Consumers pursue numerous goals that are linked to particular time frames. Might one's likelihood of agreeing to pursue a goal fluctuate even if nothing about the goal's objective features changes, but if instead the only change is in how the time allotted for goal pursuit is described? Seven experiments show that consumers are more likely to agree to pursue goals when the completion interval is described by duration (e.g., “within exactly two weeks from now”) instead of date (e.g., “between today and November 17”). This pattern may arise because dates, which may make it easier to retrieve competing obligations falling within the interval, lead people to focus more on the (unenjoyable) goal-pursuit process, whereas durations, which present the interval in isolation, allow people to focus more on the goal's (beneficial) outcome. These findings suggest that although how a time interval is described seems inconsequential, it has striking effects on goal-pursuit decisions and therefore has important implications for the marketing of products and actions designed to assist consumers in achieving their goals.
AartsHenk, GollwitzerPeter M., and HassinRan R. (2004), “Goal Contagion: Perceiving Is for Pursuing,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87 (1), 23–37.
2.
AustinJames T., and VancouverJeffrey B. (1996), “Goal Constructs in Psychology: Structure, Process, and Content,”Psychological Bulletin, 120 (3), 338–75.
3.
BagchiRajesh, and LiXingbo (2011), “Illusionary Progress in Loyalty Programs: Magnitudes, Reward Distances, and Step-Size Ambiguity,”Journal of Consumer Research, 37 (5), 888–901.
4.
BelliRobert F. (1998), “The Structure of Autobiographical Memory and the Event History Calendar: Potential Improvements in the Quality of Retrospective Reports in Surveys,”Memory, 6 (4), 383–406.
5.
BuhrauDenise, and SujanMita (2015), “Temporal Mindsets and Self-Regulation: The Motivation and Implementation of Self-Regulatory Behaviors,”Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25 (2), 231–44.
6.
CustersRuud, and AartsHenk (2010), “The Unconscious Will: How the Pursuit of Goals Operates Outside of Conscious Awareness,”Science, 329 (5987), 47–50.
7.
ErezMiriam, and AradRevital (1986), “Participative Goal-Setting: Social, Motivational, and Cognitive Factors,”Journal of Applied Psychology, 71 (4), 591–97.
8.
ErezMiriam, EarleyP. Christopher, and HulinCharles L. (1985), “The Impact of Participation on Goal Acceptance and Performance: A Two-Step Model,”Academy of Management Journal, 28 (1), 50–66.
9.
ErezMiriam, and KanferFrederick H. (1983), “The Role of Goal Acceptance in Goal Setting and Task Performance,”Academy of Management Review, 8 (3), 454–63.
10.
FishbachAyelet, and ChoiJinhee (2012), “When Thinking About Goals Undermines Goal Pursuit,”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 118 (2), 99–107.
11.
FishbachAyelet, and LabrooAparna A. (2007), “Be Better or Be Merry: How Mood Affects Self-Control,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93 (2), 158–73.
12.
FreitasAntonio L., LibermanNira, SaloveyPeter, and HigginsE. Tory (2002), “When to Begin? Regulatory Focus and Initiating Goal Pursuit,”Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28 (1), 121–30.
13.
FujitaKentaro, TropeYaacov, LibermanNira, and Levin-SagiMaya (2006), “Construal Levels and Self-Control,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90 (3), 351–67.
14.
HarberKent D., ZimbardoPhillip G., and BoydJohn N. (2003), “Participant Self-Selection Biases as a Function of Individual Differences in Time Perspective,”Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 25 (3), 255–64.
15.
HawsKelly L., BeardenWilliam O., and NenkovGergana Y. (2012), “Consumer Spending Self-Control Effectiveness and Outcome Elaboration Prompts,”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40 (5), 695–710.
16.
HayesAndrew F. (2013), Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis.New York: Guilford.
17.
HigginsE. Tory (2005), “Value from Regulatory Fit,”Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14 (4), 209–13.
18.
HollenbeckJohn R., and KleinHoward J. (1987), “Goal Commitment and the Goal-Setting Process: Problems, Prospects, and Proposals for Future Research,”Journal of Applied Psychology, 72 (2), 212–20.
19.
JanssenSteve M.J., ChessaAntonio G., and MurreJaap M.J. (2006), “Memory for Time: How People Date Events,”Memory & Cognition, 34 (1), 138–47.
20.
KeoughKelli A., ZimbardoPhilip G., and BoydJohn N. (1999), “Who's Smoking, Drinking, and Using Drugs? Time Perspective as a Predictor of Substance Use,”Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21 (2), 149–64.
21.
KruglanskiArie W. (1996), “Goals as Knowledge Structures,” in The Psychology of Action: Linking Cognition and Motivation to Behavior, GollwitzerP.M. and BarghJ.A., eds. New York: Guilford.
22.
KruglanskiArie W., PierroAntonio, MannettiLucia, ErbHans-Peter, and ChunWoo Young (2007), “On the Parameters of Human Judgment,” in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 39, ZannaMark P., ed. Waltham, MA: Academic Press.
23.
KurbatMatthew A., ShevellSteven K., and RipsLance J. (1998), “A Year's Memories: The Calendar Effect in Autobiographical Recall,”Memory & Cognition, 26 (3), 532–52.
24.
LeBoeufRobyn A. (2006), “Discount Rates for Time Versus Dates: The Sensitivity of Discounting to Time-Interval Description,”Journal of Marketing Research, 43 (1), 59–72.
25.
LeBoeufRobyn A., and ShafirEldar (2009), “Anchoring on the 'Here' and 'Now' in Time and Distance Judgments,”Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35 (1), 81–93.
26.
