Search results

This study attempts to identify and explicate the unique segmentation of the increasingly growing virtual reality (VR) user market based on the user experience. Consequently, it collects five hundred forty-five online survey questionnaires through the Prolific platform and deploys cluster analysis to identify mutually exclusive groups of VR users. The research variable, user experience, contains 16 indicators explained by four dimensions. As a result, this study is able to unveil three mutually exclusive markets which are labeled as (1) beginner, (2) aficionado, and (3) utilitarian. The unique features of these three groups are further compared based on their VR tour behaviors. In the conclusion section, it offers managerial implications for devising novel marketing strategies.

As a part of a larger study, the purpose of this study was to explore the learning outcomes for the “manager as coach” when exemplary managers are engaged in coaching their respective employees.

A qualitative, multi-case study using an adaptation of the critical incident technique (CIT) and semistructured interviews was employed with 12 managers and their respective direct reports totaling 24 interviews. Content and constant comparative analyses were used to analyze the data.

A total of five themes and 19 subthemes were identified regarding managers’ learning outcomes from managers’ perspectives. From the perspectives of their employees as coachees regarding their managers’ learning outcomes, one theme with three subthemes emerged.

Limited empirical research has explored the developmental outcomes for managers who serve as coaches for their employees. This study examined the outcomes associated with managerial coaching from both the perspectives of the managers who coach and their direct reports. The findings of this research provide more insight into the benefits managers derive from coaching their employees.

Integrating conceptual perspectives from social exclusion, thinking style and context effects, this study aims to examine how different types of social exclusion influence attraction and compromise effects.

Eight studies were conducted. To establish the causal relationship between social exclusion types and context effects, this study uses experimental designs in all studies.

The attraction effect is stronger when consumers feel rejected than ignored, whereas the compromise effect is stronger when they feel ignored than rejected. Consumers who feel rejected increase their propensity to think holistically, which in turn leads to their choice preferences for asymmetrically dominant options. Conversely, those who feel ignored increase their propensity to think analytically, which in turn leads to their choice preferences for compromise options.

The findings show that consumer preferences for one option over the other alternatives in choice contexts are susceptible to subtle differences in the manner that exclusion is communicated. The studies are limited to recall tasks and scenarios that previous research has shown to be effective. Future research may use actual exclusion to corroborate this study’s findings.

Marketing practitioners may benefit from this study’s findings when it comes to an increase in the relative share of their target brand against their competitor brands by introducing a third option.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this research is the first to provide evidence that exclusion communicated in an explicit manner produces the attraction effect, whereas exclusion communicated in an implicit manner produces the compromise effect. Given that threatening situations often influence individuals’ preferences and choices, how social exclusion shapes cognitive processes is an empirical question worthy of investigation.

Since the development of the COVID-19 vaccinations, questions surrounding race have been prominent in the literature on vaccine uptake. Early in the vaccine rollout, public health officials were concerned with the relatively lower rates of uptake among certain racial/ethnic minority groups. We suggest that this may also be patterned by racial/ethnic residential segregation, which previous work has demonstrated to be an important factor for both health and access to health care.

In this study, we examine county-level vaccination rates, racial/ethnic composition, and residential segregation across the U.S. We compile data from several sources, including the American Community Survey (ACS) and Centers for Disease Control (CDC) measured at the county level.

We find that just looking at the associations between racial/ethnic composition and vaccination rates, both percent Black and percent White are significant and negative, meaning that higher percentages of these groups in a county are associated with lower vaccination rates, whereas the opposite is the case for percent Latino. When we factor in segregation, as measured by the index of dissimilarity, the patterns change somewhat. Dissimilarity itself was not significant in the models across all groups, but when interacted with race/ethnic composition, it moderates the association. For both percent Black and percent White, the interaction with the Black-White dissimilarity index is significant and negative, meaning that it deepens the negative association between composition and the vaccination rate.

The analysis is only limited to county-level measures of racial/ethnic composition and vaccination rates, so we are unable to see at the individual-level who is getting vaccinated.

We find that segregation moderates the association between racial/ethnic composition and vaccination rates, suggesting that local race relations in a county helps contextualize the compositional effects of race/ethnicity.

The protective aspects of relationships for health have been extensively studied. Here, we assess whether different dimensions of partnership status at the time of a child’s birth are associated with better self-assessed health later in mid-life. Data are from three countries with different social welfare policies relating to union status and parenting: the US, the UK, and Norway. Results indicate that women who were partnered at first birth had better health at midlife in all three countries than women who were unpartnered. The analysis indicates no differences in the mid-life health of Norwegian women who were married or cohabiting at birth, whereas for US and UK women, being married at the birth of a first child is more beneficial for mid-life health than bearing the child in a cohabiting union. In the US, women who are least likely to marry do not demonstrate better mid-life health if they had wed relative to cohabiting. In the UK, in contrast, the women least likely to be married at the birth experience better returns if they marry. These findings highlight the importance of paying closer attention to heterogeneous treatment effects as they relate to childbearing, relationship status, and mid-life health.