IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecl/stabus/1910.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Understanding Regulatory Fit

Author

Listed:
  • Aaker, Jennifer L.

    (Stanford U)

  • Lee, Angela Y.

    (Northwestern U)

Abstract

We focus on three critical areas of future research on regulatory fit. The first focuses on how regulatory orientation gets sustained. We argue that there are two distinct approaches that bring about the 'just right feeling': (1) process-based (involving the interaction between regulatory orientation and decision making processes) and (2) outcome-based (involving the interaction between regulatory orientation and framed outcomes offered). Second, we discuss possible boundary conditions of regulatory fit effects, highlighting in particular the apparent paradoxical role of involvement. We suggest that the antecedents giving rise to regulatory fit (e.g., lowered motivation) may differ from its consequences (e.g., increased motivation). Finally, we discuss broader implications of regulatory fit, proposing three possible mechanisms by which regulatory fit may lead to improved health and discussing the degree to which the 'just right feeling' may play a role in goal-sustaining experiences related to subjective well-being (e.g., flow).

Suggested Citation

  • Aaker, Jennifer L. & Lee, Angela Y., 2006. "Understanding Regulatory Fit," Research Papers 1910, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    • Handle: RePEc:ecl:stabus:1910
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://gsbapps.stanford.edu/researchpapers/library/RP1910.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lee, Angela Y. & Aaker, Jennifer L. & Gardner, Wendi L., 2000. "The Pleasures and Pains of Distinct Self-Construals: The Role of Interdependence in Regulatory Focus," Research Papers 1577r, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    2. Barbara E. Kahn & Mary Frances Luce, 2003. "Understanding High-Stakes Consumer Decisions: Mammography Adherence Following False-Alarm Test Results," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 393-410, April.
    3. Pham, Michel Tuan & Avnet, Tamar, 2004. "Ideals and Oughts and the Reliance on Affect versus Substance in Persuasion," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(4), pages 503-518, March.
    4. Aaker, Jennifer L & Lee, Angela Y, 2001. ""I" Seek Pleasures and "We" Avoid Pains: The Role of Self-Regulatory Goals in Information Processing and Persuasion," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 28(1), pages 33-49, June.
    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. Zhang, Jason Q. & Craciun, Georgiana & Shin, Dongwoo, 2010. "When does electronic word-of-mouth matter? A study of consumer product reviews," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(12), pages 1336-1341, December.
    2. Leder, Susanne & Mannetti, Lucia & Hölzl, Erik & Kirchler, Erich, 2010. "Regulatory fit effects on perceived fiscal exchange and tax compliance," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 271-277, April.
    3. Adams, Leen & Faseur, Tineke & Geuens, Maggie, 2010. "The Influence of the Self-Regulatory Focus on the Effectiveness of Stop-Smoking Campaigns for Young Smokers," Working Papers 2010/38, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    4. Lucia Mannetti & Ambra Brizi & Mauro Giacomantonio & E Tory Higgins, 2013. "Framing Political Messages to Fit the Audience’s Regulatory Orientation: How to Improve the Efficacy of the Same Message Content," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-1, October.
    5. Florack, Arnd & Keller, Johannes & Palcu, Johanna, 2013. "Regulatory focus in economic contexts," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 127-137.
    6. Das, Gopal & Mukherjee, Amaradri & Smith, Ronn J., 2018. "The Perfect Fit: The Moderating Role of Selling Cues on Hedonic and Utilitarian Product Types," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 203-216.
    7. Sunaga, Tsutomu & Meng, Yan & Zhuang, Xuhong, 2020. "Interactions between instrumental timbre and consumers’ regulatory focus," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 1-12.
    8. Sun, Jin & Keh, Hean Tat & Lee, Angela Y., 2019. "Shaping consumer preference using alignable attributes: The roles of regulatory orientation and construal level," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 151-168.
    9. Yang, Zhiyong & Janakiraman, Narayan & Hossain, Mehdi T. & Grisaffe, Douglas B., 2020. "Differential effects of pay-it-forward and direct-reciprocity on prosocial behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 400-408.
    10. Cheng, Yin-Hui & Yen, HsiuJu Rebecca & Chuang, Shih-Chieh & Chang, Chia-Jung, 2013. "Product option framing under the influence of a promotion versus prevention focus," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 402-413.
    11. Chung-Chau Chang & Bo-Chi Lin & Shin-Shin Chang, 2011. "The relative advantages of benefit overlap versus category similarity in brand extension evaluation: The moderating role of self-regulatory focus," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 391-404, November.
    12. Saleem Rahman & Agnieszka Chwialkowska & Nazim Hussain & Waheed Akbar Bhatti & Harri Luomala, 2023. "Cross-cultural perspective on sustainable consumption: implications for consumer motivations and promotion," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 997-1016, February.
    13. Ku, Hsuan-Hsuan & Shang, Rong-An & Fu, Yi-Fan, 2021. "Social learning effects of complaint handling on social media: Self-construal as a moderator," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    14. Kim, Kyeongheui & Park, Jongwon, 2019. "Cultural influences on brand extension judgments: Opposing effects of thinking style and regulatory focus," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 137-150.
    15. Som, Anirban & Lee, Yih Hwai, 2012. "The joint effects of choice assortment and regulatory focus on choice behavior," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 202-209.
    16. Wei Qi & Xiumei Guo & Xia Wu & Dora Marinova & Jin Fan, 2018. "Do the sunk cost effect and cognitive dissonance increase risk perception? An empirical study in the context of city smog," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(5), pages 2269-2289, September.
    17. Bu, Kyunghee & Kim, Donghoon & Son, Jungmin, 2013. "Is the culture–emotion fit always important?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(8), pages 983-988.
    18. Park, Tae-Youn & Kim, Seongsu & Sung, Li-Kuo, 2017. "Fair pay dispersion: A regulatory focus theory view," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 1-11.
    19. Xin Liu, 2019. "The Role of Enterprise Risk Management in Sustainable Decision-Making: A Cross-Cultural Comparison," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-15, May.
    20. Haipeng (Allan) Chen & Woojin Choi & Yan (Lucy) Liu & Haoying Sun & Fu Liu, 2021. "More or Less? Consumer Goal Orientation and Product Choice," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 8(1), pages 16-26, June.

    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:ecl:stabus:1910. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gsstaus.html .

    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.