Abstract We demonstrate that natural products are more strongly preferred when used to prevent a problem than when used to cure a problem (the prevent/cure effect). This organizing principle explains variation in the preference for natural across distinct product categories (e.g., food vs. medicine), within product categories (e.g., between different types of medicines), and for the same product depending on how it is used (to prevent or to cure ailments). The prevent/cure effect is driven by two factors: lay beliefs about product attributes and importance of product attributes. Specifically, (a) consumers hold lay beliefs that natural products are safer and less potent and (b) consumers care more about safety and less about potency when preventing as compared to when curing, which leads to a stronger preference for natural when preventing. Consistent with this explanation, when natural products are described as more risky and more potent, reversing the standard inferences about naturalness, then natural products become more preferred for curing than for preventing. This research sheds light on when the marketing of “natural” is most appealing to consumers.

How does coping with a resource loss of time, space, or money change a consumer? In the current work, we argue that resource losses that give rise to budget contractions require a coping strategy that not only influences choice in the moment but also changes underlying consumer preferences. We show that the preference restructuring that occurs when coping with a budget loss also leads to stabilization of preferences. Specifically, a consumer who allocates a budget to a set of items prior to a budget contraction and allocates that same budget post-contraction when the budget is fully restored will allocate the restored budget to fewer options in the set. Coping with the contraction helps consumers prioritize what matters to them, leading to refinement of preference. This within-consumer preference refinement effect exists for budgets of time, space, and money. We identify boundary conditions (i.e., significant budget contractions and self-determined contraction allocations are necessary for prioritization to occur) and rule out non-prioritization explanations (e.g., anchoring and under-adjusting). These findings suggest that marketers should focus on capturing consumers who are dealing with budget contractions as this is one of the moments where individuals revisit and rediscover what matters most to them.

Abstract Drawing on institutional theory and discursive psychology, this article elucidates how actors use emotion discourse to undermine the legitimacy of consumer practices. Based on an empirical investigation of the bullfighting controversy in Spain, our work shows how activists engage in the production and circulation of compelling emotional prototypes of their adversaries. Such emotional prototypes constitute the discursive foundations of a pathic stigma, which, once established, taints the identity of the social groups associated with the practice. Our work frames the centrality of pathic stigmatization as a cultural mechanism mediating the relationship between emotion discourse and the subsequent delegitimization of consumer practices. We make three key contributions to the literature: we advance a rhetorical perspective on emotions and their role in deinstitutionalization processes; we further develop the theory of marketplace sentiments by showing how sentiments operate downstream; and we provide evidence of the sociocultural mechanisms underpinning the emotional vilification, stereotyping and stigmatization of consumer collectives.

Abstract When a consumer realizes that information relevant to a consumption decision is missing, such uncertainty can be attributed to ignorance (i.e., the information has never been observed and is unknown) or to memory failure (i.e., the information has been observed and is forgotten). Although research has examined inferences about unknown attributes, no prior work has examined inferences about forgotten attributes. Across six experiments in the lab and in the field, we find that when uncertainty is attributed to ignorance, consumers often make inferences about unknown attributes based on existing correlational evidence (e.g., a brand comparison sheet that could indicate a positive or negative correlation between the unknown attribute and observable attributes). However, when uncertainty is attributed to memory failure, consumers tend to ignore such existing correlational evidence and instead make inferences about forgotten attributes that tend to be positively correlated with known attributes. This process occurs partly because when consumers believe that an attribute was forgotten, they falsely retrieve an impression about the attribute that tends to be consistent with their overall product evaluation. Overall, believing that an attribute is forgotten and believing that it is unknown can lead to opposite inferences and choices.

Abstract In many situations, consumers use green products without a deliberate choice to use or purchase the product. This research explores how using a green product (e.g., a pair of headphones made from recycled materials) influences the enjoyment of the accompanying consumption experience (e.g., listening to music), even if consumers have not deliberately chosen or purchased the product. Five experiments in actual consumption settings revealed that using a green (vs. conventional) product enhances the enjoyment of the accompanying consumption experience, referred to as the greenconsumption effect. Merely using a green product makes consumers perceive an increase in the extent to which they are valued as individuals by society, which leads to warm glow feelings, and consequently enhances the enjoyment of the accompanying consumption experience. When consumers experience low social worth, the positive effect of using green products on the accompanying consumption experience is amplified. The greenconsumption effect disappears when the negative environmental impact of the green product attribute is low. From a managerial standpoint, the current research identifies instances where brands can benefit from going green and encourages marketers, especially service providers, to promote green products that are instrumental in consumption experiences.

