See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/293801220

What We Feel and Why We Buy: The Influence of Emotions on Consumer

Decision-Making

Article  in  Current Opinion in Psychology · February 2016

DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.01.009

CITATIONS READS
41 9,390

4 authors:

Chethana Achar Jane So

Northwestern University University of Washington Seattle
6 PUBLICATIONS   99 CITATIONS    2 PUBLICATIONS   97 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Nidhi Agrawal Adam Duhachek

University of Washington Seattle University of Illinois at Chicago
22 PUBLICATIONS   976 CITATIONS    43 PUBLICATIONS   2,795 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

The Impact of Emotions on the Persuasiveness of Detection versus Prevention Appeals View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Chethana Achar on 23 April 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Accepted Manuscript

Title: What We Feel and Why We Buy: The Influence of

Emotions on Consumer Decision-Making

Author: Chethana Achar Jane So Nidhi Agrawal Adam

Duhachek

PII: S2352-250X(16)30001-X
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.01.009
Reference: COPSYC 254

To appear in:

Received date: 22-10-2015

Revised date: 21-1-2016
Accepted date: 22-1-2016

Please cite this article as: C. Achar, J. So, N. Agrawal, A. Duhachek, What We Feel and
Why We Buy: The Influence of Emotions on Consumer Decision-Making, COPSYC
(2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.01.009

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication.
As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript.
The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof
before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process
errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that
apply to the journal pertain.
HIGHLIGHTS

 Emotions embedded in marketing appeals or in decision contexts influence decision-

making.

t
 Consumers are influenced by emotions that are both related and unrelated to the decision.

ip
 Emotions impact consumer decisions through cognitive appraisals.

cr
us
an
M
ed
pt
ce
Ac

Page 1 of 17
 2

What We Feel and Why We Buy: The Influence of Emotions on Consumer

Decision-Making

t
ip
cr
us
Chethana Achara, Jane Soa, Nidhi Agrawala and Adam Duhachekb
an
M
ed

Addresses:
pt

a
Foster School of Business, University of Washington, PACCAR Hall, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
ce

b
Kelley School of Business, Indiana University, 1309 East 10th Street, Bloomington, IN 47405,
USA.
Ac

Corresponding author: Achar, Chethana (acharc@uw.edu)

Page 2 of 17
 3

Abstract

Each specific emotion is associated with a set of cognitive appraisals that drives the influence of

the emotion on decision-making through nuanced psychological mechanisms. We present an

integrated view of the current literature on how emotions - both related and unrelated to the

t
decision at hand - play an important role in shaping consumer decision-making. Emotions

ip
embedded in marketing stimuli influence decision-making via processes driven by cognitive

cr
appraisals. Emotions that are unrelated to the decisions influence decision-making via carried

us
over appraisal tendencies. We present perspectives on why and under what conditions emotions

serve as antecedents to decision-making, and call for future research to examine how emotional
an
influences can both undermine and help consumer decision-making.
M
Introduction
ed

Consider the following situations: Requesting a nicotine patch after seeing a fear-

inducing anti-smoking flier in your doctor’s office, donating money to a charity after eating a
pt

sinful chocolate cake, holding on tightly to your bottle of Coke (as an object of attachment)
ce

while watching a horror movie. Each of these situations provides an example of how emotions

influence consumer decision-making. In some of these instances, marketing efforts create an

Ac

emotional experience in hopes of influencing consumers, whereas in other instances, a

consumer’s incidental emotional state affects the decisions she or he might make. Before delving

into the psychological processes by which emotions influence consumers, we review the current

views on the nature of discrete emotions.

Page 3 of 17
 4

Nature of Discrete Emotions

Emotions are multidimensional feelings that reflect information about consumers'

relationship to their social and physical surroundings as well as their interpretations regarding

these relationships [1,2]. Each specific or discrete emotion is associated with a profile of

t
cognitive evaluations called ‘appraisals’. Early research on specific emotions was aimed at

ip
identifying and classifying emotional appraisals. Smith and Ellsworth [2] classified cognitive

cr
appraisals associated with fifteen common specific emotions along six dimensions (i.e.,

us
pleasantness, certainty, self-responsibility, anticipated effort, attention and situational control).

