IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/v37y2010i2p304-314.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Goal Management in Sequential Choices: Consumer Choices for Others Are More Indulgent than Personal Choices

Author

Listed:
  • Juliano Laran

Abstract

What are the differences in exerting self-control in sequential choices when consumers choose for others (family or friends) rather than for themselves? Sequential choices represent an opportunity to manage the pursuit of one's multiple personal goals. Consumers typically manage these personal goals by combining indulgent and virtuous choices. When choosing for others, however, this is not the case. Consumers then focus on a pleasure-seeking goal, which leads to indulgent choices for others. Six experiments demonstrate this phenomenon and uncover conditions that encourage more virtuous choices for others. (c) 2010 by JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH, Inc..

Suggested Citation

  • Juliano Laran, 2010. "Goal Management in Sequential Choices: Consumer Choices for Others Are More Indulgent than Personal Choices," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(2), pages 304-314, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:37:y:2010:i:2:p:304-314
    DOI: 10.1086/652193
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/652193
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/652193?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. Polman, Evan, 2012. "Self–other decision making and loss aversion," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 119(2), pages 141-150.
    2. Maferima Touré-Tillery & Lili Wang, 2022. "The Good-on-Paper Effect: How the Decision Context Influences Virtuous Behavior," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(5), pages 1004-1024, September.
    3. Aneel Karnani & Brent McFerran & Anirban Mukhopadhyay, 2016. "The Obesity Crisis as Market Failure: An Analysis of Systemic Causes and Corrective Mechanisms," Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(3), pages 445-470.
    4. Peggy J. Liu & Kelly L. Haws & Karen Scherr & Joseph P. Redden & James R. Bettman & Gavan J. Fitzsimons, 2019. "The Primacy of “What” over “How Much”: How Type and Quantity Shape Healthiness Perceptions of Food Portions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(7), pages 3353-3381, July.
    5. Polman, Evan & Wu, Kaiyang, 2020. "Decision making for others involving risk: A review and meta-analysis," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    6. John Tsalikis, 2015. "The Effects of Priming on Business Ethical Perceptions: A Comparison Between Two Cultures," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(3), pages 567-575, October.
    7. Bose, Arundhati Sarkar & Sarkar, Sumit, 2022. "Delight or disappointment? A model of signal-based other-pleasing choice," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    8. Schumacher, Anika & Goukens, Caroline & Geyskens, Kelly, 2021. "Taking care of you and me: How choosing for others impacts self-indulgence within family caregiving relationships," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 715-731.
    9. Jingyi Lu & Zhengyan Liu & Zhe Fang, 2016. "Hedonic products for you, utilitarian products for me," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(4), pages 332-341, July.
    10. Liu, Peggy J. & Campbell, Troy H. & Fitzsimons, Gavan J. & Fitzsimons, Gráinne M., 2013. "Matching choices to avoid offending stigmatized group members," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 291-304.
    11. Nguyen, Stephanie & Didi Alaoui, Mohamed & Llosa, Sylvie, 2020. "When interchangeability between providers and users makes a difference: The mediating role of social proximity in collaborative services," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 506-515.
    12. Teng, Lefa & Xie, Chenxin & Liu, Tianjiao & Wang, Fan & Foti, Lianne, 2021. "The effects of uppercase vs. lowercase letters on consumers’ perceptions and brand attitudes," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 164-175.
    13. Didi Alaoui, Mohamed & Valette-Florence, Pierre & Cova, Véronique, 2022. "How psychological distance shapes hedonic consumption: The moderating role of the need to justify," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 57-69.
    14. Wang, Xuehua & Wang, Xiaoyu & Lei, Jing & Chao, Mike Chen-ho, 2021. "The clothes that make you eat healthy: The impact of clothes style on food choice," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 787-799.
    15. Ximena Garcia-Rada & Lalin Anik & Dan Ariely, 2019. "Consuming together (versus separately) makes the heart grow fonder," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 27-43, March.
    16. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:3:p:250-267 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Eric R. Stone & YoonSun Choi & Wandi Bruine de Bruin & David R. Mandel, 2013. "I can take the risk, but you should be safe: Self-other differences in situations involving physical safety," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 8(3), pages 250-267, May.
    18. Nagpal, Anish & Lei, Jing & Khare, Adwait, 2015. "To Choose or to Reject: The Effect of Decision Frame on Food Customization Decisions," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 91(3), pages 422-435.
    19. Liu, Yi & Polman, Evan & Liu, Yongfang & Jiao, Jiangli, 2018. "Choosing for others and its relation to information search," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 65-75.
    20. Sérgio Silva Demoliner & Cláudio Damacena, 2019. "The Effect of Prior Commitment on Consumer Choice," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(2), pages 21582440198, May.
    21. Peggy J. Liu & Kelly L. Haws & Cait Lamberton & Troy H. Campbell & Gavan J. Fitzsimons, 2015. "Vice-Virtue Bundles," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(1), pages 204-228, January.
    22. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:4:p:332-341 is not listed on IDEAS

    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:37:y:2010:i:2:p:304-314. 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.