 1968, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V9, P1, DOI 10.1037/h0025848 NR 96 TC 43 Z9 45 U1 1 U2 34 PU AMER PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC PI WASHINGTON PA 750 FIRST ST NE, WASHINGTON, DC 20002-4242 USA SN 0096-3445 J9 J EXP PSYCHOL GEN JI J. Exp. Psychol.-Gen. PD AUG PY 2009 VL 138 IS 3 BP 383 EP 399 DI 10.1037/a0015748 PG 17 WC Psychology, Experimental SC Psychology GA 478PJ UT WOS:000268599900005 PM 19653797 ER PT J AU Zhang, M Wang, J AF Zhang, Meng Wang, Jing TI Psychological distance asymmetry: The spatial dimension vs. other dimensions SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article ID CONSTRUAL LEVEL THEORY; DECISION-MAKING; CONSUMER; KNOWLEDGE; BEHAVIOR; FOREST; TREES; MIND; SET AB In this research we demonstrate an asymmetry between the spatial dimension and the other three dimensions of psychological distance-i.e., the temporal, social, and hypothetical dimensions. The first study shows that a distal prime along the spatial dimension leads to greater perceived distance along the other three dimensions, but not the other way around. We theorize that this is because people understand temporal, social, and hypothetical distance in terms of spatial distance. Hence, symmetric priming effects should occur when similarities between the spatial dimension and other dimensions are highlighted. Indeed, the last three studies, using multiple operationalizations, show that such priming effects could become symmetric when people engage in relational processing. (C) 2009 Society for Consumer Psychology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. C1 [Zhang, Meng] Chinese Univ Hong Kong, Dept Mkt, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. [Wang, Jing] Univ Iowa, Dept Mkt, Iowa City, IA 52242 USA. RP Zhang, M (reprint author), Chinese Univ Hong Kong, Dept Mkt, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Peoples R China. EM zhangmeng@baf.msmail.cuhk.edu.hk; jing-wang@uiowa.edu CR ARON A, 1992, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V63, P596, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.63.4.596 Bar-Anan Y, 2007, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V136, P610, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.136.4.610 Bar-Anan Y, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P609, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.609 Boroditsky L, 2002, PSYCHOL SCI, V13, P185, DOI 10.1111/1467-9280.00434 Boroditsky L, 2000, COGNITION, V75, P1, DOI 10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00073-6 Dhar R, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P96, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70014-1 Fiedler K, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P101, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70015-3 Freitas AL, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V80, P410, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.80.3.410 Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x GreganPaxton J, 1997, J CONSUM RES, V24, P266, DOI 10.1086/209509 KIM K, 2008, J CONSUMER RES DEC, P706 Lakoff G., 1990, Cognitive Linguistics, V1, P39, DOI 10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.39 Levy SR, 2002, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V83, P1224, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.83.5.1224 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P113, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7 Lynch JG, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P107, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70016-5 MARTIN LL, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P493, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.3.493 MAYALL RN, 1994, SUNDIALS THEIR CONST MEYERSLEVY J, 1991, J CONSUM RES, V18, P424 Roehm ML, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P257, DOI 10.1086/322901 Smith PK, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P578, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.578 Thompson-Schill SL, 1998, J MEM LANG, V38, P440, DOI 10.1006/jmla.1997.2559 Todorov A, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P473, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.002 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Wyer RS, 2008, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V18, P276, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2008.09.005 Wyer RS, 2008, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V18, P244, DOI 10.1016/j.jcps.2008.09.002 Xu AJ, 2008, PSYCHOL SCI, V19, P859, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02169.x ZHU R, 2007, ADV CONSUME IN PRESS NR 29 TC 17 Z9 18 U1 1 U2 23 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 1057-7408 J9 J CONSUM PSYCHOL JI J. Consum. Psychol. PD JUL PY 2009 VL 19 IS 3 BP 497 EP 507 DI 10.1016/j.jcps.2009.05.001 PG 11 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA 547LZ UT WOS:000273891700026 ER PT J AU Haws, KL Poynor, C AF Haws, Kelly L. Poynor, Cait TI Seize the Day! Encouraging Indulgence for the Hyperopic Consumer SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID SELF-CONTROL; CONSTRUAL LEVELS; BEHAVIOR; VARIABLES AB This article explores the phenomenon of "hyperopia," or an aversion to indulgence, as introduced by Kivetz and Keinan (2006) and Kivetz and Simonson (2002). We first develop a measure to capture hyperopia as an individual difference. Three empirical studies use this measure to demonstrate that hyperopia and high self-control are both conceptually and empirically distinct. Further, we show that altering the level at which an action or item is construed can make an indulgent goal or luxury product more appealing to the high hyperopia consumer by influencing its value in terms of an attractive long-term outcome. C1 [Haws, Kelly L.] Texas A&M Univ, Mays Business Sch, College Stn, TX 77843 USA. [Poynor, Cait] Univ Pittsburgh, Katz Grad Sch Business, Pittsburgh, PA 15260 USA. RP Haws, KL (reprint author), Texas A&M Univ, Mays Business Sch, 4112 TAMU, College Stn, TX 77843 USA. EM khaws@mays.tamu.edu; cpoynor@katz.pitt.edu CR Aiken L.S., 1991, MULTIPLE REGRESSION ANDERSON JC, 1988, PSYCHOL BULL, V103, P411, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411 ANDREASEN NJ, 1974, BRIT J PSYCHIAT, V125, P452, DOI 10.1192/bjp.125.5.452 BARON RM, 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V51, P1173, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173 Baumeister RF, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V28, P670, DOI 10.1086/338209 Baumeister R. F., 1994, LOSING CONTROL WHY P Carver C. S., 1981, ATTENTION SELF REGUL Diener E, 2006, AM PSYCHOL, V61, P305, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.61.4.305 