This article aims to investigate the mechanisms underlying the influence of the interaction between temporal distance and mental simulation on consumer reactions towards technological innovations, and to determine whether the benefits of this interaction, which have been demonstrated previously with semi-continuous innovation, also occur with discontinuous innovation. Due to the high rate of failure at the launching of discontinuous innovations and the issues this poses for companies operating in the high technology sector, it remains important to identify effective actions to foster adoption by consumers. Our results show that when the purchase is considered in the short term, process-focused simulation reduces learning cost uncertainty and anxiety, and increases use and purchase intent. In the long term, outcome-focused simulation decreases benefit uncertainty and increases optimism as well as both use and purchase intent.
AlexanderDLLynchJGWangQ (2008) As time goes by: Do cold feet follow warm intentions for really new versus incrementally new products?Journal of Marketing Research45(3): 307–319.
2.
ArtsJWCFrambachRTBijmoltTHA (2011) Generalizations on consumer innovation adoption: A meta-analysis on drivers of intention and behavior. International Journal of Research in Marketing28(2): 134–144.
3.
AubertBGottelandD (2010) Former les consommateurs à l’usage des produits. Intérêt et principes de mise en oeuvre. Décisions Marketing59(3): 7–16.
4.
BrownSAVenkateshVBalaH (2006) Household technology use: Integrating household life cycle and the model of adoption of technology in households. Information Society22(4): 205–218.
5.
BrunerGCKumarA (2005) Explaining consumer acceptance of handheld internet devices. Journal of Business Research58(5): 553–558.
6.
CastanoRSujanMKackerMSujanH (2008) Managing consumer uncertainty in the adoption of new products: Temporal distance and mental simulation. Journal of Marketing Research45(3): 320–336.
7.
ChandyRKTellisGJ (1998) Organizing for radical product innovation: The overlooked role of willingness to cannibalize. Journal of Marketing Research35(4): 474–487.
CrespoAHdel BosqueIRde los Salmones SanchezMMG (2009) The influence of perceived risk on internet shopping behavior: A multidimensional perspective. Journal of Risk Research12(2): 259–277.
10.
DahlDWHoefflerS (2004) Visualizing the self: Exploring the potential benefits and drawbacks for new product evaluation. Journal of Product Innovation Management21(4): 259–267.
11.
DavisFD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly13(3): 319–340.
12.
DerbaixCPoncinI (2005) La mesure des réactions affectives en marketing: évaluation des principaux outils. Recherche et Applications en Marketing20(2) : 55–75.
13.
EngelJFBlackwellDRMiniardPW (1995) Consumer behavior. Fort Worth, TX: The Dryden Press.
14.
EscalasJELuceM.F (2003) Process versus outcome thought focus and advertising. Journal of Consumer Psychology13(3): 246–254.
15.
EscalasJELuceMF (2004) Understanding the effects of process-focused versus outcome-focused thought in response to advertising, Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 2, 274–285.
16.
FeiereisenSWongVBroderickAJ (2008) Analogies and mental simulations in learning for really new products: The role of visual attention. Journal of Product Innovation Management25(6): 593–607.
17.
FournierS (1998) Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research24(4): 343–373.
18.
GaudronJ-PVignoliE (2002) Assessing computer anxiety with the interaction model of anxiety: Development and validation of the computer anxiety trait subscale. Computers in Human Behavior18(3): 315–325.
19.
GoldenbergJLehmannDRMazurskyD (2001) The idea itself and the circumstances of its emergence as predictors of new product success. Management Science47(1): 69–84.
20.
GoldsmithKAmirO (2010) Can uncertainty improve promotions?Journal of Marketing Research47(6): 1070–1077.
21.
GourvilleJT (2006) Eager sellers and stony buyers. Harvard Business Review84(6): 98–106.
22.
HenardDHSzymanskiDM (2001) Why some new products are more successful than others. Journal of Marketing Research38(3): 362–375.
23.
HerzensteinMPosavacSSBrakusJJ (2007) Adoption of new and really new products: The effects of self-regulation systems and risk salience. Journal of Marketing Research44(2): 251–260.
24.
HoefflerS (2003) Measuring preferences for really new products. Journal of Marketing Research40( 4): 406–420.
25.
HoefflerSZaubermanGZhaoM (2011) Mental simulation and product evaluation: The affective and cognitive dimensions of process versus outcome simulation. Journal of Marketing Research48(5): 827–839.
26.
HoffmanJ (2007) Développement et test d’un modèle des déterminants individuels de l’adoption des innovations technologiques dans l’industrie des TIC. Doctoral dissertation, Université Pierre Mendès-France, Grenoble.
27.
JaspersonJCarterPEZmudRW (2005) A comprehensive conceptualization of post-adoptive behaviors associated with information technology enabled work systems. MIS Quarterly29(3): 525–557.
28.
KazdinAE (1974) Covert modeling, model similarity, and reduction of avoidance behavior. Behavior Therapy5(3): 325–340.
29.
KimY-JParkJWyerRS (2009) Effects of temporal distance and memory on consumer judgments. Journal of Consumer Research36(4): 634–645.
30.
LakshmananAKrishnanHS (2011) The A-ha! experience: Insight and discontinuous learning in product usage. Journal of Marketing75(6): 105–123.
31.
LehmannD (1994) Characteristics of ‘really new products’. In: Conference of the Marketing Science Institute, Boston, MA.
32.
LibermanNTropeY (1998) The role of feasibility and desirability considerations in near and distant future decisions: A test of temporal construal theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology75(1): 5–18.
33.
ManceauD (1996) Les effets des annonces préalables de nouveaux produits sur le marché: état des connaissances et propositions théoriques. Recherche et Applications en Marketing11(3): 39–55.
34.
