Premature Purchase Plans Forming implementation intentions reduces purchase likelihood of novel products Siegfried Dewitte Research Center Marketing Katholieke.

Premature Purchase PlansForming implementation

intentions reduces purchase likelihood of

novel productsSiegfried Dewitte

Research Center MarketingKatholieke Universiteit Leuven

Louvain La Neuve November 2009

2/32

Overview

• Amazing power of implementation intentions

• Goal novelty moderates

• Demonstration of the effect (Studies 1-3)

• The process (Studies 4-6)

• What next?

Amazing power of implementation intentions

3/32

4/32

What?

• Goal intention• ‘I am going to buy a bike’

• Implementation intention:– if Situation X occurs, I will do Y.

• ‘next Thursday after work, I will buy a bike in store A’

• Effect sizes .50-1.0

Gollwitzer, P.M. (1999). American Psychologist, 54, 493-504Gollwitzer, P.M. & Sheeran P. (2006). Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 69-116

5/32

How?

• Perception of X facilitated

• X-Y association reinforced

• Flexible delegation of control to cues

Gollwitzer, P.M. (1999). Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54, 493-504

Webb & Sheeran (2007). How do implementation intention promote goal attainment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 295-302

6/32

Where?

– Organization behavior – Health behavior– Educational psychology– Marketing?

Budden, J.S., Sagarin, B.J., (2007). Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12, 391-401. Luszczynska, A.; Scholz, U., & Sutton, S. (2007). Journal of Psychosomatic Research 63 (5): 491-497

Webb, T.L., Christian, J., & Armitage, C.J. (2007). Learning and Individual Differences, 17, 316-327

Goal novelty moderates

7/32

8/32

Goal system theory

• Network of goals and means– Goal intentions

• Non-exclusive links

• Adding means Dilution effect– Claim: II analogous to adding means

Fishbach, A., J.Y. Shah, and A. Kruglanski (2004), Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40 (6), 723–38.

Kruglanski, A. W., Shah, J. Y., Fishbach, A., Friedman, R., Chun, W., & Sleeth-Keppler, D. (2002). A theory of goal systems. Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 331–378)

9/32

Cost and benefits of II

+ more efficient organization• Input is catalyzed

-- Dilution effect- Adding means reduces triggering power of other

means

• Pivotal role of associative strength – Novelty is real life proxy

Fishbach, A., J.Y. Shah, and A. Kruglanski (2004), Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40 (6), 723–38.

Kruglanski, A. W., Shah, J. Y., Fishbach, A., Friedman, R., Chun, W., & Sleeth-Keppler, D. (2002). A theory of goal systems. Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 331–378)

10/32

Consistent evidence

• Reversed effect for difficult “outcome” goals

• Reversed effect among socially prescribed perfectionists

• No II effect when no goal intention

Dewitte, S, Verguts, T. & Lens, W. (2003). Current Psychology: Development, Learning, Personality, Social, Planned Behavior, 22, 73-89.

Powers, T.A. Koestner, R & Topciu, RA (2005). Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 31, 902-912

Sheeran, P. Webb, T. L., & Gollwitzer, P. (2005). Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 87–98.

11/32

Present project

– Forming implementation intentions hinder novel goal enactment Studies 1 - 3

– Association strength plays a crucial roleStudy 4 moderation by individual

differenceStudies 5-6 experimental causal chain

design

Demonstration of the effect

12/32

13/32

Study 1

• Do implementation intention reduce purchase likelihood for novel products?

• PHASE 1– Two (novelty) by two (I.I. vs. None)

• Both within subjects factors– Four goal intentions per person (n = 75, 299 goals, 203

final)– Price– Manipulation checks

14/32

Study 1

• PHASE 2 – Two weeks later– By e-mail– Goal intentions listed

• Five category scale1. Purchased as planned2. Purchased but in an other way3. Went to the store but did not buy4. Thought of it, but did not act upon it5. Did not think of it anymore

15/32

Study 1: a few examples

Ventilating system

cheese

Spa sprankling water

dress

Mp3 player

shoes

Gsm protection bag

Mashed potatoes

Dvd

cubborn

Book by Dan Brown 'Digital Fortress'

