Society for Consumer Psychology 2011 Scp Annual Winter Conference President
نویسندگان
چکیده
Mindsets Promote Sensitivity to Affect Clayton R. Critcher, University of California, Berkeley, USA* Melissa J. Ferguson, Cornell University, USA As a consumer peruses an ad for a cruise vacation, is his attention captured by the affect-rich depictions of tropical beaches, or does he focus on the less evocative details of the package? As a restaurant patron progresses down the buffet line, is she driven by her affective reaction to the food as she decides how much to pile on, or is she sensitive to the steep by-the-pound price or other such concerns? The answers to these and related questions require an understanding of when people are sensitive to affect. Most researchers who have approached this question have focused on the affective state of the consumer. For example, Niedenthal, Halberstadt, and Innes-Ker (1999) found that when people are experiencing an affective state, they are especially likely to attend to and categorize stimuli in more affective terms. In this research, we suggest and find evidence that a non-affective, purely cognitive variable—the level (abstract vs. concrete) at which one construes the world—influences people‘s sensitivity to affect. Although no past research has tested the impact of level of construal on sensitivity to affect, a number of literatures have hinted at a connection. First, according to Construal Level Theory (Liberman, Trope, & Stephan, 2007), desirability—an affective feature— guides decisions about psychologically distant stimuli, which tend to be construed more abstractly (e.g., Sagristano, Trope, & Liberman, 2002). Second, in the clinical psychology literature, abstract thinking has been associated with breadth, self‐ reflection, and emotional awareness, whereas low-level strivings are associated with concrete, non‐ affective goals (Emmons, 1992; Pennebaker, 1989). Third, according to fuzzy-trace theory (Reyna, 2004), gist‐ based representations include evaluations of stimuli as good or bad. As Rivers, Reyna, and Mills (2008) stated, ―The valence component of gist is a central component of meaning associated with a stimulus‖ (p. 123). These disparate literatures suggest that a causal link between abstract thinking and sensitivity to affect is plausible. That is, when one considers the world at an abstract level (―That vacation offers a chance to take a break from it all‖) versus a concrete level (―That vacation offers a chance to visit three islands and eat lavish meals‖), one may be more attentive to and influenced by affect. In Studies 1a, 1b, and 1c, participants completed an emotional Stroop task—a cognitive psychology measure that assesses one‘s automatic sensitivity to highly affective information. In the task, participants are presented with words that are written in different SCP 2011 Winter Conference February 24-27, 2011 149 color fonts. The participant must identify the font color; thus, it is unnecessary to attend to the actual word. Some of the target words are highly affectively valenced (e.g., pleasure, gruesome) and some affectively neutral (e.g., container, pewter). The longer it takes a participant to identify the font color on the valenced versus the neutral trials is an indication of that participant‘s automatic attention to affect. In a Study 1a, participants‘ responses on the Behavioral Identification Form (BIF)—indicating a dispositional tendency to construe the world abstractly (versus concretely)—predicted a tendency to have one‘s attention automatically captured by highly-affective stimuli, r(60) = .36, p = .004. For the remaining studies, we modified the BIF to create abstract and concrete mindset manipulations. Such generalized abstract or concrete mindsets were induced by having participants repeatedly construe stimuli (e.g., ―cleaning the house‖) in more abstract terms (e.g., ―showing one‘s cleanliness‖) or more concrete terms, (e.g., ―vacuuming the floor‖), respectively. Establishing that level of construal causes one‘s sensitivity to affect, those placed into an abstract mindset had higher emotional Stroop scores than those placed into a concrete mindset or no mindset (Study 1b). In Study 1c, we established that it was the affective component of the target words that captured the attention of those in an abstract mindset. Participants primed to construe the target words in non-affective terms no longer showed the effect. The final two studies expanded on these findings to test whether abstract mindsets have a significant impact on consumers‘ mood and behavior. In Study 2, we relied on past findings that one‘s mood shifts to match affectively-charged stimuli in one‘s environment, even when observed non-consciously (Chartrand, van Baaren, & Bargh, 2006). Participants were first placed into an abstract or concrete mindset before being exposed—subliminally and thus outside of their awareness—to a