Science of Emotion and Sensibility (감성과학)

Korean Society for Emotion and Sensibility (한국감성과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Impact of Social Exclusion on Consumer Response : The Moderating Effect of Embodied Cognition

사회적 배제가 소비자 반응에 미치는 효과 : 체화된 인지의 조절효과를 중심으로

  • Son, Jung-sik (Dept. of Journalism and Communications, Kwangwoon University) ;
  • Lee, Byung-kwan (Dept. of Industrial Psychology, Kwangwoon University)
  • 손정식 (광운대학교 신문방송학과) ;
  • 이병관 (광운대학교 산업심리학과)
  • Received : 2015.08.17
  • Accepted : 2015.10.06
  • Published : 2015.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In today's society, the experience of social exclusion caused by being rejected or ignored, leads to negative social consequences, such as aggressive behavior, self-defeating thoughts, and diminished intelligence. This study is performed to examine 1) how two types of social exclusion, rejection and ignorance, affect conspicuous consumption and prosocial behavior and 2) how embodied cognition formed with a firmed muscle moderates their causal relationships. For this purpose, half of the participants in ignorance and rejection conditions were asked to grip their hands to form a firmed muscle (firmed muscle group) while the other half (control group) were not. After the manipulation of embodied cognition, their conspicuous consumption and intention of prosocial behavior were measured. Results show that, in ignorance condition, the firmed muscle group exhibited lower conspicuous consumption and higher intention of prosocial behavior than the control group while, in rejection condition, there were no differences in conspicuous consumption and intention of social behavior between firmed muscle and control groups. Findings indicate that, in the case of social exclusion caused by ignorance, firmed muscle improves self-efficacy, which may increase prosocial behavior.

오늘날 우리 사회는 거절과 무시라는 사회적 배제(social exclusion) 경험의 증가로 인해 공격 행동, 자기 자멸적행동, 인지 능력의 저하와 같은 많은 사회적 문제가 발생하고 있다. 본 연구는 사회적 배제의 유형인 무시와 거절이 각각 과시적 소비와 친사회적 행동에 미치는 효과를 검증하고 근육 강화에 의한 체화된 인지가 그 효과를 어떻게 조절하는지 규명하고자 수행되었다. 이를 위해 무시와 거절 조건의 참가자에게 악력기를 통한 근육 강화(firmed muscle)로 체화된 인지를 형성시킨 후 과시적 소비(conspicuous consumption) 성향과 친사회적 행동(prosocial behavior) 의도를 측정하였다. 분석 결과, 무시 조건의 경우 악력기를 통한 근육강화 집단이 근육비강화 집단 (통제 집단)에 비해 더 낮은 과시적 소비 경향과 더 높은 친사회적 행동 의도를 보였으나, 거절 조건의 경우 근육강화 집단과 근육비강화 집단 간의 유의미한 차이를 보이지 않았다. 이는 사회적 배제 경험 중 무시의 경우, 체화된 인지를 통해 효능감의 동기를 높이면 친사회적 행동과 같은 긍정적인 행동을 유도할 수 있음을 시사한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84(5), 888-918. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.84.5.888
  2. Alba, J. W., & Hutchinson, J. W. (1987). Dimensions of consumer expertise. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(4), 411-454. https://doi.org/10.1086/209080
  3. Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617-645. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639
  4. Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., Ciarocco, N. J., & Twenge, J. M. (2005). Social exclusion impairs self-regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(4), 589-604. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.4.589
  5. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachment as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497-529. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497
  6. Baumeister, R. F., Twenge, J. M., & Nuss, C. K. (2002). Effect of social exclusion on cognitive processes: Anticipated aloneness reduce intelligent thought. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(4), 817-827. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.4.817
  7. Carney, D. R., Cuddy, A. J., & Yap, A. J. (2010). Power posing brief nonverbal displays affect neuroendocrine levels and risk tolerance. Psychological Science, 21(10), 1363-1368. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610383437
  8. Cesario, J., & McDonald, M. M. (2013). Bodies in context: Power poses as a computation of action possibility. Social Cognition, 31(2), 260-274. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2013.31.2.260
  9. Chi, S., & Lee, J. (1999). Self-involving emotion working sensitively in a close interpersonal relationship: Ignorance. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of Korean Psychological Association, 58-61.
  10. DeWall, C. N., Baumeister, R. F., Gailliot, M. T., & Maner, J. K. (2008). Depletion makes the heart grow less helpful: Helping as a function of self-regulatory energy and genetic relatedness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(12), 1653-1662. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167208323981
  11. Galinsky, A. D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Magee, J. C. (2003). From power to action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 453-466. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.453
  12. Galinsky, A. D., Magee, J. C., Inesi, M. E., & Gruenfeld, D. H. (2006). Power and perspectives not taken. Psychological Science, 17(12), 1068-1074. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01824.x
  13. Hsu, D. Y., Huang, L., Nordgren, L. F., Rucker, D. D., & Galinsky, A. D. (2015). The music of power perceptual and behavioral consequences of powerful music. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6(1), 75-83. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614542345
  14. Hung, I. W., & Labroo, A. A. (2011). From firm muscles to firm willpower: Understanding the role of embodied cognition in self-regulation. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(6), 1046-1064. https://doi.org/10.1086/657240
  15. Lee, J., & Shrum, L. J. (2012). Conspicuous consumption versus charitable behavior in response to social exclusion: A differential needs explanation. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(3), 530-544. https://doi.org/10.1086/664039
  16. Magee, J. C., Galinsky, A. D., & Gruenfeld, D. H. (2007). Power, propensity to negotiate, and moving first in competitive interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(2), 200-212. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167206294413
  17. Molden, D. C., Lucas, G. M. Gardner, W. L., Dean, K., & Knowles, M. L. (2009). Motivations for prevention or promotion following social exclusion: Being rejected versus being ignored. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(2), 415-431. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012958
  18. Oh, M., & Hwang, Y. (2014). Does social exclusion decrease ethical consumption behavior?. Journal of Consumer Studies, 25(4), 181-203.
  19. Rucker, D. D., & Galinsky, A. D. (2009). Conspicuous consumption versus utilitarian ideals: How different levels of power shape consumer behavior, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(3), 549-555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.01.005
  20. Rucker, D. D., Galinsky. A. D., & Dubois, D. (2012). Power and consumer behavior: How power shapes who and what consumers value. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(3), 352-368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.06.001
  21. Twenge, J. M., Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., Ciarocco, N. J., & Bartels, J. M. (2007). Social exclusion decreases prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 56-66. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.56
  22. Twenge, J. M., Baumeister, R. F., Tice, D. M., & Stucke, T. S. (2001). If you can't join them, beat them: Effect of social exclusion on aggressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(6), 1058-1069. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.6.1058
  23. Twenge, J. M., & Cacho, J. C. (2003). When does social rejection lead to aggression?: Exploring situation and target effect. Unpublished manuscript, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA.
  24. Twenge, J. M., Catanese, K. R., & Baumeister, R. F. (2002). Social exclusion causes self-defeating behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(3), 606-615. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.3.606