Impression Management
Beyond Dislike Counts: How YouTube Users React to the Visibility of Social Cues
Maggie Mengqing Zhang & Yee Man Margaret Ng
New Media & Society, forthcoming
Abstract:
This study investigates the impact of YouTube’s 2021 policy, which hides dislike counts and limits a form of negative social feedback. It examines how this change affects social media herding behavior -- the tendency of users to align with the majority opinion. We adopted a mixed-method approach, incorporating an online experiment that simulates the YouTube interface and an Interrupted Time Series analysis of real-world user reactions, to assess how the policy affects user engagement. Specifically, we looked at how the absence of one-sided digital cues, combined with content characteristics and individual user predispositions, influences user behavior. Our findings suggest that YouTube’s initiative to boost platform positivity had limited success: user responses were more influenced by their ideological leanings than by visible digital cues; hiding dislikes reduced commenting frequencies and inadvertently increased negative expression. These results highlight the stronger role of ideological beliefs over social cues in shaping engagement, challenging the presumed impact of audience conformity and the negativity bias on social media dynamics.
Disrespectful Promotions: The Negative Impact of Price Promotions on Products Symbolically Linked to Stigmatized Identities
Guanzhong Du et al.
Journal of Marketing Research, forthcoming
Abstract:
To reach a more diverse consumer base, companies have begun to offer products symbolically linked to stigmatized identities, and these products are often promoted by price discounts. Despite past work finding that linking consumer identities to products is generally appealing and that price promotions benefit consumers, the current research finds that offering discounts on products symbolically linked to stigmatized identities may backfire. Across eight studies, which include a variety of stigmatized groups in U.S. society, we find that when a company offers a discount on a product symbolically linked to a stigmatized identity, members of the stigmatized group react negatively toward the company (i.e., they hold less favorable attitudes, have lower purchase intentions, and choose the company’s competitor). These negative reactions, which do not arise for the non-stigmatized, occur because stigmatized consumers perceive the company’s action of offering a discount as disrespectful toward their social group. The effect is contingent on whether the company is an in-group or out-group member, the selection of other discounted products, and the type of sales promotions employed. This research enriches our understanding of stigmatized consumers and offers insights into the nature of disrespectful cues in the marketplace and the social cost of price promotions.
Speaking in Private: Privacy Expectations Depend on Communication Modality
Johann Melzner, Andrea Bonezzi & Tom Meyvis
Management Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
Consumers disclose personal information when they interact with connected technologies. The advent of voice technology has enabled consumers to interact with connected technologies not only through typing but also through speaking. The present research investigates whether consumers expect different levels of privacy for information they disclose via different communication modalities. The results of three studies suggest that consumers have more restrictive privacy expectations for information disclosed via speech as compared with text. The studies probe the viability of several mechanisms that may drive this effect and test practically relevant moderators. The results suggest that the effect is driven, at least in part, by increased feelings of ownership over content disclosed via speech as compared with text. Of relevance to multiple stakeholders, the article discusses implications for privacy regulation, privacy-preserving application design, targeted advertising, and the “privacy paradox.”
Diversity Representations in Advertising: Enhancing Variety Perceptions and Brand Outcomes
Uzma Khan et al.
Journal of Consumer Research, forthcoming
Abstract:
We present a novel business case for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) by showing that DEI representation in advertisements has important, and yet unestablished, implications for brands. We show that depicting observably diverse (e.g., in race, gender, or age) models in advertisements creates a perception that the brand offers greater product variety, even when the advertisement neither showcases nor directly suggests greater variety. This effect arises because people believe that observably different customers have more varied needs. Diversity representations, therefore, increase the perception that the brand offers greater product variety, presumably to meet the varied needs of its observably different customers. The findings are important because perceptions of variety improve brand impression, perceptions of a brand’s creativity, willingness to pay, willingness to use, and choice. The findings are particularly relevant for brands that offer limited variety, face resource constraints to diversify, and/or want to benefit from generating perceptions of large product variety while avoiding the drawbacks of managing large assortments.