The more recently developed Appraisal Tendency Framework (ATF) [3,4], suggests that
an
appraisals associated with the experience of a specific emotion can ‘carry over’ by predisposing

individuals’ view of other, unrelated events in line with the preexisting appraisals [5]. For
M
example, fear is an emotion that arises from the appraisal of low individual control over an

unpleasant event whereas anger is associated with high individual control [2]. Thus feelings of
ed

fear or anger lead to different subsequent risk perceptions, such that fear leads to pessimistic risk

perceptions (i.e., perceptions of low control) and anger leads to optimistic risk perceptions (i.e.,
pt

perceptions of high control) [3,6].

ce

Based on the source of consumers’ emotional experiences and its relationship to the

decision at hand, emotional influences are classified into two broad categories: Integral emotions
Ac

and incidental emotions. Integral emotions are experienced when marketers embed emotions in

the marketing stimuli or contexts with the intention of influencing a particular decision [7].

Incidental emotions arise from sources that are unrelated to a particular decision, yet their

influence carries over to that subsequent decision [7]. This review is organized around such

Page 4 of 17
 5

classification of emotions, beginning with an integrative model of how emotions influence

consumer decision-making, followed by sections that detail the specific psychological processes.

Integrative Model Illustrating Role of Integral and Incidental Emotions in Consumer

t
ip
Decision-Making

Appraisals associated with emotions influence judgments in two ways. One, the nature of

cr
marketing appeals and marketing contexts (i.e., advertising, brand, category) can elicit emotions

us
(i.e., integral emotions), which influence consumers’ decision-making processes via cognitive

appraisals of the object or the event. Two, unrelated environmental factors, such as prior events,
an
or consumer’s personality might elicit emotions (i.e., incidental emotions), which affect how

consumers make that decision. Such incidental emotions activate appraisal tendencies related to
M
the emotion and are carried over to decisions about another object or situation. Finally, integral

and incidental emotions can jointly influence decision-making via interaction of cognitive
ed

appraisals. Figure 1 presents an integrative model of emotional influences on consumer behavior.

pt
ce
Ac

Impact of Integral Emotions on Decision-making

Consumers are exposed to emotion-inducing marketing in the form of advertisements,

product packaging, positioning, events, etc. [8,9]. Brands and marketing contents systematically

portray and evoke emotions that encourage desired consumer responses. There is a small stream

Page 5 of 17
 6

of research that explores how integral emotions influence decision-making. Here, we review this

area of research in the hope that it will serve as a call for more scholars to examine the role of

integral emotions in decision-making. Early literature documented the effect of emotions on

consumption by contrasting emotion-laden marketing appeals to non-emotional or rational

t
appeals. In a field experiment, anti-child abuse public service announcements that used

ip
empathetic (vs. rational) appeals were more effective [10]. Following multiple demonstrations

cr
that emotional appeals could be effective alternatives to rational appeals in influencing consumer

us
behavior, most research has focused on understanding how and when integral emotions make

marketing appeals effective.

an
How do emotional appeals influence decisions? There is a wide range of psychological

processes that drives consumer reactions to emotional appeals. Certain emotions increase the
M
motivation to act in compliance with an appeal via accountability appraisals. For example,

sunscreen ads that used specific emotions with appraisals of self-accountability (such as regret,
ed

guilt, and challenge) increased individuals’ intentions to use sunscreen, relative to appeals that

used emotions with low self-accountability (e.g., fear, hope) [11]. Emotional appeals could also
pt

influence subsequent decision-making through modifying one’s concept of self relative to others.
ce

For example, the emotion love expands the boundary of caring toward others and extends

feelings of connection. Therefore, seeing a love-inducing advertisement made participants more

Ac

likely to donate to an international (vs. local) charity [12]. Emotions may also influence

consumer behavior through contagion effects; individuals experienced more sadness when

viewing a charitable appeal with victims’ faces showing sad (vs. happy) expressions and hence

were more likely to feel sympathy [13].

Page 6 of 17
 7

Some emotional appeals influence consumers by changing how the information provided

in the appeal is processed. For example, high fear-arousing appeals (i.e. anti-smoking ads) are

likely to be defensively processed by consumers. Hence, they were effective only when the

message reduced the problem elaboration by using others as references [14]. Another processing

t
mechanism that could enhance the effectiveness of emotional appeals is metacognitive fluency

ip
facilitated by message framing [15]. A guilt-inducing anti-drinking appeal cast in a gain (rather

cr
than loss) frame was processed more fluently and was consequently more effective in decreasing

us
binge drinking intentions. This is because guilt functions through problem-focused coping – as

facilitated by a gain frame – and shame functions through emotion-focused coping, facilitated by

a loss frame [15]. an

M
When do emotional appeals influence decisions? Effectiveness of emotional stimuli may

depend on their compatibility with many consumer-related factors, such as culture, consumers’
ed

salient self-identities, and their incidental emotional states. For example, the influence of

different discrete emotions across people belonging to different cultures varies; emotional
pt

appeals that are not compatible with the participants’ culture may be more effective due to their
ce

novelty [16]. For example, members of a collectivist (vs. individualist) culture were more

persuaded by emotional appeals that were ego-focused (e.g., pride) rather than appeals that
Ac

used other-focused emotions (e.g., empathy) due to a sense of novelty [16]. In another

demonstration of emotional stimuli interacting with consumer characteristics, Coleman and