FORNELL C, 1981, J MARKETING RES, V18, P39, DOI 10.2307/3151312 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Giner-Sorolla R, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V80, P206, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.80.2.206 HOCH SJ, 1991, J CONSUM RES, V17, P492, DOI 10.1086/208573 Irwin JR, 2003, J MARKETING RES, V40, P366, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.40.3.366.19237 Kardes FR, 2006, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V16, P135, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1602_4 KEINAN A, 2008, J MARKETING IN PRESS, V45 Kivetz R, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V29, P199, DOI 10.1086/341571 Kivetz R, 2006, J CONSUM RES, V33, P273, DOI 10.1086/506308 Lastovicka JL, 1999, J CONSUM RES, V26, P85, DOI 10.1086/209552 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, P353 *MINT, 2005, LUX GOODS RET US Mukhopadhyay A, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V31, P779, DOI 10.1086/426611 POYNOR C, 2009, J CONSUMER IN PRESS, V36 Puri Radhika, 1996, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V5, P87, DOI DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP0502_01 Richins ML, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P209, DOI 10.1086/383436 Rick SI, 2008, J CONSUM RES, V34, P767, DOI 10.1086/523285 Rook DW, 1995, J CONSUM RES, V22, P305, DOI 10.1086/209452 Rosenthal R., 1991, ESSENTIALS BEHAV RES SAUCIER G, 1994, J PERS ASSESS, V63, P506, DOI 10.1207/s15327752jpa6303_8 Schwarz N, 2004, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V14, P332, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1404_2 Tangney JP, 2004, J PERS, V72, P271, DOI 10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00263.x THOMPSON C, 2006, NY TIMES MAGAZI 1210 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X NR 33 TC 24 Z9 24 U1 3 U2 33 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD DEC PY 2008 VL 35 IS 4 BP 680 EP 691 DI 10.1086/592129 PG 12 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 372CA UT WOS:000260877800010 ER PT J AU Cheema, A Patrick, VM AF Cheema, Amar Patrick, Vanessa M. TI Anytime versus only: Mind-sets moderate the effect of expansive versus restrictive frames on promotion evaluation SO JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE framing; mind-sets; construal level; coupons; rebates ID ACTION IDENTIFICATION; CONSUMER-BEHAVIOR; COUPON REDEMPTION; BRAND CHOICE; TIME; DECISIONS; DESIRABILITY; SENSITIVITY; PERCEPTION; INFERENCE AB Three studies demonstrate that the framing of redemption windows as expansive or restrictive, with the actual length of the window held constant, influences consumers' evaluations of sales promotions. When feasibility concerns are highlighted (i.e., an implemental mind-set), consumers prefer the expansive ("anytime") to the restrictive ("only") frame. However, consumers in a deliberative mind-set prefer the restrictive (only) frame to the expansive (anytime) frame. Study 1 reveals that whereas the former consumers attend more to their ability to redeem the offer, the latter are influenced more by the precision of the offer. Study 2 highlights the mediating role of these inferences on consumers' likelihood of taking advantage of the offer. Study 3 demonstrates the impact of these frames on real-world coupon redemption. The authors conclude with a discussion of the scope of this framing effect, the implications of the findings, and directions for further research. C1 [Cheema, Amar] Washington Univ, John M Olin Sch Business, St Louis, MO 63130 USA. [Patrick, Vanessa M.] Univ Georgia, Terry Coll Business, Athens, GA 30602 USA. RP Cheema, A (reprint author), Washington Univ, John M Olin Sch Business, St Louis, MO 63130 USA. EM cheema@wustl.edu; vpatrick@terry.uga.edu CR BERKOWITZ EN, 1980, J MARKETING RES, V17, P349, DOI 10.2307/3150533 Chandon P, 2000, J MARKETING, V64, P65, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.64.4.65.18071 Cialdini R., 1985, INFLUENCE SCI PRACTI Darke PR, 2003, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V13, P328, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP1303_13 DELLABITTA AJ, 1981, J MARKETING RES, V18, P416 ELLSBERG D, 1961, Q J ECON, V75, P643, DOI 10.2307/1884324 FRAISSE P, 1984, ANNU REV PSYCHOL, V35, P1 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Gilbert DT, 2002, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V82, P503, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.82.4.503 Gollwitzer PM, 1999, AM PSYCHOL, V54, P493, DOI 10.1037//0003-066X.54.7.493 Grow B, 2005, BUS WEEK, P34 HECKHAUSEN H, 1987, MOTIV EMOTION, V11, P101, DOI 10.1007/BF00992338 Heilman CM, 2002, J MARKETING RES, V39, P242, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.39.2.242.19081 HILTON DJ, 1995, PSYCHOL BULL, V118, P248, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.118.2.248 HORNIK J, 1984, J CONSUM RES, V11, P615, DOI 10.1086/208998 INMAN JJ, 1990, J CONSUM RES, V17, P74, DOI 10.1086/208538 INMAN JJ, 1994, J MARKETING RES, V31, P423, DOI 10.2307/3152229 KUNDA Z, 1990, PSYCHOL BULL, V108, P480, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.108.3.480 LeBoeuf RA, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P59, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.1.59 LEBOEUF RA, 2005, ANCHORING HERE NOW A Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 LYNN M, 1989, J ECON PSYCHOL, V10, P257, DOI 10.1016/0167-4870(89)90023-8 MACKENZIE SB, 1986, J CONSUM RES, V13, P174, DOI 10.1086/209059 Malkoc SA, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P618, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.4.618 McKenzie CRM, 2004, MEM COGNITION, V32, P874, DOI 10.3758/BF03196866 MOBLEY MF, 1988, J CONSUM RES, V15, P273, DOI 10.1086/209164 Muller D, 2005, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V89, P852, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.852 Pauwels K, 2002, J MARKETING RES, V39, P421, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.39.4.421.19114 RAJU JS, 1994, MARKET SCI, V13, P145, DOI 10.1287/mksc.13.2.145 REIBSTEIN DJ, 1982, J MARKETING, V46, P102, DOI 10.2307/1251366 Sanna LJ, 2005, GROUP DYN-THEOR RES, V9, P173, DOI 10.1037/1089-2699.9.3.173 Soman D, 1998, J MARKETING RES, V35, P427, DOI 10.2307/3152162 TVERSKY A, 1981, SCIENCE, V211, P453, DOI 10.1126/science.7455683 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 WARD RW, 1978, J ADVERTISING RES, V18, P51 Zauberman G, 2005, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V134, P23, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.134.1.23 Zhao M, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P379, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.3.379 