The Assigned papers for this week will be reviewed differently, using the concept learnt from our last paper on Effects of the presence of others on food intake: A normative interpretation (Herman, C. P., Roth, D. A., & Polivy, J. (2003) they review literature and came up with a normative explanation for each ideology using a new Inhibitory Norm Model of Social Influence on Eating. So I intend to do something similar with the use of regulatory focus theory (RFT) on of the paper, and question another, then our normal traditional paper criticism. I hope with such an attempt; I might stumble on a potential research area, experiment with the papers on how well this class has influenced my thought. Firstly, what does Regulatory Focus theory say? is a goal pursuit theory, formulated by Columbia University psychology professor and researcher E. Tory Higgins regarding peoples’ perceptions in the decision making process. RFT examines the relationship between the motivation of a person and the way in which they go about achieving their goal. RFT posits two separate and independent self-regulatory orientations: prevention and promotion (Higgins, 1997).
Swaminathan, Vanitha, Karen L. Page, and Zeynep Gürhan-Canlı (2007), “My Brand or Our Brand: The Effects of Brand Relationship Dimensions and Self-Construal on Brand Evaluations: People engage in consumption behaviour in part to construct their self-concepts and to create their personal identity. Brands become linked to the self when a brand is able to help consumers achieve goals that are motivated by the self. For example, brands can be used to meet self-expression needs, publicly or privately. Brand loyalty may be affected by psychological self-concept variables such as self-construal, self-expression, and by feelings or affect elicited by the brand. the authors identified brand commitment as a moderating factor that influences when the culturally endorsed or temporarily primed self-construal would influence persuasion. Explanations on the Effects of Brand Relationship Dimensions and Self-Construal on Brand Evaluations: The authors showed that individuals with a more accessible independent self-view are oriented towards a promotional goal, whereas those with more accessible interdependent self-view are oriented towards a prevention goal. A Normative Account of this paper: The writers failed to give detailed insight on the variability of this this self-view, what if they interchangeable? As a result of mixed races or some cross country effect on participant. It is also possible that consumer response to self-concept and brand personality may differ for different categories of products
Aaker, Jennifer L. and Angela Lee (2001), “I Seek Pleasures and We Avoid Pains: The Role of Self-Regulatory Goals on Information Processing and Persuasion. Will your customers respond more strongly to advertising that promises fun, happiness and prosperity? Or will an ad stressing the avoidance of illness or hardship be a better sell? The answer depends on how your customers see themselves, says Marketing Professors Angela Lee and Aaker. Those who define themselves as individuals – for example, stereotypical Americans -probably will respond more to ads that promise greater enjoyment in life. Those who see themselves primarily as members of a larger group – for example, people in East Asian cultures – tend to pay more attention to ads suggesting a product will help them avoid a negative fate. “The notion that people with an independent self-view seek out pleasures while those with an interdependent self-view avoid pains helps explain why different people adopt different strategies to achieve their goals,” Lee says. “What makes it even more interesting is the fact that the way we look at ourselves is not fixed. We are very adaptive and can project ourselves in a different light as the situation changes. Question: For the Chinese and others with this “interdependent self-view, they tend to be more risk-averse and more influenced by ads that focus on avoiding undesirable outcomes. So how deep are such cultural differences? is there any relationship with cultural difference on our eating preference with regards to previous papers we read on food intake?
Monga, Alokparna Basu and Deborah Roedder John (2007), “Cultural Differences in Brand Extension Evaluation: The Influence of Analytic versus Holistic Thinking. How do McDonald’s onion rings sound? What McDonald’s chocolate bars? Would you buy McDonald’s razors? A 2007 paper issued of the Journal of Consumer Research argues that what you think about these new products is influenced by cross-cultural psychology – in other words, where you’re from and how you think. “Eastern cultures promote holistic thinking, whereas Western societies promote analytic thinking,” explain Alokparna Monga and Deborah John. “Holistic thinking involves an orientation to the context or field as a whole, whereas analytic thinking involves a detachment of the object from its context and a focus on attributes of the object. Comment: A presentation will be given on this article which intends to covers every unclear fact left out as a result of amount of text required for this review.
Agrawal, Nidhi and Durairaj Maheswaran (2005), “The Effects of Self-Construal and Commitment on Persuasion.: Imagine two advertisements for a personal digital assistant (PDA) brand. The first highlights “self-focused” or individualist product benefits, such as enhanced productivity and organization. The second focuses instead on “collectivist” or group benefits, such as connecting with friends and family. Under which circumstances would each of these advertisements be more persuasive? Nidhi Agrawal and Durairaj Maheswaran addressed this question by investigating the role of culture and brand commitment in advertising effectiveness. In this paper, Researcher have devoted little attention to personality or psychological processes that distinguish highly committed consumers from those who lack brand commitment. The complication is that one’s self-construal can change within a specific context or for a certain time, a condition known as latent self-construal. For example, even an American who chronically expresses an independent self-construal might temporarily adopt an interdependent self-construal based on specific circumstances or external factors. Researchers have shown that advertising messages compatible with either the chronic or latent self can be effective. Agrawal and Maheswaran set out to identify the conditions under which each of these self-construal’s chronic or latent—exhibits greater influence in the evaluation of an advertising message. Comment: The ideology the papers present is very simple to understand and I find it really interesting when compared to the above papers for the week.