IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/mktlet/v26y2015i4p691-702.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is it fun or exercise? The framing of physical activity biases subsequent snacking

Author

Listed:
  • Carolina Werle
  • Brian Wansink
  • Collin Payne

Abstract

Do consumers eat more when they exercise more? If so, the implications could ripple through the multi-billion dollar fitness and food industries and have implications for both consumers and health-care providers. Three studies—two field experiments and one observational field study—triangulate on this potential compensatory mechanism between physical activity and food intake. The findings showed that when physical activity was perceived as fun (e.g., when it is labeled as a scenic walk rather than an exercise walk), people subsequently consume less dessert at mealtime and consume fewer hedonic snacks. A final observational field study during a competitive race showed that the more fun people rated the race as being, the less likely they were to compensate with a hedonic snack afterwards. Engaging in a physical activity seems to trigger the search for reward when individuals perceive it as exercise but not when they perceive it as fun. Key implications for the fitness industry and for health-care professionals are detailed along with the simple advice to consumers to make certain they make their physical activity routine fun in order to avoid compensation. Copyright The Author(s) 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Carolina Werle & Brian Wansink & Collin Payne, 2015. "Is it fun or exercise? The framing of physical activity biases subsequent snacking," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 691-702, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:mktlet:v:26:y:2015:i:4:p:691-702
    DOI: 10.1007/s11002-014-9301-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11002-014-9301-6
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11002-014-9301-6?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. Ayelet Fishbach & Ravi Dhar, 2005. "Goals as Excuses or Guides: The Liberating Effect of Perceived Goal Progress on Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 32(3), pages 370-377, December.
    2. Juliano Laran & Chris Janiszewski, 2011. "Work or Fun? How Task Construal and Completion Influence Regulatory Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(6), pages 967-983.
    3. Davy Lerouge, 2009. "Evaluating the Benefits of Distraction on Product Evaluations: The Mind-Set Effect," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 36(3), pages 367-379.
    4. Xinshu Zhao & John G. Lynch & Qimei Chen, 2010. "Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and Truths about Mediation Analysis," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(2), pages 197-206, August.
    5. Strahilevitz, Michal & Myers, John G, 1998. "Donations to Charity as Purchase Incentives: How Well They Work May Depend on What You Are Trying to Sell," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 24(4), pages 434-446, March.
    6. Brett Martin & Ekant Veer & Simon Pervan, 2007. "Self-referencing and consumer evaluations of larger-sized female models: A weight locus of control perspective," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 197-209, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Yudong Zhang & Huilong Zhang & Chubing Zhang & Dongjin Li, 2020. "The Impact of Self-Quantification on Consumers’ Participation in Green Consumption Activities and Behavioral Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-21, May.
    2. Septianto, Felix, 2017. "Work more and indulge more: Exploring the self-licensing effect of hard work on likelihood to purchase hedonic products," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 235-239.
    3. Jenni Sipilä & Sascha Alavi & Laura Marie Edinger-Schons & Sabrina Dörfer & Christian Schmitz, 2021. "Corporate social responsibility in luxury contexts: potential pitfalls and how to overcome them," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 280-303, March.
    4. Nagpal, Anish & Lei, Jing & Khare, Adwait, 2015. "To Choose or to Reject: The Effect of Decision Frame on Food Customization Decisions," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 91(3), pages 422-435.
    5. Chun-Tuan Chang & Xing-Yu (Marcos) Chu, 2020. "The give and take of cause-related marketing: purchasing cause-related products licenses consumer indulgence," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 203-221, March.
    6. Verena Huettl & Heribert Gierl, 2012. "Visual art in advertising: The effects of utilitarian vs. hedonic product positioning and price information," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 893-904, September.
    7. Juliano Laran & Eva Buechel, 2017. "Mental Resources Increase Preference for Dissimilar Experiences," Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(1), pages 123-135.
    8. Nicole Koschate-Fischer & Wayne D. Hoyer & Nicola E. Stokburger-Sauer & Jan Engling, 2018. "Do life events always lead to change in purchase? The mediating role of change in consumer innovativeness, the variety seeking tendency, and price consciousness," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 516-536, May.
    9. Dolan, Paul & Galizzi, Matteo M., 2014. "Because I'm worth it: a lab-field experiment on the spillover effects of incentives in health," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 60356, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Dolan, Paul & Galizzi, Matteo M., 2015. "Like ripples on a pond: Behavioral spillovers and their implications for research and policy," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 1-16.
    11. Kim, Kihyon & Jhang, Jihoon & Song, Sangyoung & Shin, Hyun & Song, Sujin, 2024. "Goal proximity effect on collective action: The mediating role of perceived behavioral impact and collective outcome expectancy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    12. Sara Kim & Rocky Peng Chen & Ke Zhang, 2016. "Anthropomorphized Helpers Undermine Autonomy and Enjoyment in Computer Games," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 43(2), pages 282-302.
    13. Dongho Yoo & Jung-Ae Kim & Sun-Jae Doh, 2018. "The Dual Processing of Donation Size in Cause-Related Marketing (CRM): The Moderating Roles of Construal Level and Emoticons," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-21, November.
    14. Brown, James R., 2020. "The competitive structure of restaurant retailing: the impact of hedonic-utilitarian patronage motives," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 233-244.
    15. Joëlle Vanhamme & Adam Lindgreen & Jon Reast & Nathalie Popering, 2012. "To Do Well by Doing Good: Improving Corporate Image Through Cause-Related Marketing," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(3), pages 259-274, September.
    16. Ashley A. Austin & Jacqueline S. Hammersley & Michael A. Ricci, 2020. "Improving Auditors' Consideration of Evidence Contradicting Management's Estimate Assumptions†," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(2), pages 696-716, June.
    17. Tiefenbeck, Verena & Staake, Thorsten & Roth, Kurt & Sachs, Olga, 2013. "For better or for worse? Empirical evidence of moral licensing in a behavioral energy conservation campaign," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 160-171.
    18. Jaeho Yang & Bokyeong Kim, 2021. "Guilt and the Consumption of Products with an Unhealthy Image," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-16, October.
    19. Yunjeong Ahn & Jieun Lee, 2019. "The Effect of Participation Effort on CSR Participation Intention: The Moderating Role of Construal Level on Consumer Perception of Warm Glow and Perceived Costs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, December.
    20. 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.

    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:kap:mktlet:v:26:y:2015:i:4:p:691-702. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.