NR 38 TC 18 Z9 18 U1 4 U2 26 PU AMER MARKETING ASSOC PI CHICAGO PA 311S WACKER DR, STE 5800, CHICAGO, IL 60606-6629 USA SN 0022-2437 J9 J MARKETING RES JI J. Mark. Res. PD AUG PY 2008 VL 45 IS 4 BP 462 EP 472 DI 10.1509/jmkr.45.4.462 PG 11 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 335AJ UT WOS:000258262900007 ER PT J AU Freitas, AL Langsam, KL Clark, S Moeller, SJ AF Freitas, Antonio L. Langsam, Karen L. Clark, Sheri Moeller, Scott J. TI Seeing oneself in one's choices: Construal level and self-pertinence of electoral and consumer decisions SO JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article DE decision making; the self; action identification; temporal construal ID ACTION IDENTIFICATION; BEHAVIOR; GOALS; PREFERENCE; DISSONANCE; COGNITION; MODEL AB Building on previous research examining the implications for self-regulation and decision making of construing action at varying levels of abstraction, the authors proposed that construing action in terms of its abstract purposes facilitates orienting one's decisions toward the standards, characteristics, and goals that define one's desired self-concept. Consistent with this proposal, desiring for oneself a political candidate's personal qualities predicted evaluating favorably (in Study 1) and voting for (in Study 2) that candidate to a greater extent among participants focused on the distal future (and presumably construing action at a relatively high-level of abstraction) than the proximal future (and presumably construing action at a relatively low-level of abstraction). Moreover, individuals chronically construing action in high-level terms responded more favorably to advertisements appealing to their desired self-concept (in Study 3) than to product quality. These findings' implications for decision making are discussed. (C) 2008 Published by Elsevier Inc. C1 [Freitas, Antonio L.; Langsam, Karen L.; Clark, Sheri; Moeller, Scott J.] SUNY Stony Brook, Dept Psychol, Stony Brook, NY 11794 USA. RP Freitas, AL (reprint author), SUNY Stony Brook, Dept Psychol, Stony Brook, NY 11794 USA. EM antonio.freitas@sunysb.edu RI Moeller, Scott/L-5549-2016 OI Moeller, Scott/0000-0002-4449-0844 CR Bargh JA, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V81, P1014, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.81.6.1014 BAUMEISTER RF, 1990, PSYCHOL REV, V97, P90, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.97.1.90 Bern D. J., 1972, ADV EXPT SOCIAL PSYC, V6, P1 Caprara GV, 2004, AM PSYCHOL, V59, P581, DOI 10.1037/0003-066X.59.7.581 Carver CS, 1999, ADV SOC COG, V12, P1 Ditto PH, 2006, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V19, P99, DOI 10.1002/bdm.520 Eagly A. H., 1993, PSYCHOL ATTITUDES EMMONS RA, 1992, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V62, P292, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.62.2.292 Forster J, 2005, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V41, P220, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.06.009 Glaser J, 1998, Pers Soc Psychol Rev, V2, P156, DOI 10.1207/s15327957pspr0203_1 HIGGINS ET, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P319, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.3.319 Hovland C. I., 1953, COMMUNICATION PERSUA Iyengar SS, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P995, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.995 James W., 1890, PRINCIPLES PSYCHOL, V1 Janis IL, 1977, DECISION MAKING PSYC Kim H, 1999, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V77, P785, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.77.4.785 LANGSAM KL, 2007, THESIS STONY BROOK U LEWIN K, 1944, PERSONALITY BEHAV DI, P333 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Lifton R. J., 1986, NAZI DOCTORS MED KIL Mann T, 2004, HEALTH PSYCHOL, V23, P330, DOI 10.1037/0278-6133.23.3.330 MARKUS HR, 1991, PSYCHOL REV, V98, P224, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224 Petty R. E., 1986, COMMUNICATION PERSUA Piacentini Maria, 2004, J CONSUM BEHAV, V3, P251, DOI [10.1002/cb.138, DOI 10.1002/CB.138] Powers W. T., 1973, BEHAV CONTROL PERCEP Rothman AJ, 1997, PSYCHOL BULL, V121, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.121.1.3 Sagristano MD, 2002, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V131, P364, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.131.3.364 Snyder C. R., 1980, UNIQUENESS HUMAN PUR STEELE CM, 1993, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V64, P885, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.64.6.885 Stone J, 2001, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V37, P228, DOI 10.1006/jesp.2000.1446 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Williams-Piehota P, 2003, HEALTH COMMUN, V15, P375, DOI 10.1207/S15327027HC1504_01 NR 35 TC 11 Z9 18 U1 0 U2 9 PU ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE PI SAN DIEGO PA 525 B ST, STE 1900, SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-4495 USA SN 0022-1031 J9 J EXP SOC PSYCHOL JI J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. PD JUL PY 2008 VL 44 IS 4 BP 1174 EP 1179 DI 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.02.011 PG 6 WC Psychology, Social SC Psychology GA 321YO UT WOS:000257342600027 ER PT J AU Alexander, DL Lynch, JG Wang, Q AF Alexander, David L. Lynch, John G., Jr. Wang, Qing TI As time goes by: Do cold feet follow warm intentions for really new versus incrementally new products? SO JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH LA English DT Article DE really new products; purchase intentions; new product expectations; psychological distance; construal-level theory ID BEHAVIOR; PURCHASE; MODEL; REPRESENTATION; INFORMATION; KNOWLEDGE; ADOPTION; ATTITUDE; SELF AB Combining prior theory about really new products (RNPs) with temporal construal theory, the authors show in four field studies that consumers follow through less often on positive purchase intentions to buy RNPs than on intentions to buy incrementally new products (INPs), and the decrement grows over time. Compared with consumers of INPs, consumers of RNPs are less likely to think concretely about the circumstances of buying and using the products and are more poorly calibrated in their expectations of initial product use. The authors discuss implications for both the marketing of and the market research on RNPs. C1 [Alexander, David L.] Univ St Thomas, Opus Coll Business, St Paul, MN 55105 USA. [Lynch, John G., Jr.] Duke Univ, Fuqua Sch Business, Durham, NC 27706 USA. [Wang, Qing] Univ Warwick, Warwick Business Sch, Coventry CV4 7AL, W Midlands, England. RP Alexander, DL (reprint author), Univ St Thomas, Opus Coll Business, St Paul, MN 55105 USA. EM dlalexander@stthomas.edu; john.lynch@duke.edu; qing.wang@wbs.ac.uk