Search results

1 – 10 of over 28000
To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 10 August 2021

Jonghan Hyun

The purpose of this study is to utilize consumers' regulatory focus as a segmentation variable to understand how and why consumers shift their tendency to prioritize…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to utilize consumers' regulatory focus as a segmentation variable to understand how and why consumers shift their tendency to prioritize certain apparel attributes.

Design/methodology/approach

Six hypotheses are developed and then tested via two experiments. Self-administered online questionnaire is used to collect data from a total of 1,178 participants recruited via Amazon Mechanical Turk. The collected data is analyzed using series of Chi-square tests and ANOVAs.

Findings

Results show that promotion-focused (prevention-focused)) consumers are not only more likely to prioritize apparel attributes that ensure the attainment of satisfaction (avoidance of dissatisfaction) but also attach higher monetary value to apparel products bearing such attributes.

Originality/value

Previous studies of apparel attribute prioritization utilized static segmentation variables such as age or gender despite the dynamic nature of attribute prioritization tendency. This study extends the literature by demonstrating the significance of consumers' regulatory focus – a dynamic segmentation variable that has not been studied in the current context.

Details

Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, vol. ahead-of-print no. ahead-of-print
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1361-2026

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 15 June 2021

Gizem Atav, Subimal Chatterjee and Rajat Roy

When a product fails out of negligence on the seller’s part, consumers can either retaliate against the seller, more so if a third party encourages them to do so, or…

Abstract

Purpose

When a product fails out of negligence on the seller’s part, consumers can either retaliate against the seller, more so if a third party encourages them to do so, or forgive the seller should the seller express remorse. This paper aims to examine how the fit between the consumer’s promotion/prevention regulatory orientation and the promotion/prevention frame of a message of contrition (retaliation), such as an apology from a chief executive officer (CEO) (a class action suit threat by a lawyer), affects such forgiveness (retaliation) intentions in the form of product repurchase decisions.

Design/methodology/approach

In two laboratory experiments, this paper temporally induces a promotion or prevention orientation in the study participants and thereafter ask them to imagine experiencing a product failure and listening to (1) the CEO apologize for the harm (eliciting sympathy/encouraging repurchase); or (2) a lawyer inviting them to seek damages for the harm (eliciting anger/discouraging repurchase). This paper frames the messages from the CEO/lawyer such that they fit either with a promotion mindset or with a prevention mindset.

Findings

This paper finds that, following a message of apology, a frame-focus fit (compared to a frame-focus misfit) elicits sympathy and encourages repurchase universally across promotion and prevention-oriented consumers. However, following a message encouraging retaliation, the same fit elicits anger and discourages repurchase more among prevention-oriented than promotion-oriented consumers.

Originality/value

Although past research has investigated how regulatory fit affects forgiveness intentions, this paper fills three research gaps therein by (a) addressing both forgiveness and retaliation intentions, (b) deconstructing the fit-induced “just right feelings” by exploring their underlying emotions of sympathy and anger, and (c) showing that fit effects are not universal across promotion and prevention-oriented consumers. For practice, the results suggest that managers can lessen the fallout from product failures by putting consumers in a promotion mindset that strengthens the effect of a promotion-framed apology and inoculates them against all types of retaliatory messages.

Details

Journal of Consumer Marketing, vol. 38 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0736-3761

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 10 October 2018

Peter T. Coleman, Katharina G. Kugler, Robin Vallacher and Regina Kim

The purpose of this paper is to propose that a more optimal regulatory focus in conflict reflects a mix of promotion and prevention considerations because conflict often…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to propose that a more optimal regulatory focus in conflict reflects a mix of promotion and prevention considerations because conflict often elicits needs for promoting well-being as well as needs for preventing threats to security and interests. Two studies using distinct methodologies tested the hypothesis that social conflict is associated with better outcomes when the parties construe the conflict with a regulatory focus that reflects a combination of both promotion and prevention orientations.

Design/methodology/approach

Study 1 was an experiment that framed the same low-intensity conflict scenario as either prevention- or promotion-focused, or as both. In Study 2, we mouse-coded stream-of-thought accounts of participants’ actual ongoing high-intensity conflicts for time spent in both promotion and prevention focus.

Findings

In Study 1, the combined framing resulted in greater satisfaction with expected conflict outcomes and goal attainment than did either prevention or promotion framing alone. However, a promotion frame alone was associated with greater process and relationship satisfaction. These results were replicated in Study 2.

