The wellbeing implications of maximizing: A conceptual framework and meta‐analysis

Belli, Alex; Carrillat, François A.; Zlatevska, Natalina; Cowley, Elizabeth

doi:10.1002/jcpy.1283

Cited by 12 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 178 publications

(274 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Importantly, we find that this effect is consistent across different operationalizations of maximizing, offering novel theoretical contributions. Specifically, while previous research has generally identified a positive effect on well-being outcomes of high standards and a negative one of alternative search (Belli et al, 2022;Hughes & Scholer, 2017), our Study 1 reveals that maximizing is associated to positive financial well-being regardless of its operationalization.…”

Section: Implications For Theorycontrasting

confidence: 69%

“…Our paper extends the literature by investigating the relationship of a maximizing decision-making style with individuals' financial wellbeing and unraveling the underlying psychological process. Although a maximizing decision-making style has been shown to lead to counterfactual thinking (Leach & Patall, 2013;Schwartz et al, 2002) and regret (Huang & Zeelenberg, 2012), and thus linked to poorer general well-being (Belli et al, 2022), we show that maximizing can in fact be a beneficial approach to achieve financial well-being, in line with goal-setting theory. In fact, evaluating as many choice 5…”

Section: Implications For Theorysupporting

confidence: 68%

“…Our findings also substantiate the findings of previous research focusing on the role of maximization on well-being in consequential decision contexts. Indeed, Belli et al (2022) suggest that employing a maximizing decision-making style has a greater negative effect on individuals' well-being for decisions affecting more consequential areas of daily life (e.g., regarding one's career, family, or relationships) compared to others, arguably less consequential, areas (e.g., consumption). In this regard, although Americans consider financial decisions to be amongst the most important and consequential ones in their lives, they still give more weight to choices pertaining to their career and family instead (Camilleri, 2023).…”

Section: Implications For Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, maximizers often engage in counterfactual thinking (Leach & Patall, 2013; Schwartz et al, 2002); are more likely to ruminate over forgone options (Bruine de Bruin et al, 2016); experience a higher level of regret in relation to the decision made (Huang & Zeelenberg, 2012); and are more neurotic and less optimistic (Bruine de Bruin et al, 2016; Purvis et al, 2011; Schwartz et al, 2002). Consequently, prior literature has associated a maximizing decision‐making style with lower overall well‐being (Belli et al, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

When “good enough” is not good enough: How maximizing benefits financial well‐being

Silber,

Hoffmann,

Belli

2023

Psychology and Marketing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A maximizing decision‐making style is generally associated with lower individual well‐being. That is, even though maximizers invest more time and resources in finding the best option and achieve better outcomes than satisficers, they are still more dissatisfied with those outcomes. Contrary to this general consensus that maximizing is negatively associated with overall well‐being, across two studies we show that this decision‐making style is actually positively associated with individuals' financial well‐being. We find that measured dispositional maximizing is positively associated with financial well‐being, regardless of whether maximizing is operationalized as having high standards or the tendency to engage in alternative search (Study 1) and replicate this relationship with experimentally induced situational maximizing (Study 2). We identify financial self‐control (both measured as a trait and as the behavioral outcome of an experimental choice task) as a mediator of the aforementioned relationship. Our findings offer guidance to financial service providers and policymakers on how to improve consumers' financial well‐being, such as encouraging consumers to engage in a more meticulous search while evaluating financial products and services (e.g., home loans, retirement plans, investments) to identify the best possible option.

show abstract

Section: Implications For Theorycontrasting

confidence: 69%

Section: Implications For Theorysupporting

confidence: 68%

Section: Implications For Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

When “good enough” is not good enough: How maximizing benefits financial well‐being

Silber,

Hoffmann,

Belli

2023

Psychology and Marketing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We ran influential case diagnostics to identify any potential outliers that could distort conclusions taken from the data (Viechtbauer & Cheung, 2010 ). We found several effect sizes had high standardized residuals (> 2.57; Belli et al, 2021 ), so they were omitted from further analysis. Among remaining effect sizes, we correlated the variables to detect any potential multicollinearity (see Appendix 3 for correlation matrices).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Meta-Analytical Assessment of the Effect of Deontological Evaluations and Teleological Evaluations on Ethical Judgments/Intentions

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deontological and teleological evaluations are widely utilized in the context of consumer decision-making. Despite their use, the differential effect of these distinct types of evaluations, and the conditions under which they hold, remains an unresolved issue. Thus, we conduct a meta-analysis of 316 effect sizes, from 53 research articles, to evaluate the extent to which deontological and teleological evaluations influence ethical judgments and intentions, and under what circumstances the influence occurs. The effect is explored across three categories of moderators: (1) contextual elements of the ethical issue, (2) stakeholders, and (3) methodological characteristics of primary studies. We find that the overall effect of deontological evaluations on ethical judgments and intentions is stronger than for teleological evaluations; however, the magnitude of the effect is contingent on several moderators. Deontological evaluations are weaker in offline consumer contexts and stronger when there are financial implications of the ethical issue. Conversely, the effect of teleological evaluations is relatively stable across ethical consumer contexts. Teleological evaluations are stronger from a utilitarian perspective than from an egoist one. Furthermore, the effect of deontological evaluations is weaker, but the effect for teleological evaluations is stronger, when the decision-maker has a personal relationship (as compared to an organizational relationship) with the victim of the unethical act. Findings validate the effect of both deontological and teleological evaluations on ethical judgments and intentions and highlight their importance in consumers’ ethical decision-making. Implications for developing programs to prevent consumer unethical behavior are discussed.

show abstract

Consumers' variety‐seeking behaviors under time pressure: Based on regulatory focus and excitement levels

Yang,

Liu,

Wang

2024

PsyCh Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Variety‐seeking behavior has received substantial attention in marketing literature. Although various explanations of the causes of variety‐seeking explore the influence of consumers' internal psychological characteristics on behavioral decisions, few studies have been conducted on external factors. With the fast pace of modern life and the increasing trend of online shopping, consumers often face time constraints when making purchasing decisions. This study examines the impact of time pressure as a significant external environmental factor on consumers' variety‐seeking behavior. A conceptual framework is developed based on construal level theory to uncover the influencing mechanism of time pressure on variety‐seeking behavior while also considering the effects of the consumer's personality and emotional state. We conducted two experiments to investigate the moderating effect of regulatory focus from the personality perspective and excitement level from the emotional state perspective. Study 1 found that time pressure significantly affects variety‐seeking behavior. Additionally, consumers with prevention regulatory focus tend to exhibit more variety‐seeking behavior when not under time pressure. Study 2 supports the main effect and shows that the level of excitement affects the impact of time pressure on variety‐seeking behavior. Therefore, this study contributes to the literature on consumer behavior and purchasing decisions by presenting a robust theoretical framework that provides practical insights and implications for enterprise managers.

show abstract

The wellbeing implications of maximizing: A conceptual framework and meta‐analysis

Cited by 12 publications

References 178 publications

When “good enough” is not good enough: How maximizing benefits financial well‐being

When “good enough” is not good enough: How maximizing benefits financial well‐being

A Meta-Analytical Assessment of the Effect of Deontological Evaluations and Teleological Evaluations on Ethical Judgments/Intentions

Consumers' variety‐seeking behaviors under time pressure: Based on regulatory focus and excitement levels

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About