RI Lynch, John/A-8595-2009 OI Lynch, John/0000-0002-4094-3738 CR ALEXANDER DL, 2008, THESIS DUKE U Allison PD, 1995, SURVIVAL ANAL USING BOLLEN K, 1991, PSYCHOL BULL, V110, P305, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.110.2.305 Booz-Allen & Hamilton, 1982, NEW PRODUCT MANAGEME Castano R, 2008, J MARKETING RES, V45, P320, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.45.3.320 Clancy KJ, 2006, MARKET NEW PRODUCTS Dahl DW, 2004, J PROD INNOVAT MANAG, V21, P259, DOI 10.1111/j.0737-6782.2004.00077.x DAVIDSON AR, 1985, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V49, P1184, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.49.5.1184 Dholakia UM, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V29, P159, DOI 10.1086/341568 Diamantopoulos A, 2001, J MARKETING RES, V38, P269, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.38.2.269.18845 Eyal T, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P781, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781 FARLEY JU, 1987, SLOAN MANAGE REV, V28, P5 FELDMAN JM, 1988, J APPL PSYCHOL, V73, P421, DOI 10.1037//0021-9010.73.3.421 FOUST J, 2006, SEGWAYS SPACE Goldenberg J, 2001, MANAGE SCI, V47, P69, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.47.1.69.10670 Gollwitzer PM, 1999, AM PSYCHOL, V54, P493, DOI 10.1037//0003-066X.54.7.493 Gourville JT, 2006, HARVARD BUS REV, V84, P98 HAFNER K, 2003, NY TIMES 1015 Hoeffler S, 2003, J MARKETING RES, V40, P406, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.40.4.406.19394 HOEFFLER S, 2006, BUILDING EVOLUTIONAR Hoeffler S., 1999, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V8, P113, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp0802_01 HOLAK SL, 1990, J PROD INNOVAT MANAG, V7, P59, DOI 10.1111/1540-5885.710059 Irwin JR, 2001, J MARKETING RES, V38, P100, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.38.1.100.18835 JAMIESON LF, 1989, J MARKETING RES, V26, P336, DOI 10.2307/3172905 LABAY DG, 1981, J CONSUM RES, V8, P271, DOI 10.1086/208865 Lehmann D.R, 1994, MARK SCI I C BOST SE Levav J, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P207, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01687.x Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Trope J., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B, V2, P353 LYNCH JG, 1994, MANAGE SCI, V40, P169, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.40.2.169 Lynch JG, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P107, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70016-5 MEYER RJ, 1981, J MARKETING RES, V18, P428, DOI 10.2307/3151336 Mick DG, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V25, P123, DOI 10.1086/209531 MOLDOVAN S, 2006, DIFFERENT ROLES PROD Montaguti E, 2002, INT J RES MARK, V19, P21, DOI 10.1016/S0167-8116(02)00046-0 MOREAU C, 1997, 97118 MARK SCI I Moreau CP, 2001, J MARKETING RES, V38, P14, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.38.1.14.18836 Moreau CP, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V27, P489, DOI 10.1086/319623 MORWITZ VG, 1992, J MARKETING RES, V29, P391, DOI 10.2307/3172706 Morwitz V. G., 2001, PRINCIPLES FORECASTI, P33 Morwitz V. G., 1991, THESIS U PENNSYLVANI Reichheld F.F., 2006, ULTIMATE QUESTION DR Rogers E, 2003, DIFFUSION INNOVATION SIMMONS CJ, 1991, J CONSUM RES, V17, P477, DOI 10.1086/208572 Thompson DV, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P431, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.2005.42.4.431 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Urban GL, 1996, J MARKETING, V60, P47, DOI 10.2307/1251887 Winer B. J., 1971, STAT PRINCIPLES EXPT Wood SL, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V29, P416, DOI 10.1086/344425 Zauberman G, 2005, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V134, P23, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.134.1.23 ZHAO M, 2006, THESIS U N CAROLINA NR 53 TC 45 Z9 47 U1 5 U2 40 PU AMER MARKETING ASSOC PI CHICAGO PA 311S WACKER DR, STE 5800, CHICAGO, IL 60606-6629 USA SN 0022-2437 J9 J MARKETING RES JI J. Mark. Res. PD JUN PY 2008 VL 45 IS 3 BP 307 EP 319 DI 10.1509/jmkr.45.3.307 PG 13 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 312RK UT WOS:000256688300005 ER PT J AU Kim, H John, DR AF Kim, Hakkyun John, Deborah Roedder TI Consumer response to brand extensions: Construal level as a moderator of the importance of perceived fit SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article ID 2 LINEAR REGRESSIONS; ACTION IDENTIFICATION; DISTANT FUTURE; BEHAVIOR; PERSUASION; ATTITUDE; IMPACT; COEFFICIENTS; PERCEPTIONS; PREDICTION AB One of the most enduring findings from branding research is that consumers evaluate brand extensions on the basis of their perceived fit with the parent brand. In this article, we propose that the importance of perceived fit in extension evaluations is moderated by construal level. We draw upon construal level theory which posits that individuals can construe stimuli in their environments in terms of abstract and generalized features (high-level construals) or in terms of concrete and contextualized features (low-level construals). Results from three studies confirm that consumers who construe their environment at a higher level place more importance on perceived extension fit in evaluating brand extensions. These consumers evaluate high fit extensions more favorably than moderate fit extensions, consistent with prior research. However, consumers who construe their environment at a lower level do not evaluate high and moderate fit extensions any differently, unless the importance of using fit perceptions is made salient. (C) 2008 Society for Consumer Psychology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. C1 [John, Deborah Roedder] Univ Minnesota, Carlson Sch Management, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA. [Kim, Hakkyun] Concordia Univ, John Molson Sch Business, Montreal, PQ H3G 1M8, Canada. RP John, DR (reprint author), Univ Minnesota, Carlson Sch Management, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA. EM hkim@jmsb.concordia.ca; djohn@umn.edu CR AAKER DA, 1990, J MARKETING, V54, P27, DOI 10.2307/1252171 Aaker JL, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V28, P33, DOI 10.1086/321946 Ahluwalia R, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V27, P371, DOI 10.1086/317591 Ashmore R. D., 1981, COGNITIVE PROCESS, P1 Barone MJ, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V26, P386, DOI 10.1086/209570 Barone MJ, 2002, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V12, P283 Bottomley PA, 2001, J MARKETING RES, V38, P494, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.38.4.494.18901 BOUSH DM, 1991, J MARKETING RES, V28, P16, DOI 10.2307/3172723 BOUSH DM, 