IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/v34y2008i5p624-634.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reducing Satiation: The Role of Categorization Level

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph P. Redden

Abstract

People usually like experiences less as they repeat them: they satiate. This research finds that people satiate less if they categorize the consumption episodes at lower levels. For instance, as people ate more jelly beans, their enjoyment declined less quickly when the candy was categorized specifically (e.g., cherry, orange) rather than generally (e.g., jelly bean). Three studies demonstrate this "specificity effect" for people's ratings of enjoyment both during and immediately after consumption. Process evidence shows that subcategorization focuses people's attention on differentiating aspects, making the episodes seem less repetitive and consequently less satiating. (c) 2008 by JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH, Inc..

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph P. Redden, 2008. "Reducing Satiation: The Role of Categorization Level," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(5), pages 624-634, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:34:y:2008:i:5:p:624-634
    DOI: 10.1086/521898
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/521898
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/521898?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.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Irene Consiglio & Stijn M J van Osselaer & Darren W DahlEditor & Amna KirmaniEditor & L J ShrumAssociate Editor, 2019. "The Devil You Know: Self-Esteem and Switching Responses to Poor Service," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 46(3), pages 590-605.
    2. Joo-Eon Jeon & Eun Mi Lee, 2020. "The Effect of Sensory Satiety on Perceived Benefits: The Case of Aesthetic Consumption in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-15, October.
    3. Raluca M. Ursu & Daria Dzyabura, 2020. "Retailers’ product location problem with consumer search," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 125-154, June.
    4. Chutian Wang & Bo Zhou & Yogesh V. Joshi, 2024. "Endogenous Consumption and Metered Paywalls," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(1), pages 158-177, January.
    5. Hee Jin Kim & Song Oh Yoon, 2016. "The effect of category label specificity on consumer choice," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 765-777, December.
    6. Kim, Jungkeun, 2019. "The impact of different price promotions on customer retention," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 95-102.
    7. Jordan Etkin & Cassie Mogilner, 2016. "Does Variety Among Activities Increase Happiness?," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 43(2), pages 210-229.
    8. Antón, Carmen & Camarero, Carmen & Garrido, María-José, 2018. "A journey through the museum: Visit factors that prevent or further visitor satiation," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 48-61.
    9. Cammy Crolic & Chris Janiszewski, 2016. "Hedonic Escalation: When Food Just Tastes Better and Better," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 43(3), pages 388-406.
    10. Shen, Liang & Cai, Fengyan & Wyer, Robert S., 2022. "How the interplay of variety and processing strategy affects calorie estimates," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 97-107.
    11. David A. Schweidel & Young-Hoon Park & Zainab Jamal, 2014. "A Multiactivity Latent Attrition Model for Customer Base Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 273-286, March.
    12. Zachary G. Arens & Rebecca W. Hamilton, 2016. "Why Focusing on the Similarity of Substitutes Leaves a Lot to Be Desired," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 43(3), pages 448-459.
    13. Jihyeon Oh & Dae Hee Kim & Daehwan Kim, 2022. "Exploring Experiential Patterns Depending on Time Lapses in Virtual Reality Spectatorship (VRS): The Role of Interruption in Reducing Satiation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-14, December.
    14. Smith, Robert W. & Keller, Kevin Lane, 2021. "If all their products seem the same, all the parts within a product seem the same too: How brand homogeneity polarizes product experiences," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 698-714.
    15. Sam K. Hui, 2017. "Understanding repeat playing behavior in casual games using a Bayesian data augmentation approach," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 29-55, March.
    16. Raghuram Iyengar & Kamel Jedidi, 2012. "A Conjoint Model of Quantity Discounts," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 334-350, March.
    17. Noelle M. Nelson & Joseph P. Redden, 2017. "Remembering Satiation: The Role of Working Memory in Satiation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 44(3), pages 633-650.
    18. Kwon, Ohjin & Singh, Tanya & Kim, SunAh, 2023. "The competing roles of variety seeking in new brand adoption," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    19. Wang, Yan & Jiang, Jing & Yang, Ying, 2023. "Magic odd numbers: The effect of numerical parity on variety-seeking," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    20. Ovul Sezer & Michael I. Norton & Francesca Gino & Kathleen D. Vohs, 2016. "Family Rituals Improve the Holidays," Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(4), pages 509-526.
    21. Scott Connors & Stephen Anderson-MacDonald & Matthew Thomson, 2017. "Overcoming the ‘Window Dressing’ Effect: Mitigating the Negative Effects of Inherent Skepticism Towards Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 145(3), pages 599-621, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:jconrs:v:34:y:2008:i:5:p:624-634. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcr .

    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.