Williams [17] show that individuals prefer emotional messages that are compatible with their

salient self-identity. Individuals primed with their athlete identity were most persuaded by anger-

Page 7 of 17
 8

based advertisements because anger is consistent with the stereotypical social identity of being

an athlete.

In summary, emotional appeals influence decision-making by skewing consumers’

thinking towards appraisals associated with those emotions such as higher self-responsibility

t
(e.g., regret) and greater inclusion of other in self (e.g., love). Appraisals may also interact with

ip
decision contexts and consumer characteristics to enhance effectiveness of marketing through

cr
various processes such as identity-compatibility, reduced defensive processing, and novelty.

us
While existing research has documented the effects of both compatibility and incompatibility of

emotional appeals with culture [17], future research could explore when compatibility versus

incompatibility effects occur. an

M
Impact of Incidental Emotions on Decision-Making

Emotional influences in the marketplace are not limited to those intentionally set up by
ed

marketers. Even incidental emotions may affect a variety of consumer responses such as

perception, brand choice, information processing, risk taking, etc. [3,18-22]. Incidental emotions
pt

evoked from a previous experience (e.g., watching an ad that portrays hope while watching TV)
ce

may influence subsequent, unrelated decisions (e.g., how many chips you may eat while

watching TV). Recent research has documented effects such as incidental pride affecting
Ac

consumers’ uniqueness-seeking tendency when consumers attribute the feeling of pride to their

personal traits (vs. people who attribute pride to their effort) [23]. In this section, we review

some current views on how and when such incidental influences occur.

How do incidental emotions influence decisions? ATF [7] has helped researchers

understand the mechanism through which even unrelated (i.e., incidental) emotions influence

Page 8 of 17
 9

decisions. The appraisals associated with incidental emotions predispose individuals to perceive

unrelated events in ways that are consistent with appraisal dimensions. This influence of

emotional appraisals can explain why effectiveness of the same message may differ, depending

on the emotion being incidentally experienced. For example, among people incidentally feeling

t
positive emotions (e.g. happiness, calmness), compatibility between emotional appraisals and

ip
referent in a message enhances message effectiveness [24]. In addition to some of the appraisals

cr
discussed previously, recent research has identified new appraisals to provide evidence for

us
differential effects of the same incidental emotions. For example, guilt arises from a behavior-

specific appraisal (e.g., I did not study hard) whereas shame arises from a global self-appraisal
an
(e.g., I am not an intelligent person). Thus, feelings of guilt lead consumers to adopt lower-level

construals and value secondary features (e.g., direct camera upload in an MP3 player) whereas
M
feelings of shame lead consumers to adopt higher-level construals and value primary features

(e.g., storage capacity in an MP3 player) [25]. Thus, guilt-laden consumers chose a product with
ed

unattractive primary features but attractive secondary features but shame-laden consumers chose

the reverse. This illustrates that incidental emotions can influence the construal level of
pt

consumers’ mindsets [25]. Another example of an influential appraisal is the temporal focus of
ce

the emotion. Emotions associated with future-focused appraisals (e.g., hope) increase consumers’

self-control and lead them to make healthier choices relative to emotions associated with present-
Ac

focused or past-focused appraisals (e.g., pride) [26]. In summary, incidental emotions can

influence unrelated decisions via processes such as enhancing message compatibility, changing

temporal focus and mindsets.