1987, PSYCHOL MARKET, P225 Bridges S, 2000, J ADVERTISING, V29, P1 BRONIARCZYK SM, 1994, J MARKETING RES, V31, P214, DOI 10.2307/3152195 CHOW GC, 1960, ECONOMETRICA, V28, P591, DOI 10.2307/1910133 Dhar R, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P96, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70014-1 EDWARDS K, 1990, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V59, P202, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.59.2.202 Fabrigar LR, 1999, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V25, P363, DOI 10.1177/0146167299025003008 FELDMAN JM, 1988, J APPL PSYCHOL, V73, P421, DOI 10.1037//0021-9010.73.3.421 Fiske S, 1986, HDB MOTIVATION COGNI, V1, P167 Freitas AL, 2001, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V80, P410, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.80.3.410 Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x Greene W. H., 2000, ECONOMETRIC ANAL GUJARATI D, 1970, AM STAT, V24, P50, DOI 10.2307/2682300 Gujarati D. N., 2003, BASIC ECONOMETRICS Han JK, 1997, J INT MARKETING, V5, P77 Herr P. M., 1996, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V5, P135, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp0502_03 Hilton JL, 1996, ANNU REV PSYCHOL, V47, P237, DOI 10.1146/annurev.psych.47.1.237 Kardes FR, 2006, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V16, P135, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1602_4 KELLER K, 2002, BRANDING BRAND EQUIT KELLER KL, 1992, J MARKETING RES, V29, P35, DOI 10.2307/3172491 Lane VR, 2000, J MARKETING, V64, P80, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.64.2.80.17996 Lavine H, 1996, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V32, P580, DOI 10.1006/jesp.1996.0026 Lee AY, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V78, P1122, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.78.6.1122 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P113, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7 LOKEN B, 1993, J MARKETING, V57, P71, DOI 10.2307/1251855 Lynch JG, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P107, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70016-5 Malkoc SA, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P411 Monga AB, 2007, J CONSUM RES, V33, P529, DOI 10.1086/510227 Ng S, 2006, J CONSUM RES, V32, P519, DOI 10.1086/500482 Nussbaum S, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P152, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.2.152 Nussbaum S, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P485, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.485 PARK CW, 1991, J CONSUM RES, V18, P185, DOI 10.1086/209251 Petty RE, 1998, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V24, P227, DOI 10.1177/0146167298243001 Smith PK, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P578, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.578 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Volckner F, 2006, J MARKETING, V70, P18, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.70.2.18 NR 49 TC 37 Z9 41 U1 2 U2 35 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 1057-7408 J9 J CONSUM PSYCHOL JI J. Consum. Psychol. PY 2008 VL 18 IS 2 BP 116 EP 126 DI 10.1016/j.jcps.2008.01.006 PG 11 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA 300EJ UT WOS:000255806800008 ER PT J AU Auh, S Shih, E Yoon, Y AF Auh, Seigyoung Shih, Eric Yoon, Yeosun TI Aligning benefits with payments: A test of the pattern alignment hypothesis SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article ID CONSTRUAL LEVEL THEORY; DECISION-MAKING; CONSUMER PERCEPTIONS; PRICE; SATISFACTION; CONSUMPTION; CUSTOMERS; BEHAVIOR; RISK; CONSEQUENCES AB This article examines consumer perception of transactions whose benefits Of Consumption and cost of purchase unfold over time. Specifically, the article employs the notion of narrow framing to suggest that, when consumers confront a series of decisions, they tend to make evaluations one at a time, rather than take into consideration the entire portfolio. Consistent with this argument, the authors test the pattern alignment hypothesis, which states that consumers prefer payment schemes that match the pattern of benefits and payments in each period, rather than a scheme that encompasses ail entire financing period. In two experiments, the authors find general support for the pattern alignment hypothesis and for the underlying process by which this hypothesis occurs. Specifically, Experiment 2 highlights the mediating role of consumers' perceived fairness in determining the effectiveness of a financing program. The paper Concludes with a discussion of the theoretical and practical implications of developing financing and pricing strategies that promote the perception of fairness. (C) 2008 Society for Consumer Psychology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. C1 [Yoon, Yeosun] Korea Adv Inst Sci & Technol, Grad Sch Management, Seoul 130722, South Korea. [Auh, Seigyoung] Yonsei Univ, Yonsei Sch Business, Seoul 120749, South Korea. [Shih, Eric] Sungkyunkwan Univ, Grad Sch Business, Seoul 110745, South Korea. RP Yoon, Y (reprint author), Korea Adv Inst Sci & Technol, Grad Sch Management, 207-43 Cheongryangri 2 Dong, Seoul 130722, South Korea. EM sauh@yonsei.ac.kr; eshih@skku.edu; yyoon@business.kaist.ac.kr RI Yoon, Yeosun/C-1673-2011 CR Barron R., 1986, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V5, P1173, DOI DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 Benartzi S, 1999, MANAGE SCI, V45, P364, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.45.3.364 Bolton LE, 2003, J CONSUM RES, V29, P474, DOI 10.1086/346244 Bolton RN, 1999, J MARKETING RES, V36, P171, DOI 10.2307/3152091 Bruner II GC, 1994, MARKETING SCALES HDB Campbell MC, 1999, J MARKETING RES, V36, P187, DOI 10.2307/3152092 Cheema A, 2006, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V16, P33, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1601_6 Cheema A, 2002, ADV CONSUM RES, V29, P342 Dhar R, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P96, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70014-1 Fiedler K, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P101, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70015-3 Gourville JT, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V25, P160, DOI 10.1086/209533 Heath C, 1996, J CONSUM RES, V23, P40, DOI 10.1086/209465 Heath C, 1996, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V68, P95, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1996.0092 HENDERSON PW, 1992, ORG BEHAV HUMAN DECI, V51, P38 HIRST DE, 1994, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V58, P136, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1994.1031 