Does your gain define my loss?: Socially-defined counterfactual loss and prevention-focused decision-making

Nakkawita, Emily; Mathmann, Frank; Higgins, E. Tory

doi:10.1016/j.paid.2020.109926

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Following previous research (e.g., Huang et al, 2012;Hyodo and Bolton, 2021;Nakkawita, Mathmann and Higgins, 2020), consistent across studies, we excluded fraudulent responses outside of the intended sample frame (e.g., 10 participants were not living in the UK at the time of participating in the study and 8 participants indicated that they were not Clickworkers) and one due to an invalid response regarding age (145). to the typology of moderators provided by Sharma et al (1981), choice restrictions could be classified as a quasi-moderator as the main effect of choice restrictions on service performance was significant, as was the interaction effect of display inauthenticity and choice restrictions.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fake smiles. Customer reactions to employees’ display inauthenticity and choice restrictions

Pham

Lechner

Mathmann

2022

Psychology and Marketing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Frontline employees’ fake smiles (i.e., positive emotion display inauthenticity) frequently occur despite firms’ efforts to ensure real smiles in service delivery. Previous research on the effects of display inauthenticity on customers reveals considerable heterogeneity. Attempts to resolve this have largely been limited to stable and dispositional factors, which often escape managerial control. The present research investigates the impacts of display inauthenticity, choice restrictions, and their interaction on service performance. Choice restrictions may buffer inauthenticity effects as demonstrated by results from three factorial experiments in different contexts (e.g., restrictions of service provider choice in predelivery in Study 1 and in‐store choice restrictions during service delivery in Studies 2 and 3). Frontline employees’ display inauthenticity negatively affects service performance only if customers are subjected to low but not high choice restrictions. The interaction effect is explained by customers’ interdependent self‐construal and is generalizable to actual spending behaviors. Our findings inform managers about the interplay of increasingly common inauthenticity and choice restrictions due to market shocks such as COVID‐19 and provide insights into managerial interventions that can be used to mitigate the effects of inauthenticity on customers.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fake smiles. Customer reactions to employees’ display inauthenticity and choice restrictions

Pham

Lechner

Mathmann

2022

Psychology and Marketing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…nonlosses) and avoiding errors of commission or "false alarms" (i.e. losses) (Higgins et al, 2001;Nakkawita et al, 2020). Previous research on the prevention of consumers' sensitivity to deception (Lechner and Mathmann, 2021) has suggested that regulatory focus could also play a role in the context of misinformation accusations.…”

Section: Intr 335mentioning

confidence: 99%

You are lying! How misinformation accusations spread on Twitter

Galande,

Mathmann,

Ariza-Rojas

et al. 2023

INTR

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeMisinformation is notoriously difficult to combat. Although social media firms have focused on combating the publication of misinformation, misinformation accusations, an important by-product of the spread of misinformation, have been neglected. The authors offer insights into factors contributing to the spread of misinformation accusations on social media platforms.Design/methodology/approachThe authors use a corpus of 234,556 tweets about the 2020 US presidential election (Study 1) and 99,032 tweets about the 2022 US midterm elections (Study 2) to show how the sharing of misinformation accusations is explained by locomotion orientation.FindingsThe study findings indicate that the sharing of misinformation accusations is explained by writers' lower locomotion orientation, which is amplified among liberal tweet writers.Research limitations/implicationsPractitioners and policymakers can use the study findings to track and reduce the spread of misinformation accusations by developing algorithms to analyze the language of posts. A limitation of this research is that it focuses on political misinformation accusations. Future research in different contexts, such as vaccines, would be pertinent.Practical implicationsThe authors show how social media firms can identify messages containing misinformation accusations with the potential to become viral by considering the tweet writer's locomotion language and geographical data.Social implicationsEarly identification of messages containing misinformation accusations can help to improve the quality of the political conversation and electoral decision-making.Originality/valueStrategies used by social media platforms to identify misinformation lack scale and perform poorly, making it important for social media platforms to manage misinformation accusations in an effort to retain trust. The authors identify linguistic and geographical factors that drive misinformation accusation retweets.

show abstract

“…This is relevant for the current research because, in the present study, we have a hypothesis for high (vs. low) promotion, but not high (vs. low) prevention. Prevention focus (as opposed to promotion focus) refers to safety and security concerns (Cornwell and Higgins, 2015; Nakkawita et al, 2020). In contrast to promotion focus, we do not expect visitors’ prevention focus to affect licensing given that it does not involve the same emphasis on ideals as promotion that intersects the relationship between farmers’ market attendance and positive self-image.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can attending farmers’ markets lead to unplanned deviant visitor behavior?

Joenpolvi

Mortimer

Mathmann

2022

Tourism and Hospitality Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Farmers’ markets can enhance local food tourism experiences, as well as benefit regions and businesses that operate within these markets. With the impact of COVID-19 reducing international travel, domestic and local tourism is predicted to increase due to a desire to support local economies. While it has been established that visitors who shop at farmers’ markets do so for pro-social reasons, the current study examines the unintended consequences of these pro-social behaviors. We apply ‘moral licensing’ and regulatory focus theory to explain how a person’s pro-social behavior gives a temporary boost to their positive self-image which subsequently gives them a ‘licence’ to act in a deviant manner. We examine the effect of licensing and consider individual differences in promotion focus to test whether some visitors are more prone to deviant behavior than others. This research assists in identifying the unintended outcomes for the local food tourism sector through licensing and provides suggestions on how to diminish this behavior.

show abstract

Does your gain define my loss?: Socially-defined counterfactual loss and prevention-focused decision-making

Cited by 3 publications

References 20 publications

Fake smiles. Customer reactions to employees’ display inauthenticity and choice restrictions

Fake smiles. Customer reactions to employees’ display inauthenticity and choice restrictions

You are lying! How misinformation accusations spread on Twitter

Can attending farmers’ markets lead to unplanned deviant visitor behavior?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About