The Influence of Consumers’ Lay Theories on Approach/Avoidance Motivation

Abstract

This research suggests that consumers’ approach/avoidance tendencies depend on their implicit theories about the world around them. Entity theorists believe in the immutability of the world, and thus they are not influenced by whether a persuasive message is framed in terms of approach or avoidance. In contrast, incremental theorists believe that the world is mutable, and thus they are influenced by the message frame. This proposition is supported in two studies that feature advertising messages. The mechanism underlying these effects differs as a function of implicit theory orientation. Entity theorists’ focus on the outcome and incremental theorists’ reliance on the process form the basis for the observed findings. A third study reveals that when a consumer's implicit theory is violated, these findings are reversed. The authors discuss theoretical and managerial implications.

Consumer mindsets and self‐enhancement: Signaling versus learning

“…For instance, psychological studies show that reading scientific articles that describe the changeability or fixedness of human traits can induce different mindsets (Levy et al, 1998). More relevant to the current discussion, extant studies demonstrate that mindsets can be primed using marketing stimuli such as ads (Yorkston, Nunes, & Matta, 2010), television shows, and movies (e.g., Jain et al, 2009). This seems to be a straightforward way to prime mindsets.…”

“…Another dimension on which entity and incremental theorists differ is in their focus on outcome versus process. Extant research shows that those with a fixed mindset focus on the outcome while those with a growth mindset tend to focus on process (Jain, Mathur, & Maheswaran, 2009; Mathur, Jain, Hsieh, Lindsey, & Maheswaran, 2013). In a similar vein, Murphy and Dweck (2016‐in this issue) discuss that those with a growth mindset may consider the process of “how” a product delivers consumer benefits, but those with a fixed mindset may only consider the outcome or the “what” of the product.…”

What are you dieting for? The role of lay theories in dieters' goal setting

“…Existing research finds that lay theories of personality have context‐specific influences on judgment and behavior (Dweck, ). Studies have examined the relationships between lay theories and the number of goals (Mukhopadhyay and Johar, ), mood (Labroo and Mukhopadhyay, ), self‐control (Mukhopadhyay and Yeung, ), evaluation of brand extensions (Yorkston et al ., ), evaluation of goal‐related performance (Cho and Johar, ), planning (Beruchashvili and Moisio, ), and responses to advertising appeals (Jain et al ., ). However, less attention has been given to the relationship between lay theories and the content of goals that we examine in the current paper.…”

Can Implicit Theory Influence Construal Level?

“…For example, entity‐theorists form strong brand‐attitudes more rapidly and with less cognitive elaboration than incremental‐theorists (Kwon & Nayakankuppam, ); entity‐theorists also form perceptions of people based on their brand use more readily than incremental‐theorists (Park & John, ). In contrast, incremental‐theorists are more susceptible to framing effects in advertising (Jain, Mathur, & Maheswaran, ) and are more accepting of brand extensions compared to entity‐theorists (Yorkston, Nunes, & Matta, ).…”