When do incidental emotions influence decisions? Sometimes, the surprising effect of the

same emotion having different effects can be explained by minor differences in the nature of

Page 9 of 17
 10

incidental emotions and their interactions with contextual factors. For example, pride arising

from different sources affects decision-making differently. Pride experienced when self-

awareness is heightened leads to virtuous choices by motivating consumers to act in accordance

with their goals. However, pride experienced due to the appraisal of self-achievement leads to

t
indulgent choices because consumers disengage with the goal [27]. In a similar vein, presence of

ip
a goal can moderate the effect of incidental emotions on decisions [28,29]. Incidental sadness

cr
leads to more hedonic consumption because consumers are trying to regulate their feelings.

us
However, this effect is mitigated when a hedonic eating goal is salient because consumers try to

reduce further harmful consequences [28].

an
Features of consumption settings, such as who is involved in the decision making or

where the product is displayed, moderate the effect of incidental emotions [30]. For example,
M
incidental fear leads people to sell stocks early when individuals are led to believe that a peer

decides the value of the stock; this effect of fear on stock-selling does not occur when they are
ed

told that a computer decides stock values [31]. This is caused by ‘social projection’ that is,

people’s tendency to judge others’ state of mind based on their own state. Product display or
pt

physical placement can affect the evaluation of a product when consumers are feeling disgusted
ce

by a nearby, unrelated product [32]. When a disgust-eliciting product (e.g., sanitary napkin) was

placed in such a way that it touches a target product (e.g., a package of notebook paper),
Ac

consumers see the target product as contaminated and had less favorable evaluations of it,

relative to when it was not in contact with the disgust-eliciting product.

In summary, emotions can affect decisions that are seemingly unrelated via appraisal

tendencies. Appraisals associated with each emotion shape consumers’ decisions by processes

such as influencing consumers’ construal levels or temporal focus. The effect of incidental

Page 10 of 17
 11

emotions varies by decision contexts such as source of the emotion, presence of goal or physical

proximity.

Interaction of Integral and Incidental Emotions

t
An important but relatively understudied area in emotions research is how and when

ip
integral emotions and incidental emotions jointly influence consumer decisions. Emotional

cr
stimuli could interact with incidentally experienced emotional states and influence the manner in

us
which information is processed. Agrawal and Duhachek [33], for example, showed that anti-

drinking appeals that exacerbate guilt or shame were less effective among participants
an
incidentally feeling guilt or shame. When the emotional appeal exacerbated the emotional state

participants were already feeling, they defensively processed the information. This finding
M
demonstrated that negative emotional appeals could backfire when they were compatible with

incidental negative emotions. There has been limited research on this area, but future research
ed

can explore how integral and incidental emotions can interact as well as how they can contrast.
pt

Conclusions and Discussion

ce

We have presented a review of how emotions shape decision-making through appraisals;

both when embedded in marketing efforts and when carried over to the decision-making context
Ac

from an unrelated source. Under some conditions, the two forms may interact to jointly influence

consumers. Future research should delve into studying the influence of integral emotions on

consumers and contrast the effects of integral versus incidental emotions [7].

Possible future directions: When emotions help or hurt consumer decisions. A

meaningful future direction is to explore when and why emotions help or hurt consumer

Page 11 of 17
 12

decisions. A commonly held view is that emotional influences hurt consumers, such as incidental

fear or anger leading to risky decisions [31,33-35]. However, many findings reported in this

review show that emotions can have beneficial influences such as aiding self-regulation and

encouraging healthier decisions [26-28, 35,36].

t
This article has summarized recent research that views emotions as antecedents to

ip
decision-making. In contrast to this ‘emotions as antecedents to decisions’ approach, an

cr
important stream of literature has examined how emotions can be outcomes of decision-making

us
and consumption [38-46]. Eating chocolates or buying gifts or purchasing experiences rather

than material products has been shown to make people happier [39-41]. Some of these findings
an
hint that consumers strategically make decisions to manage their emotions. The prevalence of the

phrase ‘retail therapy’ implies that consumers use consumption to manage their emotional states.
M
Blair and Roese [47] show that consumers attempt to reduce embarrassment induced by purchase

of embarrassing products (e.g., anti-diarrheal medicine) by purchasing additional unrelated

ed

products. A related idea is that negative emotions are undesirable and should be repaired where

as positive emotions are desirable and should be increased or sustained [15, 39-41]. A fruitful
pt

line of enquiry is to study why and when consumers may do the opposite, that is, try to reduce a
ce

positive emotion or hold onto a negative emotion.

In conclusion, emotions have complex effects in various decision-making domains. There

Ac

is rich scholarly potential in studying the processes through which emotions influence decision-

making and persuasion.