A strip “Gaston nr 18”

A marsbar

Special head phones

computer

A drum

16/32

Study 1: Results (percentage)

No Impl. Int Impl. Int No Impl. Int Impl. Intrepeat purchase plan repeat purchase plan novel purchase plan novel purchase plan

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

5

4

3

2

1

17/32

Study 1: Results (enactment rate)

repeat purchase plan novel purchase plan0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

No Impl. IntImpl. Int

18/36

Study 1: within repeat plans

repeat purchase plan novel purchase plan0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

No Impl. IntImpl. Int

19/32

Study 1: Results

• Price problem

• Replication weak

• Novelty: artificial?

20/32

Study 2

• Price and replication problem: – activities rather than products

• Artificiality problem:– Measure novelty rather than manipulate it

21/32

Study 2: Method

• Identical to Study 1, except

– Activities rather than products

– Novelty was measured rather than manipulated

– D.V. measured on a 100-point scale

– 25 students

22/32

Study 2: A few examples

• Revalidation activities (walking, biking)• Painting my student room• Learning how to cook• Decorating my student room• Searching a student job• shopping• Work as a job student for another week• Giving my fish fresh water• Buy stuff for my student room• Go to the movies

23/32

Study 2: Results

0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

no II II no II II

repeated novel

pe

rce

nta

ge

0

50

100

24/32

Study 3: Supermarket

• Like study 1, except

• Only supermarket products

• 4 weeks delay

• Price problem solved

25/32

Study 3: Supermarket

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

novel purchase plans repeat purchase plansPurchase plan novelty (manipulated)

En

ac

tme

nt

rate

(%

)

no Implementation Intention

Implementation intention

26/32

Interim summary

Forming implementation intentions hinders novel purchase plans and activities

How?

27/32

What is the process?

Study 4: moderation by procrastinationStudy 5 & 6: experimental causal chain

design

28/32

Study 4

– Procrastinators vs. Prudents• Behavioral definition: postponing intentions

– Procrastinators and prudents: top-down organization

– Procrastinators: – Dilution effect weaker– II relatively more efficient

Dewitte, S., & Lens, W. (1999). European Journal of Personality, 14, 121-140.

Steel, P. (2007). Psychological Bulletin, 133, 65-94.

29/32

Study 4

– Identical to study 2, except

• Between subjects• DV: enactment of two novel goals (novel versus

repeat)• Interphase interval 8 weeks• Workplace: working adults (50 in both phases)• Lay’s procrastination scale

Lay CH. 1986. Journal of Research in Personality, 20, 474-495.

30/32

Study 4: Results (novel goals)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

procrastinator prudent

succ

ess

rate

procrastination type

baseline

Impl Int

31/32

Study 5&6: Process

– Experimental Causal Chain design

– Manipulate A measure B– Manipulate B measure C

– Useful if measuring and manipulating B is undebatable: “A causes C via B”

Spencer, SJ, Zanna M, & Fong GT 2005. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 89, 845-851

32/32

Study 5

– parallels Study 1, 30 participants

– D.V.1 in phase 1 (following a filler of 10’):• Free ‘continuous’ association task with the

product as a source stimulus

33/32

Study 5: Results

-0,4

-0,2

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

1,2

novel repeated

nu

mb

er o

f as

soci

atio

ns

novelty

baseline

Impl Int

34/32

Study 6

– Like study 1, but

– Association strength manipulated– Associate either 1 or 4 times with the

product (between-subjects)

– For novel goals with implementation intention only

35/34

Study 6

Strong associations Weak associations0

10

20

30

40

50

60

enactment rate

enactment rate

36/34

Study 5 & 6

• II leads to weaker associations with goal in novel goals

• Forging associations with goal increases enactment rate

• Chain: II leads to lower enactment rate in novel goals due to weaker associations• Interpretation: premature delegation

37/34

Future research

• Summary

• Spontaneous planning: do people realize the moderation?– Perhaps planning occurs only if

• Novelty is only derivative of association strength. Other interesting side-effects of association strength?

• Why and how do I.I. help procrastinators?