Pub Date : 2024-09-02DOI: 10.1177/00222437241282308
Saeed Shekari, Sourav Ray
Monitoring technologies, which are at the heart of the industrial Internet of Things (IOT) ecosystems, promise significant transactional efficiencies by making it easier to track product performance and contract compliance. These efficiencies are particularly compelling in industrial multi-vendor, multi-component systems, where complex component interdependencies often cause disputes around liability in the case of product failures. Drawing on transaction cost theory, fieldwork, and a national survey of industrial original equipment manufacturers we estimate how product performance contracts are specified in these contexts, and how these monitoring technologies can impact ex-post exchanges between OEMs and their suppliers. We find that systems architecture associated with the multi-component systems, as well as the presumed efficiencies of monitoring technologies, drive the contract designs through their potential impact on the disputes, monitoring, and contract writing costs faced by the OEM. However, we also find there are clear limits to the benefits offered by these monitoring technologies. The greater monitoring facilitated by these technologies appears to exacerbate disputes. This counterintuitive finding comports with the view that, when unforeseen interdependent failures occur, detailed data from monitoring may trigger a spate disputes over new and unexpected information, as well as over the appropriateness of existing protocols for failure metrics and remedies.
{"title":"EXPRESS: Monitoring Technologies in Industrial Systems","authors":"Saeed Shekari, Sourav Ray","doi":"10.1177/00222437241282308","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222437241282308","url":null,"abstract":"Monitoring technologies, which are at the heart of the industrial Internet of Things (IOT) ecosystems, promise significant transactional efficiencies by making it easier to track product performance and contract compliance. These efficiencies are particularly compelling in industrial multi-vendor, multi-component systems, where complex component interdependencies often cause disputes around liability in the case of product failures. Drawing on transaction cost theory, fieldwork, and a national survey of industrial original equipment manufacturers we estimate how product performance contracts are specified in these contexts, and how these monitoring technologies can impact ex-post exchanges between OEMs and their suppliers. We find that systems architecture associated with the multi-component systems, as well as the presumed efficiencies of monitoring technologies, drive the contract designs through their potential impact on the disputes, monitoring, and contract writing costs faced by the OEM. However, we also find there are clear limits to the benefits offered by these monitoring technologies. The greater monitoring facilitated by these technologies appears to exacerbate disputes. This counterintuitive finding comports with the view that, when unforeseen interdependent failures occur, detailed data from monitoring may trigger a spate disputes over new and unexpected information, as well as over the appropriateness of existing protocols for failure metrics and remedies.","PeriodicalId":48465,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Marketing Research","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142219398","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}
Pub Date : 2024-09-02DOI: 10.1177/00222437241281873
Verena Schoenmueller, Simon J. Blanchard, Gita Venkataramani Johar
We propose that social-media users’ own post histories are an underused yet valuable resource for studying fake-news sharing. By extracting textual cues from their prior posts, and contrasting their prevalence against random social-media users and others (e.g., those with similar socio-demographics, political news-sharers, and fact-check sharers), researchers can identify cues that distinguish fake-news sharers, predict those most likely to share fake news, and identify promising constructs to build interventions. Our research includes studies along these lines. In Study 1, we explore the distinctive language patterns of fake-news sharers, highlighting elements such as their higher use of anger and power-related words. In Study 2, we show that adding textual cues into predictive models enhances their accuracy in predicting fake-news sharers. In Study 3, we explore the contrasting role of trait and situational anger, and show trait anger is associated with a greater propensity to share both true and fake news. In Study 4, we introduce a way to authenticate Twitter accounts in surveys, before using it to explore how crafting an ad copy that resonates with users’ sense of power encourages the adoption of fact-checking tools. We hope to encourage the use of novel research methods for marketers and misinformation researchers.