On-Demand Delivery Platforms and Restaurant Sales
Zhuoxin Li & Gang Wang
Management Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
Restaurants are increasingly relying on on-demand delivery platforms (e.g., DoorDash, Grubhub, and Uber Eats) to reach customers and fulfill takeout orders. Although on-demand delivery is a valuable option for consumers, whether restaurants benefit from or are being hurt by partnering with these platforms remains unclear. This paper investigates whether and to what extent the platform delivery channel substitutes restaurants’ own takeout/dine-in channels and the net impact on restaurant revenue. Empirical analyses show that restaurants overall benefit from on-demand delivery platforms -- these platforms increase restaurants’ total takeout sales while creating positive spillovers to customer dine-in visits. However, the platform effects are substantially heterogeneous, depending on the type of restaurants (independent versus chain) and the type of customer channels (takeout versus dine-in). The overall positive effect on fast-food chains is four times as large as that on independent restaurants. For takeout, delivery platforms substitute independent restaurants’ but complement chain restaurants’ own takeout sales. For dine-in, delivery platforms increase both independent and chain restaurants’ dine-in visits by a similar magnitude. Therefore, the value of delivery platforms to independent restaurants mostly comes from the increase in dine-in visits, whereas the value to chain restaurants primarily comes from the gain in takeout sales. Further, the platform delivery channel facilitates price competition and reduces the opportunity for independent restaurants to differentiate with premium services and dine-in experience, which may explain why independent restaurants do not benefit as much from on-demand delivery platforms.
Hitting the Target but Missing the Point: How Donors Use Cost Information
Joshua Lewis & Deborah Small
Journal of Consumer Research, forthcoming
Abstract:
Charities often advertise the cost of a given impact (e.g., $5 provides a meal). Though often intended to demonstrate cost-effectiveness, we find that donors also use the cost as a target. Therefore, the impact cost can be too low, reducing donation amounts, or too high, deterring donors from donating altogether. We propose that, whenever donors have a reference point for a reasonable donation, the revenue-maximizing impact cost is at or just below this reference point, due to loss aversion. We examined these predictions across two online studies (N = 1,711) and one field experiment conducted within a US non-profit’s mailing appeal (N = 141,161). Study 1 demonstrates that donors target impact costs; participants report giving more when the cost of a mosquito net is higher. Study 2, the field experiment, reveals the pernicious effect of setting a target too high. Study 3 tests how the reference donation amount informs the revenue-maximizing impact cost. Supplemental studies robustly support our optimal-target recommendation, while demonstrating that cost information is ubiquitous and theoretically distinct from other types of targets. Together, these results shed light on an often-unintended side-effect of providing cost information, with practical insight on how to leverage it for higher donation revenue.
The Multitier Discount Effect
Haiyang Yang
Journal of Marketing Research, forthcoming
Abstract:
How can firms make their quantity discounts more attractive to consumers? This research proposes that, instead of providing only a quantity discount (e.g., regular price: $6.99 each; buy two: $5.59 each), offering it along with an additional tier of discount (e.g., buy one: $6.79 each) can increase the likelihood that consumers take the quantity discount. This “multitier discount effect” occurs because the inclusion of the additional discount tier can lead consumers to perceive the quantity discount price as lower. Through a series of studies involving different consumption contexts, product categories, price points and discount levels, this research demonstrates the multitier discount effect, its mechanism and key boundary conditions. Specifically, Study 1 shows that social media ads featuring multitier (vs. control) discounts can attract higher clickthrough rates. In a preregistered incentive-compatible setup, Study 2 demonstrates the multitier discount effect and the mediating role of perceived price difference. Studies 3-5 indicate that the price level of the additional discount tier, consumers’ prior purchase frequency, and their distrust of advertised original price can each moderate the multitier discount effect. These findings add to the theoretical literature and provide actionable managerial insights.