CONSUMER BEHAVIOR (JUDGMENT AND DECISION MAKING VERSION) – BUSML 8250 CLASS TIME/LOCATION: Tuesdays, 1pm-4pm @ Fisher 500A INSTRUCTOR: Selin A. Malkoc, PhD OFFICE: Fisher Hall 510 E-MAIL: malkoc@fisher.osu.edu OFFICE HOURS: by appointment

Course Description This class provides students an introductory overview of judgment and decision making (JDM, aka Behavioral Decision Making) research, with a slant on consumer behavior. The field of JDM is heavily grounded by the disciplines of economics and psychology. Now has major contributions from most business domains as well (organizational behavior, behavioral accounting, behavioral finance, consumer behavior, etc.). We will look at some of the classics articles and theories that started the movement and current work that has updated these theories. Learning Objectives

• Critically evaluate the classic Judgment and Decision Making (JDM) and Behavioral Decision Theory (BDT) literature, particularly those relating to consumer behavior and marketing.

• Synthesize a framework for understanding both the normative and descriptive principles that govern consumer and managerial decision making.

• Understand future directions for JDM research and develop a critical perspective to identify opportunities for contributing to the general area of JDM.

• Practice original idea generation and experiment design relating to JDM, BDT, consumer behavior, or managerial decision making.

• Practice and improve presentation and writing skills of research ideas Text/Materials Course Packet: None. I will also post copies of book chapters and articles as pdf’s on Blackboard. Email I will use email for official communication and I will use your name-dot-numbers OSU email address.

Grading Your grade will be based on your class membership and the idea paper.

2

I. Tickets Before each class you need to write a “ticket” to gain admission to class. Tickets are your thoughts and reflections on that day’s readings. Here are some guidelines:

1) Tickets should include one research idea and description of at least one study designed to test the idea.

2) The research idea could be an extension of a study you read, a way to test an alternative explanation or a new idea that is inspired by the readings/topic.

3) Tickets should NOT repeat or summarize the readings. I actually want to know what you THINK!

4) Email them to me the night before class and bring a copy to class for your reference. 5) Keep them short. About a page (600 words) is usually fine. If you can say it in one

sentence instead of a paragraph, then say it in one sentence! 6) Don’t forget to sign the email/document!

Here are some tips for critically evaluating a paper:

1) Do you find the findings interesting? 1 2) Do you find the conclusion(s) convincing?

a. If so, why? Which particular data, analyses, or arguments convinced you. What would be the implications of this finding for further research (i.e., what would be a good extension)? How could you extend this or apply it to your research area?

b. If not, why not? What is unclear, lacking, or outright wrong? What alternative theory might be plausible or account for the results? How would you test this?

II. Class Discussions

This class is a discussion class. Thus, the success of the class is dependent upon active participation. We will not spend too much time tearing the papers down and instead try to build things up using your ideas. The goal of the readings is to (1) gain historical perspective about a broad research topic, (2) understand who the key players are in that domain, (3) discuss the strengths and weakness of each paper and (4) the ways in which they can be expanded. To that end, I might ask you lead the discussion (not formally) if your ticket was closely related to one of the papers.

III. Idea Paper

A research idea paper is due at the end of the semester. You can take an idea from a ticket and develop it further. You are also welcome to submit a project you are already pursuing and incorporate topic(s) we discussed in class. The paper must propose a research idea and specify an experiment(s) you would run to test your theory. Actual data is not necessary, but encouraged.

1 TIP: Negation. Insert a "not" in an assertion, or imagine the opposite result. Does it make sense? If not (i.e., if the "not" is not believable on prior grounds), then either the assertion or the result convey little or no information. For example, consider the argument that psychopathology is due to low self-esteem--supported by the finding that people who are drunk all the time, or abuse spouses or children, or who go in and out of mental hospitals don't have high self-esteem. Ask yourself is it plausible for people who have as high self-esteem as anyone else be never drunk, abuse or have mental problems? My conclusion: The finding proves nothing at all about the origins of pathological behavior. (credit: Robyn M. Dawes)

3

Class Schedule (subject to change) Jan 9th Introduction: Bounded Rationality & Dual-Processing Systems Jan 16th Heuristics and Biases* Jan 23rd Framing Effects 1 – Loss Aversion and Endowment Effect Jan 30th Framing Effects 2 – Mental Accounting Feb 6th Constructed Preferences & Context Dependence Feb 13th Context Effects Feb 20th Variety Seeking and Choice Overload Feb 27th Affect and Choice March 6th Choice Over Time March 13th SPRING BREAK March 20th Time vs. Money March 27th Time Consumption April 3rd Subjective Wellbeing and Happiness April 10th What is next in JDM? April 17th Presentations * we will need to reschedule this class as I will be out of town – ideally to sometime on Thursday.

