In recent decades, U.S. gun rights lobbying groups, politicians, courts, and market actors have sought to responsibilize U.S. consumers to use firearms to address the societal problem of crime. These efforts center an interpretation of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment as an entitlement for individuals to practice armed self-defense. Using interview and online discussion data, this research investigates consumers’ responses to responsibilization for this morally fraught set of behaviors, and the role of consumers’ various understandings of the right to bear arms in these responses. Findings show that consumers consider multiple, specific armed protection scenarios and accept responsibilization in only a portion of these scenarios while rejecting it for the remainder. Acceptance is determined by their appraisals of the morality of consumer responsibilization subprocesses. Consumers’ understanding of the constitutional right serves as a heuristic in these appraisals, with some understandings leading consumers to accept responsibilization across a much larger proportion of scenarios than others. Contributions include illustrating response to consumer responsibilization as a proportionality; illuminating consumers’ active role in appraising responsibilizing efforts; and demonstrating how some consumers come to understand a responsibilized behavior as a moral entitlement.
{"title":"Morality Appraisals in Consumer Responsibilization","authors":"Michelle Barnhart, A. Huff, Inara K. Scott","doi":"10.1093/jcr/ucad032","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucad032","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In recent decades, U.S. gun rights lobbying groups, politicians, courts, and market actors have sought to responsibilize U.S. consumers to use firearms to address the societal problem of crime. These efforts center an interpretation of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment as an entitlement for individuals to practice armed self-defense. Using interview and online discussion data, this research investigates consumers’ responses to responsibilization for this morally fraught set of behaviors, and the role of consumers’ various understandings of the right to bear arms in these responses. Findings show that consumers consider multiple, specific armed protection scenarios and accept responsibilization in only a portion of these scenarios while rejecting it for the remainder. Acceptance is determined by their appraisals of the morality of consumer responsibilization subprocesses. Consumers’ understanding of the constitutional right serves as a heuristic in these appraisals, with some understandings leading consumers to accept responsibilization across a much larger proportion of scenarios than others. Contributions include illustrating response to consumer responsibilization as a proportionality; illuminating consumers’ active role in appraising responsibilizing efforts; and demonstrating how some consumers come to understand a responsibilized behavior as a moral entitlement.","PeriodicalId":15555,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Consumer Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2023-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45138900","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the fight for legitimacy, understanding the rules of status games is critical. This idea holds true in the wedding marketplace. However, when legalization of marriage for same-sex couples disrupted the binary wedding script, the rules of the game became less clear to consumers. Couples sometimes found their gendered bodies, roles, and expressions were out of sync with the evolving script of a destabilized wedding field, thus raising legitimacy questions. This situation is defined as hysteresis—meaning delays in the realignment between habitus and the field. Hysteresis results in consumers’ disorientation about what forms of capital are valued as well as perceived absences of materials or recognition from the market. This study investigates consumers’ attempts to mobilize gendered capital to resolve hysteresis through realignment of habitus and the script. Grounded in a Bourdieuian field-level analysis of depth interviews with 30 same-sex couples and ethnographic observation in the wedding field, four consumption alignment strategies are identified that consumers leverage to address hysteresis: confronting, masking, collaborating, and experimenting. Consumers’ variations in gendered capital explain which consumption alignment strategies they use, with different possibilities for updating habitus and expanding the script. Throughout this process, consumers’ moral judgments hinder this pursuit.
{"title":"When Fields Are Destabilized: Mobilizing Gendered Capital to Resolve Hysteresis","authors":"Sunaina R. Velagaleti, Amber M. Epp","doi":"10.1093/jcr/ucad038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucad038","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In the fight for legitimacy, understanding the rules of status games is critical. This idea holds true in the wedding marketplace. However, when legalization of marriage for same-sex couples disrupted the binary wedding script, the rules of the game became less clear to consumers. Couples sometimes found their gendered bodies, roles, and expressions were out of sync with the evolving script of a destabilized wedding field, thus raising legitimacy questions. This situation is defined as hysteresis—meaning delays in the realignment between habitus and the field. Hysteresis results in consumers’ disorientation about what forms of capital are valued as well as perceived absences of materials or recognition from the market. This study investigates consumers’ attempts to mobilize gendered capital to resolve hysteresis through realignment of habitus and the script. Grounded in a Bourdieuian field-level analysis of depth interviews with 30 same-sex couples and ethnographic observation in the wedding field, four consumption alignment strategies are identified that consumers leverage to address hysteresis: confronting, masking, collaborating, and experimenting. Consumers’ variations in gendered capital explain which consumption alignment strategies they use, with different possibilities for updating habitus and expanding the script. Throughout this process, consumers’ moral judgments hinder this pursuit.","PeriodicalId":15555,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Consumer Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2023-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44521933","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Expression of Concern: Super Size Me: Product Size as a Signal of Status","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/jcr/ucad037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucad037","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":15555,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Consumer Research","volume":"59 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135270083","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Expression of Concern: Dynamics of Communicator and Audience Power: The Persuasiveness of Competence versus Warmth","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/jcr/ucad036","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucad036","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":15555,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Consumer Research","volume":"83 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135269852","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Cosmopolitanism is often cast as an elite cultural orientation and as a privileged disposition to an increasingly globalized marketplace, instigated by, and lived through, mobility. But how does cosmopolitanism evolve among consumers at intersectional subordinate positions of power? This article analyses the emergence of cosmopolitanism through a 9-year longitudinal extended case study of female migrants with low levels of resources. Through the deployment of a Bourdieusian framework cosmopolitanism is theorized to evolve through processes set in motion by the experience of mismatch and subsequent alignment between new social contexts and existing socialized dispositions (hysteresis). The experience of hysteresis caused by mobility can lead to a habitus with traits of cosmopolitanism. The emergence of a cosmopolitan habitus can result in a sense of emancipation, but it also engenders new subordinate positions within intersectional systems of power. The outcome of this process is labelled Dominated Cosmopolitanism, representing a more nuanced version of cosmopolitanism that incorporates various systems of power. The analysis has implications for acculturation studies in consumption contexts characterized by low resource endowments and provides new insights into the processual nature of the constitution of social systems of power.
