Looming Losses in Future Time Perception

Bilgin, Baler; LeBoeuf, Robyn A.

doi:10.1037/e722852011-060

Cited by 6 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results replicated prior findings that indicated losses loomed shorter than gains (Bilgin & Leboeuf, 2010). Moreover, we demonstrated that the construal level served as a mechanism driving this effect.…”

Section: Mediating Role Of Construal Levelsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…We randomly assigned the participants to a gain or loss condition, modified from Bilgin and Leboeuf (2010). The instructions asked them to imagine a scenario in which they would move into a new office in two weeks:…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The hedonic principle suggests that people are motivated to make decisions that maximize their future positive outcomes and minimize future negative outcomes as much as possible (Harinck, Van Dijk, Van Beest, & Mersmann, 2007). People facing gains thus may be motivated to focus relatively more on the value of the end point (Bilgin & Leboeuf, 2010), whereas people in a loss situation would be less willing to think about the outcomes. In turn, positive outcomes are often part of people's goals, but negative outcomes appear incidental and imposed by circumstances (Trope & Liberman, 2000).…”

Section: The Impact Of Event Valence On Construal Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In turn, there are many consequences of differences in gains versus losses, such as loss aversion in future time perceptions (Bilgin & Leboeuf, 2010). We propose another psychological process triggered by event valence that involves a shift in a person's construal level.…”

Section: The Impact Of Event Valence On Construal Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Leboeuf, 2010). Existing research has documented biasing impacts of event valence, but literature examining the psychological process that underlies these effects remains limited.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Effect of Event Valence on Future Time Perception and Choices: A Construal-Level Perspective

Wang

2013

PSYCHOLOGIA -An International Journal of Psychological Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the mental construal process believed to be responsible for event valence. In three studies, respondents were exposed to future events, varying in their gains or losses, and asked to estimate the mental construal process and subsequent temporal perceptions or choices. The gains versus losses could be construed distinctly. People receiving gains were more likely to construe the event at a high rather than a low level of thinking. Therefore, people facing gains perceived the future time interval as longer than those facing losses and relied more on desirability rather than feasibility attributes.

show abstract

Section: Mediating Role Of Construal Levelsupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Impact Of Event Valence On Construal Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Impact Of Event Valence On Construal Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Leboeuf, 2010). Existing research has documented biasing impacts of event valence, but literature examining the psychological process that underlies these effects remains limited.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Effect of Event Valence on Future Time Perception and Choices: A Construal-Level Perspective

Wang

2013

PSYCHOLOGIA -An International Journal of Psychological Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

When Good Things Feel Closer and Bad Things Feel Farther: The Role of Perceived Control on Psychological Distance Perception

Han

Gershoff

2018

J Consum Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior research has found that people perceive positive objects and locations as physically closer than negative ones. Yet, other work has found the opposite to be true for perceptions of temporal distance, where negative future events feel closer than positive ones. Motivated by this seeming discrepancy, we propose that (a) feelings of control can differentially influence how far away valenced (i.e., positive or negative) targets feel in space and time and that (b) the difference in perceived control over space versus time can account for these opposite findings. First, across four studies, we show that high (vs. low) control makes positive targets feel closer and negative targets feel more distant in both physical space (Studies 1 and 1a) and time (Studies 2 and 2a). Then, in Studies 3 and 4, we simultaneously examine perceptions of spatial and temporal distance and show that baseline differences in perceived control between these domains can explain the prior discrepant findings. Finally, a within‐paper meta‐analysis offers further support to these findings.

show abstract

Impatience and Savoring vs. Dread: Asymmetries in Anticipation Explain Consumer Time Preferences for Positive vs. Negative Events

Hardisty

Weber

2020

J Consum Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For positive experiences (e.g., when to eat a snack), consumers generally prefer to have them immediately, and for negative experiences (e.g., when to pay a bill), consumers often prefer to delay. Yet, across three studies (plus twelve supplemental studies) we find that anticipatory feelings push in the opposite direction, and do so differently for positive vs. negative events, leading to different time preferences: The desire for immediate positives is stronger than the desire to delay negatives. For negative events, anticipatory utility is strongly negative, reducing the desire to delay bad things (i.e., consumers want to "get it over with" to minimize the psychological discomfort), but for positive events, overall anticipatory utility is weakly positive, and therefore does little to reduce consumers' desire to expedite good things. This anticipatory asymmetry happens because when consumers think about a future positive event, they both enjoy imagining it (savoring) while simultaneously disliking the feeling of waiting for it (impatience), but when consumers think about a negative event, they both dislike imagining it (dread) and dislike the feeling of waiting for it. We demonstrate the managerial implications of these findings in a pair of field studies using online advertisements for retirement planning.

show abstract

Looming Losses in Future Time Perception

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Effect of Event Valence on Future Time Perception and Choices: A Construal-Level Perspective

Effect of Event Valence on Future Time Perception and Choices: A Construal-Level Perspective

When Good Things Feel Closer and Bad Things Feel Farther: The Role of Perceived Control on Psychological Distance Perception

Impatience and Savoring vs. Dread: Asymmetries in Anticipation Explain Consumer Time Preferences for Positive vs. Negative Events

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About