4

Readings (required and suggested)

Jan 9th -- Introduction: Bounded Rationality & Dual-Processing Systems

1. Simon, Herbert A. (1955), “A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69, 7-19. *Some would argue that this is the foundation paper for the JDM filed

2. Kahneman, Daniel (1991), “Judgment and Decision Making: A Personal View,” Psychological Science, 2(3), 142-145.

3. Sloman, Steven A. (2002), “Two Systems of Reasoning,” in Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment, ed. Thomas Gilovich, Dale Griffin, and Daniel Kahneman, New York: Cambridge University Press.

4. Todd, Peter M. and Gerd Gigerenzer (2003), “Bounded Rationality to the World,” Journal of Economic Psychology, 24, 143-165. *Gigerenzer is Kahneman and Tversky’s most avid critic, often engaging in rebuttals.

Other Readings:

1. Denes-Raj, Vernonika and Seymur Epstein (1994), “Conflict between Intuitive and Rational Processing,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,” 66, 819-829.

2. Evans, Jonathan (2003), “In Two Minds: Dual Process Accounts of Reasoning,” Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 454-459.

3. Morewedge, Carey K., and Daniel Kahneman (2010), “Associative processes in intuitive judgment,” Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14(10), 435-440.

4. Evans, Jonathan St. B. T. & Keith E. Stanovich (2013), “Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate,” Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 223-241, 263-271.

5

Jan 16th -- Heuristics and Biases

1. Tversky, Amos and Daniel Kaheman (1974), “Judgment and Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases,” Science, 185, 1124-1131. *The article that introduced heuristics and biases to a general audience

2. Tversky, Amos and Daniel Kahneman (1983), “Extensional versus Intuitive Reasoning: The Conjunction Fallacy in Probability Judgment,” Psychological Review, 90, 293-314. *A classic study of heuristics, includes the famous “Linda Problem”

3. Kahneman, Daniel (2003), “A perspective on Judgment and Choice,” American Psychologist, 58(9), 697-720. *Based on Kahneman’s Nobel speech, summarizes the field up to date.

4. Shah, Anuj K. and Daniel M. Oppenheimer (2008), “Heuristics Made Easy: An-Effort Reduction Framework,” Psychological Bulletin, 134(2), 207-222.

5. Sevilla, Julio and Barbara E. Kahn (2014), “The Completeness Heuristic: Product Shape Completeness Influences Size Perceptions, Preference, and Consumption. Journal of Marketing Research: February 2014, Vol. 51, No. 1, 57-68.

- For brief discussion, but you should really read it! -

6. Kahenman, Daniel and Amos Tversky (1979), “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decisions under Risk,” Econometrica, 47 (March), 263-291. *The classic paper everyone must read (at least once)

Other Readings:

1. Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman (1971), “Belief in the law of small numbers,” Psychological Bulletin, 76, 105- 110.

2. Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky (1972), “Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness,” Cognitive Psychology, 3, 430-454.

3. Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman (1973), “Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability,” Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207-232.

4. Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky (1973), “On the psychology of prediction,” Psychological Review, 80, 237-25l.

5. Tversky, Amos and Daniel Kahneman (1986), “Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions,” Journal of Business, 59(4), S251-S278. * includes a discussion a good discussion of Prospect Theory

6. Epley, Nicholas and Tom Gilovich (2001), “Putting Adjustment Back in the Anchoring and Adjustment Heuristic,” Psychological Science, 12, 391-396.

6

7. Kahneman, Daniel and Shane Frederick (2002), “Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment,” Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment, ed. Thomas Gilovich, Dale Griffin and Daniel Kahneman (pp. 49-81).

8. Gneezy, Ayelet, Uri Gneezy, and Dominique Olié Lauga (2014), “A Reference-Dependent Model of the Price–Quality Heuristic,” Journal of Marketing Research, April 2014, Vol. 51, No. 2, 153-164.

9. Cheng, Yimin, Anirban Mukhopadhyay, and Rom Y. Schrift (2017), “Do Costly Options Lead to Better Outcomes? How the Protestant Work Ethic Influences the Cost–Benefit Heuristic in Goal Pursuit,” Journal of Marketing Research: August 2017, Vol. 54, No. 4, 636-649.

10. Simmons, Joseph P. and Leif Nelson (2006), “Intuitive Confidence: Choosing between Intuitive and Non-intuitive Alternatives,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 409-428.

7

Jan 23rd -- Framing Effects 1 – Loss Aversion and Endowment Effect

1. Kahneman, Daniel, Jack L. Knetsch, and Richard H. Thaler (1991), “The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and the Status Quo Bias,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5 (1), 193-206.

