Hedonic Editing Revisited
When evaluating outcomes, prospect theory predicts that individuals should integrate losses and segregate gains. However, evidence for this hedonic editing hypothesis has been mixed, particularly in the domain of losses. We propose and demonstrate that the integration or segregation of outcomes depends on perceptions of possible category-membership.
Citation:
Ellen Evers, Alex Imas, and George Loewenstein (2016) ,"Hedonic Editing Revisited", in NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 44, eds. Page Moreau, Stefano Puntoni, and , Duluth, MN : Association for Consumer Research, Pages: 436-436.
Authors
Ellen Evers, University of California Berkeley, USA
Alex Imas, Carnegie Mellon University, USA
George Loewenstein, Carnegie Mellon University, USA
Volume
NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 44 | 2016
Share Proceeding
Featured papers
See MoreFeatured
Stating the Obvious: How “Ugly” Labels Can Increase the Desirability of Odd-Shaped Produce
Siddhanth Mookerjee, University of British Columbia, Canada
Yann Cornil, University of British Columbia, Canada
Joey Hoegg, University of British Columbia, Canada
Featured
Linguistic Antecedents of Anthropomorphism
N. Alican Mecit, HEC Paris, France
tina m. lowrey, HEC Paris, France
L. J. Shrum, HEC Paris, France
Featured
How Regional Diasporic Consumer Experiences Produce Transnational Imaginary
Mark Buschgens, RMIT University
Bernardo Figueiredo, RMIT University
Kaleel Rahman, RMIT University