Abstract Managers often set prices just-below a round number (e.g., $39)—a strategy that lowers price perceptions and increases sales. The authors question this conventional wisdom in a common consumer context: upgrade decisions (e.g., whether to upgrade a rental car or hotel room). Seven studies—including one field study—provide empirical evidence for a threshold-crossing effect. When a base product is priced at or just-above a threshold, consumers are more likely to upgrade and spend more money (studies 1–3) because they perceive the upgrade option as less expensive (study 4), and they place less weight on price (study 5). Testing theoretically motivated and managerially relevant boundary conditions, studies find that the threshold-crossing effect is mitigated under sequential choice (study 6) and when an upgrade price crosses an upper threshold (study 7). These studies demonstrate that a small increase in price on a base product can decrease price perceptions of an upgrade option and, thus, increase consumers’ likelihood to upgrade. Results suggest that just-below pricing, while sometimes advantageous at first, may not always be an optimal strategy for managers trying to encourage consumers to ultimately choose an upgrade option.

Abstract Bicultural consumers now represent a third of the US population and are the fastest growing demographic group in the United States. This shift in consumer markets presents a challenge for marketers as they try to design brand strategies to serve this important group. In this article, the authors show that certain types of brands, specifically paradox brands that incorporate contradictory brand meanings, are particularly appealing to bicultural consumers. Results from seven studies reveal that bicultural consumers evaluate paradox brands more favorably and choose paradox brands more than traditional brands without contradictions. Furthermore, bicultural consumers exhibit more favorable evaluations and greater choice of paradox brands than do monocultural consumers. These cultural differences are attributable to greater cognitive flexibility found among biculturals, particularly those who adopt an acculturation strategy of integrating their different cultural identities. Greater cognitive flexibility, in turn, prompts stronger engagement with a paradox brand, which contributes to more favorable brand evaluations and choice. Contributions of this research for understanding bicultural consumers, marketing to bicultural consumers, and directions for future research are discussed.

Abstract When considering a charitable act, consumers must often decide on how to allocate their resources across a multitude of possible causes. This article assesses how the relative “urgency” of the causes under consideration (i.e., how critical to human survival the causes are) shapes preferences for specific causes among higher and lower social class consumers. Across a series of studies in a highly unequal socioeconomic environment (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil), we demonstrate that lower-class consumers prefer to donate to urgent causes (e.g., alleviating hunger) compared to non-urgent causes (e.g., encouraging cultural activities), whereas the effect reverses among higher-class consumers. Contrasting experiences with scarcity across social classes vary the consumers’ intrinsic sympathy toward people’s unmet basic needs, which in turn shapes donation allocation preferences. Consistent with this theoretical rationale, class differences in charitable allocations decrease when (a) vivid contextual cues induce sympathy among both higher- and lower-class consumers or (b) the experience with scarcity is similar across social classes. Thus, although class differences in preferences for specific causes can be shifted with relative ease, our findings suggest that those who have the most to give do not spontaneously prioritize what is most urgently needed in society.

Consumer multitasking (i.e., working on multiple tasks simultaneously) is a widespread modern phenomenon, yet the literature lacks an understanding of when and why consumers multitask. We experimentally show that consumers engage in multitasking behavior as a way to compensate for feelings of low control. Specifically, across five main studies and seven Web Appendix studies using two different multitasking paradigms, we find that consumers feeling low (vs. high) control volitionally choose to multitask more on subsequent tasks, rather than do the tasks sequentially (i.e., one task at a time). Mediation and moderation evidence demonstrate that this effect is driven by increased motivations to use time resources efficiently for those feeling low (vs. high) control. We also find that multitasking generally results in suboptimal consumer decision making and decreased task performance. An intervention that altered consumer lay beliefs regarding multitasking and time efficiency was effective in lowering multitasking behavior for consumers experiencing low control during the COVID-19 pandemic. By investigating a cause of consumer multitasking and the underlying mechanism, our studies contribute to research on consumer multitasking, perceptions of control, and resource allocation with important implications for advertisers and marketing managers.

