Free will, temptation, and self-control: We must believe in free will. We have no choice (Isaac B. Singer).

Baumeister, Sparks, Stillman, and Vohs (2007), sketch a theory of free will as the human ability to exert self-control. Self-control can produce goal-directed behavior, which free will conceptualized as random behavior cannot. We question whether consumer psychology can shed light on the ontological question of whether free will exists. We suggest that it is more fruitful for consumer psychology to examine consumer's belief in free will. Specifically, we propose that this belief arises from customers' phenomenological experience of exercising self-control in the face of moral or intertemporal conflicts of will. Based on extant literature in philosophy, psychology, and economics, we offer both a narrower conceptualization of the nature of self-control problems and a more general conceptualization of self-control strategies, involving not only willpower but also precommitment. We conclude with a discussion of the consequences of consumer's belief in free will.Research; Theory; Self-control; Behavior; IT; Experience; philosophy; Economics; Problems; Strategy;

Bragging Through an Intermediary

The use of an intermediary to convey positive information about a target person is received more favorably and is more effective than direct self -promotion by the target person . These effects persist irrespective of whether the intermediary is motivated by self-interest . However, intermediation may carry image costs for the intermediary

Disclosure of Positive and Negative Experiences as Social Utility

We propose that disclosing one’s positive and negative experiences carries social utility for both senders and recipients. We show that consumers consider this utility when deciding whether to disclose their experiences with others. In three preregistered studies, consumers respond in kind to the disclosures of positive and negative experiences by others

Pleasure, Guilt and Regret in Hedonic Consumption: Revisiting the Vice-Virtue Categorization in Theories of Self-Control

The popular characterization of self-control conflicts as a choice between hedonic vices and utilitarian virtues leads to the unrealistic prediction that hedonic consumption is always accompanied by feelings of guilt and regret. The paradox is resolved by recognizing that excess consumption - rather than hedonics - is the defining characteristic of vices

Response to Commentaries on Exerting Self-Control ≠ Sacrificing Pleasure

Lamberton (2020) presents a brilliant and enriching read of our main arguments through a series of analogies with the life and work of Charles Sanders Peirce on self‐control. Lamberton also presents examples of “reflective self‐control conflicts” that involve choosing among ideals, social norms, and moral values rather than just consumption goals. These questions are arguably much more fascinating than the mundane consumption decisions that we have discussed in our paper, and we thank Lamberton for raising them

He Said, She Said: Gender Differences in Disclosure

We explore gender differences in disclosure and find that men and women are similar in their desire and propensity to disclose positive information, but men are significantly less likely to want to disclose negatively-valenced information and more likely to cite self-presentational motives as underlying their disclosing behavior, relative to women

You call it ‘Self-Exuberance,’ I call it ‘Bragging.’ Miscalibrated Predictions of Emotional Responses to Self-Promotion

People engage in self-promotional behavior because they want others to hold favorable images of them. Self-promotion, however, entails a tradeoff between conveying one’s positive attributes and being seen as bragging. We propose that people get this tradeoff wrong because they erroneously project their own feelings onto their interaction partners. As a consequence, people overestimate the extent to which recipients of their self-promotion will feel proud of and happy for them, and underestimate the extent to which recipients will feel annoyed (Experiment 1 and 2). Because people tend to self-promote excessively when trying to make a favorable impression on others, such efforts often backfire, causing targets of the self-promotion to view the self-promoter as less likeable and as a braggart (Experiment 3)

Tightwads and spendthrifts.

Consumers often behave differently than they would ideally like to behave. We propose that an anticipatory pain of paying drives "tightwads" to spend less than they would ideally like to spend. "Spendthrifts," by contrast, experience too little pain of paying and typically spend more than they would ideally like to spend. This article introduces and validates the "spendthrift-tightwad" scale, a measure of individual differences in the pain of paying. Spending differences between tightwads and spendthrifts are greatest in situations that amplify the pain of paying and smallest in situations that diminish the pain of paying. They were so skewed and squint-eyed in their minds, their misering or extravagance mocked all reason. (Dante's Inferno, "Canto VII: The Hoarders and the Wasters") E conomic models of decision making are consequentialist in nature. They assume that decision makers choose between alternative courses of action based on a cognitive evaluation of the desirability (i.e., "utility") and likelihood of their consequences. This does not, however, imply that consequentialist decision makers are devoid of *Scott I. Rick ([email protected]) is a visiting professor of operations and information management at the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania

Tightwads and spendthrifts.

Consumers often behave differently than they would ideally like to behave. We propose that an anticipatory pain of paying drives "tightwads" to spend less than they would ideally like to spend. "Spendthrifts," by contrast, experience too little pain of paying and typically spend more than they would ideally like to spend. This article introduces and validates the "spendthrift-tightwad" scale, a measure of individual differences in the pain of paying. Spending differences between tightwads and spendthrifts are greatest in situations that amplify the pain of paying and smallest in situations that diminish the pain of paying. They were so skewed and squint-eyed in their minds, their misering or extravagance mocked all reason. (Dante's Inferno, "Canto VII: The Hoarders and the Wasters") E conomic models of decision making are consequentialist in nature. They assume that decision makers choose between alternative courses of action based on a cognitive evaluation of the desirability (i.e., "utility") and likelihood of their consequences. This does not, however, imply that consequentialist decision makers are devoid of *Scott I. Rick ([email protected]) is a visiting professor of operations and information management at the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania