Premature Purchase Plans Forming implementation intentions reduces purchase likelihood of novel...
-
Upload
jamel-grew -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
Transcript of Premature Purchase Plans Forming implementation intentions reduces purchase likelihood of novel...
Premature Purchase PlansForming implementation
intentions reduces purchase likelihood of
novel productsSiegfried Dewitte
Research Center MarketingKatholieke Universiteit Leuven
Louvain La Neuve November 2009
2/32
Overview
• Amazing power of implementation intentions
• Goal novelty moderates
• Demonstration of the effect (Studies 1-3)
• The process (Studies 4-6)
• What next?
Amazing power of implementation intentions
3/32
4/32
What?
• Goal intention• ‘I am going to buy a bike’
• Implementation intention:– if Situation X occurs, I will do Y.
• ‘next Thursday after work, I will buy a bike in store A’
• Effect sizes .50-1.0
Gollwitzer, P.M. (1999). American Psychologist, 54, 493-504Gollwitzer, P.M. & Sheeran P. (2006). Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 69-116
5/32
How?
• Perception of X facilitated
• X-Y association reinforced
• Flexible delegation of control to cues
Gollwitzer, P.M. (1999). Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54, 493-504
Webb & Sheeran (2007). How do implementation intention promote goal attainment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 295-302
6/32
Where?
– Organization behavior – Health behavior– Educational psychology– Marketing?
Budden, J.S., Sagarin, B.J., (2007). Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12, 391-401. Luszczynska, A.; Scholz, U., & Sutton, S. (2007). Journal of Psychosomatic Research 63 (5): 491-497
Webb, T.L., Christian, J., & Armitage, C.J. (2007). Learning and Individual Differences, 17, 316-327
Goal novelty moderates
7/32
8/32
Goal system theory
• Network of goals and means– Goal intentions
• Non-exclusive links
• Adding means Dilution effect– Claim: II analogous to adding means
Fishbach, A., J.Y. Shah, and A. Kruglanski (2004), Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40 (6), 723–38.
Kruglanski, A. W., Shah, J. Y., Fishbach, A., Friedman, R., Chun, W., & Sleeth-Keppler, D. (2002). A theory of goal systems. Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 331–378)
9/32
Cost and benefits of II
+ more efficient organization• Input is catalyzed
-- Dilution effect- Adding means reduces triggering power of other
means
• Pivotal role of associative strength – Novelty is real life proxy
Fishbach, A., J.Y. Shah, and A. Kruglanski (2004), Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40 (6), 723–38.
Kruglanski, A. W., Shah, J. Y., Fishbach, A., Friedman, R., Chun, W., & Sleeth-Keppler, D. (2002). A theory of goal systems. Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 331–378)
10/32
Consistent evidence
• Reversed effect for difficult “outcome” goals
• Reversed effect among socially prescribed perfectionists
• No II effect when no goal intention
Dewitte, S, Verguts, T. & Lens, W. (2003). Current Psychology: Development, Learning, Personality, Social, Planned Behavior, 22, 73-89.
Powers, T.A. Koestner, R & Topciu, RA (2005). Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 31, 902-912
Sheeran, P. Webb, T. L., & Gollwitzer, P. (2005). Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 87–98.
11/32
Present project
– Forming implementation intentions hinder novel goal enactment Studies 1 - 3
– Association strength plays a crucial roleStudy 4 moderation by individual
differenceStudies 5-6 experimental causal chain
design
Demonstration of the effect
12/32
13/32
Study 1
• Do implementation intention reduce purchase likelihood for novel products?