ManceauD (2003) Lancement de nouveaux produits. In : MustarPPenanH (eds) Encyclopédie de l’innovation. Paris : Economica, pp.281–295.
35.
MartinBASGnothJStrongC (2009) Temporal construal in advertising: The moderating role of temporal orientation and attribute importance in consumer evaluations. Journal of Advertising38(3): 5–19.
36.
MartocchioJJWebsterJ (1992) Effects of feedback and cognitive playfulness on performance in microcomputer software training. Personnel Psychology45(3): 553–578.
37.
McLeodAPippinSMasonR (2009) Individual taxpayer intention to use tax preparation software: Examining experience, trust, and perceived risk. Journal of Information Science and Technology6(1): 25–44.
38.
MeuterMLBitnerMJOstromALBrownSW (2005) Choosing among alternative service delivery modes: An investigation of customer trial of self-service technologies. Journal of Marketing69(2): 61–83.
39.
MickDGFournierS (1998) Paradoxes of technology: Consumer cognizance, emotions, and coping strategies. Journal of Consumer Research25(2): 123–143.
40.
MohrJJShooshtariNH (2003) Introduction to the special issue: Marketing of high-technology products and innovations. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice11(3): 1–5.
41.
MoldovanSGoldenbergJChattopadhyayA (2011) The different roles of product originality and usefulness in generating word-of-mouth. International Journal of Research in Marketing28(2): 109–119.
42.
MongaAHoustonMJ (2006) Fading optimism in products: Temporal changes in expectations about performance. Journal of Marketing Research43(4): 654–663.
43.
MonnotE (2010) L’expérience d’apprentissage du client: la première utilisation d’un produit-service. Doctoral dissertation, Université Paris-Dauphine, Paris.
44.
OliverRLWinerRS (1987) A framework for the formation and structure of consumer expectations: review and propositions. Journal of Economic Psychology8(4): 469–499.
45.
OstlundLE (1974) Perceived innovation attributes as predictors of innovativeness. Journal of Consumer Research1(2): 23–29.
46.
OzanneJLBrucksMGrewalD (1992) A study of information search behavior during the categorization of new products. Journal of Consumer Research18(4): 452–463.
47.
PetersonC (2000) The future of optimism, American Psychologist55(1): 44–55.
48.
PetrovaPKCialdiniRB (2008) Evoking the imagination as a strategy of influence. In: HaugtvedtCHerrPKardesF (ed.) Handbook of Consumer Psychology. New-York: Psychology Press, pp.505–524.
RamSShethJN (1989) Consumer resistance to innovations: the marketing problem. Journal of Consumer Marketing6(2): 5–14.
51.
RijsdijkSAHultinkE (2003) ‘Honey, have you seen our hamster?’ Consumer evaluations of autonomous domestic products. Journal of Product Innovation Management20(3): 204–216.
52.
RobertsonTS (1971) Innovative Behavior and Communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
53.
RogersEM (2003) Diffusion of Innovations. New York, Free Press.
54.
SarinSSegoTChanvarasuthN (2003) Strategic use of bundling for reducing consumers’ perceived risk associated with the purchase of new high-tech products. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice11(3): 71–83.
55.
ScheierMFCarverCS (1985) Optimism, coping, and health: Assessment and implications of generalized outcome expectancies. Health Psychology4(3): 219–247.
56.
ShihC-FVenkateshA (2004) Beyond adoption: Development and application of a use-diffusion model. Journal of Marketing68(1): 59–72.
57.
SmithBCaputiP (2001) Cognitive interference in computer anxiety. Behaviour and Information Technology20(4): 265–273.
SutinARRobinsRW (2007) Phenomenology of autobiographical memories: The Memory Experiences Questionnaire. Memory15(4): 390–411.
60.
SzpunarKKAddisDRSchacterDL (2012) Memory for emotionnal simulations: Remembering a rosy future. Psychological Science23(1): 24–29.
61.
TaylorJW (1974) The role of risk in consumer behavior. Journal of Marketing38(2): 54–60.
62.
TaylorSESchneiderSK (1989) Coping and the simulation of events. Social Cognition7(2): 174–194.
63.
TaylorSEPhamLBRivkinIDArmorDA (1998) Harnessing the imagination: Mental stimulation, self-regulation, and coping. American Psychologist53(4): 429–439.
64.
ThompsonDVHamiltonRWRustRT (2005) Feature fatigue: When product capabilities become too much of a good thing. Journal of Marketing Research42(4): 431–442.
65.
TigerL (1979) Optimism: The Biology of Hope. New York: Simon and Schuster.
66.
VallacherRRWegnerDM (1987) What do people think they’re doing? Action identification and human behavior. Psychological Review94(1): 3–15.
67.
WoodSLLynchJG (2002) Prior knowledge and complacency in new product learning. Journal of Consumer Research29(3): 416–426.
68.
WoodSLMoreauCP (2006) From fear to loathing? How emotion influences the evaluation and early use of innovations. Journal of Marketing70(3): 44–57.
69.
ZaichkowskyJL (1985) Familiarity: product use, involvement or expertise. Advances in Consumer Research12: 296-299.
70.
ZhaoMHoefflerSDahlD.W (2009) The role of imagination-focused visualization on new product evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research46(1): 46–55.
71.
ZhaoMHoefflerSZaubermanG (2007) Mental simulation and preference consistency over time: the role of process- versus outcome-focused thoughts, Journal of Marketing Research, 44, 3, 379-388.
72.
ZhaoMXieJ (2011) Effects of social and temporal distance on consumers’ responses to peer recommendations, Journal of Marketing Research, 48, 3, 486–496.
73.
ZimbardoPGBoydJN (1999) Putting time in perspective: a valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology77(6): 1271–1288.
