IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/mktlet/v29y2018i1d10.1007_s11002-017-9443-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When the purpose lies within: Maximizers and satisfaction with autotelic choices

Author

Listed:
  • Michail D. Kokkoris

    (WU Vienna University of Economics and Business)

Abstract

Are maximizers less satisfied with their choices than satisficers? This research provides a novel perspective on this question by distinguishing between two types of consumer goals: autotelic, when choice is a goal in itself, and instrumental, when a choice is a means to achieving other goals. Study 1 showed that maximizers value autotelic experiences more than satisficers. Study 2 experimentally manipulated the choice goal and found that maximizers compared to satisficers experience higher choice satisfaction when the choice goal is autotelic rather than instrumental. Additionally, evidence is provided for the underlying mechanism (perceived ease of choice) as well as downstream consequences (consumers’ willingness to pay for their chosen option). These findings advance a conceptualization of maximizers as consumers seeking self-contained meaning in choice and provide new insights into the relation between maximizing and choice satisfaction. Theoretical and practical implications for consumer decision-making are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Michail D. Kokkoris, 2018. "When the purpose lies within: Maximizers and satisfaction with autotelic choices," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 73-85, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:mktlet:v:29:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s11002-017-9443-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11002-017-9443-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11002-017-9443-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11002-017-9443-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Juliano Laran & Chris Janiszewski, 2011. "Work or Fun? How Task Construal and Completion Influence Regulatory Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(6), pages 967-983.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:5:y:2010:i:5:p:411-419 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Higgins, E. Tory & Cornwell, James F.M., 2016. "Securing foundations and advancing frontiers: Prevention and promotion effects on judgment & decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 56-67.
    4. Ali Besharat & Daniel Ladik & François Carrillat, 2014. "Are maximizers blind to the future? When today’s best does not make for a better tomorrow," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 77-91, March.
    5. Kiyoshi Asakawa, 2004. "Flow Experience and Autotelic Personality in Japanese College Students: How do they Experience Challenges in Daily Life?," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 123-154, June.
    6. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:2:p:126-146 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Fangyuan Chen & Jaideep Sengupta, 2014. "Forced to Be Bad: The Positive Impact of Low-Autonomy Vice Consumption on Consumer Vitality," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 41(4), pages 1089-1107.
    8. Simona Botti & Ann L. McGill, 2011. "The Locus of Choice: Personal Causality and Satisfaction with Hedonic and Utilitarian Decisions," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(6), pages 1065-1078.
    9. Fangyuan Chen & Jaideep Sengupta, 2014. "Forced to Be Bad: The Positive Impact of Low-Autonomy Vice Consumption on Consumer Vitality," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 41(4), pages 1089-1107.
    10. repec:cup:judgdm:v:7:y:2012:i:5:p:644-658 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. repec:cup:judgdm:v:6:y:2011:i:6:p:565-579 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Aaker, Jennifer L. & Lee, Angela Y., 2006. "Understanding Regulatory Fit," Research Papers 1910, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    13. repec:cup:judgdm:v:5:y:2010:i:3:p:164-175 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. repec:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i::p:364-370 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Peck, Joann & Childers, Terry L, 2003. "Individual Differences in Haptic Information Processing: The "Need for Touch" Scale," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(3), pages 430-442, December.
    16. Tilottama Chowdhury & S. Ratneshwar & Praggyan Mohanty, 2009. "The time-harried shopper: Exploring the differences between maximizers and satisficers," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 155-167, June.
    17. François Carrillat & Daniel Ladik & Renaud Legoux, 2011. "When the decision ball keeps rolling: An investigation of the Sisyphus effect among maximizing consumers," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 283-296, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daniel C. Brannon & Brandon W. Soltwisch, 2017. "If it has lots of bells and whistles, it must be the best: how maximizers and satisficers evaluate feature-rich versus feature-poor products," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 651-662, December.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:2:p:126-146 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Misuraca, Raffaella & Fasolo, Barbara, 2018. "Maximizing versus satisficing in the digital age: disjoint scales and the case for “construct consensus”," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 84324, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Quentin André & Ziv Carmon & Klaus Wertenbroch & Alia Crum & Douglas Frank & William Goldstein & Joel Huber & Leaf Boven & Bernd Weber & Haiyang Yang, 2018. "Consumer Choice and Autonomy in the Age of Artificial Intelligence and Big Data," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 5(1), pages 28-37, March.
    5. Nathan N. Cheek & Barry Schwartz, 2016. "On the meaning and measurement of maximization," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(2), pages 126-146, March.
    6. Ana Alina Tudoran, 2022. "A machine learning approach to identifying decision-making styles for managing customer relationships," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(1), pages 351-374, March.
    7. Harris, Patricia & Dall’Olmo Riley, Francesca & Hand, Chris, 2021. "Multichannel shopping: The effect of decision making style on shopper journey configuration and satisfaction," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    8. Gaetano Miceli & Maria Antonietta Raimondo, 2020. "Creativity in the marketing and consumer behavior literature: a structured review and a research agenda," Italian Journal of Marketing, Springer, vol. 2020(1), pages 85-124, March.
    9. Araceli Galiano Coronil, 2022. "Behavior as an approach to identifying target groups from a social marketing perspective," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 19(2), pages 265-287, June.
    10. Izadi, Anoosha & Rudd, Melanie & Patrick, Vanessa M., 2019. "The Way the Wind Blows: Direction of Airflow Energizes Consumers and Fuels Creative Engagement," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 95(4), pages 143-157.
    11. Chirag Dagar & Ashish Pandey & Ajinkya Navare, 2022. "How Yoga-Based Practices Build Altruistic Behavior? Examining the Role of Subjective Vitality, Self-transcendence, and Psychological Capital," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 191-206, January.
    12. Tejaswi Patil & Zillur Rahman, 2023. "A bibliometric analysis of scientific literature on guilt in marketing," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 73(3), pages 1385-1415, September.
    13. Ali Besharat & Daniel Ladik & François Carrillat, 2014. "Are maximizers blind to the future? When today’s best does not make for a better tomorrow," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 77-91, March.
    14. Ping Sun & Xiaoming Zhou & Cui Shao & Wenli Wang & Jinkun Sun, 2022. "The Impacts of Environmental Dynamism on Chinese Tour Guides’ Sustainable Performance: Factors Related to Vitality, Positive Stress Mindset and Supportive Policy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-15, July.
    15. Mittal, Banwari, 2016. "The maximizing consumer wants even more choices: How consumers cope with the marketplace of overchoice," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 361-370.
    16. Alderighi, Marco & Nava, Consuelo R. & Calabrese, Matteo & Christille, Jean-Marc & Salvemini, Chiara B., 2022. "Consumer perception of price fairness and dynamic pricing: Evidence from Booking.com," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 769-783.
    17. Yi He & Qimei Chen & Dana L. Alden, 2016. "Time will tell: managing post-purchase changes in brand attitude," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 791-805, November.
    18. Zou, Lili Wenli & Chan, Ricky Y.K., 2019. "Why and when do consumers perform green behaviors? An examination of regulatory focus and ethical ideology," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 113-127.
    19. Erin Percival Carter & Stephanie Welcomer, 2021. "Designing and Distinguishing Meaningful Artisan Food Experiences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-13, July.
    20. Muthaffar, Aisha & Vilches-Montero, Sonia, 2023. "Empowering retailers: A bounded rationality perspective to enhancing omnichannel journey satisfaction," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    21. Tarek Ben Hassen & Hamid El Bilali & Mohammad S. Allahyari & Sinisa Berjan & Darjan Karabašević & Adriana Radosavac & Goran Dašić & Ružica Đervida, 2021. "Preparing for the Worst? Household Food Stockpiling during the Second Wave of COVID-19 in Serbia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-19, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:mktlet:v:29:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s11002-017-9443-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.