Francesca Gino’s research while affiliated with Harvard Medical School and other places

Income inequality is a growing social issue in the United States, yet little research has examined whether and how it affects consumers’ everyday purchasing decisions. To address this gap, we analyze the role of income inequality in shopper behavior, namely grocery shoppers’ preference for private labels versus national brands. Since income inequality increases people’s interest in brands that are associated with higher status than others, we predict that shoppers facing higher inequality have a stronger preference for national brands rather than private labels. The results support our thesis: Americans living in places with high versus low income inequality include fewer private label items in their shopping baskets and are willing to pay a higher premium for national brands. Further, consistent with social comparison theory, we find that the link between income inequality and preference for private labels versus national brands is stronger when people have higher social comparison orientation.

Trust is a key ingredient in decision making, as it allows us to rely on the information we receive. Although trust is usually viewed as a positive element of decision making, we suggest that its effects on memory are costly rather than beneficial. Across nine studies using three different manipulations of trust and distrust and three different memory paradigms, we find that trust reduces memory performance as compared with distrust. In Study 1, trust leads to higher acceptance rates of misinformation. Studies 2a and 2b demonstrate that participants in a distrust and a control condition perform better at a memory-recognition task than participants in a trust condition. Studies 3a and 3b show that trust also reduces free recall of memory content. Examining the underlying mechanism, we find that reduced memory performance in a state of trust is caused by an increased perception of similarities between items that are to be memorized. Following a causal chain design, Study 4 shows that trust increases the sensitivity to similarities as compared with distrust and a control condition, and Study 5 shows that a processing focus on similarities reduces memory accuracy. Studies 6 and 7 create circumstances that either leave the proposed mediator free to vary or interrupt it via the induction of a similarity-focus (Study 6) or a difference-focus (Study 7). The disadvantage of trust is only present if the mediating processing focus can freely operate. Overall, these studies show that trust impairs memory performance due to an increased perception of similarities between memory content. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Rituals are predefined sequences of actions characterized by rigidity and repetition. We propose that enacting ritualized actions can enhance subjective feelings of self-discipline, such that rituals can be harnessed to improve behavioral self-control. We test this hypothesis in 6 experiments. A field experiment showed that engaging in a pre-eating ritual over a 5-day period helped participants reduce calorie intake (Experiment 1). Pairing a ritual with healthy eating behavior increased the likelihood of choosing healthy food in a subsequent decision (Experiment 2), and enacting a ritual before a food choice (i.e., without being integrated into the consumption process) promoted the choice of healthy food over unhealthy food (Experiments 3a and 3b). The positive effect of rituals on self-control held even when a set of ritualized gestures were not explicitly labeled as a ritual, and in other domains of behavioral self-control (i.e., prosocial decision-making; Experiments 4 and 5). Furthermore, Experiments 3a, 3b, 4, and 5 provided evidence for the psychological process underlying the effectiveness of rituals: heightened feelings of self-discipline. Finally, Experiment 5 showed that the absence of a self-control conflict eliminated the effect of rituals on behavior, demonstrating that rituals affect behavioral self-control specifically because they alter responses to self-control conflicts. We conclude by briefly describing the results of a number of additional experiments examining rituals in other self-control domains. Our body of evidence suggests that rituals can have beneficial consequences for self-control.

Although religion is a central aspect of life for many people across the globe, there is scant research on how religion affects people's non-religious routines. In the present research, we identify a frequent consumption activity that is influenced by religiosity: grocery shopping. Using both field and laboratory data, we find that grocery spending decreases with religiosity. Specifically, we document that people who live in more religious U.S. counties spend less money on groceries and make fewer unplanned purchases. We also demonstrate this negative relationship by measuring religiosity at the individual level and employing a religious prime. That is, the more religious people are, the less willing they are to follow through on novel purchase opportunities that arise during their grocery shopping trips. This effect is consistent with the account that many religions emphasize the value of being prudent with money. Additional analysis supports our predicted indirect effect of religiosity on spending through frugality.

Dilemmas featuring competing moral imperatives are prevalent in organizations and are difficult to resolve. Whereas prior research has focused on how individuals adjudicate among these moral imperatives, we study the factors that influence when individuals find solutions that fall outside of the salient options presented. In particular, we study moral insight, or the discovery of solutions, other than selecting one of the competing moral imperatives over another, that honor both competing imperatives or resolve the tension among them. Although individuals intuitively consider the question “What should I do?” when contemplating moral dilemmas, we find that prompting people to consider “What could I do?” helps them generate moral insight. Together, these studies point toward the conditions that enable moral insight and important practical implications.

We present theory suggesting that experiences at work that meet employees' expectations of need fulfillment drive work engagement. Employees have needs (e.g., a desire to be authentic) and they also have expectations for how their job or their organization will fulfill them. We argue that experiences at work that confirm employees' need fulfillment expectations yield a positive emotional state that is energizing, and that this energy is manifested in employees' behaviors at work. Our theorizing draws on a review of the work engagement literature, in which we identify three core characteristics of work engagement: (a) a positive emotional state that (b) yields a feeling of energy and (c) leads to positive work-oriented behaviors. These key themes provide the foundation for further theorizing suggesting that interactions at work confirm or disconfirm employees' need fulfillment expectations, leading to different levels of engagement. We extend our theorizing to argue that confirmation, or disconfirmation, of different need expectations will yield emotional experience of varying magnitudes, with confirmation of approach-oriented need expectations exerting stronger effects than the confirmation of avoidance-oriented need expectations. We close with a review suggesting that organizational contextual features influence the expression of these needs, sustaining or undermining the positive emotional experiences that fuel work engagement.

The nature of the cognitive processes that give rise to moral judgment and behavior has been a central question of psychology for decades. In this paper, we suggest that an often ignored yet fruitful stream of research for informing current debates on the nature of moral cognition is social influence. We introduce what we call the “social-moderation-of-process” perspective, a methodological framework for leveraging insights from social influence research to inform debates in moral psychology over the mechanisms underlying moral cognition and the moral domains in which those mechanisms operate. We demonstrate the utility of the social-moderation-of-process perspective by providing a detailed example of how research on social influence in behavioral ethics can be utilized to test a research question related to a debate between two prominent theories in moral psychology. We then detail how researchers across the field of moral psychology can utilize our social-moderation-of-process perspective.

In this paper, we explore referral-based hiring practices and show how a referrer's power (relative to the hiring manager) influences other organizational members' support (or lack thereof) for who is hired through perceptions of the hiring manager's motives and morality. We apply principles derived from the literature on attribution of motives to research on relational power to delineate a model that explains employees' moral evaluations of and reactions to referral practices based on the power relationship between a referrer and a hiring manager. Specifically, we predict that employees are more likely to see the acceptance of a referral from a higher- (as opposed to a lower-) power referrer as a way for the hiring manager to gain more power in the relationship with the referrer, thereby attributing more self-interested motives and more counter-organizational motives to the hiring manager in such situations. These motives are then associated with harsher moral judgments of the hiring manager, which in turn lead to less support for the hiring decision. We find support for our model in two experimental studies and two field studies. We discuss implications for the literature on referral practices, ethics, and observers' reactions to power dynamics.