Page 12 of 17
 13

REFERNCES:

1. Lambie JA, Marcel AJ: Consciousness and the varieties of emotion experience: a

t
theoretical framework. Psychol Review 2002, 109(2):219-259.

ip
2. Smith CA, Ellsworth PC: Patterns of cognitive appraisal in emotion. J Pers Soc Psychol
1985, 48(4):813-838.

cr
3. Lerner JS, Keltner D: Beyond valence: toward a model of emotion-specific influences on
judgement and choice. Cog & Emo 2000, 14(4):473-493.

us
4. Lerner JS, Keltner D: Fear, anger, and risk. J Pers Soc Psychol 2001, 81(1):146-159.
5. So, J, Achar C, Han D, Agrawal N, Duhachek A, Maheswaran D: The psychology of
an
appraisal: specific emotions and decision-making. J Cons Psychol 2015, 25(3): 359-
371.
**This publication presents a framework of how appraisals associated with specific
M
emotions may influence decision-making. The authors highlight some nuanced
approaches of studying emotions and provide directions for future research in the domain
ed

of discrete emotions.
6. Han, S, Lerner, J S, & Keltner, D Feelings and consumer decision making: The appraisal-
tendency framework. J Cons Psychol 2007, 17(3): 158-168.
pt

7. Pham MT: Emotion and rationality: A critical review and interpretation of empirical
evidence. Rev Gen Psychol 2007, 11(2): 155-178.
ce

8. Chen CY, Mathur P, Maheswaran D: The effects of country-related affect on product

evaluation. J Con Res 2015, 41(4):1033-1046.
Ac

9. Lee CJ, Andrade EB, Palmer SE: Interpersonal relationships and preferences for mood-
congruency in aesthetic experience. J Con Res 2013, 40(2):382-391.
10. Bagozzi RP, Moore DJ: Public service advertisements: emotions and empathy guide
prosocial behavior. J Mark 1994, 58(1):56-70.
11. Passyn K, Sujan M: Self-accountability emotions and fear appeals: motivating
behavior. J Cons Res 2006, 32(4):583-589.

Page 13 of 17
 14

12. Cavanaugh LA, Bettman JR, Luce MF: Feeling love and doing more for distant others:
specific positive emotions differentially affect prosocial consumption. J Mark Res
2015, 52(5):657-673.
*This work demonstrates the differential effects of positive emotions in the context of
prosocial behavior. The authors demonstrate psychological processes through which

t
specific positive emotions may increase or decrease prosocial behavior towards different

ip
beneficiaries.
13. Small DA, Verrochi NM: The face of need: facial emotion expression on charity

cr
advertisements. J Mark Res 2009, 46(6):777-787.
14. Keller PA, Block LG: Increasing the persuasiveness of fear appeals: The effect of arousal

us
and elaboration. J Cons Res 1996, 22(4):448-459.
15. Duhachek A, Agrawal N, Han D: Guilt versus shame: coping, fluency, and framing in the
an
effectiveness of responsible drinking messages. J Mark Res 2012, 49(6):928-941.
16. Aaker JL, Williams P: Empathy versus pride: the influence of emotional appeals across
cultures. J Cons Res 1998, 25(3), 241-261.
M
17. Coleman NV, Williams P: Feeling like myself: emotion profiles and social identity. J Cons
Res 2013, 40(2):203-222.
ed

*This work brings together the literatures on consumers’ self-identity and emotions. This
is a good example of integration across contemporary research streams.
18. Agrawal N, Han D, Duhachek A: Emotional agency appraisals influence responses to
pt

preference inconsistent information. Org Beh Human Decision Proc 2013, 120(1):87-
97.
ce

* This research brings together the literature on discrete emotions and biased processing
of information. Studies provide evidence that incidental emotions differ in their response
Ac

to preference-inconsistent (vs. preference consistent) information due to their differences

in agency appraisals.
19. Dunn L, Hoegg J: The impact of fear on emotional brand attachment. J Cons Res 2014,
41(1):152-168.
20. De Mello G, MacInnis DJ, Stewart DW: Threats to hope: effects on reasoning about
product information. J Cons Res 2007, 34(2):153-161.

Page 14 of 17
 15

21. Herrald MM, Tomaka J: Patterns of emotion-specific appraisal, coping, and

cardiovascular reactivity during an ongoing emotional episode. J Pers Soc Psychol
2002, 83(2):434-450.
22. Maheswaran D, Chen CY: Nation equity: incidental emotions in country-of-origin effects.
J Cons Res 2006, 33(3):370-376.

t
23. Huang X, Dong P, Mukhopadhyay A: Proud to belong or proudly different? Lay theories

ip
determine contrasting effects of incidental pride on uniqueness seeking. J Cons Res
2014, 41(3): 697-712.25.

cr
24. Agrawal N, Menon G, Aaker JL: Getting emotional about health. J Mark Res 2007,

us
44(1):100-113.28.
25. Han D, Duhachek A, Agrawal N: Emotions shape decisions through construal level: the
case of guilt and shame. J Cons Res 2014, 41(4):1047-1064.
an
*This paper shows that specific emotions can systematically alter individuals’ construal
level (i.e., abstract from shame and vs. concrete from guilt) due to the appraisals
associated with those emotions. This is a demonstration of how emotions not only
M
provide information and motivate, but affect general psychological processes.
26. Winterich KP, Haws KL: Helpful hopefulness: the effect of future positive emotions on
ed

consumption. J Con Res 2011, 38(3):505-524.

