IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v5y2015i3p2158244015602751.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Don’t Tell Me What to Do

Author

Listed:
  • Steven G. Buzinski
  • Allison Price

Abstract

Self-control is required when the pursuit of focal goals conficts with the desire to indulge in temptations. As such, the characteristics of one’s focal goals may influence the likelihood of their attainment. The present work explored the hypothesis that highly restrictive goals increase the desire for, and the likelihood of indulging in, goal-damaging temptations. Highly restrictive goals can engender psychological reactance, a motivation to restore threatened freedom, by placing salient restrictions on the freedom to indulge in temptations. Consequently, one may indulge in those temptations in order to restore the threatened sense of freedom. Three experiments supported this hypothesis: Framing goals as highly restrictive caused greater desire for (Studies 1 and 2), and more behavioral indulgence in (Study 3), goal-damaging temptations. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Steven G. Buzinski & Allison Price, 2015. "Don’t Tell Me What to Do," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(3), pages 21582440156, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:5:y:2015:i:3:p:2158244015602751
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244015602751
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244015602751
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244015602751?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simonson, Itamar, 1989. "Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(2), pages 158-174, September.
    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. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:2:p:136-149 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. John A. List, 2007. "On the Interpretation of Giving in Dictator Games," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115, pages 482-493.
    3. H. Henry Cao & Bing Han & David Hirshleifer & Harold H. Zhang, 2011. "Fear of the Unknown: Familiarity and Economic Decisions," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 15(1), pages 173-206.
    4. de Meza, David & Pathania, Vikram, 2021. "Is the Second-Cheapest Wine a Rip-Off? Economics vs. Psychology in Product-Line Pricing," Working Papers 321852, American Association of Wine Economists.
    5. Jonathan C. Pettibone, 2012. "Testing the effect of time pressure on asymmetric dominance and compromise decoys in choice," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 7(4), pages 513-523, July.
    6. Chorus, Caspar & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Daniel, Aemiro Melkamu & Sandorf, Erlend Dancke & Sobhani, Anae & Szép, Teodóra, 2021. "Obfuscation maximization-based decision-making: Theory, methodology and first empirical evidence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 28-44.
    7. Chorus, Caspar G., 2014. "Benefit of adding an alternative to one׳s choice set: A regret minimization perspective," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 49-59.
    8. Nicola Gennaioli & Alberto Martin & Stefano Rossi, 2014. "Sovereign Default, Domestic Banks, and Financial Institutions," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 69(2), pages 819-866, April.
    9. Ekström, Mathias, 2018. "The (un)compromise effect," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 10/2018, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics, revised 16 May 2018.
    10. Todd McElroy & David L. Dickinson & Irwin P. Levin, 2019. "Thinking About Decisions: An Integrative Approach of Person and Task Factors," Working Papers 19-04, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    11. Ivo Vlaev & Nick Chater & Neil Stewart, 2007. "Relativistic financial decisions: Context effects on retirement saving and investment risk preferences," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 2, pages 292-311, October.
    12. Chang, Shin-Shin & Chang, Chung-Chau & Liao, Yen-Yi, 2015. "A joint examination of effects of decision task type and construal level on the attraction effect," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 168-182.
    13. Pronobesh Banerjee & Tamara Masters, 2021. "When consumers do not compromise - An Eye Tracking Study!," Working papers 446, Indian Institute of Management Kozhikode.
    14. Gerasimou, Georgios, 2010. "Rational indecisive choice," MPRA Paper 25481, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Boissonnet, Niels & Ghersengorin, Alexis & Gleyze, Simon, 2020. "Revealed Deliberate Preference Changes," MPRA Paper 101756, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Nunnari, Salvatore & Zapal, Jan, 2017. "A Model of Focusing in Political Choice," CEPR Discussion Papers 12407, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Zhang, Tao & Zhang, David, 2007. "Agent-based simulation of consumer purchase decision-making and the decoy effect," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(8), pages 912-922, August.
    18. Kim, Hee Jin & Song, Hayeon, 2020. "Effort justification for fun activities?: The effect of location-based mobile coupons using games," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    19. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2013. "Salience and Consumer Choice," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(5), pages 803-843.
    20. Ivan Moscati, 2022. "Behavioral and heuristic models are as-if models too — and that’s ok," BAFFI CAREFIN Working Papers 22177, BAFFI CAREFIN, Centre for Applied Research on International Markets Banking Finance and Regulation, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy.
    21. Gerasímou, Georgios, 2010. "Consumer theory with bounded rational preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 708-714, September.

    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:sae:sagope:v:5:y:2015:i:3:p:2158244015602751. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.