Let Us Eat and Drink, for Tomorrow We Shall Die: Effects of Mortality Salience and Self-Esteem on Self-Regulation in Consumer Choice

By Rosellina Ferraro, B. Shiv, James R. Bettman. 2005

307 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8264d51143b89e6f71af902dd9e2d32e256019f5

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Be Fit and Be Strong: Mastering Self‐Regulation through Regulatory Fit (2008, methodology): “In this experiment, participants were presented with the self-regulation dilemma of choosing between a healthy and a decadent snack (e.g., Ferraro et al. 2005; Fishbach et al. 2003).”
'The Time vs. Money Effect': Shifting Product Attitudes and Decisions through Personal Connection (2008, background): “DOI: 10.1086/597161 “The Time vs. Money Effect”: Shifting Product”
The Sweet Escape: Effects of Mortality Salience on Consumption Quantities for High- and Low-Self-Esteem Consumers (2008, background): “Furthermore, these findings are inconsistent with an explanation that our participants simply wish to “eat, drink [and be merry]” (Ferraro et al. 2005).”
Uncovering the relationships between aspirations and luxury brand preference (2010, background): “Self-esteem has also been presented as a fundamental element within theories of motivation and selfconcept (Hogg et al., 2000; Ferraro et al., 2005).”
Drivers of brand community engagement (2020, background): “Another approach for establishing discriminant validity was referred to the Fornell and Larcker (1981) criterion, where the square root (SQRT) value of AVE score of the latent constructs was compared to their inter-construct correlations (ICC); SQRT(AVE) > ICC established the discriminant validity…”
Threat and defense: From anxiety to approach (2014, background): “People typically turn to such consumptive concrete personal defenses only if they do not conflict with other salient priorities and values (e.g., Ferraro et al., 2005), suggesting that relatively abstract personal commitments related to values and ideals may take priority.”