My research primarily focuses on: (a) how consumer researchers can best measure consumer preferences, and (b) why people exhibit cognitive biases when predicting others' judgments, preferences, and choices. Below, I detail a handful of my research projects.
When and why do measures of preference diverge under uncertainty? Market research firms need to forecast consumer product interest and frequently use willingness-to-pay as a measure. In a paper with Leif Nelson, we studied when that measure insufficiently captures how much a consumer values a product. Past research has assumed that pricing measures (e.g., willingness-to-pay) and rating measures (e.g., enjoyment) should both make similar predictions about how much consumers value a product. Contrary to this traditional assumption, we find that consumers are willing to pay less for an uncertain prospect than the worst possible outcome (replicating the uncertainty effect by Gneezy, List, & Wu, 2006), while simultaneously expecting to enjoy the same uncertain prospect often as much as the best possible outcome.
Paper: Moon & Nelson, 2020, Management Science.
Transcribed interview: Knowledge@Wharton
How do we estimate preference and valuations in others? People often make judgments about their own and others' valuations and preferences. In a paper with Minah Jung and Leif Nelson, we found a robust bias in these judgments such that people tend to believe that others have more intense experiences than they do themselves, which is reflected in their overestimation of others' valuations and preferences. We argue that this overestimation arises because estimations of others' preferences rely on people's intuitive, core representations of the experience itself (e.g., whether the experience is positive or negative). Such judgments based on core representations also produce a paradox in how people think that others trade off between valuation and utility. Specifically, people believe that an identically-paying other would enjoy the same experience more than they themselves would, but also that an identically-enjoying other would pay more for the same experience. Finally, consistent with a core representation explanation, explicitly prompting people to consider the entire distribution of others' preferences significantly reduced or eliminated the bias. These findings suggest that social judgments of others' preferences are not only largely biased, but that they also ignore how others make tradeoffs between evaluative metrics.
Paper: Jung*, Moon*, & Nelson, 2020, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.
DataColada talk: If you want to subject yourself to an hour-long talk on this, best of luck to you,
How do types of donation requests affect donation behavior? In 2020, individual contributions comprised 69% of all donations in the US. In a project with Eric VanEpps, we explore how framing of donation requests greatly influences donation behavior. In particular, we find a quantity request, one that provides multiple donation amount choice options, increases donation rates and overall donations compared to other requests. This is because quantity requests highlight the appropriate range of donation amounts, which facilitates the likelihood of donations and ultimately, increases overall donations.
Paper: Moon* & VanEpps*, 2022, Journal of Consumer Research.
Popular press coverage: Wall Street Journal
Interview: Wharton Business Daily
When and why do consumers overestimate how extremely they will be judged by others? Consumers are interested in and concerned with how they are viewed by others, but are they accurate in their predictions of how others view them? For example, if you make an insightful or an unintelligent comment during a work meeting, how competent do you think your co-workers now view you, and are you accurate in your perceptions? Across multiple elaborate laboratory studies with Muping Gan and Clayton Critcher, we find that people expect observers to judge them more harshly (or positively) based on a negative (or positive) performance behavior than observers actually judge them. We provide evidence that this occurs because the threat of evaluation causes meta-perceptions (how you think others view you) to overblow the implications of that performance behavior compared to observers’ actual perceptions.
Paper: Moon, Gan, & Critcher, 2020, Journal of Personality & Social Psychology.
Blog post: Don't worry, your reputation is not at stake.
Transcribed interview: Knowledge@Wharton
How does the perception of customization influence valuation? Consumers enjoy customization. In a stream of research with Maarten Bos, we find that: (a) the way product choices are presented influences valuation of seemingly customized options, and (b) the act of customization leads to overvaluing (worse) custom options. In one project, we document the "illusion of design": Even when providing the same set of options, choosing by product attributes makes consumers feel as though they have customized their product, and ultimately, leads to greater willingness-to-pay. In another project, we find that people are willing to pay more for custom bundles than bundles that include the same items as the custom bundle plus additional items.
Illusion of Design paper: Moon & Bos, under revision.
Custom bundles paper: In preparation.