• PHASE 1– Two (novelty) by two (I.I. vs. None)
• Both within subjects factors– Four goal intentions per person (n = 75, 299 goals, 203
final)– Price– Manipulation checks
14/32
Study 1
• PHASE 2 – Two weeks later– By e-mail– Goal intentions listed
• Five category scale1. Purchased as planned2. Purchased but in an other way3. Went to the store but did not buy4. Thought of it, but did not act upon it5. Did not think of it anymore
15/32
Study 1: a few examples
Ventilating system
cheese
Spa sprankling water
dress
Mp3 player
shoes
Gsm protection bag
Mashed potatoes
Dvd
cubborn
Book by Dan Brown 'Digital Fortress'
A strip “Gaston nr 18”
A marsbar
Special head phones
computer
A drum
16/32
Study 1: Results (percentage)
No Impl. Int Impl. Int No Impl. Int Impl. Intrepeat purchase plan repeat purchase plan novel purchase plan novel purchase plan
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
5
4
3
2
1
17/32
Study 1: Results (enactment rate)
repeat purchase plan novel purchase plan0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
No Impl. IntImpl. Int
18/36
Study 1: within repeat plans
repeat purchase plan novel purchase plan0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
No Impl. IntImpl. Int
19/32
Study 1: Results
• Price problem
• Replication weak
• Novelty: artificial?
20/32
Study 2
• Price and replication problem: – activities rather than products
• Artificiality problem:– Measure novelty rather than manipulate it
21/32
Study 2: Method
• Identical to Study 1, except
– Activities rather than products
– Novelty was measured rather than manipulated
– D.V. measured on a 100-point scale
– 25 students
22/32
Study 2: A few examples
• Revalidation activities (walking, biking)• Painting my student room• Learning how to cook• Decorating my student room• Searching a student job• shopping• Work as a job student for another week• Giving my fish fresh water• Buy stuff for my student room• Go to the movies
23/32
Study 2: Results
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
no II II no II II
repeated novel
pe
rce
nta
ge
0
50
100
24/32
Study 3: Supermarket
• Like study 1, except
• Only supermarket products
• 4 weeks delay
• Price problem solved
25/32
Study 3: Supermarket
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
novel purchase plans repeat purchase plansPurchase plan novelty (manipulated)
En
ac
tme
nt
rate
(%
)
no Implementation Intention
Implementation intention
26/32
Interim summary
Forming implementation intentions hinders novel purchase plans and activities
How?
27/32
What is the process?
Study 4: moderation by procrastinationStudy 5 & 6: experimental causal chain
design
28/32
Study 4
– Procrastinators vs. Prudents• Behavioral definition: postponing intentions
– Procrastinators and prudents: top-down organization
– Procrastinators: – Dilution effect weaker– II relatively more efficient
Dewitte, S., & Lens, W. (1999). European Journal of Personality, 14, 121-140.
Steel, P. (2007). Psychological Bulletin, 133, 65-94.
29/32
Study 4
– Identical to study 2, except
• Between subjects• DV: enactment of two novel goals (novel versus
repeat)• Interphase interval 8 weeks• Workplace: working adults (50 in both phases)• Lay’s procrastination scale
Lay CH. 1986. Journal of Research in Personality, 20, 474-495.
30/32
Study 4: Results (novel goals)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
procrastinator prudent
succ
ess
rate
procrastination type
baseline
Impl Int
31/32
Study 5&6: Process
– Experimental Causal Chain design
– Manipulate A measure B– Manipulate B measure C
– Useful if measuring and manipulating B is undebatable: “A causes C via B”
Spencer, SJ, Zanna M, & Fong GT 2005. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 89, 845-851
32/32
Study 5
– parallels Study 1, 30 participants
– D.V.1 in phase 1 (following a filler of 10’):• Free ‘continuous’ association task with the
product as a source stimulus
33/32
Study 5: Results
-0,4
-0,2
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
novel repeated
nu
mb
er o
f as
soci
atio
ns
novelty
baseline
Impl Int
34/32
Study 6
– Like study 1, but
– Association strength manipulated– Associate either 1 or 4 times with the
product (between-subjects)
– For novel goals with implementation intention only
35/34
Study 6
Strong associations Weak associations0
10
20
30
40
50
60
enactment rate
enactment rate
36/34
Study 5 & 6
• II leads to weaker associations with goal in novel goals
• Forging associations with goal increases enactment rate
• Chain: II leads to lower enactment rate in novel goals due to weaker associations• Interpretation: premature delegation
37/34
Future research
• Summary
• Spontaneous planning: do people realize the moderation?– Perhaps planning occurs only if
• Novelty is only derivative of association strength. Other interesting side-effects of association strength?
• Why and how do I.I. help procrastinators?