The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Locus of Choice: Personal Causality and Satisfaction with Hedonic and Utilitarian Decisions
Abstract
Consumers may consume the same products or services with different goals, for example, for their own pleasure—a hedonic goal—or to achieve some higher level purpose—a utilitarian goal. This article investigates whether this difference in goals influences satisfaction with an outcome that was either self-chosen or externally determined. In four experiments we manipulate consumption goals, controlling for the outcomes, the option valence, and whether the externally made choice was determined by an expert or at random. Results show that the outcome of a self-made choice is more satisfying than the outcome of an externally made choice when the goal is hedonic but not when it is utilitarian. We hypothesize that this effect results from the greater perceived personal causality associated with terminally motivated activities, such as hedonic choices, relative to instrumentally motivated activities, such as utilitarian choices, and provide evidence that supports this explanation over alternative accounts.
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
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Festinger, L. (1957) · doi:10.1515/9781503620766 · Cited by 24,241 · cited 1×
“Indeed, when people perceive to have freely chosen an outcome, they tend to boost its subjective value, resulting in an improved outcome evaluation (Festinger 1957; Gilbert et al. 1998; Shafir, Simonson, and Tversky 1993).”
Work and/or Fun: Measuring Hedonic and Utilitarian Shopping Value
Babin, B. J., Darden, W. R., & Griffin, M. (1994) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209376 · Cited by 6,020
When choice is demotivating: can one desire too much of a good thing?
Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (2000) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.995 · Cited by 2,878
Further Examining the American Dream: Differential Correlates of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Goals
Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1996) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167296223006 · Cited by 2,745
Lepper, M. R., Greene, D., & Nisbett, R. E. (1973) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0035519 · Cited by 2,559 · cited 1×
“…people’s sense of free will in that the reason for making that choice is shifted away from the enjoyment of an immediate reward to the selection of a course of action that is functional to the achievement of a higher-level goal (Lepper, Greene, and Nisbett 1973; Ryan, Koestner, and Deci 1991).”
BackgroundHeart and Mind in Conflict: The Interplay of Affect and Cognition in Consumer Decision Making
Shiv, B., & Fedorikhin, A. (1999) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209563 · Cited by 2,044
Mano, H., & Oliver, R. L. (1993) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209361 · Cited by 1,973
Shafir, E. (1993) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/0010-0277(93)90034-s · Cited by 1,453
Justification effects on consumer choice of hedonic and utilitarian goods.
Okada, E. M. (2005) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.42.1.43.56889 · Cited by 1,069
Reactance to Recommendations: When Unsolicited Advice Yields Contrary Responses
Fitzsimons, G. J., & Lehmann, D. R. (2004) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.1030.0033 · Cited by 604
Cited by
Consumers and artificial intelligence: An experiential perspective
Puntoni, S., Reczek, R. W., Giesler, M., & Botti, S. (2021) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/0022242920953847 · Cited by 1,547
Self-citationArtificial Intelligence in Utilitarian vs. Hedonic Contexts: The “Word-of-Machine” Effect
Longoni, C., & Cian, L. (2022) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/0022242920957347 · Cited by 831
Power and consumer behavior: How power shapes who and what consumers value
Rucker, D. D., Galinsky, A. D., & Dubois, D. (2012) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2011.06.001 · Cited by 452
Unreal influence: leveraging AI in influencer marketing
Sands, S., Campbell, C. L., Plangger, K., & Ferraro, C. (2022) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/ejm-12-2019-0949 · Cited by 452
Kronrod, A., & Danziger, S. (2013) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/671998 · Cited by 294
Metadata
- Authors
- Botti, S., & McGill, A. L.
- Venue
- Journal of Consumer Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2011-04-01
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1065-1078
- ISSN
- 0093-5301 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5277
- OpenAlex
- W2097949912
- Cited by
- 387
- References
- 12
- FWCI
- 3.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: The Locus of Choice: Personal Causality and Satisfaction with Hedonic and Utilitarian Decisions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/656570
- The paper
- Botti, S., & McGill, A. L. (2011). The Locus of Choice: Personal Causality and Satisfaction with Hedonic and Utilitarian Decisions. Journal of Consumer Research. https://doi.org/10.1086/656570
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.
