Frequency Versus Intensity: How Thinking of a Frequent Consumption Indulgence as Social Versus Solitary Affects Preferences for How to Cut Back

Abstract

Many consumers engage in frequent consumption indulgences. Because such indulgences accumulate resource costs (e.g., money, calories), consumers are often prompted or need to cut back, posing questions for how to design cut-back programs with consumer appeal. This research distinguishes between frequent indulgences that consumers think of as social (vs. solitary), demonstrating that thinking of an indulgence as social (vs. solitary) decreases preferences to cut “frequency” (how often the indulgence occasion occurs) and increases preferences to cut “intensity” (choosing a within-category substitute that involves lower resource expenditure). These effects are explained by differentiating between enjoyment from the product itself versus enjoyment from aspects outside the product. Thinking of an indulgence as social (vs. solitary) heightens anticipated enjoyment particularly for aspects outside of the product, decreasing interest in cutting the number of occasions (cutting frequency) and increasing interest in cutting back on the product itself via a within-category substitute (cutting intensity). This divergence in cut-back preferences for social (vs. solitary) experiences is thus eliminated: 1) when consumers think of social experiences with distant (vs. close) others, which involve lower enjoyment outside of the product, or 2) when solitary experiences primarily involve heightened enjoyment for aspects outside of the product.

Too little money or time? Using justifications to maintain a positive image after self‐control failure

“…In Study 1, participants read about someone who failed at a New Year's resolution to eat more healthily due to lack of money or time or no information on a reason for the failure in the control condition. I chose New Year's resolutions to eat more healthy food because this is a very common instance of exerting self‐control that most people are familiar with (P. J. Liu, 2022). At the same time, people commonly believe that eating healthily is more expensive than eating unhealthily (Haws et al., 2017) and also takes more time (Kearney & McElhone, 1999), which should render both reasons for failure credible.…”

“…I chose New Year's resolutions to eat more healthy food because this is a very common instance of exerting self-control that most people are familiar with (P. J. Liu, 2022). At the same time, people commonly believe that eating healthily is more expensive than eating unhealthily (Haws et al, 2017) and also takes more time (Kearney & McElhone, 1999), which should render both reasons for failure credible.…”

Evaluating factors influencing customers’ intention to eat Korean cuisine “Samgyeopsal” in the Philippines: A structural equation model forest classifier approach

“…From the descriptive statistics results, most of the consumers eat Samgyeopsal at least once (68.7%), twice (21.3%), or thrice (6.50%) a week. Despite the constant consumption, Liu [91] expounded on a possible cutback on indulgence. Thus, marketers may strategize on this effect by changing up schemes for Samgyeopsal consumption to reduce distaste for eating among consumers.…”

A desire to create shared memories increases consumers' willingness to sacrifice experience quality for togetherness

“…In this work, we focus on common choices that consumers make involving conflict between two dimensions that impact consumption utility: experience quality (i.e., how much consumers enjoy the consumption of the good or service in real time) and togetherness (i.e., the ability to experience the activity in physical proximity to a relationship partner). Certainly, there are often benefits from being with a companion (Liu, 2022), such as when close relationship partners amplify the intensity of a pleasant experience (Boothby et al, 2016) or when others' favorable reactions to an experience are congruent with one's own (Raghunathan & Corfman, 2006). However, these real-time benefits of companionship do not always emerge, such as when sharing an experience amplifies the intensity of an unpleasant experience (Boothby et al, 2014) or when one lacks clarity about a partner's interests (Wu et al, 2021).…”