Impulsive consumption and reflexive thought: Nudging ethical consumer behavior

Lades, Leonhard K.

doi:10.1016/j.joep.2013.01.003

Cited by 55 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 101 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Through this process consumers can thereby acquire likes and dislikes that are unique to their particular learning history. Lades (2014) elaborates on how acquired wants may be linked to impulsive consumption behavior (see also Laibson 2001, Bernheim andRangel 2004).…”

Section: Acquired Wantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This dynamic interaction between learning modes can result in a specialisation process through which both what consumers know and what they like becomes more refined. Some cognitive concerns that have been studied in the case studies include concerns about obesity (Ruprecht 2005, Manig 2010), environmental concerns (Bünstorf and Cordes 2008, Woersdorfer andKaus 2011) and the desire for a consistent self-image (Lades 2014).…”

Section: Consumer Specialisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tackling Keynes’ Question: A Look Back on 15 years of Learning to Consume

Chai

2016

Economic Complexity and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Acquired Wantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Consumer Specialisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tackling Keynes’ Question: A Look Back on 15 years of Learning to Consume

Chai

2016

Economic Complexity and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For instance, dissociations between "wanting" and "liking" have been assumed to play a role in food consumption, (e.g., Finlayson, King, & Blundell, 2007; but see also Havermans, 2011), impulsive economic choice (e.g., Lades, 2014), depression (e.g., Bushmann, Moeller, Konrath, & Crocker, 2012), schizophrenia (Heerey & Gold, 2007), compulsive sexual behavior (Voon et al, 2014), and autism (Kohls, Chevallier, Troiani, & Schultz, 2012). Even though IST has provided valuable new insights in drug addiction and a striking influence on the study of a broad range of behaviors, there is uncertainty regarding the operation of incentive sensitization in humans.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Implicit measures of “wanting” and “liking” in humans

Tibboel

Houwer

Bockstaele

2015

Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Incentive Sensitization Theory (IST; e.g., Robinson & Berridge, 1993; suggests that a common dopamine system that deals with incentive salience attribution is affected by different types of drugs. Repeated drug use will sensitize this neural system, which means that drugs increasingly trigger the experience of incentive salience or "wanting". Importantly, Robinson and Berridge stress that there is a dissociation between drug "wanting" (the unconscious attribution of incentive salience) and drug "liking" (the unconscious hedonic experience when one consumes drugs). Whereas the former plays an essential role in the development and maintenance of drug addiction, the latter does not. Although this model was based mainly on research with non-human animals, more recently the dissociation between "wanting" and "liking" has been examined in humans as well. A widely used and promising means of studying these processes are behavioral implicit measures such as the Implicit Association Test (IAT), the Approach-Avoidance Task (AAT), different types of StimulusResponse Compatibility (SRC) tasks, and Affective Simon Tasks (AST).IST makes the clear prediction that (1) there should be a positive correlation between indices of "wanting" (e.g., drug consumption) and implicit "wanting" scores. Similarly, there should be a positive correlation between indices of "liking" (e.g., various expressions of subjective pleasure) and implicit "liking" scores; (2) there should be higher "wanting" scores in substance abusers or frequent substance users compared to non-users or infrequent users, and there should be no differences in "liking" between these groups (or even less "liking" in frequent substance users); (3) manipulations of "wanting" should affect implicit "wanting" scores whereas manipulations of "liking" should affect implicit "liking" scores. However, studies that tested these hypotheses did not produce equivocal results. To shed light on these discrepancies, we first discuss the different definitions of "wanting" and "liking" and the different tests that have been used to assess these processes. Then, we discuss whether it is 3 reasonable to assume that these tests are valid measures of "wanting" and "liking" and we review correlational, quasi-experimental, and experimental studies that inform us about this issue. Finally, we discuss the future potential of implicit measures in research on IST and make several recommendations to improve both theory and methodology. 4

show abstract

“…Only when individuals know that decision-making biases may have an influence on their current and future behavior, can they critically reflect upon whether they are willing to let their behavior be influenced by these biases. For example, informing people about the factors that lead to impulsive choices can help the individuals to organize their lives to either generate or prevent impulsive decisions (Lades, 2014). This provision of information can be combined with offering commitment devices that critically reflecting individuals can install to constrain their future selves' behaviors, which would be considered to be an instrument of AEP (see Bryan et al, 2010).…”

Section: Examplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The policy-maker can transfer the knowledge about factors that can lead to impulsive behavior, such as fatigue (Baumeister et al, 1998), cognitive load (Shiv and Fedorikhin, 1999), visceral states such as hunger and thirst (Loewenstein, 1996), and being exposed to many attractive cues (Lades, 2012). Increased awareness and understanding of these factors allow individuals to effectively modify their own decision-making contexts and thus to engage in self-nudging (see Lades, 2014). To activate System 2 and encourage deliberative decision-making policymakers can, for example, prompt individuals to make decisions well in advance (Rogers and Bazerman, 2008), provide pre-commitment mechanisms (Bryan et al, 2010), induce a higher construal level thinking rather than lower level thinking (Trope and Liberman, 2003), and make people accountable for their decisions.…”

Section: Behavioral Policy Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Autonomy-Enhancing Paternalism

Binder

Lades²

2014

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. The Levy Economics Institute Working Paper Collection presents research in progress by Levy Institute scholars and conference participants. The purpose of the series is to disseminate ideas to and elicit comments from academics and professionals. Terms of use: Documents inLevy Economics Institute of Bard College, founded in 1986, is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, independently funded research organization devoted to public service. Through scholarship and economic research it generates viable, effective public policy responses to important economic problems that profoundly affect the quality of life in the United States and abroad.

show abstract

Impulsive consumption and reflexive thought: Nudging ethical consumer behavior

Cited by 55 publications

References 101 publications

Tackling Keynes’ Question: A Look Back on 15 years of Learning to Consume

Tackling Keynes’ Question: A Look Back on 15 years of Learning to Consume

Implicit measures of “wanting” and “liking” in humans

Autonomy-Enhancing Paternalism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About