Thought Calibration: How Thinking Just the Right Amount Increases One’s Influence and Appeal

Previous research suggests that people draw inferences about their attitudes and preferences based on their own thoughtfulness. The current research explores how observing other individuals make decisions more or less thoughtfully can shape perceptions of those individuals and their decisions, and ultimately impact observers’ willingness to be influenced by them. Three studies suggest that observing others make more (versus less) thoughtful decisions generates more positive reactions when a choice is difficult, but more negative reactions when a choice is easy. In essence, people perceive the quality of others’ decisions to be greater when other individuals engage in the right amount of thinking for the situation. These assessments then affect observers’ own decisions and openness to influence

Moral choice when harming is unavoidable

Past research suggests that actors seek to minimize harm often at the cost of maximizing social welfare. However, this prior research has confounded a desire to minimize the negative impact caused by one’s actions (harm aversion) with a desire to avoid causing any harm whatsoever (harm avoidance). Across six studies (*N* = 2,152), we demonstrate that these two motives are distinct. Specifically, we find that when decision-makers can completely avoid committing a harmful act they strongly prefer to do so. However, harming often cannot be avoided, and decision-makers must choose between committing less harm for less benefit or committing more harm for more benefit. In these cases, harm aversion diminishes substantially, and decision-makers become increasingly willing to commit greater harm to obtain greater benefits. Thus, value-tradeoffs that decision-makers refuse to accept when it is possible to completely avoid committing harm can suddenly become desirable when some harm must be committed

Reduced Incidence of Slowly Progressive Heymann Nephritis in Rats Immunized With a Modified Vaccination Technique

A slowly progressive Heymann nephritis (SPHN) was induced in three groups of rats by weekly injections of a chemically modified renal tubular antigen in an aqueous medium. A control group of rats received the chemically unmodified version of the antigen in an aqueous solution. One group of SPHN rats were pre- and post-treated with weekly injections of IC made up of rKF3 and rarKF3 IgM antibody at antigen excess (MIC) (immune complexes [ICs] containing sonicated ultracentrifuged [u/c] rat kidney fraction 3 [rKF3] antigen and IgM antibodies specific against the antigen, at slight antigen excess). One group of SPHN rats were post-treated with MIC 3 weeks after the induction of the disease and one group of SPHN animals received no treatment. The control group of rats received pre- and post-treatment with sonicated u/c rKF3

How consumer digital signals are reshaping the customer journey

Marketers are adopting increasingly sophisticated ways to engage with customers throughout their journeys. We extend prior perspectives on the customer journey by introducing the role of digital signals that consumers emit throughout their activities. We argue that the ability to detect and act on consumer digital signals is a source of competitive advantage for firms. Technology enables firms to collect, interpret, and act on these signals to better manage the customer journey. While some consumers' desire for privacy can restrict the opportunities technology provides marketers, other consumers' desire for personalization can encourage the use of technology to inform marketing efforts. We posit that this difference in consumers' willingness to emit observable signals may hinge on the strength of their relationship with the firm. We next discuss factors that may shift consumer preferences and consequently affect the technology-enabled opportunities available to firms. We conclude with a research agenda that focuses on consumers, firms, and regulators