IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v117y2020icp87-98.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

(Not) giving the same old song and dance: Givers’ misguided concerns about thoughtfulness and boringness keep them from repeating gifts

Author

Listed:
  • Givi, Julian

Abstract

Much of the time when a gift giver is selecting a gift, the recipient is someone whom the giver has given a gift to previously. The present work explores how givers’ decision-making and recipients’ desires are influenced by prior gifts given from giver to recipient; in particular, this research examines whether givers and recipients agree when it comes to the decision of whether to repeat a gift that the giver previously gave to the recipient (a “repeat” gift), or opt for a different gift that the giver is yet to give to the recipient (a “novel” gift). Nine studies demonstrate that givers do not give repeat gifts nearly as often as recipients prefer because givers perceive the act of giving a repeat gift to be less thoughtful and more boring than do recipients. Critically, givers avoid repeat gifts even when they are thought to be better matches with recipients’ preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Givi, Julian, 2020. "(Not) giving the same old song and dance: Givers’ misguided concerns about thoughtfulness and boringness keep them from repeating gifts," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 87-98.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:117:y:2020:i:c:p:87-98
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.023
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296320303179
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.023?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:4:p:332-341 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Stenstrom, Eric P. & Saad, Gad & Hingston, Sean T., 2018. "Menstrual cycle effects on prosocial orientation, gift giving, and charitable giving," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 82-88.
    4. Choi, Woo Jin & Park, JaeHong & Yoon, Ho-Jung, 2018. "Your gift choice for your boss versus your subordinate would not be the same: The interplay of power and giver-receiver role on consumers' gift preferences," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 1-7.
    5. Julian Givi & Jeff Galak, 2020. "Selfish Prosocial Behavior: Gift-Giving to Feel Unique," Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 5(1), pages 34-43.
    6. Beatty, Sharon E. & Kahle, Lynn R. & Homer, Pamela, 1991. "Personal values and gift-giving behaviors: A study across cultures," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 149-157, March.
    7. Wooten, David B, 2000. "Qualitative Steps toward an Expanded Model of Anxiety in Gift-Giving," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 27(1), pages 84-95, June.
    8. Mary Steffel & Robyn A. LeBoeuf, 2014. "Overindividuation in Gift Giving: Shopping for Multiple Recipients Leads Givers to Choose Unique but Less Preferred Gifts," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 40(6), pages 1167-1180.
    9. Close, Angeline G. & Zinkhan, George M., 2009. "Market-resistance and Valentine's Day events," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 200-207, February.
    10. Waldfogel, Joel, 1993. "The Deadweight Loss of Christmas," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1328-1336, December.
    11. Hjort, Klas & Lantz, Björn, 2016. "The impact of returns policies on profitability: A fashion e-commerce case," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 4980-4985.
    12. Kessous, Aurélie & Valette-Florence, Pierre & De Barnier, Virginie, 2017. "Luxury watch possession and dispossession from father to son: A poisoned gift?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 212-222.
    13. Luo, Biao & Fang, Wenpei & Shen, Jie & Cong, Xue Fei, 2019. "Gift–image congruence and gift appreciation in romantic relationships: The roles of intimacy and relationship dependence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 142-152.
    14. Richard H. Thaler, 2008. "Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 15-25, 01-02.
    15. Givi, Julian & Galak, Jeff, 2019. "Keeping the Joneses from getting ahead in the first place: Envy's influence on gift giving behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 375-388.
    16. Ernest Baskin & Cheryl J. Wakslak & Yaacov Trope & Nathan Novemsky, 2014. "Why Feasibility Matters More to Gift Receivers than to Givers: A Construal-Level Approach to Gift Giving," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 41(1), pages 169-182.
    17. Otnes, Cele & Lowrey, Tina M & Kim, Young Chan, 1993. "Gift Selection for Easy and Difficult Recipients: A Social Roles Interpretation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 20(2), pages 229-244, September.
    18. Aurélie Kessous & Pierre Valette-Florence & Virginie de Barnier, 2017. "Luxury watch possession and dispossession from father to son : A poisoned gift ?," Post-Print hal-01452153, HAL.
    19. Ganesh Pillai, Rajani & Krishnakumar, Sukumarakurup, 2019. "Elucidating the emotional and relational aspects of gift giving," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 194-202.
    20. Nguyen, Hieu P. & Munch, James M., 2011. "Romantic gift giving as chore or pleasure: The effects of attachment orientations on gift giving perceptions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 113-118, February.
    21. Dailey, Lynn C. & Ülkü, M. Ali, 2018. "Retailers beware: On denied product returns and consumer behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 202-209.
    22. Close, Angeline G. & Kukar-Kinney, Monika, 2010. "Beyond buying: Motivations behind consumers' online shopping cart use," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(9-10), pages 986-992, September.