Originality/value

Prior research on regulatory focus has emphasized the benefits of a promotion focus over prevention when managing conflict. The present research offers new insight into how these seemingly opposing motives can operate in tandem to increase conflict satisfaction. Thus, this research illustrates the value of moving beyond dichotomized motivational distinctions in conflict research, to understand the dynamic interplay of how these distinctions may be navigated in concert for more effective conflict engagement. It also illustrates the value of mouse-coding methods for capturing the dynamic interplay of motives as they rise and fall in salience over time.

Details

International Journal of Conflict Management, vol. 30 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1044-4068

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 13 August 2018

Anna Paola Codini, Giulia Miniero and Michelle Bonera

The purpose of this paper is to empirically test the effects of regulatory focus (RF) orientation (promotion/prevention) on decisions to purchase green products. The two…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to empirically test the effects of regulatory focus (RF) orientation (promotion/prevention) on decisions to purchase green products. The two experimental studies conducted aimed to test whether individuals in a prevention (promotion) state were more (or less) inclined to buy green products.

Design/methodology/approach

To test the effect of RF on green and non-green consumption, the authors carried out two experimental studies (one considering a service – car sharing – the other a physical product – a laundry detergent). The studies are 2 (RF: prevention vs promotion) × 2 (product type: green vs non-green) between factorial design involving 196 and 92 participants, respectively.

Findings

Promotion-focus has a powerful influence on green consumption. In both studies, individuals with a promotion focus seemed to be more inclined to buy green products as opposed to individuals in a prevention state.

Research limitations/implications

The main limitations of this study first relate to the results of the two experiments. Even though both studies showed that promotion-focused rather than prevention-focused individuals are more inclined to buy green products, the differences between the two orientations in green condition are not statistically significant. As a result, the studies cannot determine whether to reject or accept the two main hypothesis.

Social implications

This paper provides some preliminary indications that could be useful to encourage consumers to adopt “green” styles of consumption. Focusing on an individual’s RF is a useful strategy to induce them to change their consumption choices abruptly. Relying more on a “promotion” rather than a “preventionfocus, individuals would be compelled to take immediate responsible behavior.

Originality/value

This paper aims to fill the gap on the role of RF in green consumption. Contrary to the accepted idea that a prevention state is more compatible with consumer ethics than promotion state, the studies showed the controversial role assumed by a prevention state in green consumption.

Details

European Business Review, vol. 30 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0955-534X

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 4 November 2014

Shin-Shin Chang, Chung-Chau Chang, Ya-Lan Chien and Jung-Hua Chang

This research aims to analyze whether the self-regulatory focus, a consumer variable, moderates the impact of incongruity on consumer evaluations. A congruity or…

Downloads
1001

Abstract

Purpose

This research aims to analyze whether the self-regulatory focus, a consumer variable, moderates the impact of incongruity on consumer evaluations. A congruity or typicality arises when a product (e.g. champagne) is consistently consumed in certain occasions or is used in conjunction with other specific products. This typicality may remind people of the product with regard to specific contexts but may limit the product’s overall versatility. In line with the moderate incongruity effect, there may be an opportunity to extend a product usage to situations associated with moderate incongruity or atypicality.

Design/methodology/approach

Study 1 is a 2 (self-regulatory focus: promotion/prevention) × 3 (atypicality of product usage context: typical/moderately atypical/highly atypical) between-subject experimental design. Study 2 replicated Study 1 with a sample of different age, three different champagne usage contexts and a manipulation of self-regulatory focus. Study 3 is a 2 (self-regulatory focus: promotion/prevention) × 3 (atypicality of product usage context: typical/moderately atypical/highly atypical) × 2 (product replicates: red wine/pearl jewelry) mixed design with self-regulatory focus and atypicality as between-subjects factors and product replicates as a within-subject variable.

Findings

Promotion-focus consumers’ product evaluations for the moderate incongruity or atypicality are higher than those for congruity and extreme incongruity. The relationship takes an inverted-U shape. Prevention-focus consumers’ product evaluations decrease monotonically as congruity decreases. Moreover, compared with prevention-focus individuals, promotion-focus ones evaluate moderate incongruity more favorably.

Research limitations/implications

There are some limitations to this research. First, it only investigates the moderate incongruity effect with regard to product use occasions and complementary products. To increase the external validity of self-regulatory focus as a moderator of incongruity-evaluation relationships, it remains to future research to extend the research setting to products which have been tightly bonded to specific users, locations, seasons or times. Second, although the experimental designs are similar to previous ones, the scenarios are nevertheless imaginary. Therefore, participants’ involvement levels in all manipulated situations, as well as the quality of their answers, remain unknown.