series of either highly positive or highly negative stimuli. Afterward, participants reported their current mood. Although those induced to think concretely were not impacted by the subliminal presentations, the mood of those in an abstract mindset shifted to match the valence of the stimuli they had unknowingly observed. Thus, sensitivity to affect not only guided attention but impacted participants‘ experience. In Study 3, we tested whether this greater sensitivity to affect would have behavioral consequences. We predicted that the consumption behavior of those in an abstract (versus concrete) mindset would follow from their affective response to the stimulus. Participants participated in what was ostensibly a study of ―consumers‘ preferences.‖ After being induced into an abstract or a concrete mindset, participants were asked to sample chocolate candies while completing an accompanying ―product rating task.‖ Unbeknownst to participants, the bowl of candies was connected to a scale, permitting assessment of how many candies participants consumed during the task. As predicted, consumption behavior was predicted by their affectively-based attitudes toward chocolate candies (measured on a pretest) when participants were in an abstract mindset, r = .26, but not while in a concrete mindset, r = -.02. Across these studies, we found a consistent causal relationship between abstract thinking and sensitivity to affect. Given the great number of variables known to influence consumers‘ level of construal—such as physical distance (Fujita, Henderson, Eng, Trope, & Liberman, 2006), social distance (Livitan, Trope, & Liberman, 2008), temporal distance (Liberman, Sagristano, & Trope 2002), and power (Smith & Trope, 2006)—future research may find that many of these variables also impact consumers‘ sensitivity to affect. We hope our findings here are merely a first effort to bridge two major psychological literatures concerning level of construal and affect, which have heretofore developed largely independently. For more information contact: [email protected] SCP 2011 Winter Conference February 24-27, 2011 150 Shall I Tell You Now or Later? The Effect of Product Information Order on Experiential Product Evaluation Keith Wilcox, Babson College, USA* Anne Roggeveen, Babson College, USA Dhruv Grewal, Babson College, USA Numerous studies have demonstrated that product information, such as its price or brand name, learned prior to experiencing a product can affect consumers‘ expectations, which can, in turn, influence their product evaluations (Klaaren, Hodges and Wilson 1994). Less is known, however, how learning such information after the initial product experience affects consumers‘ evaluations. This current research examines whether product information learned before or after sampling an experiential product will lead to differences in consumers‘ evaluation of the experience. Experiential products have affective, sensory and informational components (Nowlis and Shiv 2005). Importantly, when consumers sample experiential products, the affective component carries more weight than the informational component (Biswas, Grewal and Roggeveen 2010). One of the key differences between these components is that the affective and sensory components are based on reactions that arise from the experience and occur automatically; whereas the informational component is based on controlled processes (Nowlis and Shiv 2005). Based on assimilation and contrast theory (e.g., Stapel and Winkielman 1998), we expect the automatic formation of affective evaluations to result in differences in affective evaluations when information is received before or after a product is experienced. One of factor that decides whether contextual information results in assimilation or contrast is how distinct the information is from the target being judged (Stapel and Winkielman 1998). Distinctness is often determined by the extent to which the information is evaluated with the target being judged or presented separate from the evaluation. For example, Martin and Seta (1983) showed that if descriptions of two persons were given and participants were asked to read about both before forming their evaluations, the impression of the target person was assimilated towards the contextual person. In contrast, when participants were asked to form separate evaluations of the target person and the contextual person, the impression of the target was contrasted with the context. This is because the separate evaluations lead the context to serve as a comparison standard when judging the target. For somatosensory experiences if information is received prior to experiencing the product, then we expect assimilation of the experience towards the product information. This is because, knowing that they will be experiencing the product immediately, people are not expected to judge the product on the product information alone. Instead, judgments