Homburg C, 2005, J MARKETING, V69, P84, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.69.2.84.60760 HUPPERTZ JW, 1978, J MARKETING RES, V15, P250, DOI 10.2307/3151255 Jacoby J, 2002, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V12, P21, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP1201_03 KAHNEMAN D, 1993, MANAGE SCI, V39, P17, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.39.1.17 KAHNEMAN D, 1979, ECONOMETRICA, V47, P263, DOI 10.2307/1914185 Kamleitner B, 2006, MARKET LETT, V17, P281, DOI 10.1007/s11002-006-8521-9 Kelley H. H., 1978, INTERPERSONAL RELATI Lynch JG, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P107, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70016-5 Maxham JG, 2003, J MARKETING, V67, P46, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.67.1.46.18591 Nagle T. T., 2006, STRATEGY TACTICS PRI Nunes JC, 2000, J MARKETING RES, V37, P397, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.37.4.397.18788 OKADA EM, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V27, P443 OLIVER RL, 1989, J MARKETING, V53, P21, DOI 10.2307/1251411 Patrick VM, 2006, J RETAILING, V82, P165, DOI 10.1016/j.jretai.2006.06.002 Prelec D, 1998, MARKET SCI, V17, P4, DOI 10.1287/mksc.17.1.4 Ramaswami SN, 2003, J MARKETING, V67, P46, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.67.4.46.18690 Read D, 1999, J RISK UNCERTAINTY, V19, P171, DOI 10.1023/A:1007879411489 SIMONSON I, 1990, J MARKETING RES, V27, P150, DOI 10.2307/3172842 Soman D, 2002, MARKET LETT, V13, P359, DOI 10.1023/A:1020374617547 Soman D, 2001, J CONSUM RES, V27, P460, DOI 10.1086/319621 Thaler R., 1985, MARKET SCI, V4, P199, DOI DOI 10.1287/MKSC.4.3.199 Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Kahneman D., 1986, J BUS, V59, P251, DOI DOI 10.1086/296365 Xia L, 2004, J MARKETING, V68, P1, DOI 10.1509/jmkg.68.4.1.42733 NR 39 TC 2 Z9 2 U1 4 U2 21 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 1057-7408 J9 J CONSUM PSYCHOL JI J. Consum. Psychol. PY 2008 VL 18 IS 4 BP 292 EP 303 DI 10.1016/j.jcps.2008.09.007 PG 12 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA 379MJ UT WOS:000261400100009 ER PT J AU Hamilton, RW Thompson, DV AF Hamilton, Rebecca W. Thompson, Debora Viana TI Is there a substitute for direct experience? Comparing consumers' preferences after direct and indirect product experiences SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH LA English DT Article ID BEHAVIOR; CONSISTENCY; TRIAL AB We show that direct product experiences (e. g., product trials) and indirect product experiences (e. g., reading a product description) result in different levels of mental construal and product preferences. Study 1 demonstrates that increasing experiential contact with a product triggers more concrete mental construal and increases preferences for products that are easy to use relative to those that are more desirable but difficult to use. Studies 2 and 3 show that the effect of product experience can be attenuated by encouraging consumers to think concretely prior to product exposure and by asking consumers to choose products for others instead of themselves. C1 [Hamilton, Rebecca W.] Univ Maryland, Robert H Smith Sch Business, College Pk, MD 20742 USA. [Thompson, Debora Viana] Georgetown Univ, McDonough Sch Business, Washington, DC 20057 USA. RP Hamilton, RW (reprint author), Univ Maryland, Robert H Smith Sch Business, College Pk, MD 20742 USA. EM rhamilto@rhsmith.umd.edu; dvt@georgetown.edu CR DAILY L, 2005, AM WAY 0801, P46 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 HOCH SJ, 1989, J MARKETING, V53, P1, DOI 10.2307/1251410 Hoch SJ, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V29, P448, DOI 10.1086/344422 Hsee CK, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P680, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.5.680 Kardes FR, 2006, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V16, P135, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1602_4 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B Mitchell AA, 1996, J CONSUM RES, V23, P219, DOI 10.1086/209479 Mooy S., 2002, J PRODUCT BRAND MANA, V11, P432, DOI 10.1108/10610420210451625 OLIVER RL, 1993, J CONSUM RES, V20, P418, DOI 10.1086/209358 PAIVIO A, 1991, CAN J PSYCHOL, V45, P255, DOI 10.1037/h0084295 Peracchio LA, 1996, J CONSUM RES, V23, P177, DOI 10.1086/209476 PERREAULT WD, 1989, J MARKETING RES, V26, P135, DOI 10.2307/3172601 REGAN DT, 1977, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V13, P28, DOI 10.1016/0022-1031(77)90011-7 SMITH RE, 1988, J ADVERTISING, V17, P3 SMITH RE, 1983, J MARKETING RES, V20, P257, DOI 10.2307/3151829 SMITH RE, 1982, J MARKETING, V46, P81, DOI 10.2307/1251162 Thompson DV, 2005, J MARKETING RES, V42, P431, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.2005.42.4.431 Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 NR 20 TC 54 Z9 54 U1 1 U2 26 PU UNIV CHICAGO PRESS PI CHICAGO PA 1427 E 60TH ST, CHICAGO, IL 60637-2954 USA SN 0093-5301 J9 J CONSUM RES JI J. Consum. Res. PD DEC PY 2007 VL 34 IS 4 BP 546 EP 555 DI 10.1086/520073 PG 10 WC Business SC Business & Economics GA 249QO UT WOS:000252244200010 ER PT J AU Trope, Y Liberman, N Wakslak, C AF Trope, Yaacov Liberman, Nira Wakslak, Cheryl TI Construal levels and psychological distance: Effects on representation, prediction, evaluation, and behavior SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article ID SELF-CONTROL; ACTION IDENTIFICATION; TEMPORAL DISTANCE; ATTRIBUTION; CATEGORIES; PREFERENCE; COGNITION; EVENTS; FUTURE; FOREST AB Construal level theory (CLT) is an account of how psychological distance influences individuals' thoughts and behavior. CLT assumes that people mentally construe objects that are psychologically near in terms of low-level, detailed, and contextualized features, whereas at a distance they construe the same objects or events in terms of high-level, abstract, and stable characteristics. Research has shown that different dimensions of psychological distance (time, space, social distance, and hypotheticality) affect mental construal and that these construals, in turn, guide prediction, evaluation, and behavior. The present paper reviews this research and its implications for consumer psychology. C1 NYU, Dept Psychol, New York, NY 10003 USA. Tel Aviv Univ, IL-69978 Tel Aviv, Israel. RP Trope, Y (reprint author), NYU, Dept Psychol, 6 Washington Pl,7th Fl, New York, NY 10003 USA. EM yaacov.trope@nyu.edu RI Liberman, Nira /D-7994-2011; Claus, Bart/I-3780-2014 OI Claus, Bart/0000-0002-8642-9240 FU NIMH NIH HHS [R01 MH059030, R01 MH059030-08] CR AGRAWAL N, 2006, UNPUB VALUE HIGHLIGH AMIT E, 2006, UNPUB DISTANCE DEPEN ARKES HR, 1985, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V35, P124, DOI 