How and when does a used (vs. unused) account affect consumption behavior?

How does spending from a used (vs. unused) account affect consumption behavior? An account is used when some resources of that account have been used (e.g., $90 has been used on a gift card that originally had $100). An account is unused when no resources of that account have been used (e.g., no money has been used on a gift card that has $10). Across seven studies (N = 8,667), we find that people are more likely to spend resources from a used account than otherwise equivalent resources from an unused account. This is because people engage in within-account comparisons, comparing the remaining resources in the account with what the account originally had, leading them to value the remaining resources less in a used account. We demonstrate the robustness of the effect of a used (vs. unused) account across several domains, including gift cards, checking accounts, and credit card reward points. Further, we demonstrate a boundary condition of the effect, revealing that the proportion of the account remaining moderates the subsequent consumption. Lastly, we generalize this effect from consumption to charitable giving. The findings provide insights into how policymakers, companies, and individuals may consider leveraging the perception of an account being used or unused to curb expenses and encourage charitable giving. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Impact of Privacy Messaging on COVID-19 Exposure Notification App Downloads: Evidence From a Randomized Experiment.

Introduction: Digital contact-tracing smartphone apps have the potential to slow the spread of disease but are not widely used. We tested whether messages describing how a COVID-19 digital contact-tracing app protects users' privacy led to increased or decreased intentions to download the app by either calming privacy concerns or increasing their saliency. Design: Randomized controlled trial. Setting/participants: We recruited adult smartphone owners in the U.S. (oversampled for younger adults aged 18-34 years) in November 2020 through an online panel. Intervention: Survey software randomly assigned 860 participants to 1 of 2 parallel messaging conditions (n=430 privacy assured, n=430 no privacy described). Main outcome measures: 4-point scale of intention to use the app "if public health officials released a COVID Exposure Notification app in their state" that averaged likelihood to (1) download and install the app on their phone; (2) keep the app active on their phone; and (3) keep Bluetooth active on their phone (needed for the app to work). Results: After removing incompletes, those who failed the manipulation checks, or those who had already downloaded a COVID-19 digital contact-tracing app, we analyzed 671 participants (n=330 privacy, n=341 no privacy) in 2021. There was no relationship between privacy condition and download intention (meanprivacy=2.69, meannoprivacy=2.69, b=0.01, 95% CI= -0.13, 0.15, p=0.922) but also no evidence that describing the app's security increased context-dependent privacy concerns (measured 3 ways). Instead, we found increased endorsement of data security in the privacy condition using a scale of beliefs about the app keeping privacy secure (meanprivacy=2.74, meannoprivacy=2.58, b=0.16, 95% CI=0.04, 0.28, p=0.009, small effect ω2=0.009). Conclusions: This study provides some evidence that people developing contact-tracing messaging campaigns do not need to worry that describing a digital contact-tracing app's privacy protections will backfire. Future mixed methods testing of messages about who has access to information-and for how long-may uncover new communication strategies to increase public trust in contact-tracing apps. Trial registration: This study is registered with AsPredicted#51826.

A field experiment on subgoal framing to boost volunteering: The trade-off between goal granularity and flexibility.

Research suggests that breaking overarching goals into more granular subgoals is beneficial for goal progress. However, making goals more granular often involves reducing the flexibility provided to complete them, and recent work shows that flexibility can also be beneficial for goal pursuit. We examine this trade-off between granularity and flexibility in subgoals in a preregistered, large-scale field experiment (N = 9,108) conducted over several months with volunteers at a national crisis counseling organization. A preregistered vignette pilot study (N = 900) suggests that the subgoal framing tested in the field could benefit goal seekers by bolstering their self-efficacy and goal commitment, and by discouraging procrastination. Our field experiment finds that reframing an overarching goal of 200 hr of volunteering into more granular subgoals (either 4 hr of volunteering every week or 8 hr every 2 weeks) increased hours volunteered by 8% over a 12-week period. Further, increasing subgoal flexibility by breaking an annual 200-hr volunteering goal into a subgoal of volunteering 8 hr every 2 weeks, rather than 4 hr every week, led to more durable benefits. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Having too little or too much time is linked to lower subjective well-being.

Many people living in modern society feel like they do not have enough time and are constantly searching for more. But is having limited discretionary time actually detrimental? And can there be downsides of having too much discretionary time? In two large-scale data sets spanning 35,375 Americans and two experiments, we explore the relationship between the amount of discretionary time individuals have and their subjective well-being. We find and internally replicate a negative quadratic relationship between discretionary time and subjective well-being. These results show that whereas having too little time is indeed linked to lower subjective well-being caused by stress, having more time does not continually translate to greater subjective well-being. Having an abundance of discretionary time is sometimes even linked to lower subjective well-being because of a lacking sense of productivity. In such cases, the negative effect of having too much discretionary time can be attenuated when people spend this time on productive activities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

The Effect of Relative Encoding on Memory-Based Judgments.

Several models of judgment propose that people struggle with absolute judgments and instead represent options on the basis of their relative standing. This leads to a conundrum when people make judgments from memory: They may encode an option's ordinal rank relative to the surrounding options but later observe a different distribution of options. Do people update their representations when making judgments from memory, or do they maintain their representations based on the initial encoding? In three studies, we found that people making memory-based judgments rely on a stimulus's relative standing in the distribution at the time of encoding rather than attending to absolute quality or updating the stimulus's ordinal ranking in light of the distribution at the time of the later judgment.