Hello there and thanks for stopping by.

I’m Erin, a scientist using the tools of behavioral economics and social and cognitive psychology to study how people think about sustainability, well-being, authenticity, and morality. Why these topics? Well, I think they’re interesting but I’ve also found that better understanding how we make these kinds of judgments affects how we choose and behave. Better understanding what drives decisions is my job as a scientist and a marketer. I fulfill those roles in three different ways.

Meaningful Consumption Creates Connections Beyond the Self

The Persistence of Meaningful Consumption

The Role of Knowledge and Expertise in Supporting Meaningful Consumption

Work with Lawrence Williams

Consumer well-being involves not only the pursuit of pleasure, but also the pursuit of meaning.  However, little is known about how consumers perceive the costs and benefits of meaning- versus pleasure-oriented consumption.  In this work, we find that compared to the pursuit of pleasure, consumers expect the pursuit of meaning to involve lasting benefits that persist longer into the future (studies 1 and 2), and require greater minimum time investments (studies 3 – 5), which we define as the minimum amount of time needed to derive benefits from consumption. We also examine the role that connection, knowledge, and expertise play in supporting the cultivation of meaning.

Using Information to Design Meaningful Artisan Food Experiences

Work with Stephanie Welcomer

There is a growing movement among consumers to know more intimately where their food comes from and how it comes to be on their plate. Consumers who value this connection often search outside of traditional outlets and product varieties to satisfy their needs. These consumers are motivated to engage in such costly behaviors at least in part due to the belief that consuming different products will lead to improved well-being. In this paper we provide information to small scale producers attempting to design specialty food products that cater to consumers’ desire to meaningfully connect with their food. We surveyed high-involvement consumers of a product category that is commonly consumed in more typical and more specialized forms and varieties: cheese. Measuring within subject, we contrast consumers’ expectations about the implications of consumption on well-being for typical and specialized versions of the same product and examine the role of information in designing more compelling consumption experiences for each product type. We present our findings in three parts. We find that consumers believe that special food products are more conducive to meaning making than typical products, that information provides more consumption utility for special versus typical versions of the same product, and that the expectation that a consumption experience will prove meaningful mediates the effect of product type on the value of product information. We conclude by discussing implications for product design and market segmentation for small scale cheese producers as well as other artisanal food producers.

Agricultural Work-Based Learning Fosters Business Students’ Interest in Pursuing Careers in Agriculture

Work in progress with Stephanie Welcomer

Concern for Others' Welfare Influences Perceptions of Price Unfairness

Work with Margaret Campbell

Because consumers often react negatively to prices that seem unfair, it is important to understand what factors influence perceptions of price fairness. Previous research has identified ways in which reference prices and inferences about the price-setting firm affect perceptions of price fairness. In this work, we examine how inferences about the price-receiving consumer affect perceptions of price fairness. Specifically, we examine how inferences that a price may harm a consumer affect the perceived fairness of the price. Eight studies provide evidence that consumers make inferences about potential harm to other consumers and that these inferences influence perceptions of price fairness. We demonstrate that when a consumer is vulnerable or a product is particularly important for consumer welfare, a price that might otherwise seem fair can be inferred to harm the consumer and thus seem unfair. We find that inferences of harm affect the prices participants set in a game that impacted their own real monetary payouts, consumers’ willingness to pay higher prices than other (more vulnerable) consumers, and the perceived fairness of discounting harmful products.

Give a Little Bit: Consumers Ask More of Women Entrepreneurs

Work with Jenni Dinger

In recent years, academe and industry have sought to identify differences in the success rates of men and women who pursue entrepreneurial ventures and to understand the driving factors behind those differences. While previous work has examined differences in success rates, access to funding and mentoring, and perceptions of employees and investors, no prior research has systematically examined the consequential behavior of another important stakeholder: consumers. In this paper, we examine consumer perceptions of early stage entrepreneurs and how those perceptions translate to consequential behaviors that have the potential to significantly disadvantage nascent entrepreneurial ventures when those ventures are led by women. Specifically, in 3 studies across 4 domains, we find that consumers report an increased likelihood to ask for costly concessions from entrepreneurial ventures led by women as opposed to men. We also find that this effect is driven at least in part by perceptions that women are less likely to be primary breadwinners in their households. We conclude by discussing implications for women led businesses.

In Pursuit of Imperfection: Flawed Products Reduce Process Uncertainty

Erin Percival Carter and A. Peter McGraw

Preparing for submission

As discussed on the Here We Are podcast with Shane Mauss

Bonus: My favorite demonstration of the theory via Ron Swanson

Abstract:

Can a product be too perfect? Decades of best business practices suggest that the answer is no. Yet, people sometimes prefer products with notable imperfections. We investigate why—and hence, when—consumers prefer imperfect products. When consumers care about difficult to verify production processes (e.g., organic farming), our studies show they sometimes prefer flawed products (e.g., blemished apples) over flawless competitors when the imperfections reduce uncertainty about production processes.

Hype Narrowly Benefits and Broadly Hurts Consumers' Well-Being

Erin Percival Carter, Lawrence Williams, and A. Peter McGraw

Under review at the Journal of Marketing Research

Based on the 3rd essay of my dissertation

Abstract:

People are regularly exposed to hype—intense, coordinated, multi-pronged, and exaggerated publicity efforts. Hype cultivates excitement for an event and fosters a fear of missing out. By hyping season finales and Super Bowls, networks, sponsors, and brands improve ratings and gain access to valuable viewers who are reluctant to change the channel. But how does hype affect consumers’ well-being? Using a survey of nearly 7,000 respondents who chose either to watch one of 16 hyped television events or engage in an alternate activity, we find that believing the hype is largely detrimental to consumer well-being. Compared to people who engaged in alternative activities, people who watched a hyped event reported deriving less pleasure, meaning, engagement, and achievement from the experience. However, we found a single positive influence of hype: it sometimes improves social well-being. Hyped events helped solitary viewers feel connected to others via a shared cultural experience. Building on this insight, a follow-up experiment conducted before, during, and after Super Bowl 50 revealed that focusing on the social elements of the event boosted well-being, compared to focusing on the details of the event. Our results demonstrate that there are limited benefits but extensive costs to believing the hype, particularly when it causes you to deviate from activities more in line with your values, goals, and preferences.

The Butt of Your Own Joke: Humor Production and Perceptions of Psychological Health

A. Peter McGraw, Erin Percival Carter, and Jennifer J. Harman

Preparing for submission; available at https://ssrn.com/abstract=2727829

As discussed on the Here We Are podcast with Shane Mauss

Abstract:

Funny people—comedians, class clowns, and pranksters—often seem troubled. But are they? Though an argument can be made either way, we suggest that trying to be funny can cause people to seem psychologically unhealthy regardless of their actual psychological health. We derive our predictions from the benign violation theory of humor, which proposes amusement arises from the perception that something is wrong yet okay. Accordingly, acting non- normatively enhances humor as long as the behavior is not too deviant. We present two studies that ask participants to judge storytellers based on the content of their stories. Although stories featuring taboo topics facilitate humor (up to a point)—humorous stories also create the impression that there is something wrong with the storyteller. Importantly, we find that the same storyteller is more likely to be perceived to be psychologically unhealthy when telling a story intended to be funny than when telling a story intended to be otherwise interesting.