As social media usage has grown over the recent past, so too has a new form of celebrity: social media influencers (SMIs). It can be difficult for consumers to know whether the influencers they are following are real. To combat this, social media sites introduced user verification. Verification, denoted by a blue checkmark badge visible in search and on one's profile, is ostensibly a way of confirming one's identity, yet only accounts with large followings are awarded verification status by the platform. In this paper, we investigate the perception of verification in the context of SMIs, a topic relatively absent from the literature despite the billions of dollars spent on partnerships. Specifically, we investigate if consumers perceive verification as more directly associated with credibility or celebrity. Further, we consider whether the fit of the influencer with the advertisement yields discrepancies in consumers' trust of the advertisement and endorser in paid partnerships on social media. Through two studies, we find that consumers associate verification most closely with celebrity, rather than authenticity and that when the influencer is advertising a product that does not fit with their brand, consumers are significantly less likely to trust verified accounts rather than unverified accounts. This study has theoretical implications for marketing researchers as well as practical implications for marketing managers. Verified influencers cost more; therefore, this research provides unique insights for brands to capitalize their ad return if they are made aware of the implications associated with verification.

With the rise of the sharing economy, more consumers than ever are thinking about products not in terms of ownership, but in terms of access necessary to facilitate experiences. In this paper, we build on prior literature, which distinguished product from experiential satisfaction to explore the role that knowledge of a prior user plays in shaping these two types of satisfaction in access‐based consumption experiences. Across three studies, we demonstrate that product and experiential satisfaction can be affected differently when consumers are provided with information about previous users of products. We find that information about the previous user of a product consistently negatively impacts product satisfaction. However, we find that when the previous user has positive and experientially relevant traits, experiential satisfaction is increased. When the information about the previous user is negative or experientially irrelevant, experiential satisfaction is decreased. In cases in which we find a positive effect of prior user information on experiential satisfaction, we find it is mediated by transfer of the previous user's traits and that the effectiveness of this mechanism depends on the relevance of traits and the stability of the self‐concept of the consumer.

People want what they cannot have. Yet would people still covet a forgone option when they have no initial preference for it? We examined this question in two parts by identifying five unique types of choice indifference and testing what choices people make when they have “no preference” for receiving an endowed good that subsequently becomes unavailable. First, we found that feeling indifferent among options is a common response to making decisions; furthermore, we found that previously established effects are significantly altered when accounting for participants' indifference. Second, when people experience the loss of a would‐be endowed option, we found that they replace it with a similar option, to such an extent that they choose an option that is inferior to other available options. Together, our results demonstrate that the classic endowment effect does not only emerge after people are endowed but beforehand. That is, when people expect to be endowed with a good, they behave like it is already theirs and replace its loss with a similar good even when (1) they are initially indifferent to it and (2) they could choose something better.

PurposeAccess to media is more available now than ever before, both physically and digitally. This study was used to investigate the underlying personality traits that influence the decision to purchase either physical or digital books, and extend theory on access to art and provide a unique lens through which marketers can sell digital media.Design/methodology/approachStudy 1 is a field study in which data were collected from several comic book readers and collectors to look at the role that psychological ownership plays in influencing the likelihood of buying physical or digital comics. Specifically, study 1 includes consumers' need for uniqueness and tech savviness as potential influencers. Study 2 extends the findings of study into a new context and manipulates, rather than measures, the identity of the participants. Study 2 looks at the effects of turning a digital object into a non-fungible token (NFT).FindingsThis paper demonstrates that consumers who have a high consumer need for uniqueness (CNFU) are more likely to prefer physical media to digital media. Further, it is shown that preference for physical media leads, on average, to more purchases and that the consumer's psychological ownership mediates the effects of CNFU. In addition, this paper shows that higher degrees of tech savviness led to a preference for digital media. Finally, this paper shows that when consumers identify with a collector identity, turning a digital item into an NFT increases their preference for that object.Originality/valueThis work builds off recent research into physical and digital media and is one of the first to examine the specific personality types that prefer each.