That’s Not How I Remember It: Willfully Ignorant Memory for Ethical Product Attribute Information

2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 185-207 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Walker Reczek ◽  
Julie R Irwin ◽  
Daniel M Zane ◽  
Kristine R Ehrich

Abstract This research documents a systematic bias in memory for ethical attribute information: consumers have better memory for an ethical attribute when a product performs well on the attribute versus when a product performs poorly on the attribute. Because consumers want to avoid emotionally difficult ethical information (e.g., child labor) but believe they should remember it in order to do the right thing, the presence of negative ethical information in a choice or evaluation produces conflict between the want and should selves. Consumers resolve this conflict by letting the want self prevail and forgetting or misremembering the negative ethical information. A series of studies establishes the willfully ignorant memory effect, shows that it holds only for ethical attributes and not for other attributes, and provides process evidence that it is driven by consumers allowing the want self to prevail in order to avoid negative feelings associated with the conflict. We also ameliorate the effect by reducing the amount of pressure exerted by the should self. Lastly, we demonstrate that consumers judge forgetting negative ethical information as more morally acceptable than remembering but ignoring it, suggesting that willfully ignorant memory is a more morally acceptable form of coping with want/should conflict.

1989 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 35-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Doherty

CFA Magazine ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 13-14
Author(s):  
Crystal Detamore
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Curtis L. Wesley ◽  
Gregory W. Martin ◽  
Darryl B. Rice ◽  
Connor J. Lubojacky

1990 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 327-380
Author(s):  
David A. Hyman

Tax exemption is an ancient, honorable and expensive tradition. Tax exemption for hospitals is all of these three, but it also places in sharp focus a fundamental problem with tax exemption in general. Organizations can retain their tax exemption while changing circumstances or expectations undermine the rationale that led to the exemption in the first place. Hospitals are perhaps the best example of this problem. The dramatic changes in the health care environment have eliminated most of the characteristics of a hospital that originally persuaded the citizenry to grant it an exemption. Hospitals have entered into competition with tax-paying businesses, and have increasingly behaved like competitive actors. Such conduct may well be beneficial, but it does not follow that tax exemption is appropriate. Rather than an undifferentiated subsidy, a shift to focused goals will provide charitable hospitals with the opportunity and incentive to “do the right thing.”


2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 102-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela L. Duckworth ◽  
Katherine L. Milkman ◽  
David Laibson

Almost everyone struggles to act in their individual and collective best interests, particularly when doing so requires forgoing a more immediately enjoyable alternative. Other than exhorting decision makers to “do the right thing,” what can policymakers do to reduce overeating, undersaving, procrastination, and other self-defeating behaviors that feel good now but generate larger delayed costs? In this review, we synthesize contemporary research on approaches to reducing failures of self-control. We distinguish between self-deployed and other-deployed strategies and, in addition, between situational and cognitive intervention targets. Collectively, the evidence from both psychological science and economics recommends psychologically informed policies for reducing failures of self-control.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document