Sexual selection has been commonly considered by evolutionary psychologists interested in eating disorders among women; however, comparable attention has not been paid to problematic eating by men. We present the results of a field study through which we find that men eat more food when sharing a meal with women than with men. Notably, men appear to eat larger quantities of both unhealthy (pizza) and healthy (salad) food when in the company of women. More specifically, men eating with women ate 93% more pizza (1.44 more slices) and 86% more salad. Additionally, while women do not eat significantly differently as a function of the sex of their dining partners, women eating with men tended to estimate themselves to have eaten more and reported feeling like they were rushed and overate. In addition to expanding upon previous research concerning women's eating behaviors, our findings concerning male overconsumption in the presence of women appear to present an example of self-handicap behavior.

A field experiment was conducted to assess how diners' taste evaluations change based on how much they paid for an all‐you‐can‐eat (AYCE) buffet. Diners at an AYCE restaurant were either charged $4 or $8 for an Italian lunch buffet. Their taste evaluation of each piece of pizza consumed was taken along with other measures of behavior and self‐perceptions. Their ratings were analyzed using 2 × 3 mixed design analysis of variance (ANOVA). Diners who paid $4 for their buffet rated their initial piece of pizza as less tasty, less satisfactory and less enjoyable. A downward trend was exhibited for each of these measures with each additional piece (P = 0.02). Those who paid $8 did not experience the same decrement in taste, satisfaction and enjoyment. Paying less for an AYCE experience may face the unintended consequence of food that is both less enjoyable and rapidly declining in taste and enjoyability. In a sense, AYCE customers get what they pay for. Practical Applications This study demonstrates that when eating in a less expensive all‐you‐can‐eat (AYCE) buffet, people find the food less tasty. Such a consequence means a less enjoyable experience for the consumers, which may have implications for repeat purchase. By employing a low‐price strategy, AYCE restaurants can attract the initial business of customers. However, these customers may end up evaluating the food unfavorably. As a result, the low‐price strategy may not be as profitable in the long term. This study has implications for both consumers and restaurants.

Children have received much research attention in many different academic disciplines within social sciences, including marketing. The main objective of this study is to provide a comprehensive overview of the marketing literature to investigate the historical evolution of the studies on “children” and shed light on possible gaps which could serve as new research areas for future studies. To the authors' best knowledge, there have been a few attempts on the topic, mostly with a narrow focus on only some aspects of this important concept. The significance of this current research is that it reviews 423 articles from marketing‐related journals and evaluates the development of thought on “children” from every marketing‐based perspective that once has been a subject of scholarly attention. In this study, we examined leading articles, authors and institutions, methodologies used, countries data collected from, and the age of the sample. In addition, an auto‐correlation map is created to identify all the research domains in marketing literature related to children. Our correlation matrix indicates that major subareas in children and marketing literature are children's consumer socialization and role in family decision‐making, materialism, vulnerability and ethics, food, brands, and advertising. Findings revealed that while marketing scholars have shown great attention to children during the last two decades and a wide array of articles have been frequently published on the eight sub‐areas mentioned, marketing literature is still underdeveloped on three aspects: sustainability, technology and digitalization, and cross‐cultural differences.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to determine if the level of payment required for consumption changed the relationship between a consumer’s overall evaluation of a hedonic consumption experience and the evaluation of first, middle, last piece and peak consumption experiences. Design/methodology/approach Diners at an all-you-can-eat restaurant were either charged $4 or $8 for an Italian lunch buffet. Their taste, satisfaction and enjoyment evaluation of each piece of pizza they had was taken along with other measures of behavior and self-perceptions. Using regression analysis, we examine the relationship between these single event evaluations and their overall evaluations of the experience. Findings For the diners who paid $4 for their buffet, overall taste, satisfaction and enjoyment evaluation depend on the taste of the last piece of the pizza and the peak taste consistent with prior findings. For those paying $8 for the buffet, the first piece of pizza is more important in predicting the overall taste, satisfaction and enjoyment ratings. Practical implications Consumers do not evaluate their meal experience based on every moment of their experience. Rather, just a few moments appear to impact overall evaluation. Firms that sell access to a series of experiences, such as an all-you-can-eat buffet, should focus on leading customers to the best experience first particularly when prices may be considered moderate to high. Originality/value In this paper, we seek to unravel the relationship between price paid and the peak-end heuristic by examining the importance of peak and end experiences under two different pricing regimes. Our study also indicates that the peak-end rule may depend on specific contextual factors.

The purpose of this study is to develop a valid and reliable scale to measure e-consumers' attitudes towards ethically questionable online behaviors (e-CEQOB). A scale measuring e-consumers' attitudes towards such behaviors was developed using the conventional steps of scale development of Churchill (1979). The generated items were reduced to 24 items following EFA. The psychometric properties of e-CEQOB were assessed on two independent non-student samples in Istanbul, Turkey (Sample 1, N=635, and Sample 2, N=880-randomly split into two (G1, n=438, G2, n=442)). The e-CEQOB scale was statistically confirmed and validated using CFA and Maximum Likelihood Estimation (Lisrel 8.72). As a result of EFA and CFA, a 24-item, five-factor multi-dimensional construct on e-CEQOB was developed and its reliability and validity were tested and confirmed. Taking into consideration the gap in the literature, this study has developed and validated an instrument that measures e-consumers' attitudes towards ethically questionable online behaviors. Although there are a limited number of studies on such, none has attempted to develop a scale using the conventional steps of scale development and none has been tested for validity and reliability, nor has any been widely accepted. This study fills this gap and presents a reliable and valid scale to measure the attitudes of e-consumers towards ethically questionable online behaviors (e-CEQOB). The creation of e-CEQOB serves as an opportunity for researchers studying in this rapidly developing medium to extend their research to critical ethical issues. The application 100 BOGAZICI JOURNAL of e-CEQOB to different cultures is important for testing its reliability and validity in different cultures in order to improve its validity.