10.1016/0749-5978(85)90049-4 Bar-Anan Y, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P609, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.609 BARANAN Y, IN PRESS J EXPT PSYC BROCKNER J, 1992, ACAD MANAGE REV, V17, P39, DOI 10.2307/258647 Chandran S, 2004, J CONSUM RES, V31, P375, DOI 10.1086/422116 DAY S, 2004, 26 ANN M COGN SCI SO DONAHUE EM, 1993, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V64, P834, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.64.5.834 Ekstrom R. B., 1976, KIT FACTOR REFERENCE Eyal T, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P781, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781 EYAL T, 2006, UNPUB RESOLVING VALU Forster J, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V87, P177, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.177 Frederick S, 2002, J ECON LIT, V40, P351, DOI 10.1257/002205102320161311 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 Fujita K, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P351, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351 Fujita K, 2006, PSYCHOL SCI, V17, P278, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01698.x FUJITA K, 2006, UNPUB INFLUENCING AT Galinsky AD, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V85, P453, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.453 GENTNER D, 1994, PSYCHOL SCI, V5, P152, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1994.tb00652.x Heider F, 1944, AM J PSYCHOL, V57, P243, DOI 10.2307/1416950 HENDERSON MD, IN PRESS J PERSONALI, V91, P712 HENDERSON MD, IN PRESS J PERSONALI, V91, P845 HERZOG S, IN PRESS J EXPT SOCI JOHNSON MD, 1984, J CONSUM RES, V11, P741, DOI 10.1086/209010 JONES EE, 1967, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V3, P1, DOI 10.1016/0022-1031(67)90034-0 Kivetz R, 2002, J CONSUM RES, V29, P199, DOI 10.1086/341571 Kivetz Y, 2007, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V102, P193, DOI 10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.07.002 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Liberman N, 2002, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V38, P523, DOI 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00535-8 Liberman N., 2007, SOCIAL PSYCHOL HDB B Liberman N, 2007, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V43, P143, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.12.009 LIVIATAN I, 2006, UNPUB INTERPERSONAL Malkoc SA, 2005, PSYCHOL SCI, V16, P411 MALKOC SA, 2006, UNPUB IMPATIENCE IS Muraven M, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V74, P774, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.74.3.774 NEWTSON D, 1973, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V28, P28, DOI 10.1037/h0035584 Nussbaum S, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P152, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.2.152 Nussbaum S, 2003, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V84, P485, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.485 ROSCH E, 1975, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V104, P192, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.104.3.192 SAGRISTANO MD, 2006, UNPUB TEMPORAL DISTA SCHWARTZ SH, 1992, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V25, P1, DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6 SEMIN GR, 1988, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V54, P558, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.54.4.558 Smith PK, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V90, P578, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.578 Staw BM., 1981, ACAD MANAGE REV, V6, P577, DOI DOI 10.2307/257636 Stroop JR, 1935, J EXP PSYCHOL, V18, P643, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.121.1.15 THOMAS M, 2006, UNPUB EFFECTS TEMPOR TODOROV A, IN PRESS J EXPT SOCI Trope Y, 2000, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V79, P876, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.79.6.876 VALLACHER RR, 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P3, DOI 10.1037//0033-295X.94.1.3 VALLACHER RR, 1989, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V57, P660, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.57.4.660 Wakslak CJ, 2006, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V135, P641, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.641 WAKSLAK CJ, 2006, UNPUB EFFECT TEMPORA WAKSLAK CJ, 2006, UNPUB KNEE DEEP BIG WAKSLAK CJ, 2006, UNPUB EFFECT CONSTRU Wanke Michaela, 2000, MESSAGE ROLE SUBJECT, P143 Wechsler D., 1991, WECHSLER INTELLIGENC NR 57 TC 289 Z9 306 U1 21 U2 194 PU LAWRENCE ERLBAUM ASSOC INC-TAYLOR & FRANCIS PI PHILADELPHIA PA 325 CHESTNUT STREET, STE 800, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 USA SN 1057-7408 J9 J CONSUM PSYCHOL JI J. Consum. Psychol. PY 2007 VL 17 IS 2 BP 83 EP 95 DI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X PG 13 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA 165ES UT WOS:000246287400003 PM 21822366 ER PT J AU Dhar, R Kim, EY AF Dhar, Ravi Kim, Eunice Y. TI Seeing the forest or the trees: Implications of construal level theory for consumer choice SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article AB Like many important theories that were originally tested in one domain, construal level theory has broadened the notion of temporal distance to psychological distance and examined the wide ranging implications of this construct on evaluation and behavior. This commentary seeks to take a step back to admire the "forest" that has been created and suggest additional extensions and implications along the different stages of consumer decision making: goal pursuit, evaluation by way of consideration-set formation and receptivity, and finally choice influenced by context, comparability of options, and post-choice happiness and regret. C1 Yale Univ, Sch Management, New Haven, CT 06511 USA. RP Dhar, R (reprint author), Yale Univ, Sch Management, 135 Prospect St, New Haven, CT 06511 USA. EM ravi.dhar@yale.edu CR Chakravarti A, 2006, J MARKETING RES, V43, P642, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.43.4.642 Dhar R, 2000, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V9, P189, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP0904_1 Dhar R, 1997, J CONSUM RES, V24, P215, DOI 10.1086/209506 Dhar R, 2003, J MARKETING RES, V40, P146, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.40.2.146.19229 Eyal T, 2004, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V86, P781, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781 Fishbach A, 2005, J CONSUM RES, V32, P370, DOI 10.1086/497548 FISHBACH A, 2006, IN PRESS HDB CONSUME Fishbach A, 2006, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V91, P232, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.91.2.232 