{"title":"EXPRESS: Who Shares Fake News? Uncovering Insights from Social Media Users' Post Histories","authors":"Verena Schoenmueller, Simon J. Blanchard, Gita Venkataramani Johar","doi":"10.1177/00222437241281873","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222437241281873","url":null,"abstract":"We propose that social-media users’ own post histories are an underused yet valuable resource for studying fake-news sharing. By extracting textual cues from their prior posts, and contrasting their prevalence against random social-media users and others (e.g., those with similar socio-demographics, political news-sharers, and fact-check sharers), researchers can identify cues that distinguish fake-news sharers, predict those most likely to share fake news, and identify promising constructs to build interventions. Our research includes studies along these lines. In Study 1, we explore the distinctive language patterns of fake-news sharers, highlighting elements such as their higher use of anger and power-related words. In Study 2, we show that adding textual cues into predictive models enhances their accuracy in predicting fake-news sharers. In Study 3, we explore the contrasting role of trait and situational anger, and show trait anger is associated with a greater propensity to share both true and fake news. In Study 4, we introduce a way to authenticate Twitter accounts in surveys, before using it to explore how crafting an ad copy that resonates with users’ sense of power encourages the adoption of fact-checking tools. We hope to encourage the use of novel research methods for marketers and misinformation researchers.","PeriodicalId":48465,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Marketing Research","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142219345","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}
Pub Date : 2024-08-25DOI: 10.1177/00222437241280068
Shiri Melumad, Robert Meyer
This research investigates how listening to versus reading news alters its interpretation. A proposed theory argues that because listeners (vs. readers) are less able to regulate the rate of incoming information, they selectively attend to the more emotionally arousing elements in a story, such as those that are more negative. This selective attention leads listeners to form different interpretations of news than readers, the nature of which depend on the valence of the story. Six main experiments and three supplemental ones (N = 14,744) support the predicted effects on impression formation as well as the proposed mechanism. For example, participants who listened to (vs. read) a mixed-valence news story on the risks and benefits of a product processed its negative details more selectively, and in turn formed more pessimistic impressions of its safety. Moderators are also explored, showing that negativity biases similar to those observed for listeners arose among readers when their control over information flow was restricted, and that a positivity bias arose among listeners when the positive (vs. negative) information in a story was more surprising. Theoretical contributions to previous research on reading versus listening comprehension are discussed, as are the substantive implications for media firms and consumers.
{"title":"EXPRESS: How Listening versus Reading Alters Consumers’ Interpretations of News","authors":"Shiri Melumad, Robert Meyer","doi":"10.1177/00222437241280068","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222437241280068","url":null,"abstract":"This research investigates how listening to versus reading news alters its interpretation. A proposed theory argues that because listeners (vs. readers) are less able to regulate the rate of incoming information, they selectively attend to the more emotionally arousing elements in a story, such as those that are more negative. This selective attention leads listeners to form different interpretations of news than readers, the nature of which depend on the valence of the story. Six main experiments and three supplemental ones (N = 14,744) support the predicted effects on impression formation as well as the proposed mechanism. For example, participants who listened to (vs. read) a mixed-valence news story on the risks and benefits of a product processed its negative details more selectively, and in turn formed more pessimistic impressions of its safety. Moderators are also explored, showing that negativity biases similar to those observed for listeners arose among readers when their control over information flow was restricted, and that a positivity bias arose among listeners when the positive (vs. negative) information in a story was more surprising. Theoretical contributions to previous research on reading versus listening comprehension are discussed, as are the substantive implications for media firms and consumers.","PeriodicalId":48465,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Marketing Research","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142219397","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}
Pub Date : 2024-07-31DOI: 10.1177/00222437241270222
Xiang Hui, Ginger Zhe Jin, Meng Liu
Quality certification is a common tool to enhance trust in marketplaces. Should the certification be based on consumer reports, such as ratings, or administrative data on seller behavior, such as the number of seller-initiated cancellations? In theory, incorporating consumer reports makes the quality certificate more relevant for consumer experience but may discourage seller effort, because consumer reports can be driven by factors not entirely within sellers’ control. Alternatively, using administrative data makes the certification more controllable by sellers, but these data track only a subset of seller behavior and may not be fully aligned with consumer experience. To answer the above question, we study a major redesign of eBay’s quality certification that removed most consumer reports from its criteria and added administrative data. This change motivates seller effort in dimensions highlighted by the new criteria, as well as allowing sellers to more precisely target their effort at the threshold. Buyers place a higher value on the quality certificate and are more likely to purchase again on the platform in markets where administrative data are more correlated with consumer reports. Lastly, the proportion of certified sellers becomes more homogenized across markets, and sales seem to become more concentrated towards large sellers.
