Being Accepted or Ostracized: How Social Experience Influences Consumer Responses to Advertisements with Different Regulatory Focus

Wu, Linwan; Dodoo, Naa Amponsah

doi:10.1080/00913367.2020.1743217

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…message content) and chronically motivational tendency (Higgins, 2000). Importantly, this regulatory fit between valance of message framing and personal chronic orientation enhances the persuasion (Wu & Dodoo, 2020;Yi & Baumgartner, 2009). In sum, because of the increased persuasion through regulatory fit, prevention-focused message would be more persuasive for prevention-oriented individuals who are more sensitive to the relevance of potential precautionary information for their safety and health (De Boer et al, 2015;Lee et al, 2010;McKay-Nesbitt et al, 2013).…”

Section: Regulatory Focus Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Supermarket is a typical service context where up to 85% of customers do not comply with physical distancing (Short, 2020). Our prevention-framed appeal emphasized the health costs from losspreventing perspective while our promotion-framed appeal stressed the health benefits from gain-promoting perspective (Wu & Dodoo, 2020). Wise et al (2020) carried out a large-scale survey targeting US individuals amid this epidemic and uncovered that people engaging in physical distancing because of their perceived likelihood of personally being infected, rather than likelihood of transmitting the virus to others.…”

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Using regulatory focus to encourage physical distancing in services: when fear helps to deal with Mr. Deadly COVID-19

Wang

Guchait

2020

The Service Industries Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although physical distancing is the key to reducing the risk of virus infection, the commonly used signs to spur physical distancing in services seem ineffective as many customers still refrain from practicing physical distancing. This research therefore suggests using regulatory focus (prevention vs. promotion) to improve the persuasiveness of these appeals. Study 1 creates and validates one multiple-item scale for measuring physical distancing in services, which is then adopted in two subsequent scenariobased experiments. Study 2 proves the superior effect of prevention-focused message to both promotion-focused message and conventional message in encouraging physical distancing compliance, which is explained by perceived fear as the underlying psychological mechanism. Study 3 further unveils the boundary condition of anthropomorphism in strengthening this superiority (i.e. Mr. Deadly COVID-19, scary face). Given a great deal of uncertain future caused by this epidemic, this research provides relevant implications for fostering the engagement in physical distancing in services.

show abstract

Section: Regulatory Focus Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Using regulatory focus to encourage physical distancing in services: when fear helps to deal with Mr. Deadly COVID-19

Wang

Guchait

2020

The Service Industries Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This discussion on social exclusion's cognitive and affective advertisements with a promotion-focus work more effectively with implicitly ignored consumers (Wu & Dodoo, 2020). Furthermore, consumers with high levels of perceived social exclusion tend to engender psychological brand ownership, a cognitive-affective construct, as it helps them gain belongingness and control (Kumar & Kaushal, 2021).…”

Section: Non-behavioural Responsementioning

confidence: 92%

“…Aghakhani and Main (2019); Baek et al (2018); Baek et al (2019); Bozkurt and Gligor (2019); Chen et al (2017); Dommer et al (2013); Duclos et al (2013); El Hazzouri et al (2017); Gao and Mattila (2016); Guèvremont and Grohmann (2016); Han et al (2015); Hu et al (2018); Jiang et al (2018); Jiang et al (2020); Jiao and Wang (2018); Kandaurova and Lee (2019); Khalifa and Shukla (2017); Kim, Park, et al (2020); Lee et al (2017); Lee and Shrum (2012); Liang et al (2018); Liang and Chang (2016); Liu et al (2021); Loveland et al (2010); Lu and Sinha (2017); Mead et al (2011); Mourey et al (2017); Newman et al (2019); Sinha and Lu (2019); Sinha and Wang (2013); Su et al (2017); Su et al (2019); Tezer and Bodur (2020); Thomas and Saenger (2020); Tunçel and Kavak (n.d.); Vinuales and Thomas (2021); Wan et al (2014); Wang et al (2012); Wang and Ding (2017); Wang and Lalwani (2019); Ward and Dahl (2014); Wu and Dodoo (2020); Xie, Chen and Guo (2020); Xu and Jin (2020); Yang et al (2020); Yi et al (2017)…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social exclusion and consumer responses: A comprehensive review and theoretical framework

Rawat

Dewani

Kulashri

2022

Int J Consumer Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While social exclusion in the consumption context has gained significant interest recently, its literature remains fragmented and underexplored due to restricted categorization and limited conceptual lenses. This systematic review attempts to broaden social exclusion literature by including multiple possible aspects of social exclusion, and providing a nuanced approach to identifying changes in the consumption response of excluded individuals. Using the ‘Scientific Procedures and Rationales for Systematic Literature Review’ (SPAR‐4‐SLR) protocol to assemble, arrange and assess studies published between 2010 and 2021, we selected 83 studies as the basis of this review. With the objective of providing a synthesized view of the existing literature and presenting possible explanations for inconsistencies, this article (a) undertakes a systematic review of the existing research in the domain, (b) introduces a conceptual framework and (c) provides a taxonomy to categorize diverse strands of consumption responses. Identifying gaps, this study also provides directions for future research using the Theory, Characteristics, Context and Methodology (TCCM) framework. This study can thus enable marketers, advertisers and public policymakers to understand the needs of socially excluded individuals, and subsequently make more inclusive decisions.

show abstract

“…Septianto et al (2020) indicated that the effectiveness of luxury advertising can be improved because of the congruent matching of prevention pride with authenticity appeals and of promotion pride with exclusivity appeals within advertising messages. As demonstrated by Wu and Dodoo (2020), the social experience can also influence consumer responses to advertisements with different regulatory focus.…”

Section: Effect Of Message Regulatory Focusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Basing a claim on “negatives free”: when does it serve as a quality cue?

Chang

2021

JPBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Individuals concerned about safety comprise a significant share of the consumer market today. This paper aims to provide the results of a study on when a front-of-package (FOP) claim about “no added negatives” can serve as a quality cue. Design/methodology/approach Four between-subjects experiments examine consumers’ quality perceptions in responses to the absence-focused claims and also identifies brand parity (Studies 1a and 1b) and the associated launch of inconsistent alternatives as moderators (Study 2) and investigate the extent to which the quality signaling value of absence-focused claims varies as a function of message regulatory focus (Study 3). Findings Research shows that a unique absence-focused claim indicates product quality (Studies 1a and 1b). However, there could be a cost in terms of reduced perceived quality when adding an inconsistent alternative to a brand (Study 2). Furthermore, consumers associate greater product quality with absence-focused FOP claims if an appeal is framed as prevention-focused rather than promotion-focused benefits (Study 3). Originality/value This study advances knowledge on the effects of front-of-package claims on consumer behavior and benefits marketers in determining effective front-of-package messages for product promotion.

show abstract

Being Accepted or Ostracized: How Social Experience Influences Consumer Responses to Advertisements with Different Regulatory Focus

Cited by 12 publications

References 54 publications

Using regulatory focus to encourage physical distancing in services: when fear helps to deal with Mr. Deadly COVID-19

Using regulatory focus to encourage physical distancing in services: when fear helps to deal with Mr. Deadly COVID-19

Social exclusion and consumer responses: A comprehensive review and theoretical framework

Basing a claim on “negatives free”: when does it serve as a quality cue?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About