Journal of Consumer Psychology最新文献

Belief change does not always lead to behavior change. This belief–behavior gap has received considerable atention, particularly in the context of misinformation. We expand upon ideas in the literature by offering additional insight derived from research on attitudes. Specifically, we propose that lessons from attitudes research can be applied to the belief–behavior relationship to further understand when belief change will and will not promote behavior change. We discuss the role of attitudes in determining how beliefs shape behavior, the value of measuring and targeting attitudes in research on behavior change, and factors that can influence the attitude–behavior relationship as a means to gain insight into the belief–behavior relationship. As part of our review, we also offer recommendations as to how belief-targeting interventions might be improved to increase their impact on downstream behavior.

A common assumption among scientists, journalists, and policymakers is that combating misinformation reliably changes behavior. However, the empirical evidence reveals that the belief–behavior association is often modest, variable, and context-dependent, raising critical questions about when and how to pursue belief versus behavior change. In this paper, we discuss the mechanisms by which beliefs influence behavior and the conditions under which addressing beliefs can change behavior. Specifically, we review the belief-to-behavior inference model, which proposes that beliefs influence behavior when (a) the belief is linked to a behavioral goal, (b) the inferential path from belief to behavior is relatively short, and (c) the belief–behavior association is preserved in memory. Our framework aligns intervention decisions with the cognitive architecture of belief–behavior correspondence and the intervention's goals, whether maximizing belief accuracy or behavioral impact. We also reviewed individual and social-structural interventions that are best suited for changing beliefs versus behavior, conceptually integrating interdisciplinary work on behavior change with the psychology of belief change.

Specific beliefs do not correlate with seemingly relevant behaviors for many reasons. Such correlations may be low even when beliefs perfectly cause behavior (e.g., because multiple beliefs compete for influence, because beliefs have various behavioral outlets). A belief may be a necessary precursor to, but not a guarantee of, a behavior. And most critically, belief–behavior correlations may depend on the context in which behavioral decisions are made. The present article complements Lee and Albarracín's focus on how beliefs can serve as logical premises from which behavioral intentions are deduced (belief-to-behavior inferences) by considering how specific contexts do or do not encourage the recruitment and potential application of beliefs. Behavioral decisions can be made entirely unprompted, because the context affords a behavioral opportunity, or because a prompt requires a decision be made. These distinctions can describe naturalistic decision making and research methodologies, suggesting details of the latter can encourage misleading conclusions about a belief's behavioral relevance. Although these considerations transcend the more specific interest in correcting misinformation, a specific concern with addressing political misinformation is discussed.

Two commentaries by Tormala and Rucker and by Critcher and Galak offer complementary perspectives on our target article, Changing Beliefs versus Changing Behavior. Tormala and Rucker emphasize attitudes as proximal determinants of behavior, underscoring the importance of attitude strength and measurement compatibility. Critcher and Galak propose a contextual continuum of decision making that situates belief influence within unprompted, opportunity-based, and prompted behavioral contexts, illustrating how contextual factors shape the recruitment of beliefs for specific actions. In this response, we clarify the relations among beliefs, attitudes, and context; address the misconception that our model overemphasizes inferential reasoning; and extend the framework to integrate evaluative and contextual determinants of behavior. This synthesis offers a comprehensive account in which attitudes function as inferential products of belief processing, while contexts determine when and how these processes are activated.

This research explores the paradoxical effects of two different root metaphors of time—as resource and as motion—on impatience. We first show a conceptual correspondence between the two root metaphors: experiences associated with little time are often perceived as similar to those associated with time passing quickly, and experiences associated with ample time are often perceived as similar to those associated with time passing slowly. However, people's impatience exhibits opposite patterns for the corresponding metaphors: while people are less willing to wait when they have little versus ample time, they are more willing to wait when they experience time passing quickly versus slowly. This paradoxical effect arises because corresponding metaphors have opposite effects on perceived control and anticipated valence of the waiting time, which in turn lead to variations in impatience. Four studies (plus two in the Appendices S4 and S5) conducted across online, lab, and field settings support these findings. By identifying the relationship between the root metaphors of time-as-motion and time-as-resource and their paradoxical effects on impatience, this research contributes to the literatures on temporal cognition and intertemporal choice, and to the broader literature on the role of metaphors in consumer decision-making.

