Search

Given the proliferation of digital cameras on smartphones, selfies have become ubiquitous in consumers' daily lives, and many companies have employed consumer selfies in their marketing campaigns. However, research on selfies in the domain of consumer behavior is still lacking. This research investigates how consumer selfies, namely, self‐portrait photos featuring consumer faces and products, influence consumers' variety seeking. Through field, online, and laboratory studies and a content analysis of Instagram data, we show that if people will take a consumer selfie with the products they are going to purchase, their self‐presentational concern is heightened, which, in turn, increases their variety seeking in product choices. However, we also find that the consumer selfie effect on variety seeking diminishes when people will take a group (vs. an individual) consumer selfie. Finally, we also show that individual differences in self‐consciousness moderate the consumer selfie effect on variety seeking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Metaphors appear frequently in marketing communications. Prior literature evokes various positive outcomes of using metaphors to promote products but offers relatively limited insights into the potentially negative effects of this rhetorical figure on product perception, product choice, and adoption intention. Building on processing fluency theory, the authors investigate benefits and drawbacks of using metaphors to promote products. The results of eight studies reveal that, compared with literal claims, metaphors can make products appear more innovative but also less socially responsible. A dual process explains these effects on product perception: consumers tend to view products promoted with metaphors as more unfamiliar and thus innovative, but also as more untrustworthy and thus less socially responsible. In a further step, by examining whether using metaphors to promote products increases or decreases product choice and adoption intentions, the authors find increased product choice for brands with innovative personalities but diminished product choice for brands with socially responsible personalities. Using metaphors also boosts the adoption intentions of consumers who value innovativeness in products but lowers these intentions among consumers who value social responsibility. These findings offer novel insights into the effects of metaphors, along with actionable recommendations for practitioners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Consumers are increasingly bombarded with merchandise and offers, making clear the need for visually distinctive and sensorially engaging product packaging design. The current research demonstrates that the use of handwritten fonts on product packaging elicits an approach tendency and enhances haptic engagement, which influences product evaluation and choice likelihood. A pilot study quantifies the use of handwritten fonts in four grocery product categories to establish that the study of handwritten fonts as a packaging design element is a worthy one with managerial significance. Four experiments are then presented. Studies 1 and 2 use real products to show that a product label with a handwritten (vs. typewritten) font elicits haptic engagement and, enhanced product evaluations (Study 2). Study 3 identifies a boundary condition such that the focal effect is observed only for benign (safe and enjoyable) product categories, but not for risky (unsafe and dangerous) ones. Study 4 relies on a simulated store setup with actual products to illustrate the differential preference for products with a handwritten (vs. typewritten) font when choosing between brands in a benign (vs. risky) product category. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past decade, one of the most fundamental changes in computer‐mediated environments has been the evolution in the type of input devices from mouse devices to touch interfaces. In this paper, the authors conduct three experiments to examine the underlying connections between input device types and online shoppers' decision‐making processes in relation to affect‐driven information processing. The results show that shoppers who use a touch interface (vs. mouse) to view products demonstrate a significantly higher engagement with their shopping experience in a low‐involvement setting. Touch interface users are likely to have greater purchase intentions, as compared to mouse users, and this effect is mediated by positive affect induced by higher engagement. Using a touch interface (vs. mouse) also increases the likelihood that consumers will choose a hedonic over a utilitarian option and make an immediate purchase decision. These findings indicate that using a touch interface increases consumers' reliance on affect‐driven information processing and has a positive impact on purchase decision processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]