27. Wilcox K, Kramer T, Sen S: Indulgence or self-control: a dual process model of the effect
of incidental pride on indulgent choice. J Cons Res 2011, 38(1): 151-163.
pt

28. Salerno A, Laran J, Janiszewski C: Hedonic eating goals and emotion: when sadness
decreases the desire to indulge. J Con Res 2014, 41(1):135-151.
ce

29. Salerno A, Laran J, Janiszewski C: Pride and regulatory behavior: the influence of
appraisal information and self-regulatory goals. J Cons Res 2015, 42(3): 499-513.
Ac

30. Garg N, Inman JJ, Mittal V: Incidental and task-related affect: A re-inquiry and
extension of the influence of affect on choice. J Cons Res 2005, 32(1):154-159.
31. Lee CJ, Andrade EB: Fear, social projection, and financial decision making. J Mark Res
2011, 48(SPL):121-129.
32. Morales AC, Fitzsimons GJ: Product contagion: changing consumer evaluations through
physical contact with “disgusting” products. J Mark Res 2007, 44(2): 272- 283.

Page 15 of 17
 16

33. Agrawal N, Duhachek A: Emotional compatibility and the effectiveness of antidrinking

messages: a defensive processing perspective on shame and guilt. J Mark Res 2010,
47(2):263-273.
34. Kugler T, Connolly T, Ordóñez LD: Emotion, decision, and risk: Betting on gambles
versus betting on people. J Beh Dec Making 2012, 25(2):123-134.

t
35. McFerran B, Aquino K, Tracy J: Evidence for two facets of pride in consumption:

ip
findings from luxury brands. J Con Psychol 2014, 24(4):455-471.
36. Gardner MP, Wansink B, Kim J, Park SB: Better moods for better eating? How mood

cr
influences food choice. J Con Psychol 2014, 24(3):320-335.
37. Laran J: Consumer Goal Pursuit. Curr Opinion Psychol 2015, 10(Aug): 22-26.

us
38. Chandran S, Menon G: When a day means more than a year: effects of temporal framing
on judgments of health risk. J Con Res 2004, 31(2):375-389.
an
39. Dunn EW, Aknin LB, Norton MI: Spending money on others promotes happiness.
Science 2008, 319(5870):1687-1688.
40. Dunn EW, Gilbert DT, Wilson TD: If money doesn't make you happy, then you probably
M
aren't spending it right. J Con Psychol 2011, 21(2):115-125.
41. Bhattacharjee A, Mogilner C: Happiness from ordinary and extraordinary experiences. J
ed

Con Res 2014, 41(1):1-17.

42. Krishna A, Herd KB, Aydınoğlu NZ: Wetting the bed at twenty-one: embarrassment as a
private emotion. J Con Res 2015, 25(3):473-486.
pt

43. Lee S, Winterich KP, Ross Jr WT: I’m moral, but I won’t help you: the distinct role of
empathy and justice donations. J Con Res 2014, 41(3):678-696.
ce

44. Luce MF, Payne JW, Bettman JR: Emotional trade-off difficulty and choice. J Mark Res
1999, 36(1):143-159.
Ac

45. Lau-Gesk L, Drolet A: The publicly self-consciousness consumer: prepared to be

embarrassed. J Con Psychol 2008, 18(2):127-136
46. Goldsmith K, Cho EK, Dhar R: When guilt begets pleasure: the positive effect of a
negative emotion. J Mark Res 2012, 49(6):872-881.
47. Blair S, Roese NJ: Balancing the basket: the role of shopping basket composition in
embarrassment. J Con Res 2013, 40(4):676-691.

Page 16 of 17
 Figure 1. Integrative model of emotional influences on consumer behavior. Both integral
and incidental emotions influence decision-making via cognitive appraisals.

t
ip
cr
us
an
M
ed
pt
ce
Ac

Page 17 of 17

View publication stats