We explore the dimensionality and structure of internal and external perceived behavioral control, extending research on the relationship between these control components. Two conceptual models were identified and tested in Study 1. External control was manipulated in Study 2 to further explicate hypothesized variation in perceived internal control. The results from both studies provide support for an antecedent relationship between control constructs with external control as an antecedent and internal control as the more proximate determinant of behavioral intent. Theoretical implications of findings are discussed. ᭧

Despite considerable research on the impact of past behavior on decision making over the past two decades, little is yet known about how past experience moderates decision theoretic factors within models of behavioral intent. This research explores the implications of past behavior within the theory of planned behavior (TPB), and how it influences key decision-making variables. A theoretical model of how past behavior can induce deliberative versus heuristic processing of information is developed and tested. Consumer implications of the impact of past behavior on behavioral intentions are discussed, highlighting the importance of addressing one's experience when making a decision.

Firms often look for ways to improve the return on investment they earn from costly innovation strategies. The authors investigate a previously unexplored benefit of innovation that occurs when a brand's reputation as a provider of valued new offerings allows it to earn innovation credit, a form of customer-based brand equity. Innovation credit provides brands with the license or latitude to use strategies that violate category norms without the penalty (in the form of impaired attitudes) that consumers are shown to levy on less innovative brands. Consistent with the proposed theoretical framework, three studies demonstrate that innovative brands are granted the license to employ nonnormative strategies without sanction. In addition to providing evidence regarding the inferential mechanism underlying this licensing effect, Study 3 shows that, under certain conditions, innovative brands not only escape the penalty associated with using atypical strategies but are actually rewarded for utilizing such approaches. The authors provide theoretical and managerial implications of these findings and suggestions for further research in this emerging area of innovation research.

Purpose – This paper aims to examine how conflicting brand preferences between a social group and an individual may lead the individual to hide their consumption. Specifically, the authors examine the conditions under which hiding behaviour is most likely to occur and the impact of susceptibility to interpersonal influence on the decision to hide. Design/methodology/approach – Two experiments were conducted using a combination of student and adult samples. Analysis of variance and regression analyses were used to test the hypotheses. Findings – Findings suggest that individuals are most likely to hide their consumption behaviour when group sanctions for non-conformity are severe, but the likelihood of being caught is low. Further, individual differences in susceptibility to interpersonal influence are found to affect individuals’ decisions to hide their consumption behaviour. Research limitations/implications – By identifying hidden consumption behaviour as a possible response to preference conflict, this research contributes to the literature on social influence and extends our understanding of how consumers behave when influenced by social group pressure. Originality/value – The present work establishes hiding behaviour (a concept which has yet to be thoroughly explored in the literature) as an alternative yet viable response to preference conflict.

No abstract