Happily Ever After: The Effect of Identity-Consistency on Product Satiation

Chugani, Sunaina; Irwin, Julie R.; Redden, Joseph P.

doi:10.1093/jcr/ucv040

Cited by 33 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…How much consumers enjoy a stimulus over time can also be influenced by more discrete mechanisms such as how relevant the stimulus is to their identity (Chugani, Irwin, & Redden, 2015) and the sentimental value it evokes for oneself (Yang & Galak, 2015). Specifically, Chugani et al (2015) showed that people satiate more slowly from stimuli that are consistent with their identity. This occurs because a decline in enjoyment from identity-relevant stimuli seems to be inconsistent with people's identity.…”

Section: Factors Affecting the Desire For Variety Or Satiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variety Seeking, Satiation, and Maximizing Enjoyment Over Time

Sevilla¹,

Kahn

2018

J Consum Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we examine the different ways in which consumers balance their consumption behavior in order to maximize utility. In particular, we focus on how people balance repeating the same options with the decision to seek variety. While earlier research represented variety seeking as a means of reducing physical satiation (McAlister, 1982), more recent research suggests that the relationship between choosing variety and minimizing satiation is more complex, as these behaviors may be motivated and influenced by exogenous factors. Past reviews have largely looked at the two processes separately. In this article, we discuss the nuanced relationship between these two constructs and point to future research directions that may help us further understand how consumers tackle the everyday challenge of maximizing enjoyment over time.

show abstract

Section: Factors Affecting the Desire For Variety Or Satiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variety Seeking, Satiation, and Maximizing Enjoyment Over Time

Sevilla¹,

Kahn

2018

J Consum Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The coefficients b 1 and b 2 from ADD represent the partial relationships and the coefficient c 3 from MMR represents the interaction qualifying those two effects (e.g., Kitayama et al, 2015). Some researchers decide the partial relationships are not interesting because they are qualified by an interaction so they only report and discuss c 3 from MMR (e.g., Duffy & Chartrand, 2015) and perhaps at spotlighted (Irwin & McClelland, 2001) or pick-a-point (Hayes, 2013) values of the other variable such as conditional relationship tests for the slopes of different groups (e.g., Chugani, Irwin, & Redden, 2015;Duffy & Chartrand, 2015) or floodlight (Bauer & Curran, 2005;Spiller, Fitzsimons, Lynch, & McClelland, 2013) to test all possible simple effects (e.g., Disatnik & Steinhart, 2015;Martin, Ryan, & Brooks-Gunn, 2010).…”

Section: Interpreting Coefficients In Mmrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multicollinearity is a red herring in the search for moderator variables: A guide to interpreting moderated multiple regression models and a critique of Iacobucci, Schneider, Popovich, and Bakamitsos (2016)

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multicollinearity is irrelevant to the search for moderator variables, contrary to the implications of Iacobucci, Schneider, Popovich, and Bakamitsos (Behavior Research Methods, 2016, this issue). Multicollinearity is like the red herring in a mystery novel that distracts the statistical detective from the pursuit of a true moderator relationship. We show multicollinearity is completely irrelevant for tests of moderator variables. Furthermore, readers of Iacobucci et al. might be confused by a number of their errors. We note those errors, but more positively, we describe a variety of methods researchers might use to test and interpret their moderated multiple regression models, including two-stage testing, mean-centering, spotlighting, orthogonalizing, and floodlighting without regard to putative issues of multicollinearity. We cite a number of recent studies in the psychological literature in which the researchers used these methods appropriately to test, to interpret, and to report their moderated multiple regression models. We conclude with a set of recommendations for the analysis and reporting of moderated multiple regression that should help researchers better understand their models and facilitate generalizations across studies.Keywords Moderated multiple regression . Interactions . Multicollinearity . Regression analysis . Tutorial Saunders (1955Saunders ( , 1956) introduced moderated multiple regression (MMR), a simple but very general statistical method for determining whether the relationship between two variables, say Y and X, depends on or is moderated by a third variable Z. The analysis determines whether adding the product XZ to an additive regression model (ADD) containing the components X and Z significantly increases the explained variation or, equivalently, whether the coefficient for the product XZ is statistically significant. Specifically, for these two estimated models . The model is agnostic as to which variable is moderating the other so researchers often simply refer to a significant contribution from the product XZ as an Binteraction.^Interactions form the basis for many psychological theories and data analyses. For example, Riglin et al. (2016), investigated whether the relationship between stress (X) and depressive symptoms (Y) was buffered or moderated by cognitive ability (Z, a continuous variable) and by gender (G, a dichotomous variable).Iacobucci, Schneider, Popovich, and Bakamitsos (2016, this issue, hereinafter ISPB) attempt to sort out various multicollinearity issues in the testing of moderated regression models. Unfortunately their attempt is substantially flawed and is likely to leave many readers confused about how best to test moderated regression models. The reasoning of ISPB

show abstract

“…More importantly, self-signaling seems more autonomous than other-signaling and, as such, may serve the need for autonomy. Finally, as self-signaling is probably much more expressive of one's true self, it may lead to less satiation [65]. If people are less frustrated with the outcomes of their consumption and satiate more slowly, perhaps this may slow down the frequency of spending.…”

Section: Conclusion: Is Materialism Necessarily Detrimental?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Materialism and well-being: the role of consumption

Pandelaere

2016

Current Opinion in Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Happily Ever After: The Effect of Identity-Consistency on Product Satiation

Cited by 33 publications

References 49 publications

Variety Seeking, Satiation, and Maximizing Enjoyment Over Time

Variety Seeking, Satiation, and Maximizing Enjoyment Over Time

Multicollinearity is a red herring in the search for moderator variables: A guide to interpreting moderated multiple regression models and a critique of Iacobucci, Schneider, Popovich, and Bakamitsos (2016)

Materialism and well-being: the role of consumption

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About