The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Form versus Function: How the Intensities of Specific Emotions Evoked in Functional versus Hedonic Trade-Offs Mediate Product Preferences
Abstract
This article examines the emotional and behavioral consequences of making functional versus hedonic trade-offs. Building on the proposed correspondence between functionality and a prevention focus and between hedonics and a promotion focus, the authors predict that contexts involving functional versus hedonic trade-offs evoke a variety of both negative and positive emotions, including guilt/anxiety, sadness/ disappointment, cheerfulness/excitement, and confidence/security. These predictions are confirmed. Furthermore, an analysis of the intensities of these specific emotions reveals the following additional insights: (1) Under conditions in which the options in a choice set meet or exceed both functional and hedonic cutoffs, consumers attach greater importance to the hedonic attribute, and (2) whereas the functionally superior option is preferred in choice tasks, the hedonically superior one is preferred in willingness-to-pay tasks.
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
“Stress: appraisal and coping,”
Folkman, S. (2013) · Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1005-9_215 · Cited by 27,833
Asymptotic Confidence Intervals for Indirect Effects in Structural Equation Models
Sobel, M. E. (1982) · Sociological Methodology · doi:10.2307/270723 · Cited by 12,810
Higgins, E. T. (1997) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.52.12.1280 · Cited by 6,775
Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude
Voss, K. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Grohmann, B. (2003) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.40.3.310.19238 · Cited by 2,151
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
Cited by
Negative and positive customer shopping experience in an online context
Barari, M., Ross, M., & Surachartkumtonkun, J. (2020) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101985 · Cited by 200
Song, X., Xu, B., & Zhao, Z. (2022) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2022.103595 · Cited by 192
Shiny happy people buying: The role of emotions on personalized e-shopping
Pappas, I. O., Kourouthanassis, P. E., Giannakos, M. N., & Chrissikopoulos, V. (2014) · Electronic Markets · doi:10.1007/s12525-014-0153-y · Cited by 140
Perceived Marketplace Influence and Consumer Ethical Action
Bret Leary, R., Vann, R. J., & Mittelstaedt, J. D. (2019) · Journal of Consumer Affairs · doi:10.1111/joca.12220 · Cited by 32
Niimi, J. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.25378 · Cited by 7
“Each component imi-tates genuine studies, such as the author names (e.g., Chit-turi and Raghunathan [9]), journal name (Journal of Direct, Data, and Digital Marketing Practice [10]), and the paper title (e.g., “RFM and CLV” [11]), but the numerical details are fictitious, suggesting that multiple…”
Metadata
- Authors
- Chitturi, R., Raghunathan, R., & Mahajan, V.
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2007-11
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 702-714
- ISSN
- 0022-2437 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-7193
- OpenAlex
- W1988075985
- Cited by
- 448
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 5.61
- 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: Form versus Function: How the Intensities of Specific Emotions Evoked in Functional versus Hedonic Trade-Offs Mediate Product Preferences. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1509/jmkr.44.4.702
- The paper
- Chitturi, R., Raghunathan, R., & Mahajan, V. (2007). Form versus Function: How the Intensities of Specific Emotions Evoked in Functional versus Hedonic Trade-Offs Mediate Product Preferences. Journal of Marketing Research. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.44.4.702
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.