{"title":"EXPRESS: Designing Quality Certificates: Insights from eBay","authors":"Xiang Hui, Ginger Zhe Jin, Meng Liu","doi":"10.1177/00222437241270222","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222437241270222","url":null,"abstract":"Quality certification is a common tool to enhance trust in marketplaces. Should the certification be based on consumer reports, such as ratings, or administrative data on seller behavior, such as the number of seller-initiated cancellations? In theory, incorporating consumer reports makes the quality certificate more relevant for consumer experience but may discourage seller effort, because consumer reports can be driven by factors not entirely within sellers’ control. Alternatively, using administrative data makes the certification more controllable by sellers, but these data track only a subset of seller behavior and may not be fully aligned with consumer experience. To answer the above question, we study a major redesign of eBay’s quality certification that removed most consumer reports from its criteria and added administrative data. This change motivates seller effort in dimensions highlighted by the new criteria, as well as allowing sellers to more precisely target their effort at the threshold. Buyers place a higher value on the quality certificate and are more likely to purchase again on the platform in markets where administrative data are more correlated with consumer reports. Lastly, the proportion of certified sellers becomes more homogenized across markets, and sales seem to become more concentrated towards large sellers.","PeriodicalId":48465,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Marketing Research","volume":"45 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141866306","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}
Pub Date : 2024-07-31DOI: 10.1177/00222437241270194
Jangwon Choi, Inyoung Chae, Fred Feinberg
Promotions for digital goods have typically focused on enticing users to hasten their consumption. Here, we investigate a novel deceleration-incentivizing promotional policy, “Wait For Free” (WFF), applied to serialized digital content – sequences of interconnected episodes – monetized via episode-level paywalls. Specifically, customers can sample early episodes of promoted series for free, and can continue to do so by waiting a pre-specified time; or for those unwilling to wait, by paying. WFF can draw users to start viewing a promoted series, and generate revenue through two sources: impatient users opting to pay to consume the next episode immediately; and additional users continuing through to paid-only episodes at the end. We analyze large-scale viewership data from a platform that enacted WFF for digital comics. A comic-level Difference-in-Differences (DiD) analysis provides robust evidence that WFF boosts paid viewership for the promoted series, and the degree of lift varies by user type and over time. A more granular episode-level analysis incorporating inter-comic spillovers and promotional lift heterogeneity suggests that WFF can boost net-of-cannibalization revenue at the platform level: specifically, the model-optimized set of promoted comics performs roughly 18% better than the firm-enacted one and 25% better than the no-promotion baseline; furthermore, WFF and paid-only episodes each receive nontrivial degrees of lift, 70% and 59% respectively.
