Tightwads and Spendthrifts
AbstractConsumers often behave differently than they would ideally like to behave. We propose that an anticipatory pain of paying drives "tightwads" to spend less than they would ideally like to spend. "Spendthrifts," by contrast, experience too little pain of paying and typically spend more than they would ideally like to spend. This article introduces and validates the "spendthrift-tightwad" scale, a measure of individual differences in the pain of paying. Spending differences between tightwads and spendthrifts are greatest in situations that amplify the pain of paying and smallest in situations that diminish the pain of paying. (c) 2007 by JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH, Inc..
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by University of Chicago Press in its journal Journal of Consumer Research.
Volume (Year): 34 (2008)
Issue (Month): 6 (October)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JCR/
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Gerrit Frackenpohl & Gert Pönitzsch, 2013. "Bundling Public with Private Goods," Bonn Econ Discussion Papers bgse08_2013, University of Bonn, Germany.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Journals Division).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.