Practical implications

First, brand managers should target only promotion-focus customers to obtain the moderate incongruity effect, but should maintain a consistent marketing strategy for prevention-focus customers. Second, because both promotion- and prevention-focus individuals have unfavorable evaluations of extreme incongruity, drastic changes in marketing strategies should be avoided. Third, people from a Western (Eastern) culture exhibit more promotion (prevention) focus orientation. Therefore, the type of culture can serve as an indicator of regulatory orientation. Fourth, a gain-framed appeal is recommended for realizing the moderate incongruity effect from promotion-focus consumers. Finally, promotion-focus (vs prevention-focus) consumers will welcome a moderately nonalignable than alignable product upgrade.

Originality/value

Most prior research on goal orientation has found that promotion-focus (vs. prevention-focus) individuals are more inclined to adopt new products, but both types of people are unlikely to purchase new products when the associated risks become salient, while the research related to schema incongruity has suggested that the moderate incongruity effect may not exist when consumers perceive high risks. By combining both schema congruity and self-regulatory focus theories, this research provides a more precise picture of how and why a person’s goal orientation influences the relative salience of risks and benefits with an increase in incongruity.

Details

European Journal of Marketing, vol. 48 no. 11/12
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0309-0566

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 11 May 2015

Paraskevas Petrou and Evangelia Demerouti

The purpose of this paper is to address regulatory focus (promotion vs prevention) as a trait-level variable and a week-level variable linked to employee job crafting…

Downloads
1719

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to address regulatory focus (promotion vs prevention) as a trait-level variable and a week-level variable linked to employee job crafting behaviors (i.e. seeking resources, seeking challenges and reducing demands). The authors hypothesized that while promotion focus relates positively to seeking resources and seeking challenges, prevention focus relates positively to reducing demands. Furthermore, the authors expected that the links between week-level regulatory focus and crafting would be stronger when the respective trait-level regulatory focus is high.

Design/methodology/approach

Two studies were conducted to address the aims, namely, a cross-sectional survey among 580 civil servants and a weekly survey among 81 employees of several occupations.

Findings

The hypothesized links between regulatory focus and job crafting were supported at the trait- and the week-level. Only the link between week-level prevention focus and reducing demands was stronger when trait-level prevention focus was high. Unexpectedly, seeking resources positively related to prevention focus at the week-level.

Practical implications

While prevention states may enhance reducing demands behaviors especially for prevention focussed employees, organizations and managers may use promotion states to enhance seeking resources and seeking challenges behaviors among all types of employees and, thereby, shape a strategy emphasizing the promotion values of growth and development.

Originality/value

The findings shed light to a diverse range of employee motivational orientations (i.e. approach vs avoidance and trait-like vs state-like) behind job crafting and, thus, shed light to individual correlates of job crafting.

Details

Career Development International, vol. 20 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1362-0436

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 14 August 2017

Joana Kuntz, Philippa Connell and Katharina Näswall

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the independent and joint effects of regulatory focus (promotion and prevention) on the relationship between workplace…

Downloads
1986

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the independent and joint effects of regulatory focus (promotion and prevention) on the relationship between workplace resources (support and feedback) and employee resilience. It proposed that, at high levels of resource availability, a high promotion-high prevention profile would elicit the highest levels of employee resilience.

Design/methodology/approach

An online survey was completed by 162 white collar employees from four organisations. In addition to the main effects, two- and three-way interactions were examined to test hypotheses.

Findings

Promotion focus was positively associated with employee resilience, and though the relationship between prevention focus and resilience was non-significant, both regulatory foci buffered against the negative effects of low resources. Employees with high promotion-high prevention focus displayed the highest levels of resilience, especially at high levels of feedback. Conversely, the resilience of low promotion-low prevention individuals was susceptible to feedback availability.

Practical implications

Employee resilience development and demonstration are contingent not only on resources, but also on psychological processes, particularly regulatory focus. Organisations will develop resilience to the extent that they provide workplace resources, and, importantly, stimulate both promotion and prevention perspectives on resource management.

Originality/value

This study extends the research on regulatory focus theory by testing the joint effects of promotion and prevention foci on workplace resources, and the relationship between regulatory foci and employee resilience.

Details

Career Development International, vol. 22 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1362-0436

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 2 September 2014

Martha C. Andrews, K. Michele Kacmar and Charles Kacmar

The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of mindfulness as a predictor of the two components of regulatory focus theory (RFT): promotion and prevention focus. It…

Downloads
2618

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of mindfulness as a predictor of the two components of regulatory focus theory (RFT): promotion and prevention focus. It further examines promotion focus and prevention focus as mediators of the mindfulness-job satisfaction and mindfulness-turnover intentions relationships. Finally, job satisfaction is also examined as a mediator of the mindfulness-turnover intentions relationship.