{"title":"EXPRESS: Wait for Free: A Consumption-Decelerating Promotion for Serialized Digital Media","authors":"Jangwon Choi, Inyoung Chae, Fred Feinberg","doi":"10.1177/00222437241270194","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222437241270194","url":null,"abstract":"Promotions for digital goods have typically focused on enticing users to hasten their consumption. Here, we investigate a novel deceleration-incentivizing promotional policy, “Wait For Free” (WFF), applied to serialized digital content – sequences of interconnected episodes – monetized via episode-level paywalls. Specifically, customers can sample early episodes of promoted series for free, and can continue to do so by waiting a pre-specified time; or for those unwilling to wait, by paying. WFF can draw users to start viewing a promoted series, and generate revenue through two sources: impatient users opting to pay to consume the next episode immediately; and additional users continuing through to paid-only episodes at the end. We analyze large-scale viewership data from a platform that enacted WFF for digital comics. A comic-level Difference-in-Differences (DiD) analysis provides robust evidence that WFF boosts paid viewership for the promoted series, and the degree of lift varies by user type and over time. A more granular episode-level analysis incorporating inter-comic spillovers and promotional lift heterogeneity suggests that WFF can boost net-of-cannibalization revenue at the platform level: specifically, the model-optimized set of promoted comics performs roughly 18% better than the firm-enacted one and 25% better than the no-promotion baseline; furthermore, WFF and paid-only episodes each receive nontrivial degrees of lift, 70% and 59% respectively.","PeriodicalId":48465,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Marketing Research","volume":"65 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141866309","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}
Pub Date : 2024-07-31DOI: 10.1177/00222437241268439
Vivian (Jieru) Xie, Fengyan Cai, Rajesh Bagchi
Rank lists vary in the number of items ranked on the list (e.g., Top 5 vs. Top 20 movies on IMDb), that is, the rank length. Across ten studies, including both field and laboratory experiments, we examine the influence of rank length on evaluations, willingness to pay, and choice. We document a novel rank length effect: The same ranked items elicit more positive judgments when the rank length is longer (vs. shorter), although the differences in judgments between the ranked items are smaller. This effect is driven both by consumers’ tendency to narrowly focus on the rank list and by the manner via which they map the rank list onto their mental number line. The rank length effect extends to willingness to pay, and choice. We explore three different kinds of choice contexts, discuss implications, and offer suggestions for future research.
{"title":"EXPRESS: The Rank Length Effect","authors":"Vivian (Jieru) Xie, Fengyan Cai, Rajesh Bagchi","doi":"10.1177/00222437241268439","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222437241268439","url":null,"abstract":"Rank lists vary in the number of items ranked on the list (e.g., Top 5 vs. Top 20 movies on IMDb), that is, the rank length. Across ten studies, including both field and laboratory experiments, we examine the influence of rank length on evaluations, willingness to pay, and choice. We document a novel rank length effect: The same ranked items elicit more positive judgments when the rank length is longer (vs. shorter), although the differences in judgments between the ranked items are smaller. This effect is driven both by consumers’ tendency to narrowly focus on the rank list and by the manner via which they map the rank list onto their mental number line. The rank length effect extends to willingness to pay, and choice. We explore three different kinds of choice contexts, discuss implications, and offer suggestions for future research.","PeriodicalId":48465,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Marketing Research","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141866305","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}
Pub Date : 2024-07-31DOI: 10.1177/00222437241268491
Laura Boman, Xin He
Charitable organizations are increasingly soliciting donors to engage in word-of-mouth (WOM) as a strategy to foster future contributions. While some organizations encourage donors to share WOM that focuses on their own donations (donor-focused WOM; e.g., “I just donated to the kids of @StJude. Join me in saving children’s lives.”), others prompt donors to share WOM that focuses on the organization itself (charity-focused WOM; e.g., “Smile Train gives children with clefts the #PowerOfASmile.”). Contrary to the common belief that people mostly want to talk about themselves, the current research demonstrates that donor-focused WOM backfires, such that donors are less likely to share donor- than charity-focused WOM. This effect is driven by their belief that donor-focused WOM is less altruistic and is therefore less efficacious in persuading others to contribute to the same cause. In addition to sharing, the type of WOM solicited exerts far-reaching impact, with donor-focused WOM attracting fewer new donors in comparison to charity-focused WOM. Together, the current research improves the understanding of WOM type, its effect, and the underlying processes.
