
This article reports the influence of two specific consumption situations—hedonic and utilitarian—on the magnitude of the compromise effect. Based on the literatures of different valuation processes (valuation by calculation vs. valuation by feeling) and hedonic versus utilitarian consumption, the authors suggest that the compromise effect will be stronger under the utilitarian (vs. hedonic) consumption situation due to different valuation processes. Three experimental studies were conducted, and the results have supported the prediction. In addition, the authors successfully excluded alternative explanations such as differences in willingness to pay, justification, and attribute importance. The authors concluded with a discussion of the theoretical and managerial implication of this research.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 73 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
