IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v123y2021icp502-515.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The thought that counts is the one we ignore: How givers overestimate the importance of relative gift value

Author

Listed:
  • Givi, Julian
  • Galak, Jeff
  • Olivola, Christopher Y.

Abstract

Gift-recipients typically receive multiple gifts in the same sitting, yet little is known about the impact of other gifts on givers’ and recipients’ evaluations of any one gift. Across 12 studies, we demonstrate that givers overestimate how much a recipient’s liking of their (i.e., the giver’s) gift [increases/decreases] when it compares [favorably/unfavorably] to other gifts. This appears to be driven by givers not appreciating that, for recipients, it is the thought that counts. However, this is not due to the roles givers and recipients assume; rather, it is driven by a self-other asymmetry, wherein all people involved focus on thoughtfulness but incorrectly believe others focus on relative gift value. As a result of this misconception, when givers know beforehand that others will be giving gifts that compare favorably to their own, they are more likely to spend additional money upgrading their gifts or even to skip the gift-giving occasion altogether.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:123:y:2021:i:c:p:502-515
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296320306615
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.009?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. 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.
    2. Hsee, Christopher K., 1996. "The Evaluability Hypothesis: An Explanation for Preference Reversals between Joint and Separate Evaluations of Alternatives," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 247-257, September.
    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. Cruz-Cárdenas, Jorge & González, Reyes & del Val Núñez, M. Teresa, 2015. "The use of disliked gifts from a consumer behavior perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1635-1637.
    5. Belk, Russell W & Coon, Gregory S, 1993. "Gift Giving as Agapic Love: An Alternative to the Exchange Paradigm Based on Dating Experiences," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 20(3), pages 393-417, December.
    6. Bohns, Vanessa K. & Newark, Daniel A. & Xu, Amy Z., 2016. "For a dollar, would you…? How (we think) money affects compliance with our requests," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 45-62.
    7. Heath, Chip, 1999. "On the Social Psychology of Agency Relationships: Lay Theories of Motivation Overemphasize Extrinsic Incentives," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 25-62, April.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Gomez, Yolanda & Martínez-Molés, Víctor & Urbano, Amparo & Vila, Jose, 2016. "The attraction effect in mid-involvement categories: An experimental economics approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 5082-5088.
    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. 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.
    3. 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, 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Déborah Philippe & Alain Debenedetti & Damien Chaney, 2022. "How brands mobilize status, reputation, and legitimacy cues to signal their social standing: The case of luxury watchmaking," Post-Print hal-03657352, HAL.
    5. Cheng, Andong & Meloy, Margaret G. & Polman, Evan, 2021. "Picking Gifts for Picky People," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 97(2), pages 191-206.
    6. Turunen, Linda Lisa Maria & Cervellon, Marie-Cecile & Carey, Lindsey Drylie, 2020. "Selling second-hand luxury: Empowerment and enactment of social roles," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 474-481.
    7. Couder, Julien & Valette-Florence, Pierre, 2024. "How do customers experience terroir? An investigation of its ability to increase brand relationship quality," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    8. Woolley, Kaitlin & Fishbach, Ayelet, 2018. "Underestimating the importance of expressing intrinsic motivation in job interviews," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 1-11.
    9. Vanhamme, Joëlle & de Bont, Cees J.P.M., 2008. "“Surprise Gift” Purchases: Customer Insights from the Small Electrical Appliances Market," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 84(3), pages 354-369.
    10. Grigorescu Adriana & Ion Amalia Elena, 2020. "Innovation and product management – The direction of the 21st century luxury market," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 14(1), pages 1035-1045, July.
    11. 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).
    12. Adriana Grigorescu & Amalia-Elena Ion, 2022. "Qualitative Analysis of Sustainability and Innovation Within the Luxury Business Sector," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(4), pages 3150-3171, December.
    13. Ting, Hiram & Thaichon, Park & Chuah, Francis & Tan, Sharon Rebecca, 2019. "Consumer behaviour and disposition decisions: The why and how of smartphone disposition," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 212-220.
    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. de Hooge, Ilona E., 2014. "Predicting consumer behavior with two emotion appraisal dimensions: Emotion valence and agency in gift giving," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 380-394.
    16. Kessous, Aurélie & Valette-Florence, Pierre, 2019. "“From Prada to Nada”: Consumers and their luxury products: A contrast between second-hand and first-hand luxury products," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 313-327.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Bénédicte de Peyrelongue & Olivier Masclef & Valérie Guillard, 2017. "The Need to Give Gratuitously: A Relevant Concept Anchored in Catholic Social Teaching to Envision the Consumer Behavior," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 145(4), pages 739-755, November.
    20. Lucius Caviola & Nadira Faulmüller & Jim. A. C. Everett & Julian Savulescu & Guy Kahane, 2014. "The evaluability bias in charitable giving: Saving administration costs or saving lives?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 9(4), pages 303-315, July.

    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:123:y:2021:i:c:p:502-515. 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.