{"title":"Dominated Cosmopolitanism: Consumer Habitus Dynamics among Low-Resource Migrants","authors":"Zuzana Chytková, Dannie Kjeldgaard","doi":"10.1093/jcr/ucad035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucad035","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Cosmopolitanism is often cast as an elite cultural orientation and as a privileged disposition to an increasingly globalized marketplace, instigated by, and lived through, mobility. But how does cosmopolitanism evolve among consumers at intersectional subordinate positions of power? This article analyses the emergence of cosmopolitanism through a 9-year longitudinal extended case study of female migrants with low levels of resources. Through the deployment of a Bourdieusian framework cosmopolitanism is theorized to evolve through processes set in motion by the experience of mismatch and subsequent alignment between new social contexts and existing socialized dispositions (hysteresis). The experience of hysteresis caused by mobility can lead to a habitus with traits of cosmopolitanism. The emergence of a cosmopolitan habitus can result in a sense of emancipation, but it also engenders new subordinate positions within intersectional systems of power. The outcome of this process is labelled Dominated Cosmopolitanism, representing a more nuanced version of cosmopolitanism that incorporates various systems of power. The analysis has implications for acculturation studies in consumption contexts characterized by low resource endowments and provides new insights into the processual nature of the constitution of social systems of power.","PeriodicalId":15555,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Consumer Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2023-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46391605","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Call for Nominations: Editor in Chief","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/jcr/ucad026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucad026","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":15555,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Consumer Research","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134988422","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract How can marketers create slogans that consumers like and remember? We answer this question by analyzing how the lexical, semantic, and emotional properties of a slogan’s individual words combine to influence slogan liking and slogan memory. Through a large correlational study with over 800 brand slogans, laboratory experiments, a biometric eye-tracking experiment, and a field study, we unearth the word properties that make slogans effective. We predict and find that linguistic properties that make a slogan easier to process (i.e., more fluent) result in slogans that are more likable but less memorable, whereas linguistic properties that reduce processing fluency result in slogans that are less likable but more memorable. Across our multi-method investigation, participants indicated a more favorable attitude toward slogans that are shorter, omit the brand name, and use words that are linguistically frequent, perceptually distinct, and abstract. In contrast, participants were more likely to remember slogans that are longer, include the brand name, and use words that are linguistically infrequent, concrete, and less perceptually distinct. We conclude by offering marketers practical advice into optimal word-choice strategies and delivering actionable guidance for creating slogans that are either likable or memorable.
