The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Considering the Future: The Conceptualization and Measurement of Elaboration on Potential Outcomes
Open accessAbstract
We examine a new construct dealing with individuals' tendency to elaborate on potential outcomes, that is, to generate and evaluate potential positive and negative consequences of their behaviors. We develop the elaboration on potential outcomes (EPO) scale and then investigate its relationships with conceptually related traits and its association with consumer behaviors such as exercise of self-control, procrastination, compulsive buying, credit card debt, retirement investing, and healthy lifestyle. Finally, we show that consumers with high EPO levels exhibit more effective self-regulation when faced with a choice and that EPO can be primed, temporarily improving self-regulation for consumers with low EPO levels.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Scheier, M. F., Carver, C. S., & Bridges, M. W. (1994) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.67.6.1063 · Cited by 7,456
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116 · Cited by 5,359
Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix
Steiger, J. H. (1980) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.87.2.245 · Cited by 4,621 · cited 1×
“We conducted dependent correlation tests using the Hotelling-William test (Steiger 1980) to examine differences in the correlations of the measured constructs with the generation/ evaluation and the relative outcome focus subscales.”
MethodThe consideration of future consequences: Weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior.
Strathman, A., Gleicher, F., Boninger, D. S., & Edwards, C. S. (1994) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.66.4.742 · Cited by 1,782 · cited 4×
“As discussed earlier, the generation and evaluation dimensions are related to consumers’ depth of processing and affect their depth of self-regulation, so we explore their relationship to other constructs that have previously been used to examine depth of processing and depth of self-regulation: impulsive buying (Rook…”
BackgroundInfluentialBehavioral Decision Theory: Processes of Judgement and Choice
Einhorn, H. J., & Hogarth, R. M. (1981) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.32.020181.000413 · Cited by 1,691
Cited by
‘Fear of missing out’: antecedents and influence on purchase likelihood
Good, M. C., & Hyman, M. R. (2020) · Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice · doi:10.1080/10696679.2020.1766359 · Cited by 159
Psychological and Biological Foundations of Time Preference
Daly, M., Delaney, L., & Harmon, C. P. (2009) · Journal of the European Economic Association · doi:10.1162/jeea.2009.7.2-3.659 · Cited by 115
The Value of Nothing: Asymmetric Attention to Opportunity Costs Drives Intertemporal Decision Making
Read, D., Olivola, C. Y., & Hardisty, D. J. (2017) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2016.2547 · Cited by 83
Metadata
- Authors
- Nenkov, G. Y., Inman, J. J., & Hulland, J.
- Venue
- Journal of Consumer Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2008-06
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 126-141
- ISSN
- 0093-5301 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5277
- OpenAlex
- W2120327653
- Cited by
- 185
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 2.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Considering the Future: The Conceptualization and Measurement of Elaboration on Potential Outcomes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/525504
- The paper
- Nenkov, G. Y., Inman, J. J., & Hulland, J. (2008). Considering the Future: The Conceptualization and Measurement of Elaboration on Potential Outcomes. Journal of Consumer Research. https://doi.org/10.1086/525504
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