*The classic paper that established more than one effect at once

2. Novemsky, Nathan and Daniel Kahneman (2005), “The Boundaries of Loss Aversion,” Journal of Marketing Research, 42 (May), 119-128. * A recent take on Loss Aversion

3. Weaver, Ray and Shane Frederick (2012), “A Reference Price Theory of the Endowment Effect,” Journal of Marketing Research, 49(5). * A recent take on Endowment Effect

4. Irmak, Caglar, Cherly J. Wakslak and Yaacov Trope (2013), “Selling the Forest, Buying the Trees: The Effect of Construal Level on Seller-Buyer Price Discrepancy,” Journal of Consumer Research, 40(1), 284-297.

Other Reading -Loss Aversion

1. Carlson, Kurt A., Jared Wolfe, Simon J. Blanchard, Joel C. Huber, and Dan Ariely (2015), “The Budget Contraction Effect: How Contracting Budgets Lead to Less Varied Choice,” Journal of Marketing Research: June 2015, Vol. 52, No. 3, 337-348.

2. Sokolova, Tatiana and Aradhna Krishna (2016), “Take It or Leave It: How Choosing versus Rejecting Alternatives Affects Information Processing,” Journal of Consumer Research, 43(4), 614–635.

Other Reading - Endowment Effect

1. Kahneman, Daniel, Jack L. Knetsch, and Richard H. Thaler (1990), “Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem,” Journal of Political Economy, 98 (December), 1325-1348.

2. Strahilevitz, Michal A. and George Lowenstein (1998), “The Effect of Ownership History on the Valuation of Objects,” Journal of Consumer Research, 25 (December), 276-289.

3. Johnson, Eric J., Gerald Häubl, and Anat Keinan (2007), “Aspects of Endowment: A Query Theory of Value Construction,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, and Cognition, 33 (3), 461-474.

4. Schurr, Amos. and Ilana Ritov (2014), “The Effect of Giving It All Up on Valuation: A New Look at The Endowment Effect,” Management Science, 60 (3), 628-637.

8

Jan 30th -- Framing Effects 2 – Mental Accounting

1. Thaler, Richard H. (1999), “Mental Accounting Matters,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12(3), 183-206. * The seminal mental accounting paper summarizing many effects

2. Heath, Chip and Jack Soll (1996), “Mental Budgeting and Consumer Decisions,” Journal of Consumer Research, 23, 40-52.

3. Levav, Jonathan and A. Peter McGraw (2009), “Emotional Accounting: How Feelings About Money Influence Consumer Choice,” Journal of Marketing Research, 46 (1), 66-80.

4. Reinholtz, Nicholas, Daniel M. Bartels and Jeffrey R. Parker (2015), “On the Mental Accounting of Restructed-Use Funds: How Gift Cards Change What People Purchase,” Journal of Consumer Research, 42(4), 596-614.

Other Reading

1. Prelec, Drazen and George Loewenstein (1998), “The Red and the Black: Mental Accounting of Savings and Debt,” Marketing Science, 17 (1), 4-28.

2. Gourville John T. and Dilip Soman (1998) “Payment Depreciation: The Behavioral Effects of Temporally Separating Payments from Consumption,” Journal of Consumer Research, 25 (2), 160-174.

3. Cheema, Amar and Dilip Soman (2008), “The Effect of Partitions on Controlling Consumption,” Journal of Marketing Research, 45 (December).

4. Soster, Robin L., Andrew D. Gershoff and William O. Bearden (2014), “The Bottom Dollar Effect: The Influence of Spending to Zero on Pain of Payment and Satisfaction, Journal of Consumer Research, 41(3), 656-677.

9

Feb 6th -- Constructed Preferences & Context Dependence

1. Payne, John W., James R. Bettman, and Eric J. Johnson (1988). Adaptive strategy selection in decision making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14(3), 534-552. *one of many PBJ papers. This one established different choice strategies using MouseLab – then the revolutionary computer program.

2. Bettman, James R., Mary Frances Luce, and John W. Payne (1998), “Constructive Consumer Choice Processes,” Journal of Consumer Research, 25, 187-217. * The seminal paper, that is also Luce’s dissertation

3. Amir, On and Jonathan Levav (2008), “Choice Construction versus Preference Construction: The Instability of Preferences Learned in Context,” Journal of Marketing Research, 45 (2), 145-158.

4. Payne, John W., Adriana Samper, James R. Bettman, Mary Frances Luce, (2009), “Boundary Conditions on Unconscious Thought in Complex Decision Making,” Psychological Science, 19(1), 1118-1123.

Other Readings:

1. Slovic, Paul (1955), “The Construction of Preference,” American Psychologist, 50, 364-371. * The first seeds of preference construction

2. Luce, Mary Frances (1998), “Choosing to Avoid: Coping with Negatively Emotion-Laden Consumer Decisions,” Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (March), 409-433.

3. Payne, John W., James R. Bettman, & Eric J. Johnson (1992), “Behavioral decision research: A constructive processing perspective,” Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 87-131.