    23. Webley, P. & Lea, S. E. G. & Portalska, R., 1983. "The unacceptability of money as a gift," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 223-238.
    24. Guido, Gianluigi & Pino, Giovanni & Peluso, Alessandro M., 2016. "Assessing individuals' re-gifting motivations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 5956-5963.
    25. Jinhee Choi & B. Kyu Kim & Incheol Choi & Youjae Yi, 2006. "Variety-Seeking Tendency in Choice for Others: Interpersonal and Intrapersonal Causes," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 32(4), pages 590-595, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Julian Givi & Yumei Mu, 2023. "The Oversensitivity in Gift-Giving Phenomenon," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 619-631, December.
    2. Wu, Ruomeng & Steffel, Mary & Shavitt, Sharon, 2021. "Buying gifts for multiple recipients: How culture affects whose desires are prioritized," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 10-20.
    3. Park, Yookyung & Yi, Youjae, 2022. "Is a gift on sale “heart-discounted†? Givers’ misprediction on the value of discounted gifts and the influence of service robots," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    4. Marta Pizzetti & Diletta Acuti & Isabella Soscia & Michael Gibbert, 2024. "You designed that yourself for me? Vicarious pride in customized gift exchange," Post-Print hal-04637410, HAL.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Givi, Julian, 2021. "When a gift exchange isn’t an exchange: Why gift givers underestimate how uncomfortable recipients feel receiving a gift without reciprocating," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 393-405.
    2. Julian Givi & Yumei Mu, 2023. "The Oversensitivity in Gift-Giving Phenomenon," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 619-631, December.
    3. Cheng, Andong & Meloy, Margaret G. & Polman, Evan, 2021. "Picking Gifts for Picky People," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 97(2), pages 191-206.
    4. Givi, Julian & Galak, Jeff & Olivola, Christopher Y., 2021. "The thought that counts is the one we ignore: How givers overestimate the importance of relative gift value," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 502-515.
    5. Wu, Ruomeng & Steffel, Mary & Shavitt, Sharon, 2021. "Buying gifts for multiple recipients: How culture affects whose desires are prioritized," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 10-20.
    6. Chen, Ning & Petersen, Francine E. & Lowrey, Tina M., 2022. "The effect of altruistic gift giving on self-indulgence in affordable luxury," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 84-94.
    7. Cavanaugh, Lisa A. & Gino, Francesca & Fitzsimons, Gavan J., 2015. "When doing good is bad in gift giving: Mis-predicting appreciation of socially responsible gifts," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 178-189.
    8. Laura Birg & Anna Goeddeke, 2016. "Christmas Economics—A Sleigh Ride," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 54(4), pages 1980-1984, October.
    9. Jingyi Lu & Zhengyan Liu & Zhe Fang, 2016. "Hedonic products for you, utilitarian products for me," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(4), pages 332-341, July.
    10. Rokonuzzaman, Md & Iyer, Pramod & Harun, Ahasan, 2021. "Return policy, No joke: An investigation into the impact of a retailer's return policy on consumers' decision making," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    11. Felső, Flóra Á & Soetevent, Adriaan R., 2014. "Broad and narrow bracketing in gift certificate spending," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 284-302.
    12. Polman, Evan & Wu, Kaiyang, 2020. "Decision making for others involving risk: A review and meta-analysis," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    13. Park, Yookyung & Yi, Youjae, 2022. "Is a gift on sale “heart-discounted†? Givers’ misprediction on the value of discounted gifts and the influence of service robots," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    14. Guido, Gianluigi & Pino, Giovanni & Peluso, Alessandro M., 2016. "Assessing individuals' re-gifting motivations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 5956-5963.
    15. Jiamin Yin & Yansu Wang & Jun Pang & Kanliang Wang, 2020. "Customizing products for self versus close others: the effect of intended recipient on creator perceptions of product uniqueness," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 73-87, March.
    16. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:4:p:332-341 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Gunasti, Kunter & Baskin, Ernest, 2018. "Is a $200 Nordstrom Gift Card Worth More or Less Than a $200 Gap Gift Card? The Asymmetric Valuations of Luxury Gift Cards," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 94(4), pages 380-392.
    18. Amanda J. Sharkey & Balázs Kovács, 2018. "The Many Gifts of Status: How Attending to Audience Reactions Drives the Use of Status," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(11), pages 5422-5443, November.
    19. Branco-Illodo, Ines & Heath, Teresa, 2020. "The ‘perfect gift’ and the ‘best gift ever’: An integrative framework for truly special gifts," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 418-424.
    20. Flora Felso & Adriaan R. Soetevent, 2012. "How Consumers use Gift Certificates," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 12-002/1, Tinbergen Institute, revised 27 Nov 2013.
    21. Kim, Joonkyung & Zhao, Min & Soman, Dilip, 2023. "Converging vs diverging: The effect of visual representation of goal structure on financial decisions," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 362-377.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:117:y:2020:i:c:p:87-98. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.