From the Editor

Abstract

This issue of the Journal of Consumer Psychology presents a Research Dialogue on “Question – Behavior Effect” with a lead article and three insightful commentaries. The dialogue is followed by three interesting articles that explore consumer behavior patterns in various domains such as brand extensions, public self-consciousness and meta-cognition. The Research Dialogue begins with a review and discussion of the effects of asking questions on subsequent behavior (Fitzsimmons & Moore, 2008). The authors explore the basic premise that asking questions about behavior may lead to significant changes in compliance or desirability of the behavior in a public health context. They contend that asking questions about personal health issues like drug abuse or safe sex may lead to making the behavior salient with adverse consequences. Sherman (2008) examines the Fitzsimons and Moore (2008) contention about the potential negative consequences of asking questions about risky behavior within the framework of implicit attitudes. Sherman (2008) points out that if the respondents had a negative explicit attitude but positive implicit attitude toward a risky behavior, then, it may increase the desirability of that behavior. In the second commentary, Spangenberg, Greenwald, and Sprott (2008) observe that past research has documented that asking questions about both socially normative behavior as well as risky behavior can lead to a higher probability of performing the target behavior. They advance an explanation based on ideomotor action to understand these effects. In the final commentary, Gollwitzer and Oettingen (2008) approach the question-behavior effect from an action control perspective. They propose an intervention that may reduce the probability of engaging in risky behavior based on self-regulation and goal setting. Past Research Dialogues have highlighted the efficacy of various theoretical frameworks such as Self regulation (Bauemeister, 2008; Baumeister, Sparks, Stillman, & Vohs, 2008), Regret Regulation (Inman, 2007; Pieters & Zeelenberg, 2007; Zeelenberg & Pieters, 2007; Roese, Summerville, & Fessel, 2007), Cognitive appraisal (Han, Lerner, & Keltner, 2007; Lerner, Hahn, & Keltner, 2007), and Self-image motives (Dunning, 2007a, 2007b). This Research Dialogue is the first in a series of forthcoming dialogues that highlights the importance of examining theoretical premises in an applied context and it also captures the “unique” facet of health behavior that may differ from general consumer behavior in other contexts. This issue presents three articles that represent various research domains in social psychology. The article by Lau-Gesk and Drolet (2008) examines consumer behavior in the context of embarrassing products. They contrast the behavior of consumers who are high in public self-consciousness with those that are low in public self-consciousness in the context of buying products that are meant to prevent embarrassment but are embarrassing to buy. They identify the severity of social consequence as the determinant of the purchase of embarrassing products rather than the extent of public self-consciousness felt by the consumers. Kim and John (2008) document the importance of Construal Level Theory (CLT) in the context of brand extensions. CLT proposes that stimuli can be construed either in terms of abstract features or in terms of concrete features (Liberman, Trope, & Wakslak, 2007; Trope, Liberman, & Walsak, 2007). Kim and John (2008) show that the effect of perceived fit on extension evaluations is moderated by construal level. In the last article, Rucker, Petty and Brinol (2008) highlight the possibility that framing the message as two-sided, may indeed, lead to heightened attitude certainty and attitude-behavior correspondence. At the administrative level, the Journal of Consumer Psychology is now using a web based submission system that is managed by the publishers Elsevier. The potential contributors should access the system at http://ees.elsevier.com/jcps. We hope that this system will make the review process more efficient and author-friendly. This service began on February 1, 2008.