4. Simonson, Itamar (2008), “Will I like a “medium” pillow? Another look at constructed and inherent preferences,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 18(3), 55-169.

* Simonson arguing for non-constructed “inherent” preferences

10

Feb 13th-- Context Effects

1. Simonson, Itamar (1989), “Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects,” Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (September), 158-174. * The paper that established compromise effect

2. Dhar, Ravi (1997), “Consumer Preference for a No-choice Option,” Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (2), 215-231.

3. Hsee, Christopher K., and France Leclerc (1998), “Will Products Look More Attractive When Presented Separately Or Together?” Journal of Consumer Research, vol. 25, no. 2, 175–186.

4. Pocheptsova, Anastasia, On Amir, Ravi Dhar and Roy F. Baumeister (2009), “Deciding Without Resources: Psychological Depletion and Choice in Context,” Journal of Marketing Research, 46(3), 344-355.

* An example of more contemporary use of context effects

5. SKIM: Malkoc, Selin A., William Hedgcock and Steve Hoeffler (2013), “Between a rock and a hard place: The failure of the attraction effect among unattractive alternatives,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, Volume 23, Issue 3, 317-329.

* One of very few papers discussing a boundary condition for the attraction effect. Other Readings: 1. Tversky, Amos (1972), “Elimination by Aspects: A Theory of Choice,” Psychological Review,

79, 281-299.

2. Kahneman, Daniel and Amos Tversky (1984), “Choices, Values and Frames,” American Psychologist, 39, 342-350.

3. Huber, Joel, John W. Payne, and Christopher Puto (1982), “Adding Asymetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis,” Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 90-97.

* The seminal paper that established asymmetric dominance -------- 4. Frederick, Shane, Leonard Lee, and Ernest Baskin (2014), “The Limits of Attraction,”

Journal of Marketing Research: August 2014, Vol. 51, No. 4, 487-507. * A recent paper that tries to make the case for the very limited existence of the attraction effect.

5. Simonson, Itamar (2014), “Vices and Virtues of Misguided Replications: The Case of Asymmetric Dominance,” Journal of Marketing Research 51:4, 514-519. * Simonson’s rebuttal

6. Huber, Joel, John W. Payne and Christopher P. Puto. (2014), “Let's Be Honest About the Attraction Effect,” Journal of Marketing Research, 51:4, 520-525.

* Huber’s rebuttal -------

7. Simonson, Itamar and Amos Tversky (1992), “Choice in Context: Tradeoff Contrast and Extremeness Aversion,” Journal of Marketing Research, 29 (August), 281-295.

11

8. Shafir, Eldar, Itamar Simonson, and Amos Tversky (1993), “Reason-based Choice,” Cognition, 49, 11-36

9. Tversky, Amos and Itamar Simonson (1993), “Context-dependent preferences,” Management Science, 10, 1179-1189.

10. Irwin, Julie R. (1994), “Buying/selling price preference reversals: Preference for environmental changes in buying versus selling modes,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 60, 431-457.

11. Hsee, Christopher K., George F. Lowenstein, Sally Blount, and Max H. Bazerman (1999), “Preference Reversals Between Joint and Separate Evaluations of Options: A Review and Theoretical Analysis,” Psychological Bulletin, 125, 576-59.

12. Dhar, Ravi, and Itamar Simonson (2003), “The Effect of Forced Choice on Choice,” Journal of Marketing Research, 40 (May), 146-160.

13. Johnson, Eric J. and Daniel G. Goldstein (2003), “Do Defaults Save Lives?” Science, Vol. 302, 1338-1339.

14. Fox, Craig R., Rebecca K. Ratner and Daniel Lieb (2005), “How Subjective Grouping of Options Influences Choice and Allocation: Diversification Bias and Phenomenon of Partition Dependence,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 538-551.

15. Novemsky, Nathan, Ravi Dhar, Norbert Schwarz, and Itamar Simonson (2007), “Preference Fluency in Choice,” Journal of Marketing Research, 44 (August), 347-56.

16. Schrift, Rom Y., Oded Netzer, and Ran Kivetz (2011), “Complicating Choice: the Effort Compatibility Hypothesis,” Journal of Marketing Research, 48 (2), 308-326.

17. Mochon, Daniel, “Single-Option Aversion,” Journal of Consumer Research, Volume 40, Issue 3, 1 October 2013, 555–566.

12

Feb 20th - Variety Seeking and Choice Overload

1. Simonson, Itamar (1990), “The Effect of Purchase Quantity and Timing on Variety-Seeking Behavior,” Journal of Marketing Research, 27 (May), 150-62.

* The seminal paper to talk about variety seeking as a bias.

2. Iyengar, Sheena S and Mark R. Lepper (2000), “When Choice is Demotivating: Can One Desire Too Much of a Good Thing?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79 (6), 995-1006. * The seminal paper that established negative outcomes of (too much) choice

3. Goodman, Joseph K. and Selin A. Malkoc (2012), “Choosing Here and Now versus There and Later: The Moderating Role of Psychological Distance on Assortment Size Preferences, Journal of Consumer Research, Volume 39, Issue 4 (December), 751–768.