Abstract The idea that consumers use products to feel good about themselves is a basic tenet of marketing. Yet, in addition to the motive to self-enhance, consumers also strive to confirm their self-views (i.e., self-verification). Although self-verification provides self-related benefits, its role in consumer behavior is poorly understood. To redress that gap, we examine a dispositional variable—trait self-esteem—that predicts whether consumers self-verify in the marketplace. We propose that low (vs. high) self-esteem consumers gravitate toward inferior products because those products confirm their pessimistic self-views. Five studies supported our theorizing: low (vs. high) self-esteem participants gravitated toward inferior products (study 1) because of the motivation to self-verify (study 2). Low self-esteem consumers preferred inferior products only when those products signaled pessimistic (vs. positive) self-views and could therefore be self-verifying (study 3). Even more telling, low self-esteem consumers’ propensity to choose inferior products disappeared after they were induced to view themselves as consumers of superior products (study 4), but remained in the wake of negative feedback (study 5). Our investigation thus highlights self-esteem as a boundary condition for compensatory consumption. By pinpointing factors that predict when self-verification guides consumer behavior, this work enriches the field’s understanding of how products serve self-motives.

Abstract Consumers routinely encounter situations in which they perceive that resources are scarce. However, little is known about how this perception influences consumers’ use of price in their purchase decisions. The present research seeks to fill this gap by examining the link between scarcity and the tendency to use price to judge product quality, and the mechanisms underlying that link. Six studies (and five more reported in the web appendix) using multiple product categories and a variety of operationalizations of both scarcity and price-quality judgments show that scarcity decreases consumers’ tendency to use price to judge product quality. This occurs because scarcity induces a desire to compensate for the shortage and seek abundance, and thereby reduces an individual’s general categorization tendency (because categorizing brings about a feeling of reduction); this, in turn, hinders consumers from viewing products as belonging to different price-tier groups, and thus lowers their tendency to use price as a basis for judging product quality. Boundary conditions for the proposed effect are also identified. The current research makes fundamental contributions to the literatures on scarcity, price-quality judgments, and categorization.

Abstract The essence of a brand is that it delivers on its promises. However, consumers’ trust in brands (CTB) has declined around the world in recent decades. As a result, CTB has become a major concern for managers. The authors examine whether CTB is influenced by marketing-mix activities (i.e., advertising, new product introduction, distribution, price, and price promotion) implemented by brands. The authors propose and show that the sensitivity of CTB to marketing-mix activities is moderated by consumer, category, and country characteristics, using a multisource data set consisting of a survey of 15,073 respondents and scanner panel data on 589 brands in 46 CPG categories across 13 countries (including the four largest emerging markets), which collectively account for half of the world’s population. The authors find strong positive effects for advertising and new product introduction intensity, weak positive effects for price and distribution intensity, and a minor negative effect for price promotion intensity on CTB. Furthermore, the authors find that the effect of marketing-mix activities on CTB is moderated by consumers’ personality traits, consumers’ reliance on brands in a category, and countries’ secular-rational and self-expression cultural values.

Abstract Millions of Americans are targeted by investment scams, resulting in billions of dollars lost each year. Previous research indicates that investment fraud victims are more likely to be male, white, and married, and to have higher socioeconomic status compared to the general US population, but little research examines what behaviors and mindsets differentiate them from other investors. A telephone survey was administered to 214 investment fraud victims and 813 general investors recruited using random digit dialing. Based on the opportunity model of predatory victimization, the aim was to identify differences in investment behaviors and psychological mindsets that may affect exposure to investment scams and make individuals more attractive and susceptible targets. In addition to being older and male, victims were more materialistic than general investors and were more frequent stock traders, and purchased more investments sold through unsolicited calls, emails, television advertisements, or “free lunch” seminars, but were less likely to invest based on a social network member’s recommendation. As more retirees begin to take on managing their retirement assets, many may be tempted by unreasonable investment returns promised by unscrupulous brokers. Findings point to specific areas where investor education is needed to counteract poor investment decision-making and risky mindsets.

Abstract Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing healthcare, but little is known about consumer receptivity to AI in medicine. Consumers are reluctant to utilize healthcare provided by AI in real and hypothetical choices, separate and joint evaluations. Consumers are less likely to utilize healthcare (study 1), exhibit lower reservation prices for healthcare (study 2), are less sensitive to differences in provider performance (studies 3A–3C), and derive negative utility if a provider is automated rather than human (study 4). Uniqueness neglect, a concern that AI providers are less able than human providers to account for consumers’ unique characteristics and circumstances, drives consumer resistance to medical AI. Indeed, resistance to medical AI is stronger for consumers who perceive themselves to be more unique (study 5). Uniqueness neglect mediates resistance to medical AI (study 6), and is eliminated when AI provides care (a) that is framed as personalized (study 7), (b) to consumers other than the self (study 8), or (c) that only supports, rather than replaces, a decision made by a human healthcare provider (study 9). These findings make contributions to the psychology of automation and medical decision making, and suggest interventions to increase consumer acceptance of AI in medicine.