IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v9y2019i2p2158244019852489.html

The Effect of Prior Commitment on Consumer Choice

Author

Listed:
  • Sérgio Silva Demoliner
  • Cláudio Damacena

Abstract

Commitment to consistency (CC) theories have been widely studied in the field of social influence. However, studies on CC effect have examined only the decisions consumers make for themselves and have neglected the decisions made for others. Prior studies have indicated that the difference between decisions made for oneself and others can be explained by the psychological distance from construal level theory (CLT). Other studies have demonstrated the moderating effect of psychological distance (in the temporal dimension) on CC. The present study analyzed the effect of CC on consumers’ decisions made for themselves and for others and assessed whether the social dimension of psychological distance moderates CC. For this purpose, a study with a 2 (prior commitment: yes vs. no)  × 2 (type of decision: for himself/herself vs. for others) experimental design evaluated 180 participants (between-subjects) living in the United States. The members of the experimental group were manipulated toward a commitment to healthy food products, and the participants’ choices for healthy versus unhealthy food products were analyzed. The results indicated that CC effect occurred not only on choices made for oneself but also when choices were made for others. However, the results did not confirm that the social dimension of psychological distance moderated CC. The results and implications of the use of CC as a strategy to influence consumers’ choice to eat healthy foods are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Sérgio Silva Demoliner & Cláudio Damacena, 2019. "The Effect of Prior Commitment on Consumer Choice," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(2), pages 21582440198, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:9:y:2019:i:2:p:2158244019852489
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244019852489
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244019852489
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244019852489?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. Juliano Laran, 2010. "Choosing Your Future: Temporal Distance and the Balance between Self-Control and Indulgence," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 36(6), pages 1002-1015, April.
    2. Ernest Baskin & Cheryl J. Wakslak & Yaacov Trope & Nathan Novemsky, 2014. "Why Feasibility Matters More to Gift Receivers than to Givers: A Construal-Level Approach to Gift Giving," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 41(1), pages 169-182.
    3. Gabriele Paolacci & Jesse Chandler & Panagiotis G. Ipeirotis, 2010. "Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 5(5), pages 411-419, August.
    4. Kelly Kiyeon Lee & Min Zhao, 2014. "The Effect of Price on Preference Consistency Over Time," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 41(1), pages 109-118.
    5. 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.
    6. Ola Andersson & Håkan J. Holm & Jean-Robert Tyran & Erik Wengström, 2016. "Deciding for Others Reduces Loss Aversion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(1), pages 29-36, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yuyang Tan & Hao Gong & Chunxiang Guo, 2025. "Bi-Objective Optimization of Product Selection and Ranking Considering Sequential Search," SAGE Open, , vol. 15(3), pages 21582440251, August.

    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. Polman, Evan & Wu, Kaiyang, 2020. "Decision making for others involving risk: A review and meta-analysis," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Wang, Minda & Li, Jianbiao & Niu, Xiaofei & Wang, Wenhua, 2025. "Disclosing personal information on behalf of others: An experimental study," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    5. Li, Qiuyun & Li, Chunxiao (Spring) & McCabe, Scott & Xu, Hong, 2019. "Always best or good enough? The effect of ‘mind-set’ on preference consistency over time in tourist decision making," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 186-201.
    6. Linying (Sophie) Fan & Zhongqiang (Tak) Huang & Xing-Yu (Marcos) Chu & Yuwei Jiang, 2024. "Stick to my guns: The impact of crowding on consumers’ responsiveness to sale promotions," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 914-933, May.
    7. Polman, Evan, 2012. "Self–other decision making and loss aversion," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 119(2), pages 141-150.
    8. 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.
    9. Tian, Jing & Chen, Rong & Xu, Xiaobing, 2022. "A good way to boost sales? Effects of the proportion of sold-out options on purchase behavior," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 156-169.
    10. Besharat, Ali & Langan, Ryan J. & Nguyen, Carlin A., 2016. "Fashionably late: Strategies for competing against a pioneer advantage," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 718-725.
    11. 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.
    12. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    13. Kirchler, Michael & Lindner, Florian & Weitzel, Utz, 2020. "Delegated investment decisions and rankings," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    14. Javed, Arslan & Onculer, Ayse, 2026. "Self-other discrepancy: the role of decision transparency in risky choices," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    15. Kenneth D. Nguyen & Heather Rosoff & Richard S. John, 2017. "Valuing Equal Protection in Aviation Security Screening," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(12), pages 2405-2419, December.
    16. Varun Dutt & Cleotilde Gonzalez, 2013. "Enabling Eco-Friendly Choices by Relying on the Proportional-Thinking Heuristic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-15, January.
    17. Sweldens, Steven & Puntoni, Stefano & Paolacci, Gabriele & Vissers, Maarten, 2014. "The bias in the bias: Comparative optimism as a function of event social undesirability," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 229-244.
    18. Christian Lukas & Max-Frederik Neubert & Jens Robert Schöndube, 2025. "Exploring decision-making: experimental observations on project selection and the impact of justification pressure," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 29(3), pages 735-775, September.
    19. S. Venus Jin & Aziz Muqaddam, 2019. "Product placement 2.0: “Do Brands Need Influencers, or Do Influencers Need Brands?”," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 26(5), pages 522-537, September.
    20. Hopkins, Caroline & Hyde, Timothy, 2026. "HKC04 - How do risk perceptions change with new information? Evidence from a survey of flood-prone counties," Oberlin College Kasper Economics and Business Working Papers Series 2601, Oberlin College, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:sae:sagope:v:9:y:2019:i:2:p:2158244019852489. 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.