Blatant benevolence and conspicuous consumption: When romantic motives elicit strategic costly signals.

Griskevicius, Vladas; Tybur, Joshua M.; Sundie, Jill M.; Cialdini, Robert B.; Miller, Geoffrey F.; Kenrick, Douglas T.

doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.1.85

Cited by 569 publications

(631 citation statements)

References 100 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

556

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is highly plausible, however, that concerns about identity and social image form part of a price effect. Gender differences in behavior are commonplace in the experimental economics literature in general (Croson and Gneezy 2009) and a number of studies find that men and women respond differently to treatments designed to trigger social concerns (e.g., Hasseldine and Hite 2003;Griskevicius et al 2007;Mellström and Johannesson 2008). Given this, we have no reason to expect the effect of price on experienced pleasantness to be the same for men and women.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 87%

When Does the Price Affect the Taste? Results from a Wine Experiment

Almenberg¹,

Dreber

2011

J Wine Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may AbstractWe designed an experiment that examines how knowledge about the price of a good, and the time at which the information is received, affects how the good is experienced. The good in question was wine, and the price was either high or low.Our results suggest that hosts offering wine to guests can safely reveal the price: much is gained if the wine is expensive, and little is lost if it is cheap. Disclosing the high price before tasting the wine produces considerably higher ratings, although only from women. Disclosing the low price, by contrast, does not result in lower ratings. Our finding supports the notion that price not only serves to clear markets, it also serves as a marketing tool; it influences expectations that in turn shape a consumer's experience. In addition, our results suggest that men and women respond differently to attribute information concerning wine.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 87%

When Does the Price Affect the Taste? Results from a Wine Experiment

Almenberg¹,

Dreber

2011

J Wine Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Asher, 2000; Schaller & Neuberg, 2008), cultural variability (Fincher, Thornhill, Murray & Schaller, in press;Gangestad, Haselton, & Buss, 2006;Schaller & Murray, in press), and behaviors ranging from conformity (Griskevicius, Goldstein, Mortenson, Cialdini, & Kenrick, 2006) to consumer spending (Griskevicius, Tybur, Sundie, Cialdini, Miller, & Kenrick, 2007;Miller, Tybur, & Jordan, 2007). Importantly, the adaptationist perspective has also proven useful in the study of emotions (see Cosmides & Tooby, 2000;Keltner, Haidt, & Shiota, 2006;Ohman & Mineka, 2001;Pinker, 1997).…”

Section: An Adaptationist View Of Disgustmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microbes, mating, and morality: Individual differences in three functional domains of disgust.

Tybur¹,

Lieberman²,

Griskevicius³

2009

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Self Cite

944

1,184

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What is the function of disgust? Whereas traditional models have suggested that disgust serves to protect the self or neutralize reminders of our animal nature, an evolutionary perspective suggests that disgust functions to solve 3 qualitatively different adaptive problems related to pathogen avoidance, mate choice, and social interaction. The authors investigated this 3-domain model of disgust across 4 studies and examined how sensitivity to these functional domains relates to individual differences in other psychological constructs. Consistent with their predictions, factor analyses demonstrated that disgust sensitivity partitions into domains related to pathogens, sexuality, and morality. Further, sensitivity to the 3 domains showed predictable differentiation based on sex, perceived vulnerability to disease, psychopathic tendencies, and Big 5 personality traits. In exploring these 3 domains of disgust, the authors introduce a new measure of disgust sensitivity. Appreciation of the functional heterogeneity of disgust has important implications for research on individual differences in disgust sensitivity, emotion, clinical impairments, and neuroscience.

show abstract

“…An evolutionary hypothesis predicts that when men and women are being primed with mating motives-for example, imagining going on a date with an attractive opposite sex partner (Griskevicius et al, 2007)-this should exacerbate sex differences in cooperation. The sociocultural perspective predicts no such effect.…”

Section: Cooperation In Mixed-sex Interactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex differences in cooperation: A meta-analytic review of social dilemmas.

Balliet

Macfarlan

et al. 2011

Psychological Bulletin

281

234

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although it is commonly believed that women are kinder and more cooperative than men, there is conflicting evidence for this assertion. Current theories of sex differences in social behavior suggest that it may be useful to examine in what situations men and women are likely to differ in cooperation. Here, we derive predictions from both sociocultural and evolutionary perspectives on context-specific sex differences in cooperation, and we conduct a unique meta-analytic study of 272 effect sizes-sampled across 50 years of research-on social dilemmas to examine several potential moderators. The overall average effect size is not statistically different from zero (d ϭ -0.05), suggesting that men and women do not differ in their overall amounts of cooperation. However, the association between sex and cooperation is moderated by several key features of the social context: Male-male interactions are more cooperative than female-female interactions (d ϭ 0.16), yet women cooperate more than men in mixed-sex interactions (d ϭ -0.22). In repeated interactions, men are more cooperative than women. Women were more cooperative than men in larger groups and in more recent studies, but these differences disappeared after statistically controlling for several study characteristics. We discuss these results in the context of both sociocultural and evolutionary theories of sex differences, stress the need for an integrated biosocial approach, and outline directions for future research.

show abstract

Blatant benevolence and conspicuous consumption: When romantic motives elicit strategic costly signals.

Cited by 569 publications

References 100 publications

When Does the Price Affect the Taste? Results from a Wine Experiment

When Does the Price Affect the Taste? Results from a Wine Experiment

Microbes, mating, and morality: Individual differences in three functional domains of disgust.

Sex differences in cooperation: A meta-analytic review of social dilemmas.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About