IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/v45y2019i6p1331-1349..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Similarity as a Double-Edged Sword: The Positive and Negative Effects of Showcasing Similar Previous Winners on Perceived Likelihood of Winning in Sweepstakes

Author

Listed:
  • Sandra Laporte
  • Barbara Briers
  • Eileen Fischer
  • Lauren Block

Abstract

This research demonstrates a new effect of consumer similarity in a chance context. Six studies show how similarity with previous winners can positively or negatively affect potential participants’ perceived likelihood of winning the subsequent independent sweepstakes draw. Attributions of winning outcomes to a personal cause or randomness change potential participants’ expectations regarding the sequence of more or less similar winners. When personal attribution is prevalent, exposure to more (vs. less) similar winners causes potential participants to feel they are more likely to win and, as a consequence, judge the sweepstakes as more attractive. This positive effect of similarity is mediated by the expectation of more repetitions of similar winners consistent with the belief that luck can be transferred among similar people. When randomness is presented as the salient cause for winning, though, people’s subjective conception of randomness leads them to expect more alternations in the sequence of more and less similar winners, thus prompting a reversal of the similarity effect. That is, they feel less likely to win when the sweepstakes features a more compared to a less similar winner.

Suggested Citation

  • Sandra Laporte & Barbara Briers & Eileen Fischer & Lauren Block, 2019. "Similarity as a Double-Edged Sword: The Positive and Negative Effects of Showcasing Similar Previous Winners on Perceived Likelihood of Winning in Sweepstakes," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 45(6), pages 1331-1349.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:45:y:2019:i:6:p:1331-1349.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jcr/ucy041
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    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:oup:jconrs:v:45:y:2019:i:6:p:1331-1349.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcr .

    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.