Means versus Ends: The Roles of Implicit Theories and Maximizing versus Satisficing Orientations in Consumer Evaluations

Abstract

This dissertation consists of two essays. The first essay investigates how consumers' implicit theories influence their sensitivity to reward points. This paper demonstrates that consumers' susceptibility to reward points differs depending on their implicit theory. Incremental theorists, who believe in changeability, are process focused and susceptible to reward points, while entity theorists, who believe in fixedness, are outcome focused and display less sensitivity to reward points, unless their theories are violated or they are encouraged to focus on the process. The second essay examines maximizing and satisficing consumers' decisions when they are forced to make a trade-off between desirability and feasibility. This paper demonstrates that when facing a trade-off between desirability and feasibility, compared with satisficers, who pursue a "good enough" option, maximizers, who pursue the "best" option, emphasize the desirability of the outcome and choose a difficult-to-obtain option over a less desirable but easy-to-obtain option. The study shows that maximizers express greater purchase intentions when the aspects highlighted by maximal comparative claims match their preference for desirability, while satisficers express similar purchase intentions regardless of the orientation of maximal comparative claims.