Freitas AL, 2004, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V40, P739, DOI 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003 JOHNSON MD, 1988, J CONSUM RES, V15, P303, DOI 10.1086/209168 JOHNSON MD, 1984, J CONSUM RES, V11, P741, DOI 10.1086/209010 Kahneman D, 2002, HEURISTICS BIASES PS, P49, DOI DOI 10.1017/CB09780511808098.004 KIM EY, 2007, UNPUB CONSUMER RECEP KIM EY, 2007, UNPUB J CONSUMER PSY, V17 Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Petty Richard E, 1986, ADV EXPT SOCIAL PSYC, V19, P123, DOI DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60214-2 SCHWARZ N, IN PRESS USING CALEN Simonson I, 2001, ANNU REV PSYCHOL, V52, P249, DOI 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.249 THOMAS M, 2006, UNPUB EFFECTS TEMPOR Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X Zeelenberg M, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P3, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1701_3 NR 21 TC 38 Z9 48 U1 2 U2 45 PU LAWRENCE ERLBAUM ASSOC INC-TAYLOR & FRANCIS PI PHILADELPHIA PA 325 CHESTNUT STREET, STE 800, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 USA SN 1057-7408 J9 J CONSUM PSYCHOL JI J. Consum. Psychol. PY 2007 VL 17 IS 2 BP 96 EP 100 DI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70014-1 PG 5 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA 165ES UT WOS:000246287400004 ER PT J AU Kardes, FR Cronley, ML Kim, J AF Kardes, FR Cronley, ML Kim, J TI Construal-level effects on preference stability, preference-behavior correspondence, and the suppression of competing brands SO JOURNAL OF CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY LA English DT Article ID ATTITUDE-RELEVANT INFORMATION; THEN-REFRAME TECHNIQUE; MEASURING INTENT; SOCIAL-INFLUENCE; MEMORY; CONSISTENCY; DETERMINANT; ATTRIBUTES; COGNITION; ACCESS AB Construal level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2003) suggests that construal level-or the degree of abstractness of mental representations-increases with temporal, spatial, or sensory distance. Three experiments show that the mere presence of a set of target brands at the time a choice is made encourages consumers to represent the brands in memory in terms of concrete lower-level construals. Consequently, preference stability is higher, preference-behavior consistency is greater, and product category-identification latencies for competing brands are slower. Furthermore, the mere presence of target brands at the time of choice affects preference-behavior consistency independent of the effects of direct experience. Implications for an understanding of spontaneous preference formation, preference representation, and preference elicitation are discussed. C1 Univ Cincinnati, Coll Business, Cincinnati, OH 45221 USA. Miami Univ, Oxford, OH 45056 USA. Oakland Univ, Rochester, MI 48063 USA. RP Kardes, FR (reprint author), Univ Cincinnati, Coll Business, Cincinnati, OH 45221 USA. EM Frank.Kardes@uc.edu CR Adaval R., 1998, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V7, P207, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp0703_01 Anderson MC, 2003, J MEM LANG, V49, P415, DOI 10.1016/j.jml.2003.08.006 Bettman JR, 1998, J CONSUM RES, V25, P187, DOI 10.1086/209535 BRECKLER SJ, 1984, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V47, P1191, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.47.6.1191 Davis BP, 1999, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V76, P192, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.76.2.192 FAZIO RH, 1989, J CONSUM RES, V16, P280, DOI 10.1086/209214 FAZIO RH, 1984, SOC COGNITION, V2, P217, DOI 10.1521/soco.1984.2.3.217 Fazio R. H., 1990, REV PERSONALITY SOCI, V11, P74 Fazio R. H., 1981, ADV EXPT SOCIAL PSYC, V14, P161, DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60372-X FELDMAN JM, 1988, J APPL PSYCHOL, V73, P421, DOI 10.1037//0021-9010.73.3.421 Fennis BM, 2004, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V14, P280, DOI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1403_9 Fitzsimons GJ, 1996, J CONSUM RES, V23, P1, DOI 10.1086/209462 Gilbert Daniel T., 2002, HEURISTICS BIASES PS, P167 Gill MJ, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P1101, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.75.5.1101 GRIFFIN DW, 1991, ADV EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V24, P319, DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60333-0 Johar GV, 2000, J CONSUM RES, V26, P307, DOI 10.1086/209565 KALLGREN CA, 1986, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V22, P328, DOI 10.1016/0022-1031(86)90018-1 Lewin K., 1951, FIELD THEORY SOCIAL Liberman N, 1998, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V75, P5, DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 Lord Charles G., 1999, ADV EXPT SOCIAL PSYC, V31, P265, DOI 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60275-0 Machin JE, 2005, ADVERT CONS, P81 McCabe DB, 2003, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V13, P431, DOI 10.1207/S15327663JCP1304_10 MORWITZ VG, 1993, J CONSUM RES, V20, P46, DOI 10.1086/209332 PRENTICE DA, 1992, PSYCHOL BULL, V112, P160, DOI 10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.160 ROEDIGER HL, 1990, AM PSYCHOL, V45, P1043, DOI 10.1037//0003-066X.45.9.1043 Sagristano MD, 2002, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V131, P364, DOI 10.1037//0096-3445.131.3.364 SHERMAN SJ, 1980, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V39, P211, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.39.2.211 SHERMAN SJ, 1985, PERS SOC PSYCHOL B, V11, P118, DOI 10.1177/0146167285111011 Shiv B, 1999, J CONSUM RES, V26, P278, DOI 10.1086/209563 SIMMONS CJ, 1993, J CONSUM RES, V20, P316, DOI 10.1086/209352 SMITH RE, 1983, J MARKETING RES, V20, P257, DOI 10.2307/3151829 Trope Y, 2003, PSYCHOL REV, V110, P403, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 TULVING E, 1973, PSYCHOL REV, V80, P352, DOI 10.1037/h0020071 Vallacher R. R., 1987, PSYCHOL REV, V94, P2 Vallacher R. R., 1985, THEORY ACTION IDENTI WEGNER DM, 1984, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V46, P269, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.46.2.269 WOOD W, 1985, J EXP SOC PSYCHOL, V21, P73, DOI 10.1016/0022-1031(85)90007-1 WRIGHT AA, 1995, J CONSUM RES, V21, P708, DOI 10.1086/209429 NR 38 TC 39 Z9 40 U1 1 U2 32 PU ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC PI NEW YORK PA 360 PARK AVE SOUTH, NEW YORK, NY 10010-1710 USA SN 1057-7408 J9 J CONSUM PSYCHOL JI J. Consum. Psychol. PY 2006 VL 16 IS 2 BP 135 EP 144 DI 10.1207/s15327663jcp1602_4 PG 10 WC Business; Psychology, Applied SC Business & Economics; Psychology GA 033ZW UT WOS:000236894600004 ER EF