4. Deng, Xiaoyan, Barbara E. Kahn, H. Rao Unnava, and Hyojin Lee (2016), “A ‘Wide’ Variety: Effects of Horizontal Versus Vertical Display on Assortment Processing, Perceived Variety, and Choice,” Journal of Marketing Research, 52 (5), 682-698.

5. Sevilla, Julio, Jiao Zhang, and Barbara E. Kahn (2016), “Anticipation of Future Variety Reduces Satiation from Current Experiences.” Journal of Marketing Research: December 2016, Vol. 53, No. 6, 954-968.

Other Readings:

1. Ratner, Rebecca K., Barbara. E Kahn, and Daniel Kahneman (1999). "Choosing Less-Preferred Experiences for the Sake of Variety," Journal of Consumer Research, 26, 1-15.

2. Ratner, Rebecca.K. and Barbara K. Kahn (2002), "The Impact of Private versus Public Consumption on Variety-Seeking Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, 29, 246-257.

3. Chernev, Alexander (2003), “When More Is Less and Less Is More: The Role of Ideal Point Availability and Assortment in Consumer Choice,” Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (September), 170-83.

4. Botti, Simona and Shena S. Iyengar (2004), “The Psychological Pleasure and Pain of Choosing: When People Prefer Choosing at the Cost of Subsequent Satisfaction,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87 (3), 312-326.

5. Iyengar, Sheena S., Rachael E. Wells, and Barry Schwartz (2006), “Doing Better but Feeling Worse,” Psychological Science, 17 (2), 143-150.

6. Redden, Joseph (2008), “Reducing Satiation: The Role of Categorization Level,” Journal of Consumer Research, 34 (February), 624-34.

7. Nelson, Leif D., and Tom Meyvis (2008), “Interrupted Consumption: Disrupting Adaptation to Hedonic Experiences,” Journal of Marketing Research, 45 (6), 654-64.

13

8. Mogilner, Cassie, Tamar Rudnick, and Sheena S. Iyengar (2008), “The Mere Categorization Effect: How the Presence of Categories Increases Choosers’ Perceptions of Assortment Varieties and Outcome Satisfaction,” Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (2), 202-215.

9. Botti, Simona, Kristina Orfali, and Sheena S. Iyengar (2009), “Tragic Choices: Autonomy and Emotional Responses to Medical Decisions,” Journal of Consumer Research, 36 (3), 337-352.

10. Sela, Aner, Jonah Berger, and Wendy Liu (2009), “Variety, Vice, and Virtue: How Assortment Size Influences Option Choice,” Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (April), 941-951.

11. Scheibehenne, Benjamin, Rainer Greifeneder, and Peter M. Todd (2010), “Can There Ever Be Too Many Options? A Meta-Analytic Review of Choice Overload,” Journal of Consumer Research, 37 (October), 409-425.

12. Chernev, Alexander, Ulf Bockenholt, and Joseph Goodman (2010), “Commentary of Scheibehenne, Greifendeder, and Todd, Choice Overload: Is there Anything to It?” Journal of Consumer Research, 37 (October), 426-428.

13. Diehl, Kristin and Cait Poynor (2010), “Great Expectations?! Assortment Size, Expectations and Satisfaction,” Journal of Marketing Research, 47 (April), 312-322.

14. Goodman, Joseph K., Susan Broniarczyk, Jill Griffin, and Leigh McAlister (2013), “Help or Hinder? When Recommendation Signage Expands Consideration Sets and Heightens Decision Difficulty,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23 (April), 165-174.

15. Poynor Lamberton, Cait and Kristin Diehl (2013), “Retail Choice Architecture: The Effects of Benefit and Attribute-based Assortment Organization on Consumer Perceptions and Choice,” Journal of Consumer Research, 40 (October), 393-411.

16. Haws, Kelly L., Peggy J. Liu, Joseph P. Redden, and Heidi J. Silver (2017), “Exploring the Relationship Between Varieties of Variety and Weight Loss: When More Variety Can Help People Lose Weight,” Journal of Marketing Research: August 2017, Vol. 54, No. 4, 619-635.

14

Feb 27th -- Affect and Choice

1. Shiv, Baba and Alexander Fedorikhin (1999), “Heart and Mind in Conflict: The Interplay of Affect and Cognition in Consumer Decision Making,” Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (December), 1999.

* The seminal paper that demonstrated divergent outcomes of affect and cognition on decision making.

2. Lerner, Jennifer S., Deborah A. Small, and George Loewenstein (2004), “Heart Strings and Purse Strings: Carryover Effects of Emotions on Economic Decisions,” Psychological Science, 15 (May), 337-341.

