The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Managing Consumer Uncertainty in the Adoption of New Products: Temporal Distance and Mental Simulation
Abstract
Drawing on theories of new product adoption and intertemporal choice, the authors show in cross-sectional and longitudinal investigations (Study 1) that when adoption is in the distant future, people are more concerned about performance- and symbolic-benefit uncertainties. In contrast, in the near future, the concerns are more about switching- and affective-cost uncertainties. In Studies 2 and 2a, using theories of mental simulation, the authors show that in the distant-future adoption scenario, communication strategies that promote outcome simulations are more effective in reducing performance uncertainty, bolstering positive feelings, and enhancing behavioral intentions. In contrast, in the near-future adoption scenario, communication strategies that promote process simulations are better at reducing switching cost and affective uncertainties, assuaging anxiety, and increasing behavioral intentions. The authors also find positive effects of these communication strategies on actual adoption rates and postconsumption satisfaction (Study 2) and on delayed behavioral intentions (Study 2a). In addition, these communication strategies are more efficacious in increasing behavioral intentions when uncertainty levels are higher (Study 3). The key managerial implications are that communication strategies for new products need to reduce uncertainties about costs and benefits and account for temporal distance to adoption.
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
Consumers and Their Brands: Developing Relationship Theory in Consumer Research
Fournier, S. (1998) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209515 · Cited by 7,542
Progress on a cognitive-motivational-relational theory of emotion
Lazarus, R. S. (1991) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.46.8.819 · Cited by 3,272
Cited by
Sun, C., Fang, Y., Kong, M., Chen, X., & Liu, Y. (2022) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102828 · Cited by 148
Stock, R. M. (2011) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-010-0215-4 · Cited by 122
Strategic consumer behavior in online hotel booking
Masiero, L., Viglia, G., & Nieto-Garcia, M. (2020) · Annals of Tourism Research · doi:10.1016/j.annals.2020.102947 · Cited by 70
To Self-Persuade or be Persuaded: Examining Interventions for Users’ Privacy Setting Selection
Krsek, I., Wenzel, K., Das, S., Hong, J. I., & Dabbish, L. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3491102.3502009 · Cited by 14
Ever after: a price story – afterlife belief salience’s effect on willingness to pay
Xu, H., & Leung, A. (2019) · Journal of Consumer Marketing · doi:10.1108/jcm-05-2017-2192 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Castaño, R., Sujan, M., Kacker, M., & Sujan, H.
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-06
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 320-336
- ISSN
- 0022-2437 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-7193
- OpenAlex
- W3123527083
- Cited by
- 287
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 5.81
- 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
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.