Collaborators:
Leif Nelson
Clayton Critcher
Eric VanEpps
Minah Jung
Serena Chen
Maarten Bos
Scott Roeder
Muping Gan
Jeanne Tsai
Louise Chim
When and why do measures of preference diverge under uncertainty? Market research firms need to forecast consumer product interest and frequently use willingness-to-pay as a measure. In a paper with Leif Nelson, we studied when that measure insufficiently captures how much a consumer values a product. Past research has assumed that pricing measures (e.g., willingness-to-pay) and rating measures (e.g., enjoyment) should both make similar predictions about how much consumers value a product. Contrary to this traditional assumption, we find that consumers are willing to pay less for an uncertain prospect than the worst possible outcome (replicating the uncertainty effect by Gneezy, List, & Wu, 2006), while simultaneously expecting to enjoy the same uncertain prospect often as much as the best possible outcome.
Paper: Moon & Nelson, 2020, Management Science.
Transcribed interview: Knowledge@Wharton
How do we estimate preference and valuations in others? People often make judgments about their own and others' valuations and preferences. In a paper with Minah Jung and Leif Nelson, we found a robust bias in these judgments such that people tend to believe that others have more intense experiences than they do themselves, which is reflected in their overestimation of others' valuations and preferences. We argue that this overestimation arises because estimations of others' preferences rely on people's intuitive, core representations of the experience itself (e.g., whether the experience is positive or negative). Such judgments based on core representations also produce a paradox in how people think that others trade off between valuation and utility. Specifically, people believe that an identically-paying other would enjoy the same experience more than they themselves would, but also that an identically-enjoying other would pay more for the same experience. Finally, consistent with a core representation explanation, explicitly prompting people to consider the entire distribution of others' preferences significantly reduced or eliminated the bias. These findings suggest that social judgments of others' preferences are not only largely biased, but that they also ignore how others make tradeoffs between evaluative metrics.
Paper: Jung*, Moon*, & Nelson, 2020, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.
DataColada talk: If you want to subject yourself to an hour-long talk on this, best of luck to you,
How do types of donation requests affect donation behavior? In 2020, individual contributions comprised 69% of all donations in the US. In a project with Eric VanEpps, we explore how framing of donation requests greatly influences donation behavior. In particular, we find a quantity request, one that provides multiple donation amount choice options, increases donation rates and overall donations compared to other requests. This is because quantity requests highlight the appropriate range of donation amounts, which facilitates the likelihood of donations and ultimately, increases overall donations.
Paper: Moon* & VanEpps*, 2022, Journal of Consumer Research.
Popular press coverage: Wall Street Journal
Interview: Wharton Business Daily
When and why do consumers overestimate how extremely they will be judged by others? Consumers are interested in and concerned with how they are viewed by others, but are they accurate in their predictions of how others view them? For example, if you make an insightful or an unintelligent comment during a work meeting, how competent do you think your co-workers now view you, and are you accurate in your perceptions? Across multiple elaborate laboratory studies with Muping Gan and Clayton Critcher, we find that people expect observers to judge them more harshly (or positively) based on a negative (or positive) performance behavior than observers actually judge them. We provide evidence that this occurs because the threat of evaluation causes meta-perceptions (how you think others view you) to overblow the implications of that performance behavior compared to observers’ actual perceptions.
Paper: Moon, Gan, & Critcher, 2020, Journal of Personality & Social Psychology.
Blog post: Don't worry, your reputation is not at stake.
Transcribed interview: Knowledge@Wharton
How does the perception of customization influence valuation? Consumers enjoy customization. In a stream of research with Maarten Bos, we find that: (a) the way product choices are presented influences valuation of seemingly customized options, and (b) the act of customization leads to overvaluing (worse) custom options. In one project, we document the "illusion of design": Even when providing the same set of options, choosing by product attributes makes consumers feel as though they have customized their product, and ultimately, leads to greater willingness-to-pay. In another project, we find that people are willing to pay more for custom bundles than bundles that include the same items as the custom bundle plus additional items.
Illusion of Design paper: Moon & Bos, under revision.
Custom bundles paper: In preparation.
Collaborators:
Leif Nelson
Clayton Critcher
Eric VanEpps
Minah Jung
Serena Chen
Maarten Bos
Scott Roeder
Muping Gan
Jeanne Tsai
Louise Chim