Alixandra Barasch
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Alixandra Barasch has a total of 21 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Amit Bhattacharjee
INSEAD, Fontainebleau, France
1 shared publication Deborah A. Small
Department of Marketing, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania
1 shared publication- Deborah A. Small
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
1 shared publication - Donald R. Lehmann
Columbia University
1 shared publication Emma E. Levine
1 shared publication- Gal Zauberman
University of Pennsylvania - Marketing Department
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- 8 June 2020
- Published by Springer Nature in Marketing Letters
- Vol. 31 (4) , 429-439
Autonomy in consumer choice
We propose that autonomy is a crucial aspect of consumer choice. We offer a definition that situates autonomy among related constructs in philosophy and psychology, contrast actual with perceived autonomy in consumer contexts, examine the resilience of perceived autonomy, and sketch out an agenda for research into the role of perceived autonomy in an evolving marketplace increasingly characterized by automation.
- 8 June 2020
- Published by Springer Nature in Marketing Letters
- Vol. 31 (4) , 429-439
Autonomy in consumer choice
We propose that autonomy is a crucial aspect of consumer choice. We offer a definition that situates autonomy among related constructs in philosophy and psychology, contrast actual with perceived autonomy in consumer contexts, examine the resilience of perceived autonomy, and sketch out an agenda for research into the role of perceived autonomy in an evolving marketplace increasingly characterized by automation.
- 1 February 2020
- Published by Elsevier in Current Opinion in Psychology
- Vol. 31, 61-66
The consequences of sharing
- 1 February 2020
- Published by Elsevier in Current Opinion in Psychology
- Vol. 31, 61-66
The consequences of sharing
- 26 June 2017
- Published by SAGE Publications in Psychological Science
- Vol. 28 (8) , 1056-1066
Photographic Memory: The Effects of Volitional Photo Taking on Memory for Visual and Auditory Aspects of an Experience
How does volitional photo taking affect unaided memory for visual and auditory aspects of experiences? Across one field and three lab studies, we found that, even without revisiting any photos, participants who could freely take photographs during an experience recognized more of what they saw and less of what they heard, compared with those who could not take any photographs. Further, merely taking mental photos had similar effects on memory. These results provide support for the idea that photo taking induces a shift in attention toward visual aspects and away from auditory aspects of an experience. Additional findings were in line with this mechanism: Participants with a camera had better recognition of aspects of the scene that they photographed than of aspects they did not photograph. Furthermore, participants who used a camera during their experience recognized even nonphotographed aspects better than participants without a camera did. Meta-analyses including all reported studies support these findings.
- 26 June 2017
- Published by SAGE Publications in Psychological Science
- Vol. 28 (8) , 1056-1066
Photographic Memory: The Effects of Volitional Photo Taking on Memory for Visual and Auditory Aspects of an Experience
How does volitional photo taking affect unaided memory for visual and auditory aspects of experiences? Across one field and three lab studies, we found that, even without revisiting any photos, participants who could freely take photographs during an experience recognized more of what they saw and less of what they heard, compared with those who could not take any photographs. Further, merely taking mental photos had similar effects on memory. These results provide support for the idea that photo taking induces a shift in attention toward visual aspects and away from auditory aspects of an experience. Additional findings were in line with this mechanism: Participants with a camera had better recognition of aspects of the scene that they photographed than of aspects they did not photograph. Furthermore, participants who used a camera during their experience recognized even nonphotographed aspects better than participants without a camera did. Meta-analyses including all reported studies support these findings.
- 29 September 2016
- Published by SAGE Publications in Psychological Science
- Vol. 27 (10) , 1388-1397
When Payment Undermines the Pitch
Studies on crowding out document that incentives sometimes backfire—decreasing motivation in prosocial tasks. In the present research, we demonstrated an additional channel through which incentives can be harmful. Incentivized advocates for a cause are perceived as less sincere than nonincentivized advocates and are ultimately less effective in persuading other people to donate. Further, the negative effects of incentives hold only when the incentives imply a selfish motive; advocates who are offered a matching incentive (i.e., who are told that the donations they successfully solicit will be matched), which is not incompatible with altruism, perform just as well as those who are not incentivized. Thus, incentives may affect prosocial outcomes in ways not previously investigated: by crowding out individuals’ sincerity of expression and thus their ability to gain support for a cause.
- 29 September 2016
- Published by SAGE Publications in Psychological Science
- Vol. 27 (10) , 1388-1397
When Payment Undermines the Pitch
Studies on crowding out document that incentives sometimes backfire—decreasing motivation in prosocial tasks. In the present research, we demonstrated an additional channel through which incentives can be harmful. Incentivized advocates for a cause are perceived as less sincere than nonincentivized advocates and are ultimately less effective in persuading other people to donate. Further, the negative effects of incentives hold only when the incentives imply a selfish motive; advocates who are offered a matching incentive (i.e., who are told that the donations they successfully solicit will be matched), which is not incompatible with altruism, perform just as well as those who are not incentivized. Thus, incentives may affect prosocial outcomes in ways not previously investigated: by crowding out individuals’ sincerity of expression and thus their ability to gain support for a cause.