Feeling the values: How pride and awe differentially enhance consumers’ sustainable behavioral intentions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Building on prior work examining discrete emotions and consumer behavior, the present research proposes that consumers are more likely to engage in the target sustainable behavior when marketers use an emotional appeal that matches the brand’s expressed values or one that is congruent with consumers’ value priority. In particular, we focus on two contrasting positive emotions—pride and awe. We show that the effectiveness of pride and awe appeals depends on the corresponding human values. Specifically, pride increases sustainable behavior and intentions when the self-enhancement value is prioritized; and awe increases sustainable behavior and intentions when the self-transcendence value is prioritized. Importantly, this interaction can be explained by enhanced self-efficacy. We demonstrate these effects across six studies, including a field study. Our findings contribute to a better understanding of sustainable consumption, reconcile prior research, and provide practical guidance for marketers and policy-makers.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it