Monika Kukar-Kinney

This study examines the psychological mechanisms underlying digital piracy and proposes a framework that considers the perception of potential negative consequences for the individual (personal risk) and for society (moral intensity) as key factors associated with piracy behavior and rationalization. The conceptual model is tested using online survey data from two online panel samples of adults in the US (n = 625, age range = [18, 92], M = 42.44, SD = 16.43) and Slovenia (n = 514, age range = [18, 65], M = 43.51, SD = 13.14). The multi-group analysis indicates that perceived moral intensity is related to both lower participation in digital piracy and lower rationalization of this behavior in both countries. Furthermore, perceived personal risk is linked with lower likelihood of having ever engaged in piracy, but it is not significantly associated with either frequency of piracy behavior or rationalization for those who have engaged in digital piracy at least once in either country. This suggests that concern for individual consequences is not a deciding factor in determining frequency of piracy. The results also show that engaging in digital piracy is associated with cognitive rationalization strategies and with greater normalization of such behavior. These findings highlight the interplay between perceptions of potential negative consequences, digital piracy behavior, and rationalization and provide a basis for practical implications, particularly for marketers in the online entertainment industry.

Individuals make subjective judgments about the probability of their current social class changing in the future, and this judgment is known as perceived social mobility. Studies have explored the impact of perceived social mobility on consumer psychology and behavior; however, they have not linked it to risk preference. Based on social cognitive theory, this research examines the impact of perceived social mobility on consumers' risk preference and its underlying mechanism. Five studies are conducted to test the proposed conceptual model. Findings indicate that low perceived social mobility reduces consumers' risk preference compared to high perceived social mobility, with self‐efficacy playing a mediating role in this relationship. Alternative mediators, including sense of control and sense of power, are excluded. Time orientation plays a moderating role in this relationship. The findings advance research on perceived social mobility and risk preference, while guiding consumers to make informed consumption decisions that protect their interests.

Consumers frequently use mobile phones in a store to search for external information as an alternative to consulting with frontline employees. Mobile phone usage is especially prevalent among young consumers. Drawing on qualitative study results and existing literature, we conceptualize the effects of different in‐store information sources on choice overload, responsibility, and confidence among young consumers, as well as the moderating role of product category knowledge. A field experiment suggests that when knowledge is low, consulting with frontline employees (vs. mobile phone) leads to lower choice overload and, consequently, increases choice confidence. When knowledge is high, these beneficial effects are attenuated. At the same time, young consumers perceive greater choice responsibility when their phone is the information source; however, this does not influence choice confidence. This work contributes to extant literature by extending the knowledge of customer experience at the point of sale, the role of technology usage in in‐store retailing, and the role of frontline employees as an information source. It also provides managerial implications for retailers by highlighting the importance of providing an opportunity for an in‐person frontline employee interaction especially when customers have low product category knowledge.

Research suggests that sustainability may not be sufficient to yield a competitive advantage. Building on the resource-based view, this research evaluates three questions: (1) Can using sustainability as a differentiator lead to consumers choosing sustainable products? (2) Does product sustainability appeal more to environmentally concerned consumers? (3) Does product sustainability appeal more when paired with innovation? To test the hypotheses, an online survey of 344 US respondents was conducted. Consumers were given a hypothetical budget for an office chair and asked to choose between two products at a time. Hypotheses were tested with frequency and Chi-square tests and logistic regression. Findings indicate that the innovative product was preferred over the undifferentiated one, but the sustainable product was preferred over both innovative and undifferentiated products. The sustainability–innovativeness bundle was not preferred over the sustainable product. Environmental concern increased preference for the sustainable product over the innovative product, but not over the undifferentiated one. These findings suggest that sustainability is a stronger differentiator than innovation, but that bundling both features does not further enhance product choice. Attitude toward the environment may not predict behavior. Instead, preference for the sustainable product may originate in variety-seeking behavior, with sustainability seen as an innovation.