Prospects and problems in modeling group decisions

This paper summarizes some of the major issues related to group decision modeling. We briefly review the existing work on group choice models in marketing and consumer research. We draw some generalizations about which models work well when and use those generalizations to provide guidelines for future research.     

The effect of consumer emotional disclosure on fairness perceptions

One way consumers cope with an unfair consumption experience is to express how they felt about it. Understandably, these disclosures are often rich with emotion. Does emotional disclosure in this context influence consumers' perceptions of fairness? Drawing hypotheses from the emotional disclosure literature, this research reveals that writing about emotions improves consumer fairness perceptions and satisfaction. However, the benefit of emotional disclosure disappears if the disclosure is solicited by the company perceived to be responsible for the unfairness and they do not offer redress. The findings lead to the recommendation that companies provide and facilitate opportunities for consumers to disclose to third parties the emotions arising from consumption experiences perceived as unfair. Implications for managing customer feedback, complaints, and negative word‐of‐mouth are discussed. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

A Little Something for Me and Maybe for You,Too: Promotions that Relieve Guilt

Guilt often accompanies and discourages self-indulgent, nonessential consumption. We show that gift-with-purchase promotions designed with careful attention to the nature of the gift and its intended user can reduce guilt by counterbalancing the self-indulgence or creating a favorable comparison with another’s consumption. We find that gift-with-purchase promotions diminish guilt when (a) the gift is guilt-neutral (e.g., practical or necessary) and intended for use by the purchaser or when (b) the gift is guilt-inducing (e.g., hedonic or self-indulgent) and intended to be enjoyed by someone else.     

The influence of member heterogeneity on dyad judgment: Are two heads better than one?

An experiment is conducted to test the effect of the degree of heterogeneity in individual member judgments on the accuracy of judgments made by dyads. Predictions are made about how (1) homogeneity versus heterogeneity in judgments and (2) task instruction interact to affect a group's judgmental accuracy in average price-estimation tasks. Results indicate that dyads were not more accurate than the average dyad member or than the better member. However, increases in accuracy (relative to the accuracy of the better member of the dyad) occurred more often in dyads whose members were heterogeneous in their prior individual judgments than they did in dyads whose members were more homogeneous. When provided with instructions, heterogeneous dyads improved in accuracy to a greater degree than did homogeneous dyads.