Psychological empowerment plays a crucial role in motivating individuals to pursue their goals. This research explores a unique method to empower consumers in their goal pursuit: anthropomorphizing goals as dependent persons in need of care. Through three studies, including an incentive-compatible study and a field study conducted at a hypermarket, we demonstrate that viewing personal goals as dependent persons who require care and nurturance (e.g., presenting a goal as a dependent person in a health app) can significantly enhance goal pursuit (e.g., choosing healthy snacks) by boosting psychological empowerment. We find that this motivational boost does not occur when a goal is simply anthropomorphized as any person (Study 1), when it is depicted as a dependent object (Study 1), or when it is anthropomorphized as an independent person (Study 2). This research contributes to a deeper understanding of motivation in goal pursuit and offers practical implications for marketers. Specifically, by using marketing communications to frame goals as entities that require care, marketers can help individuals foster a more engaging and empowering relationship with their aspirations.

We advocate that the multiple studies of a common phenomenon that are featured in a typical behavioral research paper be jointly analyzed to provide a statistical summary of the set of studies as a whole. Indeed, we view such single paper meta-analysis as unavoidable in typical behavioral research papers because (i) such papers feature multiple studies of a common phenomenon, (ii) such papers contain summaries of those studies, and (iii) statistical summaries of studies (i.e., meta-analyses) are superior to non-statistical summaries of them. Nonetheless, the current dominant practice is for such papers to feature separate statistical analyses of the data from each of the studies but to contain a non-statistical summary of the multiple studies rather than a statistical summary. We believe that this is regrettable and therefore aim to rectify matters. Consequently, we review some considerations about meta-analysis and statistical analysis more broadly; compare single paper meta-analysis to traditional meta-analysis and illustrate its benefits via a case study; discuss and dismiss concern about single paper meta-analysis; and discuss single paper meta-analysis and the review process.

Although everyone must make decisions about where to live, we know little about how consumers perceive social interactions with neighbors and incorporate information about neighbors into their residence decisions. This article explores the impact of consumers' self-construal on the importance they attribute to neighbor information when choosing a residence. Across seven preregistered studies, including lab experiments and online surveys, the findings consistently show that independent consumers, compared with interdependent ones, place greater importance on information about potential neighbors. This tendency stems from independent consumers' stronger desire for social closeness with neighbors, prompting them to place more weight on information that will help them find neighbors with whom they could become friends.

The method dialogue by Blakeley McShane and Ulf Böckenholt (2025) provides a strong critique of the way behavioral scholars have analyzed and presented their findings. The initial document was sent to four established scholars who agreed to provide open collaborative guidance to the authors. Following the accepted revised document, three of the four collaborating authors and others provide their final reactions below. Christian Wheeler summarizes and clarifies the recommendations of McShane and Böckenholt and assesses their effect on current research practices. He views that Single Paper Meta-analysis (SPM) improves theory development in the social sciences by enabling researchers to better understand the inherent variability in empirical relationships. He believes the focus on point and range effect estimates can beneficially move research away from a dichotomized world to a theoretically richer one that articulates the credibility and magnitude of effects. John Lynch acknowledges the costly current practice in which authors intuitively summarize the aggregate evidence across multiple studies. He advocates a shift in focus from estimates of probabilities of null hypotheses towards meaningful metrics specifying the change in the magnitude of a dependent variable. He also counters the claim that SPM might be fraudulently used to promote false conclusions by asserting that it encourages disclosure of evidence and promotes better communication of the heterogeneity of results from different studies. The null hypothesis of zero effect is never true, and the goal of meta-analysis should never be to test some null hypothesis of zero average effect. Wegener, Pek and Matthews celebrate the philosophical value of meta-analyses for evaluating multi-study empirical cases. They note that, especially in single paper settings, the hypothetical alternative of a true null effect remains a relevant hypothesis to reject, and SPM provides a more principled and accurate means of such assessments. SPM is better than human intuition at generating estimates of the aggregate effect across studies. As evidence, they show that researchers’ intuition influences perceived credibility of the aggregate effect across studies in ways that would not be justified by SPM. By providing a compact description of aggregate effects, SPM and related techniques can provide an improved assessment of the statistical reliability of a given effect.

Meaningful shifts in consumption habits are essential to mitigate climate change and reduce global environmental degradation. Yet, despite the climate urgency and growing consumer concerns, the widespread adoption of sustainable behaviors has proven difficult. Why is this the case? How has the growing interdisciplinary field of sustainable consumption contributed to this debate? And where are the knowledge gaps? Guided by a comprehensive conceptual model, this article (a) delves into the key market, individual, and societal obstacles that hinder consumers from adopting more environmentally sustainable behaviors, (b) explores how practitioners and policymakers can help consumers minimize or circumvent these deterrents, and (c) highlights the pressing gaps in the literature, offering a roadmap for advancing our understanding of how to promote sustainable practices across the consumer journey—from search and purchase to usage and disposal.