Abstract This article proposes a novel theory, based on relational paradoxes, to explain how consumers enable or disable their relationships with brands over time. Analysis of data from in-depth, longitudinal interviews with 26 consumers reveals four relational tensions and seven actions that consumers take in response to these tensions, thus affecting the course and character of their brand relationships. Four consumer actions enable the consumer–brand relationship by creating patterns of relationship change based on equilibrium or transformation; three actions disable the relationship via patterns of vicious cycles or conflict. Overall, consumers do relationship work as they act to navigate tensions, thereby creating, maintaining, changing, and terminating their brand relationships. This research has implications for current theory on brand relationship templates, dysfunctional brand relationships, and customer relationship management.

Abstract Trade-offs between attributes are common when making product choices. Prior research suggests that consumers tend to avoid the extremes and opt for the middle options when they make a trade-off decision between two key product attributes (e.g., tastiness and healthiness of food items) in one step. In this research, we examine how consumers make such trade-off decisions in a two-step choice process in which consumers first choose between product categories competing on two key attributes and then make a final choice within the chosen category. In three studies, we show that when holding the actual choice options unchanged, consumers are more likely to make a more extreme final choice, prioritizing a single attribute rather than compromising when they follow a two-step choice process instead of a one-step process.

Abstract Consumer feedback platforms offer consumers tools to provide feedback on their market and consumption experiences. Beyond broad prior characterizations, little is known about the specific means by which platforms affect empowerment. Elements of empowerment identified in extant studies include voice, choice, justice, inclusion, catalysis, and consciousness-raising. We research a popular Brazilian platform to learn how platforms facilitate and constrain consumer empowerment. Our approach is immersive, a more-than-human netnography of the platform involving depth interviews with twenty-one of its consumer and corporate users. Findings show same-side and cross-side network effects driving the ability of the platform to offer consumers empowerment. Furthermore, affordances are critically important. Affordances provide opportunities for consumer choice, voice, justice, and inclusion. However, platforms’ cross-side network effects create economic considerations that limit those opportunities in theoretically and practically important ways. Although other feedback platforms might offer catalysis and consciousness-raising elements of empowerment, our focal platform does not. Earlier studies of consumer empowerment on the Internet may have been overly general and exuberant because they failed to recognize the constraining impacts of network effects, affordances, and algorithms. Consumer-citizenry, collective action, and consumer power are thoroughly transformed in the age of the platform, opening up new spaces for further investigation.

Abstract That wealth has diminishing marginal utility is a fact of life, and that people be sensitive to their current level of wealth when deciding whether to pursue additional wealth is a requirement of rational choice. A series of experiments, spanning diverse contexts, reveal marginal-utility neglect—that people are rather insensitive to their current wealth when deciding how much effort to expend to acquire a monetary reward (e.g., how long to walk to claim a voucher). Moreover, the experiments demonstrate that a marginal-utility-prompting manipulation, which prompts people to consider their current wealth and their need for the reward given their current wealth, produces a significant sensitization effect—making financially richer (vs. less rich) individuals less (vs. more) willing to seek the reward. This manipulation is more effective than either prompting people to consider their current wealth alone or consider their need for the reward alone, suggesting that marginal-utility prompting does not merely draw people’s attention to their current wealth or merely draw their attention to their need for the reward, but links the two elements. This research elucidates the psychology of marginal utility and yields implications beyond the pursuit of monetary rewards.

Abstract Although consumers put substantial effort toward their appearance, engaging in beauty work is often seen as inauthentic, posing challenges for beauty companies that increasingly rely on social media-driven product promotion where authenticity perceptions are consequential. This article draws on existentialist notions of authenticity (wherein the true self is created rather than innate) to explore how framing beauty work as self-expression alters others’ perceptions and, in turn, marketing outcomes. First, an archival analysis of Instagram posts demonstrates that rebranding beauty work as self-expression is positively associated with word-of-mouth about beauty products. Six studies then test how motivational information alters perceptions of people who engage in beauty work. Lowered authenticity perceptions arise from observers’ default assumption that beauty work is motivated by self-enhancement and serves primarily to conceal appearances. By contrast, self-expression enhances authenticity by leading others to see beauty work as a form of creation rather than concealment. This pattern extends to when people engage in a variety of beauty work transformations but not when beauty work is designed to restore appearances or is framed as connected to the innate self. These findings provide insight into judgments of authenticity and the management of a stigma associated with product use.