Relieving the regret for maximizers

Abstract

Purpose Prior research consistently found maximizers to experience greater regret over their choice than satisficers. Moreover, research also found maximizers to be trapped in a “maximization-regret-maximization” cycle. This paper aims to assess the role of construal level theory in alleviating regret felt by maximizers. Design/methodology/approach The authors examine the construal level theory (CLT) in conjunction with the choice context (comparable and non-comparable choices). Three experimental studies tested our assertion that a match between CLT mindset and choice set relieves regret for maximizers. Findings The authors show maximizers experience similar levels of regret compared to satisficers when considering comparable options in a concrete mindset, and non-comparable options in an abstract mindset. However, maximizers experience heightened regret in comparison to satisficers when considering non-comparable (comparable) options in a concrete (abstract) mindset. Choice difficulty mediates our effect. Research limitations/implications Future research is needed to replicate our results in real-life settings. Practical implications If marketers think that their product is likely to be compared with other comparable products, they should adopt product-specific information that focusses on how the product would be used. However, if marketers think that consumers will compare across non-comparable products, then they should focus on why their product is the most suitable to fulfil consumers’ needs. Originality/value This research represents the first attempt at reducing regret for maximizers and answers the call for an examination of the relationship between maximization and CLT. The research adds to the maximization literature by evidencing a CLT-based strategy that attenuates the negative experience of regret for maximizers.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 22 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.