3. Rottenstreich, Yuval and Chris K. Hsee (2001), “Money, kisses, and electric shocks: An affective psychology of risk,” Psychological Science, 12, 185-190.

4. Shiv, Baba, George Loewenstein, Antoine Bechara, Hanna Damasio and Antonio R. Damasio (2005), “Investment Behavior and the Negative Side of Emotion,” Psychological Science, 16(6), 435-439.

* One of the first papers to talk about downsides of emotions.

5. Nelson, Noelle., Selin A. Malkoc, and Baba Shiv (2018), "Emotions Know Best: The Advantage of Emotional versus Cognitive Responses to Failure," Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 31(1), 40-51.

Other Readings:

1. Zajonc, Robert B. (1980), “Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences,” American Psychologist, 35, 151-175. * The seminal paper distinguishing feeling and thinking.

2. Mellers, Barbara A., Alan Schwartz, Katty Ho, and Ilana Ritov (1997), “Decision affect theory: Emotional reactions to the outcomes of risky options,” Psychological Science, 8, 423–429.

3. Bechara, Antoine, Hanna Damasio, Daniel Tranel, and Antonio R. Damasi (1997), “Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy,” Science, 275, 1293-1295.

4. Finucane, Melissa L., Ali Alhakami, Paul Slovic, and Stephen M. Johnson (2000), “The Affect Heuristics in Judgments of Risks and Benefits,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13, 1-17.

5. Haidt, Jonathan (2001), “The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment,” Psychological Review, 108 (4), 814-834.

6. Baumeister, Roy F., Ellen Bratslavsky, Catrin Finkenauer, and Kathleen D. Vohs (2001), “Bad is Stronger Than Good,” Review of General Psychology, 5 (December), 323-370.

15

7. Loewenstein, George, and Jennifer S. Lerner (2003), “The role of affect in decision making,” in Handbook of Affective Science, 619-642, ed. Richard Davidson, H. Goldsmith, and Klaus Scherer, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

8. Lerner, Jennifer S., Roxana M. Gonzalez, Deborah A. Small, and Baruch Fischhoff (2003), “Emotion and perceived risks of terrorism: A national field experiment,” Psychological Science, 14 (2), 144-50.

9. Loewenstein, George and Deborah A. Small (2007), “The scarecrow and the tin man: The Vicissitudes of Human Sympathy and Caring,” Review of General Psychology (Special Issue on Emotions and Decision Making), 11 (2), 112-26.

10. Levav, Jonathan and A. Peter McGraw (2009), “Emotional Accounting: How Feelings About Money Influence Consumer Choice,” Journal of Marketing Research, 46 (1), 66-80.

11. Chapman, Hannah A., D. A. Kim, Joshua M. Susskind, & Adam K. Anderson (2009), “In bad taste: Evidence for the oral origins of moral disgust,” Science, 323, 1222-1226.

16

March 6th -- Choice over time

1. Thaler, Richard H. (1981), “Some Empirical Evidence on Dynamic Inconsistency,” Economics Letters, 8, 201-207. * The seminal paper establishing three separate intertemporal anomalies.

2. Zauberman, Gal, B. Kyu Kim, Selin Malkoc, and James R. Bettman (2009), "Discounting Time and Time Discounting: Subjective Time Perception and Intertemporal Preferences," Journal of Marketing Research, 46 (4), 543-556.

3. Bartels, Daniel M. and Oleg Urminsky (2011), "On Intertemporal Selfishness: How the Perceived Instability of Identity Underlies Impatient Consumption," Journal of Consumer Research, 38, 182-198.

4. Urminsky, Oleg and Gal Zauberman (2015), “The Psychology of Intertemporal Preferences,” in The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making, ed. Gideon Keren and George Wu, Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 141-179. * A recent and great review.

5. Goodman, Joseph K., Selin A. Malkoc and Mosi Rosenboim “The Material-Experiential Asymmetry in Discounting: When Experiential Purchases Lead to More Impatience,” working paper.

Other Readings:

1. Frederick, Shane, George F. Loewenstein, and Ted O’Donoghue (2002), “Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review,” Journal of Economic Literature, 40 (2), 351-401. * The seminal review. A bit outdated, but worth a read.

2. Ainslie, George (1975), “Specious Reward: A Behavioral Theory of Impulsiveness and Impulse Control,” Psychological Bulletin, 82 (4), 463–96. *classic * Seminal paper on impulsiveness.

3. Loewenstein, George (1996), “Out of Control: Visceral Influences on Behavior,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65 (3), 272-292. * A very-well cited conceptual piece. Great read.