are expected to occur after both the product information and the experience have occurred resulting in judgments being assimilated towards the contextual information. However, if product information is received after the experience, then we expect contrast to occur for affective judgments. This is based on the fact that affective judgments occur automatically (Nowlis and Shiv 2005). After experiencing the product, the consumer is expected to automatically think about how much they liked the taste. This will lead subsequent contextual information to be distinct from the experience and serve as a comparison standard. More formally, we hypothesize that when product information is presented before sampling an experiential product, it will result in an assimilation effect such that consumers‘ affective evaluations of the experience will by more (less) favorable when the information signals a good (poor) experience. However, when the same information is presented after sampling, it will result in a contrast effect for affective evaluations such that consumers‘ affective evaluation of the experience will be less (more) favorable when the information signals a good (poor) experience. SCP 2011 Winter Conference February 24-27, 2011 151 We test this prediction in three studies. In study 1, participants were asked to sample a piece of chocolate before or after being told the chocolate was from either Switzerland (favorable experience) or China (unfavorable experience). Even though the sampled chocolate was the same in all conditions, consistent with an assimilation effect, participants‘ affective evaluation was higher when they thought the chocolate was from Switzerland (vs. China) prior to sampling. Interestingly, and in line with our prediction, when the country-oforigin was presented after sampling, but before the formal evaluation, participants‘ affective evaluation was higher when they thought the chocolate was from China (vs. Switzerland). The second study replicated the findings using price as the product information. Specifically, we found that when price was presented prior to sampling, participants‘ affective evaluation was higher when they thought the chocolate was expensive (vs. inexpensive). However, when the price was presented after sampling participants‘ affective evaluation was higher when they thought the chocolate was inexpensive (vs. expensive). Interestingly, when participants were given a price discrediting cue, price had no effect on participants‘ evaluations. In the third study, we only focused on the after sampling conditions. The study was a field experiment conducted in a liquor store where customers participated in a blind wine tasting. After tasting the wine, they were told that the wine had a favorable or unfavorable country-of-origin (Italy vs. India). Consistent with previous studies, participants evaluated the same wine more favorably when they were instructed after sampling that it was from India (compared to Italy). Interestingly, participants were more likely to select $5 off the wine as a gift for participating when they were instructed that the wine was from India. Thus, we link our findings to actual purchase intent in a real-world setting. These results have important implications for both retailers and market researchers who are actively engage in sampling programs in a host of sensory categories ranging from food, beverages, videos, music and perfumes. More specifically, for high-end products, our results suggest that it is important to convey that information (e.g., price, brand, country-of-origin) prior to the participant sampling the merchandise. The reverse order would be preferable for products that have less favorable cues (e.g., a wonderful tasting chocolate that is made in China). For more information contact: [email protected] Happiness: How Different Dimensions of Happiness Are Affected by Different Attributes of the Purchased Good Wilson Bastos, University of Arizona* Lan Nguyen Chaplin, Villanova University, USA In the last decade, the relation between purchases and happiness has received increased attention from academics and the popular press (Flatow, 2009; Nicolao, Irwin, & Goodman, 2009; Pelletier, 2009; Weiner, 2008). A common finding is that experiential purchases (e.g., a vacation) are better at advancing happiness than are material purchases (e.g., a handbag) (e.g., Nicolao, et al., 2009; Van Boven & Gilovich, 2003). However, important questions remain—(1) Do experiential purchases only lead to happiness directly related to the product (i.e., product-related happiness), or do they also lead to more global (i.e., overall) happiness? (2) Are there conditions in which material purchases lead to more happiness than do experiential purchases? SCP 2011 Winter Conference February 24-27, 2011 152 Consumer researchers have used the term ―happiness‖ rather loosely. Upon closer examination of previous studies, we observe