MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124254735 · doi:10.1509/jmr.09.0421

When Guilt Begets Pleasure: The Positive Effect of a Negative Emotion

2012· article· en· W3124254735 on OpenAlexaff
Kelly Goldsmith, Eunice Kim Cho, Ravi Dhar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Marketing Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotions and Moral Behavior
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPleasureValence (chemistry)PsychologySocial psychologyAffect (linguistics)Consumption (sociology)CognitionContrast (vision)Negative emotionAssociation (psychology)HedonismCognitive psychologyAestheticsPsychotherapistChemistryCommunicationPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding how emotions can affect pleasure has important implications both for people and for firms’ communication strategies. Prior research has shown that experienced pleasure often assimilates to the valence of one's active emotions, such that negative emotions decrease pleasure. In contrast, the authors demonstrate that the activation of guilt, a negative emotion, enhances the pleasure experienced from hedonic consumption. The authors show that this effect occurs because of a cognitive association between guilt and pleasure, such that activating guilt can automatically activate cognitions related to pleasure. Furthermore, the authors show that this pattern of results is unique to guilt and cannot be explained by a contrast effect that generalizes to other negative emotions. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of these findings for marketing and consumption behavior.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.087
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.350 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations84
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Marketing ResearchSame topicEmotions and Moral BehaviorFrench-language works237,207