{"title":"EXPRESS: Sharing to Persuade: the Role of Donor- versus Charity-Focused WOM","authors":"Laura Boman, Xin He","doi":"10.1177/00222437241268491","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222437241268491","url":null,"abstract":"Charitable organizations are increasingly soliciting donors to engage in word-of-mouth (WOM) as a strategy to foster future contributions. While some organizations encourage donors to share WOM that focuses on their own donations (donor-focused WOM; e.g., “I just donated to the kids of @StJude. Join me in saving children’s lives.”), others prompt donors to share WOM that focuses on the organization itself (charity-focused WOM; e.g., “Smile Train gives children with clefts the #PowerOfASmile.”). Contrary to the common belief that people mostly want to talk about themselves, the current research demonstrates that donor-focused WOM backfires, such that donors are less likely to share donor- than charity-focused WOM. This effect is driven by their belief that donor-focused WOM is less altruistic and is therefore less efficacious in persuading others to contribute to the same cause. In addition to sharing, the type of WOM solicited exerts far-reaching impact, with donor-focused WOM attracting fewer new donors in comparison to charity-focused WOM. Together, the current research improves the understanding of WOM type, its effect, and the underlying processes.","PeriodicalId":48465,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Marketing Research","volume":"76 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141866310","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}
Pub Date : 2024-07-31DOI: 10.1177/00222437241272192
Verena Rieger, Anne Dreller, Andreas Engelen
New ventures are essential for developing innovations and generating economic and societal value, but they depend on external resources, especially from venture capitalists, who provide seed funding to make necessary advances in the development and commercialization of their innovative products. From the marketing discipline’s perspective, the question is whether marketing actions play a role in this early acquisition of critical resources. Building on organizational legitimacy theory, we argue that trademark applications are important from day one, as they send important information cues to venture capitalists (e.g., on marketing-related professionalism) that foster the acquisition of venture capital (VC) seed funding. We build a dataset using Crunchbase and USPTO data that follows 5,370 ventures founded between 2007 and 2010 over several years up to 2018. We find that new ventures that file trademark applications have an increased likelihood of acquiring VC seed funding compared to firms that do not file trademark applications. This association is strongest during the first 100 days and diminishes about 1,000 days after foundation. The effect is particularly pronounced in industries characterized by low technological uncertainty and when new ventures do not operate from a location with a cluster of startups, such as Silicon Valley.
{"title":"EXPRESS: Zooming in on the Very Early Days: The Role of Trademark Applications in the Acquisition of Venture Capital Seed Funding","authors":"Verena Rieger, Anne Dreller, Andreas Engelen","doi":"10.1177/00222437241272192","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222437241272192","url":null,"abstract":"New ventures are essential for developing innovations and generating economic and societal value, but they depend on external resources, especially from venture capitalists, who provide seed funding to make necessary advances in the development and commercialization of their innovative products. From the marketing discipline’s perspective, the question is whether marketing actions play a role in this early acquisition of critical resources. Building on organizational legitimacy theory, we argue that trademark applications are important from day one, as they send important information cues to venture capitalists (e.g., on marketing-related professionalism) that foster the acquisition of venture capital (VC) seed funding. We build a dataset using Crunchbase and USPTO data that follows 5,370 ventures founded between 2007 and 2010 over several years up to 2018. We find that new ventures that file trademark applications have an increased likelihood of acquiring VC seed funding compared to firms that do not file trademark applications. This association is strongest during the first 100 days and diminishes about 1,000 days after foundation. The effect is particularly pronounced in industries characterized by low technological uncertainty and when new ventures do not operate from a location with a cluster of startups, such as Silicon Valley.","PeriodicalId":48465,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Marketing Research","volume":"45 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141866304","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}
Pub Date : 2024-07-31DOI: 10.1177/00222437241270225
RISHAD HABIB, DAVID J. HARDISTY, KATHERINE WHITE, BAEK JUNG KIM
Charitable donations can be influenced by the level of progress of a cause towards its fundraising goal. The current work demonstrates how jointly considering more than one charitable cause along with their goal progress information shifts consumers’ donation decisions. When charitable causes are evaluated jointly (vs. separately), the comparison makes relative need for help more salient and easier to evaluate, leading to greater giving to the cause farther from its goal. A multi-method investigation, involving six pre-registered experimental studies, seven supplemental studies, and a large secondary dataset with over 10,000 projects from a micro-crowdfunding platform, provides evidence for this phenomenon and demonstrates that it is robust to variations in the type of cause, number of projects, and the donor being able to personally complete the goal. Conversely, the effect is eliminated or reversed when charities are evaluated separately (as relative need for help is less salient), when the gap between charities is smaller (as perceptions of relative need for help are diminished), or when for-profit businesses are evaluated (as the context does not heighten sensitivity to need). This work contributes to research on goal progress and evaluation mode and has implications for charitable giving in comparative contexts like crowdfunding.
