“…Individuals may also turn to consumption as a way to cope with a perceived lack of control. For example, when consumers sense a lack of order or control in their lives, they demonstrate a stronger preference for products that seem "bounded" (such as framed vs. unframed pictures; Cutright, 2012), high-effort products that require the consumer to work harder (Cutright & Samper, 2014), and products that are advertised as either blessed or fused with religious symbols (Shepherd, Kay, & Eibach, 2015).…”
Section: Religious Beliefs About External Sources Of Controlmentioning
This article provides a conceptual framework for studying the effects of religion on consumer behavior, with the goal of stimulating future research at the intersection of these two topics. Here, we delineate religion as a multidimensional construct and propose that religion affects consumer psychology and behavior through four dimensions-beliefs, rituals, values, and community. For each dimension of religion, we offer definitions and measures, integrate previous findings from research in the psychology, consumer behavior, marketing, and religion literatures, and propose testable future research directions. With this conceptual framework and research agenda, we challenge consumer researchers to ask deeper questions about why religious affiliation and level of religiosity may be driving previously established differences in consumer behavior and to uncover the psychological mechanisms underlying the effects. This framework complements and extends previous literature and provides a new, more delineated framework for considering research on the effects of religion on consumer behavior.
“…Individuals may also turn to consumption as a way to cope with a perceived lack of control. For example, when consumers sense a lack of order or control in their lives, they demonstrate a stronger preference for products that seem "bounded" (such as framed vs. unframed pictures; Cutright, 2012), high-effort products that require the consumer to work harder (Cutright & Samper, 2014), and products that are advertised as either blessed or fused with religious symbols (Shepherd, Kay, & Eibach, 2015).…”
Section: Religious Beliefs About External Sources Of Controlmentioning
This article provides a conceptual framework for studying the effects of religion on consumer behavior, with the goal of stimulating future research at the intersection of these two topics. Here, we delineate religion as a multidimensional construct and propose that religion affects consumer psychology and behavior through four dimensions-beliefs, rituals, values, and community. For each dimension of religion, we offer definitions and measures, integrate previous findings from research in the psychology, consumer behavior, marketing, and religion literatures, and propose testable future research directions. With this conceptual framework and research agenda, we challenge consumer researchers to ask deeper questions about why religious affiliation and level of religiosity may be driving previously established differences in consumer behavior and to uncover the psychological mechanisms underlying the effects. This framework complements and extends previous literature and provides a new, more delineated framework for considering research on the effects of religion on consumer behavior.
“…Trying to restore control can also lead to choice of healthy foods and utilitarian products (Chen, Lee, & Yap, ; VanBergen & Laran, ). People choose products associated with self‐control because these products signal more effort compared with indulgent products, and effort makes consumers feel more in control of their environment (Cutright & Samper, ). Thus, resource scarcity may reduce self‐control, but mechanisms designed to restore control when a person perceives that resources are scarce can increase self‐control.…”
Section: The Mechanisms Behind Self‐controlmentioning
People routinely encounter situations in which they have to decide between following their long‐term interests and seeking short‐term pleasure. An act of self‐control occurs when people follow their long‐term interests (e.g., eat healthy food, save money), whereas an act of indulgence occurs when people seek short‐term pleasure (e.g., eat tasty but unhealthy food, spend a lot of money). Avoiding the temptation of short‐term pleasures is often difficult, and sometimes indulgence can lead to harmful outcomes. For this reason, research has understandably focused on uncovering the many factors that can facilitate or undermine self‐control. However, making sense of this voluminous output is difficult without an organizing framework. This article provides such a framework, which organizes previous findings around three psychological processes: information activation and inhibition, priority setting, and responses to resource availability. The article concludes with a discussion of research ideas in areas that will be especially relevant moving forward.
“…Our findings also contribute to the literature on consumer perceptions of control. Prior work finds that consumers' perceived control can be easily heightened or decreased in reaction to everyday experiences (e.g., reading articles on controllable vs. uncontrollable life factors: Cutright & Samper, 2014). Moreover, past work finds that perceived control may affect probability perception (Khan & Kupor, 2017;Langer, 1975) and scholars have called for research on how perceived control may affect other perceptions (Trope & Liberman, 2010).…”
Prior research has found that people perceive positive objects and locations as physically closer than negative ones. Yet, other work has found the opposite to be true for perceptions of temporal distance, where negative future events feel closer than positive ones. Motivated by this seeming discrepancy, we propose that (a) feelings of control can differentially influence how far away valenced (i.e., positive or negative) targets feel in space and time and that (b) the difference in perceived control over space versus time can account for these opposite findings. First, across four studies, we show that high (vs. low) control makes positive targets feel closer and negative targets feel more distant in both physical space (Studies 1 and 1a) and time (Studies 2 and 2a). Then, in Studies 3 and 4, we simultaneously examine perceptions of spatial and temporal distance and show that baseline differences in perceived control between these domains can explain the prior discrepant findings. Finally, a within‐paper meta‐analysis offers further support to these findings.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.