LembregtsChristophe, and PandelaereMario (2013), “Are All Units Created Equal? The Effect of Default Units on Product Evaluations,”Journal of Consumer Research, 39 (6), 1275–89.
27.
LevinIrwin P., and GaethGary J. (1988), “How Consumers are Affected by the Framing of Attribute Information Before and After Consuming the Product,”Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (3), 374–78.
28.
LevinIrwin P., SchneiderSandra L., and GaethGary J. (1998), “All Frames Are Not Created Equal: A Typology and Critical Analysis of Framing Effects,”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76 (2), 149–88.
29.
LibermanNira, and TropeYaacov (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 Psychology, 75 (1), 5–18.
30.
LoftusElizabeth F., and MarburgerWesley (1983), “Since the Eruption of Mt. St. Helens, Has Anyone Beaten You Up? Improving the Accuracy of Retrospective Reports with Landmark Events,”Memory & Cognition, 11 (2), 114–20.
31.
MalkocSelin A., ZaubermanGal, and BettmanJames R. (2010), “Unstuck from the Concrete: Carryover Effects of Abstract Mindsets in Intertemporal Preferences,”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 113 (2), 112–26.
32.
MongaAshwani, and BagchiRajesh (2012), “Years, Months, and Days Versus 1, 12, and 365: The Influence of Units Versus Numbers,”Journal of Consumer Research, 39 (1), 185–98.
33.
NenkovGergana Y., InmanJ. Jeffrey, and HullandJohn (2008), “Considering the Future: The Conceptualization and Measurement of Elaboration on Potential Outcomes,”Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (1), 126–41.
34.
NenkovGergana Y., InmanJ. Jeffrey, HullandJohn, and MorrinMaureen (2009), “The Impact of Outcome Elaboration on Susceptibility to Contextual and Presentation Biases,”Journal of Marketing Research, 46 (6), 764–76.
35.
PandelaereMario, BriersBarbara, and LembregtsChristophe (2011), “How to Make a 29% Increase Look Bigger: The Unit Effect in Option Comparisons,”Journal of Consumer Research, 38 (2), 308–22.
36.
PayneJohn W., SagaraNamika, ShuSuzanne B., AppeltKirstin C., and JohnsonEric J. (2013), “Life Expectancy as a Constructed Belief: Evidence of a Live-to or Die-by Framing Effect,”Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 46 (1), 27–50.
37.
PhamLien B., and TaylorShelley E. (1999), “From Thought to Action: Effects of Process- Versus Outcome-Based Mental Simulations on Performance,”Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25 (2), 250–60.
38.
ReadDaniel, FrederickShane, OrselBurcu, and RahmanJuwaria (2005), “Four Score and Seven Years from Now: The Date/Delay Effect in Temporal Discounting,”Management Science, 51 (9), 1326–35.
39.
RobinsonJohn A. (1986), “Temporal Reference Systems and Autobiographical Memory,” in Autobiographical Memory, RubinC., ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
40.
RothspanSadina, and ReadStephen J. (1996), “Present Versus Future Time Perspective and HIV Risk Among Heterosexual College Students,”Health Psychology, 15 (2), 131–34.
41.
ShenLuxi, and UrminskyOleg (2013), “Making Sense of Nonsense: The Visual Salience of Units Determines Sensitivity to Magnitude,”Psychological Science, 24 (3), 297–304.
42.
StrathmanAlan, GleicherFaith, BoningerDavid S., and EdwardsC. Scott (1994), “The Consideration of Future Consequences: Weighing Immediate and Distant Outcomes of Behavior,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66 (4), 742–52.
43.
TropeYaacov, and FishbachAyelet (2000), “Counteractive Self-Control in Overcoming Temptation,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79 (4), 493–506.
44.
TropeYaacov, and LibermanNira (2003), “Temporal Construal,”Psychological Review, 110 (3), 403–21.
45.
TropeYaacov, and LibermanNira (2010), “Construal-Level Theory of Psychological Distance,”Psychological Review, 117 (2), 440–63.
46.
UlkumenGulden, and ThomasManoj (2013), “Personal Relevance and Mental Simulation Amplify the Duration Framing Effect,”Journal of Marketing Research, 50 (2), 194–206.
47.
VallacherRobin R., and WegnerDaniel M. (1987), “What Do People Think They're Doing? Action Identification and Human Behavior,”Psychological Review, 94 (1), 3–15.
48.
Van Der VaartWander, and GlasnerTina (2007), “Applying a Timeline as a Recall Aid in a Telephone Survey: A Record Check Study,”Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21 (2), 227–38.
49.
Van IttersumKoert (2012), “The Effect of Decision Makers' Time Perspective on Intention–Behavior Consistency,”Marketing Letters, 23 (1), 263–77.
50.
VroomVictor H. (1964), Work and Motivation.New York: John Wiley & Sons.
51.
ZhangY. Charles, and SchwarzNorbert (2012), “How and Why 1 Year Differs from 365 Days: A Conversational Logic Analysis of Inferences from the Granularity of Quantitative Expressions,”Journal of Consumer Research, 39 (2), 248–59.
52.
ZhangYing, FishbachAyelet, and DharRavi (2007), “When Thinking Beats Doing: The Role of Optimistic Expectations in Goal-Based Choice,”Journal of Consumer Research, 34 (4), 567–78.
53.
ZimbardoPhilip G., and BoydJohn N. (1999), “Putting Time in Perspective: A Valid, Reliable Individual-Differences Metric,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77 (6), 1271–88.
54.
ZimbardoPhilip G., KeoughKelli A., and BoydJohn N. (1997), “Present Time Perspective as a Predictor of Risky Driving,”Personality and Individual Differences, 23 (6), 1007–23.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
