IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/v49y2022i1p132-153..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumers Believe That Products Work Better for Others
[Age-Related Decline in Executive Function Predicts Better Advice-Giving in Uncomfortable Social Contexts]

Author

Listed:
  • Evan Polman
  • Ignazio Ziano
  • Kaiyang Wu
  • Anneleen Van Kerckhove

Abstract

Consumers tend to see themselves in a positive light, yet we present evidence that they are pessimistic about whether they will receive a product’s benefits. In 15 studies (N = 6,547; including nine preregistered), we found that consumers believe that product efficacy is higher for others than it is for themselves. For example, consumers believe that consuming a sports drink (to satisfy thirst), medicine (to relieve pain), an online class (to learn something new), or an adult coloring book (to inspire creativity) will have a greater effect on others than on themselves. We show that this bias holds across many kinds of products and judgment-targets, and inversely correlates with factors such as product familiarity, product usefulness, and relationship closeness with judgment-targets. Moreover, we find this bias stems from consumers’ beliefs they are more unique and less malleable than others, and that it alters the choices people make for others. We conclude by discussing implications for research on gift-giving, advice-giving, usership, and interpersonal social, health, and financial choices.

Suggested Citation

  • Evan Polman & Ignazio Ziano & Kaiyang Wu & Anneleen Van Kerckhove, 2022. "Consumers Believe That Products Work Better for Others [Age-Related Decline in Executive Function Predicts Better Advice-Giving in Uncomfortable Social Contexts]," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 49(1), pages 132-153.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:49:y:2022:i:1:p:132-153.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jcr/ucab048
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    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:49:y:2022:i:1:p:132-153.. 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.