4. Metcalfe, Janet and Walter Mischel (1999), “A Hot/Cool-System Analysis of Delay of Gratification: Dynamics of Willpower,” Psychological Review, 106(1), 3-19. * from the authors of the original “marshmallow test”

5. Read, Daniel, Shane Frederick, Burcu Orsel and Juwaria Rahman (2005), “Four Score and Seven Years From Now: The Date/Delay Effect in Temporal Discounting,” Management Science, 51 (9), 1326-1335.

6. Malkoc, Selin and Gal Zauberman (2006), “Deferring versus Expediting Consumption: The Effect of Outcome Concreteness on Sensitivity to Time Horizon,” Journal of Marketing Research, 43(4), 618-627.

17

7. Fujita, Kentaro, Yaacov Trope, Nira Liberman and Maya Levin-Sagi (2006), “Construal Levels and Self Control,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(3), 351–367.

8. Zauberman, Gal, Rebecca K. Ratner, and B. Kyu Kim (2009), “Memories as Assets: Strategic Memory Protection in Choice over Time,” Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (5), 715-728.

9. Baumeister, Roy F., Kathleen D. Vohs and Gabriele Oettingen (2016), “Pragmatic Prospection: How and Why People Think about the Future,” Review of General Psychology, 20 (1), 3-16.

10. Atlas, Stephen A., Eric J. Johnson, and John W. Payne (2017), “Time Preferences and Mortgage Choice,” Journal of Marketing Research: 54(3), (June), 415-429.

18

March 20th -- Time vs. Money

1. Zauberman, Gal and John Lynch (2005), “Resource Slack and Propensity to Discount Delayed Investments of Time versus Money,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134 (1), 23-37.

2. Mogilner, Cassie (2010), “The Pursuit of Happiness: Time, Money, and Social Connection,” Psychological Science, 21 (9), 1348-1354.

3. Lee, Leonard, Michelle P. Lee, Marco Bertini, Gal Zauberman, and Dan Ariely (2015), “Money, Time, and the Stability of Consumer Preferences,” Journal of Marketing Research: Vol. 52, No. 2, (April), 184-199.

4. Soster, Robin L., Ashwani Monga, and William O. Bearden (2010), “Tracking Costs of Time and Money: How Accounting Periods Affect Mental Accounting,” Journal of Consumer Research, 37(4), 712-721

5. Costello, John and Selin A. Malkoc, “Difference in Spending Time and Money: The Case of Charitable Giving,” working paper.

Other Readings:

1. Leclerc, France, Bernd Schmitt and Laurette Dubé (1995), “Waiting Time and Decision Making: Is Time like Money?” Journal of Consumer Research, 22(1), 110-119.

2. Soman, Dilip (2001), “The Mental Accounting of Sunk Time Costs: Why Time is Not Like Money,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 14(3), 169-85.

3. Vohs, Kathleen D., Nicole L. Mead, and Miranda R. Goode (2006), “The Psychological Consequences of Money,” Science, 314 (5802), 11541156.

4. DeVoe, Sanford E., and Jeffrey Pfeffer (2007), “When time is money: The effect of hourly payment on the evaluation of time,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 104, Issue 1, 1-13.

5. Saini, Ritesh and Ashwani Monga (2008), “How I Decide Depends on What I Spend: Use of Heuristics Is Greater for Time than for Money,” Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 914-22.

6. Mogilner, Cassie and Jennifer Aaker (2009), “The ‘Time vs. Money Effect’: Shifting Product Attitudes and Decisions through Personal Connection,” Journal of Consumer Research, 36 (August), 277 - 291.

7. Mogilner, Cassie (2010), “The Pursuit of Happiness: Time, Money, and Social Connection,” Psychological Science, 21 (9), 1348 - 1354.

8. Aaker, Jennifer L., Melanie Rudd, and Cassie Mogilner (2011), “If Money Does Not Make You Happier, Consider Time,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21 (April), 126-130.

19

9. Rudd, Melanie, Kathleen D. Vohs, and Jennifer L. Aaker (2012), “Awe Expands People’s

Perception of Time, Alters Decision Making, and Enhances Well-Being,” Psychological Science, 23 (10), 1130-1136.

10. Gino, Francesca and Cassie Mogilner (2014), “Time, Money, and Morality,” Psychological Science, 25 (2), 414-421 .

20

March 27th -- Time Consumption

1. DeVoe, Sanford E., & Jeffrey Pfeffer (2011), “Time is tight: How higher economic value of time increases feelings of time pressure,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 665-676.

2. Etkin, Jordan, Ioannis Evangelidis, and Jennifer Aaker (2015), “Pressed for Time? Goal Conflict Shapes How Time is Perceived, Spent, and Valued,” Journal of Marketing Research, 52 (June), 394–406.

3. Tonietto, Gabriela N. and Selin A. Malkoc (2016), “The Calendar Mindset: Scheduling Takes the Fun Out and Puts the Work In,” Journal of Marketing Research: (December), Vol. 53, No. 6, 922-936.

