Studies regarding the relationship between purchases and happiness have consistently found an experiential advantage: people are happier when purchasing experiential products (e.g., vacations and concerts) than material products (e.g., clothes and electronics) (Caprariello & Reis, 2013; Carter & Gilovich, 2010, 2012; Pchelin & Howell, 2014; van Boven and Gilovich, 2003). This phenomenon (i.e., experiential advantage) may make marketing efforts of service firms or any companies selling experiences relatively more effective and productive in that consumers will derive a great amount of purchase happiness. On the other hand, the same phenomenon may indicate innate challenges and hurdles for firms selling products carrying materialistic features. Considering the material-experiential spectrum, approximately 50% of the industries are seeming faced with this issue. In this research, we propose a solution with which mainly material-focused products can loom more experiential, thereby benefiting from the experiential advantage. In other words, we investigate how material goods can be perceived as experiential and they can offer greater purchase satisfaction compared to when they remain as merely materialistic. Specifically, noting that reasons for experiential advantages are originated from social aspects of experiential goods (e.g., self-presentation to other people, conversational values, reputation-building, etc.), the current study shows that posting on social media can imbue social aspects, which is a key drive of the experiential advantage.

This research investigated how residential mobility affects consumers' trust in digital consumption environments (e.g., online shopping). Due to today's digitalization, consumers' trust in digital environments is treated as important. However, work has yet to be explored that the trust of digital environments can differ depending on residential mobility. This article highlights key findings from the relationship between residential mobility and trust in digital environments. Trust in digital environments may vary depending on residential mobility. As a result of the data analysis, the lower the residential mobility, the lower the trust in digital environments, while the higher the residential mobility, the higher the trust in digital environments.

In appeals for donations, some charities highlight why their programs are important or abstract meanings that individuals' contributions can have. On the other hand, some other charities highlight how their programs are implemented or specific actions that are to be made. Drawing on construal level theory, we posit that abstract, “why” laden appeals will be more persuasive than concrete, “how” laden appeals when psychological distance (via physical distance) is high (vs. low). One experiment was conducted to test this premise. Specifically, we examined whether the location where the programs of a nonprofit organization were run was far (i.e., a foreign country) or near (i.e., domestically) would moderate the persuasiveness of abstract versus concrete messages. In terms of the procedure, participants were first asked to read a message from a nonprofit organization helping children suffering from rare diseases in their own country or in foreign countries. Then, they indicated the extent to which they were willing to help the nonprofit. To manipulate the message type, we varied the headline as well as the content of the message so as to make on version construed at a low level and the other at a high level. Further, to investigate a moderating role of disease types, we measured the changes in response to when disease names are suggested more specifically due to the variation in the degree of familiarity to the charity subject. The results of this experiment supported our prediction on the fit effect between physical distance and message type. To be specific, when the appeal was for a foreign cause, abstract messages generated a higher willingness to help the nonprofit. Conversely, when the appeal was for a local cause, concrete messages generated a higher willingness to help the nonprofit. These results indicate construal fit effect in a charitable giving context. Furthermore, we investigated a moderating role of disease types given that such fit effects can be stronger among low- (vs. highly) familiarity of disease. We observed a significant three-way interaction involving the degree of familiarity.

We propose that how people consider their own economic resources whether to be abundant or to beconstrained determines the quality judgment of an art. Respondents' with perceiving their own resources constrained evaluated the art relatively more attractive when the producer was an attractive (v. unattractive) person. However, When respondents' perceive their own resources to be abundant, no effect of the artist's attractiveness was found.

Will information from astroturf organizations affect people’s trust toward overall nonprofit organizations and willingness to engage in prosocial behaviors? Astroturf organizations are defined as “fake grassroots organizations animated by a clever public relations campaign and a huge budget” (Hoggan and Littlemore 2009). In other words, an astroturf organization hides its true identity by using rhetorical language to convince the public. It can be inferred that large corporations sponsor astroturf organizations to employ deceptive and fraudulent tactics as propaganda. Prior research on astroturf organizations for climate change shows that people exposed to information from astroturf organizations denying global warming tend to become more uncertain about climate issues (e.g., causes of global warming or the existence of global warming) than people exposed to information from grassroots organizations (Cho et al. 2011). We propose that information from astroturf organizations may affect not only relevant issues or organizations, but also nonprofit organizations in general, which can then lower people's willingness to engage in prosocial behaviors (e.g., donations and volunteering). Darke and Ritchie (2007) found that deceptive advertisements engender distrust and undermine the trustworthiness of subsequent advertising. The process of defensive stereotyping can explain how initial deception activates general skepticism regarding advertising. Based on such an explanation, we suggest that exposure to astroturf organizations can make consumers more logically defensive and can decrease their trust toward messages from other nonprofit organizations. Therefore, we hypothesize that people who read messages from astroturf organizations will be more distrustful toward nonprofit organizations and will display lower willingness to engage in prosocial behaviors than people who read messages from grassroots organizations. To test this hypothesis, we conducted an experiment. We used a one-factor design with two levels of organization types (astroturf vs. grassroots). Participants (N = 72) were randomly assigned to one of the two conditions. Participants were told that they would read a message captured from a website of an organization (astroturf vs. grassroots) working on global warming. After viewing the advertisement, participants completed a questionnaire measuring their trust toward nonprofit organizations in general and willingness to engage in prosocial behaviors. We assessed whether viewing the advertisement from the astroturf organization had an impact on participants' trust toward nonprofit organizations and their willingness to engage in prosocial behaviors. An analysis of variance (ANOVA), with trust toward nonprofit organizations as the dependent variable and the type of organization as the independent variable, yielded a significant effect (F = 4.38, p < .05). The results showed that participants who viewed the advertisement from the astroturf organization were more likely to be distrustful of nonprofit organizations than those who viewed the advertisement from the grassroots organization (Mastroturf = 4.14, SD = 1.48 vs. Mgrassroots = 4.80, SD = 1.16). Thus, astroturf organizations may not only confuse people about a specific issue that the respective astroturf organizations aimed to attack, but they can also significantly weaken people's trust toward nonprofit organizations in general, which suggests severe detriment for the entire society. In addition, exposure to the message from an astroturf organization appeared to have an impact on people's willingness to engage in prosocial behaviors (F = 4.77, p < .05). To be specific, people who viewed the advertisement from the astroturf organization indicated that they were less likely to engage in prosocial behaviors, compared to those who viewed the advertisement from the grassroots organization (Mastroturf = 3.11, SD = .63 vs. Mgrassroots = 3.48, SD = .77). Taken as a whole, this research suggests that messages from astroturf organizations can frequently engender people’s distrust toward nonprofit organizations and can lower their willingness to engage in prosocial behaviors. Our results extend prior research demonstrating that information from astroturf organizations affects people’s trust and certainty levels regarding one specific issue (Cho et al. 2011) and suggest that the effects of exposure to astroturf messages are not limited to a specific issue. Rather, the effects can be far-reaching and diverse, since such messages can evoke skepticism toward benign intentions and programs of nonprofit organizations. Given that the insidious use of astroturf organizations is growing in popularity, this research provides meaningful insights into the influence of fake grassroots organizations and can forewarn the public of their undesirable effects on the community.