A Motivational Account of the Question-Behavior Effect

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. The University of Chicago Press and A Motivational Account of the Question-Behavior Effect ANNELEEN VAN KERCKHOVE MAGGIE GEUENS IRIS VERMEIRTo explain the question-behavior effect, that is, the effect of answering an intention question on subsequent behavior, this article takes on a motivational perspective and proposes that answering an intention question automatically activates an intention. The activation of this motivational state influences subsequent brand choices due to changes in brand accessibilities. Three studies provide support for the assumption that responding to an intention question affects brand choices through a motivational mechanism, such that (1) answering an intention increases the accessibility of motivation-related information and decreases the accessibility of motivation-competing information which increases the choice for the intentionrelated brand; (2) intention completion temporarily reverses the foregoing accessibility patterns, instigating a reversal of the brand choices for an immediate, second brand choice; and (3) the changes in brand accessibilities and thus the behavioral effect persist as the delay between the intention question and brand choice occasion increases until intention completion.I magine that someone asks you about your intentions to buy a candy bar. Would merely indicating your intention change your future purchase behavior? This question has prompted significant research (Dholakia 2010;Sprott et al. 2006), most of which indicates that responding to an intention question alters subsequent consumer purchases (Chandon et al. 2011;Fitzsimons and Morwitz 1996;Morwitz, Johnson, and Schmittlein 1993). For example, consumers who completed an intentions survey about car purchases appeared more likely to purchase a car later (Morwitz et al.Anneleen Van Kerckhove (anneleen.vankerckhove@ugent.be) is a PhD student at Ghent University, Tweekerkenstraat 2, 9000 Gent, Belgium. Maggie Geuens (maggie.geuens@ugent.be) is professor of marketing at Ghent University, Tweekerkenstraat 2, 9000 Gent, Belgium, and at Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School, Reep 1, 9000 Gent, Belgium. Iris Vermeir (iris.vermeir@hogent.be) is assistant professor of marketing at University College Ghent, Voskenslaan 270, 9000 Gent, Belgium, and at Ghent University, Tweekerkenstraat 2, 9000 Gent, Belgium. The authors wish to thank Mario Pandelaere, the editor, associate editor, three reviewers, and a trainee reviewer for providing invaluable feedback on previous versions of this article. Financial support of the Research Foundation Flanders (3F017907) granted to the first author is greatly acknowledged. This article is based on the first author's doctoral dissertation. Baba Sh...

The question-behaviour effect: A theoretical and methodological review and meta-analysis

“…The time interval between questioning and measurement of behavioural DVs varied between immediately (e.g., van Kerckhove et al, 2012) and 5 years (Murray, 1988). There was a negative relationship between time interval and the size of the QBE (β = −0.001, 95% CI = −0.002, −0.0003, p = .01; k = 91 see on-line materials Table D2), consistent with the idea that the QBE fades over time.…”

“…Within the health area, studies have demonstrated that the QBE can be harnessed as an effective intervention to increase uptake of health screening (Sandberg & Conner, 2009), health checks (Conner, Godin, Norman, & Sheeran, 2011;Spangenberg & Sprott, 2006;Sprott, Smith, Spangenberg, & Freson, 2004;Sprott, Spangenberg, & Fisher, 2003) and vaccinations . In relation to consumer purchase behaviours, numerous studies have supported the QBE (e.g., Chandon et al, 2004;Fitzsimons & Williams, 2000;Janiszewski & Chandon, 2007;Morwitz & Fitzsimons, 2004;Morwitz, Johnson, & Schmittlein, 1993;van Kerckhove, Geuens, & Vermeir, 2012). Similarly, the QBE has been tested in prosocial behaviours such as blood donation (e.g., Cioffi & Garner, 1998;Godin, Sheeran, Conner, & Germain, 2008).…”

A meta‐analytic synthesis of the question–behavior effect

“…Ideally, researchers should consider how alternate theoretical accounts could be informed within an existing study, thereby providing a competitive theory test. As noted earlier, we are aware of three comparative theory tests, all of which provide evidence against attitude accessibility yet support for three other explanations (Janiszewski & Chandon, 2007; Spangenberg et al, 2003; van Kerckhove et al, 2012a). Finally, and perhaps most importantly, clear evidence supporting “the mechanism” for the effect simply might not exist, as the question–behavior effect may well be shaped by multiple mechanisms.…”

“…Of the many explanations proposed in the literature, attitude accessibility (e.g., Morwitz & Fitzsimons, 2004) and cognitive dissonance (e.g., Spangenberg & Greenwald, 1999) have arisen as the most prominent and extensively tested accounts for the effect. More recently, empirical work based on response fluency (Janiszewski & Chandon, 2007) and motivation (e.g., van Kerckhove, Geuens, & Vermeir, 2012a) has emerged. One reason that various mechanisms have been suggested for the question–behavior effect is that several cognitive or motivational processes may be active at the time of questioning and/or opportunity to perform a focal behavior, and any one, or a combination of these processes, may be responsible for subsequent behavioral change.…”

“…Attitude accessibility is one of the few theoretical mechanisms that has been tested by researchers in comparison to other proposed theories. For example, Spangenberg et al (2003, study 2), Janiszewski and Chandon (2007, experiment 1A) and van Kerckhove et al (2012a, study 3) included contexts addressing the extent to which attitude accessibility can account for the question–behavior effect. While more comparative theory testing is warranted, these studies indicate that attitude accessibility does not always account for observed effects.…”