Design/methodology/approach

The model was tested using data collected via a snowball approach. Online surveys were distributed to undergraduate students enrolled in a business course. Students were then given the opportunity to earn extra credit by sending the survey to potential respondents. The relationships were tested using structural equation modeling.

Findings

Support was found for four of the six hypotheses. Prevention focus did not negatively mediate the relationship between mindfulness and job satisfaction as well as the relationship between mindfulness and turnover intentions.

Research limitations/implications

One limitations of this research is the placement of mindfulness as an antecedent to promotion and prevention focus. Another plausible alternative is to consider mindfulness as a consequence. An additional limitation is the use of a snowball sampling technique. Future research should examine these findings using employees of a single organization.

Originality/value

This research theoretically and empirically links RFT and mindfulness. This study also adds to the limited research empirically linking RFT and turnover intentions, both directly and indirectly via job satisfaction. Finally, this research extends previous research that established the positive relationship between mindfulness and job satisfaction by examining the mindfulness-job satisfaction-turnover intentions relationship.

Details

Career Development International, vol. 19 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1362-0436

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 8 July 2014

Erlinde Cornelis, Veroline Cauberghe and Patrick De Pelesmacker

The aim of this study is to contribute to previous research by investigating the principle of regulatory congruence in two-sided advertising messages. Additionally, it…

Downloads
1092

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study is to contribute to previous research by investigating the principle of regulatory congruence in two-sided advertising messages. Additionally, it addresses the underlying mechanisms of the congruence effect.

Design/methodology/approach

The study encompasses two experiments: a two-level between-subjects design, manipulating the message’s frame (prevention vs promotion), while measuring respondents’ chronic self-regulatory focus (prevention vs promotion), and a 2 × 2 between-subjects design, manipulating processing depth (central vs peripheral) and message frame (prevention- vs promotion-oriented), while measuring individuals’ chronic self-regulatory focus (prevention vs promotion).

Findings

Study 1 shows that in two-sided messages, the effect of regulatory congruence on attitudes toward the message depends on individuals’ self-regulatory focus: a congruence effect was only found in promotion-focused individuals. This congruence effect was driven by processing fluency. The second study builds on the first one by exploring the absence of a congruence effect found in prevention-focused individuals. Its results show that in prevention-focused individuals, processing depth influences regulatory congruence effects in two-sided messages. Under peripheral processing, prevention-focused individuals have more positive attitudes toward the issue when two-sided messages are congruent with their self-regulatory focus. Under central processing, on the other hand, a regulatory incongruence effect on attitudes occurs.

Originality/value

This study complements prior research by examining the validity of the regulatory congruence principle in the context of two-sided messages. Moreover, it addresses the underlying mechanisms driving regulatory (in)congruence effects. As such, our study contributes both to the existing research on two-sided messages and that on regulatory focus.

Details

European Journal of Marketing, vol. 48 no. 7/8
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0309-0566

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 14 September 2015

Adilson Borges and Pierrick Gomez

The purpose of this paper is to test whether the simple exposure to different types of products can trigger different motivational orientation on consumers (prevention vs…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to test whether the simple exposure to different types of products can trigger different motivational orientation on consumers (prevention vs promotion), which in turn would match message frame and increase persuasion.

Design/methodology/approach

Three experiments test whether exposure to product categories can trigger consumer’s regulatory focus orientation. Participants in the pilot study are students, while participants in the two other studies are consumers.

Findings

A first pilot study randomly exposed participants to a product that could trigger promotion orientation (e.g. orange juice) versus a product that could trigger prevention orientation (e.g. sunscreen). Participants exposed to promotion (prevention) product suggest more promotion (prevention) strategies to reach a particular goal (preparing for their final exam). Study 2 shows that gain (vs loss)-framed messages using health appeals have better evaluations when featuring promotion (vs prevention) products. Study 3 generalizes these results using another sample and different product categories.

Research limitations/implications

The paper uses some product categories and including other categories would increase external validity.

Practical implications

The practical implication is to help marketers to choose the right health argument to match the product category they are trying to sell.

Originality/value

Theoretically, the results from three studies show that exposure to products can temporarily trigger a consumer’s regulatory focus and that messages using health arguments that are consistent with this regulatory focus are more persuasive than those that are not. Managerially, these results help managers to adapt the right message in function of the product category.

Details

Journal of Consumer Marketing, vol. 32 no. 6
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0736-3761

Keywords

1 – 10 of over 28000