IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/v50y2023i2p363-381..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rejections Are More Contagious than Choices: How Another’s Decisions Shape Our Own

Author

Listed:
  • Lana Xianglan Nan
  • Sang Kyu Park
  • Yang Yang
  • Amna Kirmani
  • June Cotte
  • Brent McFerran

Abstract

Every day, we learn about others’ decisions from various sources. We perceive some of these decisions as choices and others as rejections. Does the mere perception of another’s decision as a choice versus as a rejection influence our own behavior? Are we more likely to conform to another’s decision if we view it in one way or the other? The current research investigates the social influence of decision frames. Eight studies, including a field study conducted during a livestreaming event hosted by an influencer with over 1.5 million followers, find that people are more likely to conform to another’s decision if it is perceived as a rejection than if it is perceived as a choice. This effect happens because consumers are more likely to attribute another’s decision to product quality as opposed to personal preference, when consumers perceive another’s decision as a rejection than as a choice. The inference about quality versus personal preference in turn increases conformity. This research bridges the existing literatures on decision framing, social influence, and perceptions of quality and personal preference, and it offers important implications for marketers and influencers.

Suggested Citation

  • Lana Xianglan Nan & Sang Kyu Park & Yang Yang & Amna Kirmani & June Cotte & Brent McFerran, 2023. "Rejections Are More Contagious than Choices: How Another’s Decisions Shape Our Own," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 50(2), pages 363-381.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:50:y:2023:i:2:p:363-381.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jcr/ucad007
    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:50:y:2023:i:2:p:363-381.. 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.