that researchers (e.g., Nicolao, et al., 2009; Van Boven & Gilovich, 2003) have primarily focused on happiness that is directly related to the actual good (which we refer to as product-related happiness), as opposed to global, overall happiness. Given the many benefits of global happiness, (e.g., better health, longer life, success at work; see Seligman, 2002 for review), it is surprising that researchers have not examined the impact of experiential versus material purchases on global happiness. We draw upon the happiness and social relationships literatures to argue that although experiential goods are better than material goods at cultivating product-related happiness (Van Boven & Gilovich, 2003), they are not superior at cultivating global happiness. We argue that consumers‘ global happiness is impacted by the degree to which goods foster social connections between individuals (as opposed to simply being experiential vs. material). We know that healthy social relationships are of utmost importance in the cultivation of global happiness. Specifically, Diener and Seligman (2002) concluded that healthy social relationships are necessary in generating happiness. Additionally, intimacy (McAdams & Bryant, 1987) and participation in social activities (Argyle & Lu, 1990) have been found to be associated with happiness. We also know that individuals place importance on the acquisition of goods (material and experiential) in their pursuit of happiness (e.g., Csikszentmihalyi, 1999; Pelletier, 2009; Richins & Dawson, 1992). What we do not know is how social connections/relationships might influence experiential and material goods‘ ability to generate global happiness. We argue that goods (whether they be experiential or material) can vary in the degree to which they encourage social connections. We refer to social goods as those whose consumption (in the case of material goods) or experience (in the case of experiential goods) foster social connections (e.g., tennis racket, family vacation), whereas solo goods are those that do not foster (or foster very little) social connections (e.g., book, vacation to soul search). We hypothesize that (1) regardless of their nature (material or experiential), social goods will generate more happiness than solo goods, and (2) the level of social connections fostered by the good will mediate that effect. To test our hypotheses, we conducted an experiment with 104 participants who were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: 2 (nature of purchase: material vs. experiential) x 2 (sociability of the good: solo vs. social). Participants were given instructions of what constitutes a material (or experiential) purchase that is consumed/experienced solo (or socially). They were then asked to recall and write about a personal purchase that reflected the condition they were in. Next, participants answered manipulation check questions (e.g., To what extent did you feel connected to other people because of that purchase?), questions related to product-related happiness (e.g., When you think about this purchase, how happy does it make you?), and global happiness (e.g., In general, I consider myself... (Not a very happy person – A very happy person)). Participants also completed a series of control measures (e.g., materialism, social desirability, desire for the purchase, satisfaction with the purchase, and quality of the purchased good.). We performed two important analyses prior to testing our hypotheses. First, our manipulation check showed that participants in the social condition reported feeling more socially connected than did those in the solo condition (Msocial = 4.83 vs. Msolo = 4.04; F(1, 103) = 6.42, p = .01). Thus, the manipulation was successful. Second, replicating findings from previous research, we found that experiential purchases generated significantly higher levels of product-related happiness (M = 5.29) than did material purchases (M = 4.53; F(1, 103) = 14.95, p = .001). No main effect was found for solo versus social purchases. This preliminary analysis shows that experiential purchases are superior to material purchases in generating product-related happiness. SCP 2011 Winter Conference February 24-27, 2011 153 Our results supported our hypotheses. Specifically, social purchases advanced global happiness significantly more (M = 5.63) than did solo purchases (M = 5.19; F(1, 103) = 5.12, p = .03). Moreover, as hypothesized, no effect was found for material versus experiential purchases. Importantly, we found that the degree to which a good fosters social connections fully mediated the effect of type of good (solo vs. social) on global happiness—the previously significant main effect of purchase (solo vs. social) on global happiness became nonsignificant when social connectedness was controlled for (F(1, 103) = 2.57, p = .11). The following picture emerges from our research: Experiential purchases are better than