{"title":"EXPRESS: The Closing-the-Gap Effect: Joint Evaluation Leads Donors to Help Charities Farther from Their Goal","authors":"RISHAD HABIB, DAVID J. HARDISTY, KATHERINE WHITE, BAEK JUNG KIM","doi":"10.1177/00222437241270225","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222437241270225","url":null,"abstract":"Charitable donations can be influenced by the level of progress of a cause towards its fundraising goal. The current work demonstrates how jointly considering more than one charitable cause along with their goal progress information shifts consumers’ donation decisions. When charitable causes are evaluated jointly (vs. separately), the comparison makes relative need for help more salient and easier to evaluate, leading to greater giving to the cause farther from its goal. A multi-method investigation, involving six pre-registered experimental studies, seven supplemental studies, and a large secondary dataset with over 10,000 projects from a micro-crowdfunding platform, provides evidence for this phenomenon and demonstrates that it is robust to variations in the type of cause, number of projects, and the donor being able to personally complete the goal. Conversely, the effect is eliminated or reversed when charities are evaluated separately (as relative need for help is less salient), when the gap between charities is smaller (as perceptions of relative need for help are diminished), or when for-profit businesses are evaluated (as the context does not heighten sensitivity to need). This work contributes to research on goal progress and evaluation mode and has implications for charitable giving in comparative contexts like crowdfunding.","PeriodicalId":48465,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Marketing Research","volume":"46 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141866303","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}
Pub Date : 2024-07-31DOI: 10.1177/00222437241270217
Jochen Reiner, Julia Wamsler, Torsten Bornemann, Martin Natter
Retailers, service providers, and manufacturers have discovered that complementary optional insurance is an attractive source of profit and frequently charge substantial insurance prices compared to the price of the product to be insured. The implicit assumption behind this pricing strategy is that product purchase decisions are independent of the insurance offer. The authors question this assumption and propose that consumers interpret the price of insurance as a risk signal with respect to the underlying product. Perceived risk, in turn, negatively affects consumers’ decision to purchase the product in a given purchase situation. The results of a survey, three online experiments, and two studies using transactional data provide evidence for the proposed insurance price risk signal. The findings reveal that perceived risk mediates the link between the relative insurance price level and consumers’ decision to purchase the underlying product. Offering other optional add-ons and providing objective risk information weakens the insurance price risk signal.
{"title":"EXPRESS: How Insurance Prices Affect Consumers’ Purchase Decisions: Insurance Price as a Risk Signal","authors":"Jochen Reiner, Julia Wamsler, Torsten Bornemann, Martin Natter","doi":"10.1177/00222437241270217","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222437241270217","url":null,"abstract":"Retailers, service providers, and manufacturers have discovered that complementary optional insurance is an attractive source of profit and frequently charge substantial insurance prices compared to the price of the product to be insured. The implicit assumption behind this pricing strategy is that product purchase decisions are independent of the insurance offer. The authors question this assumption and propose that consumers interpret the price of insurance as a risk signal with respect to the underlying product. Perceived risk, in turn, negatively affects consumers’ decision to purchase the product in a given purchase situation. The results of a survey, three online experiments, and two studies using transactional data provide evidence for the proposed insurance price risk signal. The findings reveal that perceived risk mediates the link between the relative insurance price level and consumers’ decision to purchase the underlying product. Offering other optional add-ons and providing objective risk information weakens the insurance price risk signal.","PeriodicalId":48465,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Marketing Research","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141866308","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：