Six studies show that subtle contextual cues that increase customers’ self-awareness can be used to influence their satisfaction with service providers (while holding the objective service delivery constant). Self-awareness cues tend to increase customers’ satisfaction when the outcome of a service interaction is unfavorable, but they tend to decrease customers’ satisfaction when the outcome of the interaction is favorable. This is because higher self-awareness increases customers’ tendency to attribute outcomes to themselves rather than to the provider. Self-awareness can even influence satisfaction with service interactions that occurred far in the past. The authors demonstrate these effects across a variety of lab and field settings with different simulated retail experiences and with different real-life service interactions, including college courses, meals taken at a university cafeteria, and items purchased at an actual clothing store. The results further show that attempts to shape customers’ satisfaction by means of self-awareness are more likely to be effective when there is substantial customer responsibility for the outcome; when customers’ responsibility is limited, such attempts may backfire.
ArgoJennifer J., DahlDarren W., and ManchandaRajesh V. (2005), “The Influence of a Mere Social Presence in a Retail Context,”Journal of Consumer Research, 32(September), 207–212.
2.
BussArnold H. (1980), Self-Consciousness and Social Anxiety.San Francisco: Freeman.
3.
BussDavid M., and ScheierMichael F. (1976), “Self-Consciousness, Self-Awareness, and Self-Attribution,”Journal of Research in Personality, 10(4), 463–68.
4.
CarverCharles S., and ScheierMichael F. (1978), “Self-Focusing Effects of Dispositional Self-Consciousness, Mirror Presence, and Audience Presence,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(3), 324–32.
5.
CarverCharles S., and ScheierMichael F. (1981), Attention and Self-Regulation: A Control-Theory Approach to Human Behavior.New York: Springer-Verlag.
6.
DavisDeborah, and BrockTimothy C. (1978), “Use of First-Person Pronouns as a Function of Increased Objective Self-Awareness and Performance Feedback,”Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 11(4), 381–88.
7.
ShelleyDuval T. (1976), “Conformity on a Visual Task as a Function of Personal Novelty on Attitudinal Dimensions and Being Reminded of the Object Status of Self,”Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 12(1), 87–104.
8.
ShelleyDuval T., and LalwaniNeal (1999), “Objective Self-Awareness and Causal Attributions for Self-Standard Discrepancies: Changing Self or Changing Standards of Correctness,”Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(10), 1220–29.
9.
ShelleyDuval T., and SilviaPaul J. (2002), “Self-Awareness, Probability of Improvement, and the Self-Serving Bias,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(1), 49–61.
10.
ShelleyDuval T., SilviaPaul J., and LalwaniNeal (2001), Self-Awareness & Causal Attribution: A Dual Systems Theory.Norwell, MA: Kluwer.
11.
ShelleyDuval T., and WicklundRobert A. (1972), A Theory of Objective Self-Awareness.New York: Academic Press.
12.
ShelleyDuval T., and WicklundRobert A. (1973), “Effects of Objective Self-Awareness on Attribution of Causality,”Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 9(1), 17–31.
13.
FejfarMichele C., and HoyleRick H. (2000), “Effect of Private Self-Awareness on Negative Affect and Self-Referent Attribution: A Quantitative Review,”Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(2), 132–42.
14.
FenigsteinAllan, and LevineMichael P. (1984), “Self-Attention, Concept Activation, and the Causal Self,”Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 20(3), 231–45.
15.
FenigsteinAllan, ScheierMichael F., and BussArnold H. (1975), “Public and Private Self-Consciousness: Assessment and Theory,”Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43(4), 522–27.
16.
FolkesValerie S. (1984), “Consumer Reactions to Product Failure: An Attributional Approach,”Journal of Consumer Research, 10(4), 398–409.
17.
GaleBradley T. (1994), Managing Customer Value: Creating Quality & Service That Customers Can See.New York: The Free Press.
18.
GibbonsFrederick X. (1990), “Self-Attention and Behavior: A Review and Theoretical Update,” in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 23, ZannaMark P., ed. San Diego: Academic Press,249–303.
19.
GoukensCaroline, DewitteSiegfried, and WarlopLuk (2009), “Me, Myself, and My Choices: The Influence of Private Self-Awareness on Choice,”Journal of Marketing Research, 46(October), 682–92.
20.
HastieReid, and ParkBernadette (1986), “The Relationship Between Memory and Judgment Depends on Whether the Judgment Task Is Memory-Based or Online,”Psychological Review, 93(3), 258–68.
21.
HauserJohn R., and ClausingDon (1988), “The House of Quality,”Harvard Business Review, 66(3), 63–73.
22.
HullJay G., and LevyAlan S. (1979), “Organizational Functions of the Self: Alternative to the Duval and Wicklund Model of Self-Awareness,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(5), 756–68.
23.
HullJay G., VantreurenRonald R., AshfordSusan J., PropsomPamela, and AndrusBruce W. (1988), “Self-Consciousness and the Processing of Self-Relevant Information,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(3), 452–65.
24.
LichtensteinMeryl, and SrullThomas K. (1987), “Processing Objectives as a Determinant of the Relationship Between Recall and Judgment,”Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 23(2), 93–118.
25.
MackieDiane M., and AsuncionArlene G. (1990), “On-Line and Memory-Based Modification of Attitudes: Determinants of Message Recall-Attitude Change Correspondence,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(1), 5–16.
26.
MartinLeonard L., and TesserAbraham (1992), The Construction of Social Judgments.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
27.
OliverRichard L. (1980), “A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions,”Journal of Marketing Research, 17(November), 460–69.
28.
OliverRichard L., and DeSarboWayne S. (1988), “Response Determinants in Satisfaction Judgments,”Journal of Consumer Research, 14(4), 495–507.
29.
ParasuramanA., ZeithamlValarie A., and BerryLeonard L. (1985), “A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future Research,”Journal of Marketing, 49(Autumn), 41–50.
30.
PhamMichel Tuan, and MuthukrishnanA.V. (2002), “Search and Alignment in Judgment Revision: Implications for Brand Positioning,”Journal of Marketing Research, 39(February), 18–30.
31.
ShavittSharon, SwannSuzanne, LowreyTina M., and WankeMichaela (1992), “The Interaction of Endorser Attractiveness and Involvement in Persuasion Depends on the Goal That Guides Message Processing,”Journal of Consumer Psychology, 3(2), 137–62.
32.
SilviaPaul J., and DuvalThomas S. (2001), “Objective Self-Awareness Theory: Recent Progress and Enduring Problems,”Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(3), 230–41.
33.
SmeestersDirk, Christian WheelerS., and KayAaron C. (2009), “The Role of Interpersonal Perceptions in the Prime-to-Behavior Pathway,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(2), 395–414.
34.
TsirosMichael, MittalVikas, and RossWilliam T. (2004), “The Role of Attributions in Customer Satisfaction: A Reexamination,”Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2), 476–83.
35.
Van RaaijFred W.F., and PruynAd T.H. (1998), “Customer Control and Evaluation of Service Validity and Reliability,”Psychology & Marketing, 15(8), 811–32.
36.
WebbWilliam M., SchneidermanWilliam, MarshKerry L., and DavisBob (1989), “Interaction Between Self-Monitoring and Manipulated States of Self-Awareness,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(1), 70–80.