material purchases at advancing productrelated happiness (replicating Van Boven & Gilovich, 2003). However, experiential purchases have no advantage over material purchases in generating global happiness. In fact, not all experiential goods cultivate global happiness, and interestingly, not all material goods impede individuals‘ progress towards global happiness. The empirical evidence we presented shows that both experiential and material purchases can cultivate global happiness through their ability to foster social connections. In sum, purchases that foster social connections are more likely to advance global happiness than are those that are consumed/experienced in a solo manner. For more information contact: [email protected] Bolstering versus Counterarguing Mindsets: Implications for the Effectiveness of Persuasive Messages Alison Jing Xu, University of Toronto, Canada* Robert S. Wyer, Jr., University of Illinois, USA People who encounter a persuasive communication might either (a) generate thoughts that bolster the communicator‘s point of view or (b) attempt to refute the implications of the communication. These dispositions could obviously depend on individuals‘ prior agreement or disagreement with the point of view being expressed. However, they could also be influenced by a mindset that is activated by the behavior that participants performed before the persuasive communication is encountered (Wyer and Xu 2010). We propose that making supportive elaborations in one situation will give rise to a bolstering mind-set, which increases people‘s disposition to generate supportive thoughts about an unrelated persuasive communication (e.g., a commercial advertisement) they receive subsequently and, therefore, increases the communication‘s effectiveness. In contrast, making counterarguments in one situation would give rise to a counterarguing mind-set, which increases people‘s disposition to generate arguments against the validity of a message they receive later and, therefore, decreases its effectiveness. However, when a persuasive communication is difficult to refute, a counterarguing mindset that increases participants‘ awareness of this difficulty could increase their perceptions of the communication‘s validity and, therefore, could increase its effectiveness rather than decreasing it. Three experiments evaluated
منابع مشابه
Message of President of ISBT to 2nd International Conference on Transfusion Medicine/Plasma Industry in Tehran, Iran, May 10-11, 2011
متن کامل
Second Sino-American Conference on Nuclear Medicine.
N uclear medicine professionals from the United States and China met in New Orleans, LA, January 23–27, for the Second Sino-American Conference on Nuclear Medicine. The conference was held in conjunction with the 2013 SNMMI Mid-Winter Meeting and the annual meeting of the American College of Nuclear Medicine (ACNM). The previous conference was hosted by the Chinese Society of Nuclear Medicine (...
متن کاملHow to prove the Earth's daily and annual direction of its spinning
KiG No. 22, Vol. 1 3, 201 4 12. Publish a contest in accordance with the Regulations on CCS Awards. 13. Organize workshop of the ICA Commission on Map Projections in October 2014. The president presented the financial plan for 2014, according to which expected income and expenses amount to 200.000,00 HRK. After a brief discussion, the financial plan for 2014 was accepted unanimously. After intr...
متن کاملCharles L. Brewer Award for distinguished teaching of psychology: Neil Lutsky.
The American Psychological Foundation (APF) Charles L. Brewer Award for Distinguished Teaching of Psychology recognizes an outstanding career contribution to the teaching of psychology. The 2011 recipient of the Distinguished Teaching Award is Neil Lutsky. Dorothy W. Cantor, president of the APF, will present the APF Distinguished Teaching Award at the 119th Annual Convention of the American Ps...
متن کاملThe unlock project: A Python-based framework for practical brain-computer interface communication "app" development
In this paper we present a framework for reducing the development time needed for creating applications for use in non-invasive brain-computer interfaces (BCI). Our framework is primarily focused on facilitating rapid software "app" development akin to current efforts in consumer portable computing (e.g. smart phones and tablets). This is accomplished by handling intermodule communication witho...
متن کاملRemedying Hyperopia: The Effects of Self- Control Regret on Consumer Behavior
Journal of Marketing Research Vol. XLV (December 2008), 676–689 © 2008, American Marketing Association ISSN: 0022-2437 (print), 1547-7193 (electronic) *Anat Keinan is Assistant Professor of Marketing, Harvard Business School, Harvard University (e-mail: [email protected]). Ran Kivetz is Professor of Business, Columbia Business School, Columbia University (e-mail: [email protected]). The authors ...
متن کامل