89 Chapter 5 and state) and impulse buying (urges and behavior) while taking into account the self-inference process self-presentation bias (Goal 3 of this dissertation). As hypothesized, we found a relationship between trait mindfulness and impulse buying trait. However, we did not find a relationship between trait mindfulness and impulse buying urges. Nor did we find an effect of state mindfulness on impulse buying urges or behavior. Drawing from both the self-completion theory (Gollwitzer, Wicklund, & Hilton, 1982) and the self-discrepancy theory (Higgins, 1987), we argued that self-presentation may cause bias in research on mindfulness and impulse buying. It seems plausible that mindfulness is seen as a more appealing trait than impulsiveness (e.g., Chen, Chenn, & Lin, 2020; Karunamuni & Weerasekera, 2019), and that people therefore (unconsciously) answer questions on mindfulness and impulsiveness from an ideal-self perspective (mindful and deliberate), which leads to self-presentation bias. Our results, which only find a relationship between mindfulness and impulse buying when we appeal to one’s self-insight and not when we measure actual urges or behavior, reinforce the idea that self-presentation bias may have occurred in studies on mindfulness and impulse buying that only use self-report scales. We concluded that mindfulness may not be as helpful in reducing impulse buying as might be expected. Table 7 provides an overview of each chapter’s objectives, theoretical foundation, and outcomes. Table 7: Overview objectives and outcomes per chapter Examine the effect of interactive screens on consumers’ impulse buying urges and gain insight into the role of self-agency in this effect. 2 3 4 Examine the effect of advertising frames from socially responsible companies on consumers’ impulse buying urges and behavior and gain insight into the role of selfjustification in this effect. Examine the effect of mediated mindfulness instructions (mediated mindfulness cues) on consumers’ impulse buying urges and behavior and critically discuss the possible role of self-presentation bias in research on mindfulness and impulse buying. Objectives Chapter Theoretical Foundation Outcomes Interactivity literature (e.g., Yim et al., 2017; Hu and Wise, 2021; Huang (2016). Reactance Theory (Brehm, 1966); Agency Model of Customization (Sundar, 2008). Highly interactive (compared to less interactive) advertising screens positively affect impulse visit and impulse buying urges through selfagency. The vice/virtue response conflict (e.g., de Witt, Evers & de Ridder, 2014; Lades, 2014); Cognitive Dissonance Theory (Festinger, 1957); Message framing literature (e.g., Kim et al., 2021); Literature on justification (e.g., Yi & Baumgartner, 2011). Other-benefit advertising frames lead to more impulse purchases (but not to more impulse buying urges) than self-benefit frames. Moral justification functions as a mediator in this effect. Mindfulness literature (e.g., Dhandra, 2020; Friese & Hoffman, 2016); Self-completion theory (Gollwitzer, Wicklund, & Hilton, 1982); Self-discrepancy theory (Higgins, 1987). Trait mindfulness and impulse buying trait are negatively related. No (causal) relationship is found between (trait or state) mindfulness and impulse buying urges or impulse buying behavior. Self-presentation bias may explain why only a correlation between trait mindfulness and impulse buying traits is found.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw