De Witt Huberts et al 123 variety of fields.such as health behavior.moral behavior and eral.the purchase or consumption of such luxury goods is consumer choice.Yet,these various empirical demonstra- harder to justify than the consumption of utilitarian products tons have never led to should incre the likel 0a0 tification-based echa the backbo of the con sumer loyalty programs.Kivetz and Simonson (2002) ducted within this frame ork but that nevertheless seems to demonstrated that participants preferred a luxury award over rely on justific To he included as ey orting a iustification greater effort presumably served as a justification for the purchase of luxuries.A justification-based mechanism is ence of justifications on be cision making ed yngheavalabiyofa es. (1008)den post hoc iustification n esses:(b)including a control group more effective in promoting luxury than utilitarian consumr that was not provide The donation to charity tha e to f a justif s is th ought to re dile such that 's im impulses interfere with one's long-term intentions,as in the justifications on consumer indulgence. Typically partici of a motivational conflict,Justi cation were pres on afte llegedly in d-(d il istently de rated that articip nts with justification (e.g..effort,excellence feedback contributing Empirical Evidence for Justification hoice of cesses in Self-Re lation faily (e.g The role of justifications was first studied in the context of roduct (e.g.. cleaner.Khan Dhar.2006:healthy Zheng.2006)compared with partic ate s mo as exh an Ha 2010.for a revi nle Mor nd1er/2001 e but als showed that choosing an African American who was the ing unealthy snacks (De Witt Huberts,Evers&De Ridde the dc vers.& De Ridder at p yne 2011 gge with narticinan who hased on similar des tions. ses that are under the influence of visceral drives tially chose a White applicant as best suited for the job hunger)and that involve actively regulating one's desires This and simila g were attribut the fac er tha me kind of orthat countera can facilitat it inte dentials"that licensed them to subsequently behave in a and values,with empirical evidence demonstrating that justi way that violated these principles (e.g., fications play a subs antial role in the self-regulation contex Effro and Mille 0 moral self-licensing loyed the 9) gratifying immediate needs versus pursuing long-term Having established that iustifications play a role in self Further evidence for a justification-based mechanism regulation failure,the question rises what kind of justifica- underlying beha vior disc pant with one's long-term goals othe As m ny pur the ev liet of functional considerations,such as spending on luxuries ver- would like to note that the cate izations are ours.and lim sus saving up or spending on necessary items,they often ited only to the justifications that have actually been studied encompass Se regulation dilemm bet e rely on may ons and lo 304 De Witt Huberts et al. 123 variety of fields, such as health behavior, moral behavior and consumer choice. Yet, these various empirical demonstra￾tions have never been assembled to substantiate a justification￾based account of self-regulation failure. In the following section, we aggregate evidence for a justification-based mechanism. This includes work that was not explicitly con￾ducted within this framework but that nevertheless seems to capture the phenomenon that we sometimes rely on justifica￾tions to allow oneself a forbidden pleasure. To be included as evidence supporting a justification￾based account the studies had to establish the causal influ￾ence of justifications on behavior, including decision making, by (a) manipulating the availability of a justification before self-regulatory behavior was measured in order to rule out post hoc justification processes; (b) including a control group that was not provided with a justification before the outcome measure to establish whether the availability of a justifica￾tion systematically influenced subsequent behavior; (c) entailing a self-control dilemma, such that one’s immediate impulses interfere with one’s long-term intentions, as in the absence of a motivational conflict, justifications are not needed to foster indulgence and consequently are unlikely to affect behavior and; (d) having ruled out most prominent alternative explanations for the observed findings. Empirical Evidence for Justification Processes in Self-Regulation Failure The role of justifications was first studied in the context of moral behavior where justifications could lead one to vio￾late one’s moral principles such as exhibiting prejudiced, sexist, or selfish behavior (see Merritt, Effron, & Monin, 2010, for a review). For example, Monin and Miller (2001) showed that choosing an African American—who was the most qualified applicant—for a hypothetical job, increased the likelihood that participants would describe a subse￾quent job as better suited for White applicants compared with participants who, based on similar descriptions, ini￾tially chose a White applicant as best suited for the job. This and similar findings were attributed to the fact that people whose past behavior (e.g., acting in a non-preju￾diced way) provided them with some kind of “moral cre￾dentials” that licensed them to subsequently behave in a way that violated these principles (e.g., voicing prejudiced opinions; Effron, Cameron, & Monin, 2009). To describe this phenomenon, Monin and Miller employed the term moral self-licensing. Further evidence for a justification-based mechanism underlying behavior discrepant with one’s long-term goals comes from studies on consumer choice. As many purchas￾ing decisions are tinged with a conflict between hedonic and functional considerations, such as spending on luxuries ver￾sus saving up or spending on necessary items, they often encompass a typical self-regulation dilemma between immediate gratifications and long-term considerations. As in general, the purchase or consumption of such luxury goods is harder to justify than the consumption of utilitarian products, having a justification should increase the likelihood of indulging in luxury consumption. Indeed, a justification￾based mechanism appears to be the backbone of the popular consumer loyalty programs. Kivetz and Simonson (2002) demonstrated that participants preferred a luxury award over a utilitarian reward of equal value when the program require￾ments (e.g., frequency of purchase) were high (vs. low). The greater effort presumably served as a justification for the purchase of luxuries. A justification-based mechanism is also thought to underlie charity incentives where people can contribute to charity by purchasing luxuries. Strahilevitz and Myers (1998) demonstrated that such charity incentives are more effective in promoting luxury than utilitarian consump￾tion. The donation to charity that the luxury consumption encompasses is thought to reduce the guilt normally associ￾ated with the purchase of luxury items. Other studies further demonstrated the facilitating role of justifications on consumer indulgence. Typically, partici￾pants in these studies were presented with a justification after which, allegedly in the context of another study, they could choose between a utilitarian and a luxury item. These studies consistently demonstrated that providing participants with a justification (e.g., effort, excellence feedback, contributing to charity or volunteering) increased choice of a luxury prod￾uct (e.g., designer jeans, Khan & Dhar, 2006; indulgent chocolate cake, Kivetz & Zheng, 2006) over a utilitarian product (e.g., vacuum cleaner, Khan & Dhar, 2006; healthy fruit salad, Kivetz & Zheng, 2006) compared with partici￾pants not provided with a justification. Having a justification not only increases preference for hedonic over functional choice but also increases hedonic consumption, such as eat￾ing unhealthy snacks (De Witt Huberts, Evers, & De Ridder, 2012a; De Witt Huberts, Evers, & De Ridder, 2012c; Werle, Wansink, & Payne, 2011), suggesting that justification pro￾cesses also play an important role in self-regulatory pro￾cesses that are under the influence of visceral drives (e.g., hunger) and that involve actively regulating one’s desires rather than choosing. As outlined above, having a justification can facilitate behavior that counteracts one’s explicit intentions, norms, and values, with empirical evidence demonstrating that justi￾fications play a substantial role in the self-regulation context of gratifying immediate needs versus pursuing long-term goals. Having established that justifications play a role in self￾regulation failure, the question rises what kind of justifica￾tions people rely on to allow themselves an otherwise forbidden pleasure. A review of the empirical evidence reveals the following list of common justifications. We would like to note that the categorizations are ours, and lim￾ited only to the justifications that have actually been studied. As the justifications people rely on may be idiosyncratically determined and influenced by situational factors, the list of Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at Remen University of China on September 6, 2015