So bad it's good: When and why consumers prefer bad options

Abstract

The assumption that consumers prefer better quality options over worse ones seems almost definitional. However, a variety of marketplace examples suggest that consumers sometimes choose content that is “so bad it's good,” such as Tommy Wiseau's The Room or Rebecca Black's “Friday,” over apparently better alternatives (e.g., those of mediocre quality). In 12 preregistered studies (N = 5393) across several content domains (e.g., jokes, talent show auditions), we provide the first controlled, empirical demonstration of consumer preferences for badness (i.e., choosing options because consumers expect them to be bad). We provide initial evidence that these preferences are rooted in expectations of entertainment value from the worst available option. Preferences for these options emerge more frequently when their deviations from quality standards are perceived as benign (i.e., inconsequential). Accordingly, such preferences are less prevalent when consumption is consequential, and involves utilitarian goals or monetary costs. We conclude by exploring the extent to which dimensions such as humor, absurdity, esthetic quality, and utilitarian value underlie so‐bad‐it's‐good perceptions, and highlight several open questions to spark future research.