{"title":"Intel Inside: The Linguistic Properties of Effective Slogans","authors":"Brady T Hodges, Zachary Estes, Caleb Warren","doi":"10.1093/jcr/ucad034","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucad034","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract How can marketers create slogans that consumers like and remember? We answer this question by analyzing how the lexical, semantic, and emotional properties of a slogan’s individual words combine to influence slogan liking and slogan memory. Through a large correlational study with over 800 brand slogans, laboratory experiments, a biometric eye-tracking experiment, and a field study, we unearth the word properties that make slogans effective. We predict and find that linguistic properties that make a slogan easier to process (i.e., more fluent) result in slogans that are more likable but less memorable, whereas linguistic properties that reduce processing fluency result in slogans that are less likable but more memorable. Across our multi-method investigation, participants indicated a more favorable attitude toward slogans that are shorter, omit the brand name, and use words that are linguistically frequent, perceptually distinct, and abstract. In contrast, participants were more likely to remember slogans that are longer, include the brand name, and use words that are linguistically infrequent, concrete, and less perceptually distinct. We conclude by offering marketers practical advice into optimal word-choice strategies and delivering actionable guidance for creating slogans that are either likable or memorable.","PeriodicalId":15555,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Consumer Research","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136216140","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Correction to: The Upscaling Effect: How the Decision Context Influences Tradeoffs between Desirability and Feasibility","authors":"","doi":"10.1093/jcr/ucad031","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucad031","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":15555,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Consumer Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2023-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49095845","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This research uses a crowdfunding context to examine when and why a simple difference in frame—using “want” versus “need” in the request—affects funders’ compliance with an appeal for contributions. Building on the semantic framing and psycholinguistics literature, we propose that using “want” (versus “need”) signals that the fundraiser is a relatively less (vs. more) dependent person. This perception difference then exerts opposing effects on the two major forms of crowdfunding appeals. For reward-based appeals, in which fundraisers promise a return on contribution, funders have a for-profit (i.e., incentive-seeking) goal and are more willing to contribute to a less dependent fundraiser. In contrast, for donation-based appeals, in which no incentives are promised by the fundraisers, funders are primarily motivated by a non-profit (i.e., helping) goal, and are more willing to contribute to a fundraiser who is seen as more dependent on help. Therefore, we predict that a “want” (“need”) frame is more effective in reward-based (donation-based) crowdfunding. Results from two large-scale observational studies and four experiments support our predictions and also illuminate the underlying mechanisms. Collectively, the findings contribute to the literature on semantic framing and crowdfunding, and also offer practical implications for fundraisers, marketers, and policymakers.
{"title":"“Want” versus “Need”: How Linguistic Framing Influences Responses to Crowdfunding Appeals","authors":"Lei Su, Jaideep Sengupta, Yiwei Li, Fangyuan Chen","doi":"10.1093/jcr/ucad033","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucad033","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This research uses a crowdfunding context to examine when and why a simple difference in frame—using “want” versus “need” in the request—affects funders’ compliance with an appeal for contributions. Building on the semantic framing and psycholinguistics literature, we propose that using “want” (versus “need”) signals that the fundraiser is a relatively less (vs. more) dependent person. This perception difference then exerts opposing effects on the two major forms of crowdfunding appeals. For reward-based appeals, in which fundraisers promise a return on contribution, funders have a for-profit (i.e., incentive-seeking) goal and are more willing to contribute to a less dependent fundraiser. In contrast, for donation-based appeals, in which no incentives are promised by the fundraisers, funders are primarily motivated by a non-profit (i.e., helping) goal, and are more willing to contribute to a fundraiser who is seen as more dependent on help. Therefore, we predict that a “want” (“need”) frame is more effective in reward-based (donation-based) crowdfunding. Results from two large-scale observational studies and four experiments support our predictions and also illuminate the underlying mechanisms. Collectively, the findings contribute to the literature on semantic framing and crowdfunding, and also offer practical implications for fundraisers, marketers, and policymakers.","PeriodicalId":15555,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Consumer Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2023-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43899343","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Inconsistency in consumer time preferences has been well established and used to explain seemingly short-sighted behaviors (e.g., failures of self-control). However, prior research has conflated time-inconsistent preferences (discount rates that vary over time) with present bias (greater discounting when outcomes are delayed specifically from the present, as opposed to from a future time). This research shows that time-inconsistent preferences are reliably observed only when choices are substantially delayed (e.g., months into the future), which cannot be explained by present bias. This seeming puzzle is explained by a novel cross-period discounting framework, which predicts that consumers are more impatient when choosing between options occurring in different subjective financial periods. As a result, they display inconsistent time preferences and are less willing to wait for an equally delayed outcome specifically when a common delay to both options moves the larger-later option into a subsequent financial period. Six studies and multiple supplementary studies demonstrate that sensitivity to subjective financial periods accounts for time-inconsistent consumer preferences better than current models of time discounting based on present bias.
{"title":"Cross-Period Impatience: Subjective Financial Periods Explain Time-Inconsistent Choices","authors":"Minkwang Jang, Oleg Urminsky","doi":"10.1093/jcr/ucad029","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucad029","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Inconsistency in consumer time preferences has been well established and used to explain seemingly short-sighted behaviors (e.g., failures of self-control). However, prior research has conflated time-inconsistent preferences (discount rates that vary over time) with present bias (greater discounting when outcomes are delayed specifically from the present, as opposed to from a future time). This research shows that time-inconsistent preferences are reliably observed only when choices are substantially delayed (e.g., months into the future), which cannot be explained by present bias. This seeming puzzle is explained by a novel cross-period discounting framework, which predicts that consumers are more impatient when choosing between options occurring in different subjective financial periods. As a result, they display inconsistent time preferences and are less willing to wait for an equally delayed outcome specifically when a common delay to both options moves the larger-later option into a subsequent financial period. Six studies and multiple supplementary studies demonstrate that sensitivity to subjective financial periods accounts for time-inconsistent consumer preferences better than current models of time discounting based on present bias.","PeriodicalId":15555,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Consumer Research","volume":"95 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135111192","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：