IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Regulatory Focus, Regulatory Fit, and the Search and Consideration of Choice Alternatives

  • Michel Tuan Pham
  • Hannah H. Chang
Registered author(s):

    This research investigates the effects of regulatory focus on alternative search and consideration set formation in consumer decision making. Results from three experiments yield two primary findings. First, promotion-focused consumers tend to search for alternatives at a more global level, whereas prevention-focused consumers tend to search for alternatives at a more local level. Second, promotion-focused consumers tend to have larger consideration sets than do prevention-focused consumers. Building on these two primary findings, it is additionally shown that whereas promotion-focused consumers attach relatively greater value to options chosen from hierarchically structured sets, prevention-focused consumers attach relatively greater value to options chosen from nonhierarchically structured item lists. Finally, whereas promotion-focused consumers attach significantly greater value to options chosen from larger sets than to options chosen from smaller sets, prevention-focused consumers do not attach significantly less value to options chosen from larger sets than to options chosen from smaller sets. (c) 2010 by JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH, Inc..

    If 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.

    File URL:
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Oxford University Press in its journal Journal of Consumer Research.

    Volume (Year): 37 (2010)
    Issue (Month): 4 (December)
    Pages: 626-640

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:ucp:jconrs:v:37:y:2010:i:4:p:626-640
    Contact details of provider:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jconrs:v:37:y:2010:i:4:p:626-640. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.