4. Bellezza, Silvia, Neeru Paharia, and Anat Keinan (2017), "Conspicuous Consumption of Time: When Busyness and Lack of Leisure Time Become a Status Symbol," Journal of Consumer Research 44, no. 1, 118–138.

5. Tonietto, Gabriela, Selin A. Malkoc and Steve Nowlis (forthcoming), “When An Hour Feels Shorter: Future Boundary Tasks Contract the Perception and Consumption of Time”, Journal of Consumer Research.

Other readings:

1. Keinan, Anat, and Ran Kivetz (2011), "Productivity Orientation and the Consumption of Collectable Experiences," Journal of Consumer Research, 37(6), 935-950.

2. Okada, Erica Mina, and Stephen J. Hoch (2004), “Spending Time versus Spending Money,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2), 313-23.

3. Mogilner, Cassie, Zoë Chance, and Michael I. Norton (2012), "Giving Time Gives You Time," Psychological Science, 23 (10), 1233 - 1238.

4. DeVoe, Sanford E., & Julian House (2012), “Time, money, and happiness: How does putting a price on time affect our ability to smell the roses?” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 466-474.

21

April 3rd -- Subjective Wellbeing and Happiness

1. Frederick, Shane and George Loewenstein (1999), “Hedonic adaptation,” in Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology, ed. Daniel Kahneman, Ed Diener, and Norbert Schwartz, New York: Russell Sage, 302-330.

2. Kahneman, Daniel, Alan B. Krueger, David Schkade, Norbert Schwarz, and Arthur A. Stone (2006), “Would you be happier if you were richer? A focusing illusion,” Science, 312(5782), 1908-1910.

3. Aknin, Lara B., Christopher P. Barrington-Leigh, Elizabeth W. Dunn, John F. Helliwell, Justine Burns, Robert Biswas-Diener, Imelda Kemeza, Paul Nyende, Claire Ashton-James, and Michael I. Norton (2013), "Prosocial Spending and Well-Being: Cross-Cultural Evidence for a Psychological Universal," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 104, no. 4 (April), 635–652.

4. Goodman, Joseph K. and Sarah Lim, (2018) “When Consumers Prefer to Give Material Gifts Instead of Experiences: The Role of Social Distance,” Journal of Consumer Research.

Other Readings:

1. Elster, Jon and George. F Loewenstein (1992), “Utility from Memory and Anticipation,” in Choice Over Time, ed. George F. Loewenstein and Jon Elster, New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation, 3-34. \

2. Ariely, Dan and Michael I. Norton (2009), “Conceptual Consumption,” Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 475-499.

3. Hsee, Christopher K., Yang Yang, Naihe Li, and Luxi Shen (2009), “Wealth, warmth and wellbeing: Whether happiness is relative or absolute depends on whether it is about money, acquisition, or consumption,” Journal of Marketing Research, XLVI (June), 396-409.

4. Nicolao, Leonardo, Julie R. Irwin, and Joseph K. Goodman (2009), “Happiness for Sale: Do Experiential Purchases Make Consumers Happier than Material Purchases?” Journal of Consumer Research, 36 (August), 188-198.

5. Bhattacharjee, Amit and Cassie Mogilner (2014), “Happiness from Ordinary and Extraordinary Experiences,” Journal of Consumer Research, 41(1).

6. Goodman, Joseph K., Selin A. Malkoc and Brittney Stephenson (2016), “Celebrate or Commemorate? A Material Purchase Advantage when Honoring Special Life Events,” Journal of the Association of Consumer Research, 1 (4), 497-508.

7. Whillans, Ashley V., Elizabeth W. Dunn, Paul Smeets, Rene Bekkers, and Michael I. Norton (2017), “Buying time promotes happiness,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114 , 8523-8527.

8. Donnelly, Grant E., Masha Ksendzova, Ryan T. Howell, Kathleen D. Vohs, and Roy F. Baumeister (in press), “Buying to Blunt Negative Feelings: Materialism as Escape from the Self,” Review of General Psychology, 20(3), 272-316.

22

April 10th -- What is next in JDM?

1. Simonson, Itamar (2015), "Mission (Largely) Accomplished: What's Next for Consumer BDT-JDM Researchers?" Journal of Marketing Behavior: Vol. 1: No. 1, 9-35.

2. Lynch, John G. (2015), "Mission Creep, Mission Impossible, or Mission of Honor? Consumer Behavior BDT Research in an Internet Age," Journal of Marketing Behavior: Vol. 1: No. 1, 37-52.

3. Schwarz, Norbert (2015), "Which Mission? Thoughts About the Past and Future of BDT," Journal of Marketing Behavior: Vol. 1: No. 1, 53-58.

4. Simonson, Itamar (2015), "The BDT Effect and Future: A Reply to John Lynch and Norbert Schwarz," Journal of Marketing Behavior: Vol. 1: No. 1, 59-73.