Previous theories have suggested that consumers will be happier if they spend their money on experiences such as travel as opposed to material possessions such as automobiles. We test this experience recommendation and show that it may be misleading in its general form. Valence of the outcome significantly moderates differences in respondents’ reported retrospective happiness with material versus experiential purchases. For purchases that turned out positively, experiential purchases lead to more happiness than do material purchases, as the experience recommendation suggests. However, for purchases that turned out negatively, experiences have no benefit over (and, for some types of consumers, induce significantly less happiness than) material possessions. We provide evidence that this purchase type by valence interaction is driven by the fact that consumers adapt more slowly to experiential purchases than to material purchases, leading to both greater happiness and greater unhappiness for experiential purchases.

and the three anonymous JMR reviewers for their insightful and helpful comments. They also express their gratitude to Dilip Soman for generously discussing with them his data and analysis.

Manufacturers are increasingly producing and promoting sustainable products (i.e., products that have a positive social and/or environmental impact). However, relatively little is known about how product sustainability affects consumers' preferences. The authors propose that sustainability may not always be an asset, even if most consumers care about social and environmental issues. The degree to which sustainability enhances preference depends on the type of benefit consumers most value for the product category in question. In this research, the authors demonstrate that consumers associate higher product ethicality with gentleness-related attributes and lower product ethicality with strength-related attributes. As a consequence of these associations, the positive effect of product sustainability on consumer preferences is reduced when strength-related attributes are valued, sometimes even resulting in preferences for less sustainable product alternatives (i.e., the "sustainability liability"). Conversely, when gentleness-related attributes are valued, sustainability enhances preference. In addition, the authors show that the potential negative impact of sustainability on product preferences can be attenuated using explicit cues about product strength.

Manufacturers are increasingly producing and promoting sustainable products (i.e., products that have a positive social and/or environmental impact). However, relatively little is known about how product sustainability affects consumers' preferences. The authors propose that sustainability may not always be an asset, even if most consumers care about social and environmental issues. The degree to which sustainability enhances preference depends on the type of benefit consumers most value for the product category in question. In this research, the authors demonstrate that consumers associate higher product ethicality with gentleness-related attributes and lower product ethicality with strength-related attributes. As a consequence of these associations, the positive effect of product sustainability on consumer preferences is reduced when strength-related attributes are valued, sometimes even resulting in preferences for less sustainable product alternatives (i.e., the "sustainability liability"). Conversely, when gentleness-related attributes are valued, sustainability enhances preference. In addition, the authors show that the potential negative impact of sustainability on product preferences can be attenuated using explicit cues about product strength.

Marketing researchers frequently split (dichotomize) continuous predictor variables into two groups, as with a median split, before performing data analysis. The practice is prevalent, but its effects are not well understood. In this article, the authors present historical results on the effects of dichotomization of normal predictor variables rederived in a regression context that may be more relevant to marketing researchers. The authors then present new results on the effect of dichotomizing continuous predictor variables with various nonnormal distributions and examine the effects of dichotomization on model specification and fit in multiple regression. The authors conclude that dichotomization has only negative consequences and should be avoided.

Attribute information is not always readily available to consumers. This is especially true for ethical attributes, such as labor practices, environmental friendliness, and so forth. Intuitively, it might be expected that consumers who would use an attribute in their decision making should seek attribute information, especially if it is easily obtainable. In three studies, the authors measure discrepancies between requests for available ethical attribute information and actual use of the same attribute in a conjoint task. In both between-subjects and within-subjects designs, the authors show that consumers (1) underrequest ethical attribute information and (2) are especially likely to show request/use inconsistency if they care about the underlying ethical issue. Negative emotions, especially the avoidance of anger, appear to drive this willful ignorance. These results add to the growing literature on avoidance mechanisms and consumer decision making and may shed light on when ethical attributes do (and do not) play a role in actual purchase behavior.

Numerous studies have demonstrated that theoretically equivalent measures ofpreference, such as choices and prices, can lead to systematically different preference orderings, known as preference reversals. Two major causes of preference reversals are the compatibility effect and the prominence effect. The present studies demonstrate that the combined effects of prominence and compatibility lead to predictable preference reversals in settings where improvements in air quality are compared with improvements in consumer commodities by two methods-willingness to pay for each improvement and choice (For which of the two improvements would you pay more?; Which improvement is more valuable to you?). Willingness to pay leads to relatively greater preference for improved commodities; choice leads to relatively greater preference for improved air quality. These results extend the domain of preference reversals and pose a challenge to traditional theories of preference. At the applied level, these findings indicate the need to develop new methods for valuing environmental resources.

No abstract