New products are often extremely incongruent with expectations. The inability to make sense of these products elevates anxiety and leads to negative evaluations. Although scholars have predominantly focused on combating the negative response to extreme incongruity, we propose that extreme incongruity may have implications that extend beyond the category. We base our predictions on the concept of fluid compensation, which suggests that when people struggle to make sense of something, they will nonconsciously reinforce highly accessible schemas in unrelated domains. Four studies confirm that extreme incongruity encourages fluid compensation, such that it elevates preference for dominant brands (study 1), green consumption (studies 2 and 4), and ethnocentric products (study 3). We isolate the causal role of anxiety using moderation tasks and biometric feedback. Furthermore, we demonstrate that compensation has an immediate dampening effect on arousal intensity. Thus, if consumers can compensate before explicitly evaluating an extremely incongruent product, their evaluations tend not to be negative. Taken together, we document that extreme innovations encourage compensation, and in compensating, consumers can become more receptive to extreme innovations.

Food sharing has become quite popular over the last decade, with companies offering food options specifically designed to be shared. As the popularity has grown, so too has concerns over the potential negative impact on consumer health. Despite companies' explicit claims to the contrary, critics maintain that food sharing may be encouraging excessive caloric intake. The current article provides the first systematic exploration of why this may be happening. Three main and two supplementary studies suggest that food sharing reduces perceived ownership, which, in turn, leads people to mentally decouple calories from their consequence. Thus, sharing can reduce the perceived fattening potential of a consumption episode without biasing caloric estimates. This phenomenon persists even when explicit caloric information is provided, and it applies to both healthy and unhealthy foods. Importantly, we establish a relevant downstream consequence by illustrating that people tend to subsequently select calorie-dense foods after underestimating the fattening potential of a shared consumption episode. A roadmap for future research and practical implications are discussed.

Promotional lotteries offer consumers a chance to win one of many prizes along with their purchase. Critically, as is often the case, these campaigns not only include an assortment of prizes but also an assortment of offerings that one can buy to enter the lottery—such as a small or an extra‐large coffee. While companies regularly advertise that the objective odds of winning do not vary by the size of their product offerings, recent anecdotal evidence suggest that consumers behave as if it does. The net result is that consumers seem to be supersizing during promotional lotteries, and thus purchasing larger sized items. Eight studies (four core and four supplementary in ) and a single‐paper meta‐analysis confirm that the supersizing phenomenon is indeed real and provides evidence that this behavior is the manifestation of consumers elevating their sense of control. Specifically, supersizing serves to gain psychological control over the pursuit of a desirable, but seemingly unobtainable, outcome.