Consumer Behavior

People often rationalize their choices, reassessing selected options as more positive after choosing them. This paper proposes that this type of rationalization does not arise from the act or self-perception of choosing (as previously thought), but rather from accepting the outcome, characterized by the degree to which it feels resolved and settled.

Political advocacy is increasingly common. Companies routinely voice positions on political issues, consumers mobilize around issues they care about, and campaigns spend billions of dollars each election cycle. In this review, we define the construct of political advocacy, distinguish it from related constructs, and review the fast-growing interdisciplinary literature on the topic. We organize our review around a central question: when is political advocacy effective? We posit that the answer depends on two critical factors: the goal of political advocacy and the actor behind it.

While setting explicit goals often boosts performance, we identify a novel way in which setting a goal can backfire. In 13 studies and four supplemental studies, using both incentive-compatible and hypothetical designs across a range of consumer domains, we demonstrate that setting an explicit goal and making progress towards it decreases the likelihood that people subsequently switch to alternative means of pursuit. This occurs because means are perceived to be more effective relative to alternatives if they have been used to progress towards a clear reference point.

Consumers’ spending decisions are shaped not only by their objective financial resources but also by their subjective perceptions of wealth. This research investigates the interplay between subjective poverty (e.g., feeling financially constrained) and income in driving spending. Across five studies including real-world spending data from a U.K.