Naoufel Mzoughi

We argue that repugnance can, in some cases, be strategically used as a resource by some ‘entrepreneurs’ who can use it to advance their own goals. To understand the conditions in which repugnance can be strategically used, we first propose a conceptual framework to characterize repugnance-related transactions and emphasize how concerned individuals devise narratives to manage these situations, increase (or even decrease) artificially their acceptability, and ultimately justify their behaviour. This framework, which combines relational proximity and the strength of social consensus surrounding a transaction, allows for predicting the costs of developing appropriate narratives. Then, we analyse four rationales by which entrepreneurial individuals exploit and use strategically repugnant dimensions. Repugnance can be strategically leveraged as a barrier to entry, a tool for niche differentiation, a mechanism of political and market polarization, and a means of attracting attention, thereby shaping competition, regulation, and visibility across markets and platforms.

Traditional policy research has largely focused on enhancing happiness or well‐being, privileging positive outcomes as the primary metric of success. We argue that a systematic focus on the drivers of unhappiness—rather than solely on happiness—offers a complementary analytical framework that can uncover hidden societal deficits and broaden the repertoire of policy interventions. By foregrounding unhappiness, scholars and practitioners can identify latent demand, structural inequities, and unintended negative side effects that are often obscured in happiness‐centric analyses. We first articulate why a shift away from predominantly happiness‐driven policies is conceptually necessary, demonstrating that unhappiness signals distinct causal pathways and policy levers. Second, we explain how adopting an unhappiness lens can lead to different—and potentially better—policy outcomes. By integrating unhappiness into the policy toolkit, this paper expands the analytical horizon of scholars and offers policymakers actionable insights for more resilient, equitable, and responsive governance. We introduce several novel theoretical issues that provide a strong foundation for a research agenda on unhappiness and its policy implications. We also caution that misusing unhappiness‐based arguments poses ethical risks and could exacerbate the very problems such arguments aim to address.

While individuals are expected to perceive similarly identical quantities, regardless of the used units (e.g., 1 ton or 1000 kg), several scholars suggest that consumers over-infer quantities when they are presented in bigger and phonetically longer numbers. In two experimental studies, we examine this numerosity bias in the context of household food waste. Unlike previous scholars, manipulating numerosity revealed no effect: perceptions of food waste volume and likelihood to reduce it are not influenced by the used numeric value (2500 g vs. 2.5 kg; Study 1) nor the number of syllables (two kilos eight hundred seventy-five grams vs. three kilograms; Study 2).

Purpose: We examine whether individuals express positional and egalitarian preferences over macroeconomic indicators, addressing a gap in the literature, which has primarily focused on microeconomic variables, such as individual income, educational level, physical attractiveness and so on. Design/methodology/approach: We use a survey experiment to test preferences for various macroeconomic indicators, including inflation, poverty, research and development (R&D) spending, unemployment, debt ratio, overall happiness and the global sustainability index. Findings: While positional and egalitarian concerns play a significant role in some domains, previous studies may have overestimated positional concerns. A majority of respondents expressed strong egalitarian preferences for several macroeconomic indicators, challenging conventional economic theory. Practical implications: Governments often use comparisons when communicating about macroeconomic indicators. Some countries overrely on rankings of various kinds. We urge them to pay more attention to the reductionist, simplistic and ideologically biased nature of these tools. A shift in policies and public narratives toward reducing societal well-being gaps and fostering shared progress may be needed, rather than a narrow focus on economic competition. Social implications: Our results indicate that individuals may be more supportive of policies that improve conditions for all rather than those that enhance relative position, which has implications for the design and communication of economic policies. Originality/value: This study extends the analysis of positional and egalitarian preferences to macroeconomic indicators, providing new insights into how individuals perceive national economic performance relative to other countries. It also employs a refined experimental survey to better estimate the relevance of relative standings by controlling for whether individuals choose positional options due to genuine relative standing concerns or non-monotonic preferences.

Using survey data on a large sample of European small and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs), we examine the effect of entrepreneurship experience on environmental and social sustainability (ESS) in new companies. Estimations suggest that experienced entrepreneurs are more engaged in ESS compared to those without previous experience. This effect remains robust when considering ESS separately. However, our study reveals that the impact is primarily significant among those with specific types of prior experience, notably entrepreneurs who have previously closed one or more companies. The results highlight the complex relationship between entrepreneurial experience and sustainability orientation. Several managerial and policy implications are discussed.

Some researchers have provided evidence that contradicts the intuitive expectation that people perceive lower values expressed in a longer denomination (e.g., two dollars and eighty-five cents) as larger than higher values expressed in a shorter denomination (e.g., three dollars). Using an experimental survey of 637 respondents, we examine this bias in the context of messages about unemployment and inflation. Our results differ from previous research in that we found no evidence of this bias. Specifically, participants did not perceive the number of unemployed and the inflation rate as higher and more serious simply because they are presented in larger denominations. Our findings suggest that communication about these dimensions that relies on the potential of numerosity heuristics should be used cautiously.

Using an original experimental survey, we analyze how people perceive punishments generated by artificial intelligence (AI) compared to the same punishments generated by a human judge. We use two vignettes pertaining to two different albeit relatively common illegal behaviors, namely not picking up one’s dog waste on public roads and setting fire in dry areas. In general, participants perceived AI judgements as having a larger deterrence effect compared to the those rendered by a judge. However, when we analyzed each scenario separately, we found that the differential effect of AI is only significant in the first scenario. We discuss the implications of these findings.