Journal of Retailing 85 (3, 2009) 239–244

Editorial

Consumer Behavior and Retailing

Consumer behavior can be defined as the totality of con- We are thankful to the editors of the Journal of Retailing,
sumers’ decisions with respect to the acquisition, consumption, James R. Brown of West Virginia University and Rajiv P. Dant
and disposition of goods, services, time, and ideas by human of the University of Oklahoma, for their encouragement and the
decision making units (Hoyer and MacInnis 2010). Clearly, initiation of the Special Issue. In addition, we are most appre-
consumer behavior frequently involves decisions within retail- ciative to the many reviewers who assisted in the processing of
ing contexts and/or with retail phenomena serving as boundary manuscripts. Their work in improving the accepted papers and
or framing conditions. As the definition of consumer behavior in processing the large number of submissions has been instru-
implies, the scope of human behaviors that can be called con- mental in the development of this issue and we are very grateful
sumer behavior is wide and the contents of this special issue for their assistance. Their names and universities are listed at the
certainly are reflective of that breadth. For example, the top- end of this brief special issue introduction.
ics and research perspectives exemplified by the articles in this
special issue range from an ethnographic investigation of a retail Information processing
brandstore to experimental laboratory studies of money and time
effect differences on consumer search. The consumer behavior literature documents extensive
It is generally recognized that consumer research consump- research regarding how consumers process information and
tion contexts play a prominent role in theorizing (Deighton how such processing affects search (Moorthy, Ratchford, and
2007). Germaine to the present effort and this collection of Talukdar 1997), product evaluations, behavioral intentions, and
articles, the interface between the overlapping domains of choice. The first four papers included in the special issue address
consumer behavior and retailing takes on greater importance these topics as related to varying retail contexts.
when retailing strategy is considered. Clearly, the importance of In the first paper included in the special issue, Monga and
understanding consumer behavior has never been more impor- Saini (2009) investigate the extent to which the currency of
tant to retailers (Puccinelli et al. 2009). In particular, effective search (time versus money) moderates the relationships between
retail strategy satisfies consumer needs better than competitors’ search costs and search benefits and consumers’ willingness to
strategies and, thus, understanding consumer needs and buying search. The research has important implications for retailers and
behavior is critical for effective retail decision making, as well their efforts to appeal to consumers in both traditional retail
as the subsequent development and implementation of retail environments and in online situations. They demonstrate exper-
strategy (Levy and Weitz 2007). imentally that willingness to search is less sensitive to changes
With these issues in mind, this special issue of the Journal in costs and payoffs when search is conducted by spending
of Retailing was planned with the objective of publishing work time rather than money. Burton, Howlett, and Tangari (2009)
which would promote thinking and research regarding consumer investigate, in three different studies, the accuracy of consumer
phenomena within retailing contexts. The overall goal was to estimates regarding calorie, fat, and sodium content of quick
encourage consumer research regarding the complexities and service meals, a large segment of the retail environment. Impor-
dynamics of consumer responses and behavior as consumers tantly, the studies reveal how objective nutrition information
operate within varying retail environments. A secondary objec- influences product evaluations, intentions, and choice. Overall,
tive was to encourage consumer researchers, who might not their results demonstrate the effects of disconfirmed expecta-
normally consider the Journal of Retailing as a publication alter- tions when objective nutrition information is provided.
native for their research, to submit manuscripts and, as such, to Soldout product conditions are a common occurrence in retail
broaden interest in the Journal. The following mix of 13 papers settings (Fitzsimons 2000). In the article by Ge, Messinger, and
(from the 86 submissions received) emerged from the review Li (2009), three experiments investigate the effects of sold-
process. We have organized these manuscripts into four general out conditions on consumer preferences and decisions. Their
categories: (1) information processing, (2) affect and trait influ- results relate to subsequent demand for similar available prod-
ences, (3) promotion, and (4) retail image and customer loyalty. ucts and to outcomes the authors label as immediacy effects and

0022-4359/$ – see front matter © 2009 New York University. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/[Link].2009.07.002
240 Editorial / Journal of Retailing 85 (3, 2009) 239–244

informational cascades effects. Lastly, Boyd and Bahn (2009) ing the effects of price discount locations and important social
report the results of two experiments designed to test predictions aspects of coupon redemption.
derived from the heuristic-systematic model (Chen and Chaiken First, and in a series of three studies, DelVecchio,
1999) of information processing. Specifically, and in an exten- Lakshmanan, and Krishnan (2009) address several interesting
sion of Chernev (2006) and others who have investigated product questions regarding differences between proximal discounts
assortment effects on consumer evaluations and choice, the two (i.e., discount information adjacent to regular price information)
studies investigate the effects of risk and variety (experiment 1), versus distal discounts (i.e., discount information is physically
as well as assortment size and measured need for stimulation separated). The results of their research reveal, among other find-
(experiment 2). Overall, the findings reveal several information ings, that distal discounts result in higher price estimates and that
processing benefits associated with large product assortments on-pack discounts offer the potential for enhancing low-price
which may accrue to retail shoppers. store images.
Brumbaugh and Rosa (2009) investigate the effects of
Affect and trait influences perceived discrimination and metacognitions regarding what
consumers think the cashier thinks, on feelings of embarrass-
Three loosely related articles are included in our second sec- ment and confidence associated with the use of coupons. The
tion entitled “Affect and trait influences”. Clearly, consumer effects of perceived discrimination and metaperceptions were
researchers devote considerable attention to affective tenden- reported; moreover, these effects were found to vary across racial
cies and individual trait influences (Cohen and Areni 1991). and socio-economic groups. The article concludes with a series
Consistent with prior consumer research, the three articles in of implications for improving retail environments and enhancing
this section focus upon various aspects of compulsive buying, coupon redemption behavior.
mood and feelings, and dysfunctional consumer behavior within
diverse retail environment contexts. Emotions are central to the Retail image and customer loyalty
actions of both consumers and managers (Bagozzi, Gopinath,
and Nyer 1999). Likewise, individual consumer traits, such as The last four articles address retail brand image and cus-
compulsiveness and aggressiveness investigated in these arti- tomer loyalty topics. Retailer brand equity and strength are
cles, also impact consumer behavior in retail contexts. based heavily upon a well known and positive brand image, as
To begin, Kukar-Kinney, Ridgway, and Monroe (2009) inves- well as a loyal and profitable customer base (Keller 2008). The
tigate the relationship between Internet buying and compulsive remaining papers provide a series of interesting and important
buying. Based on both survey information and actual purchase insights regarding our understanding of these determinants of
data from a group of e-tail customers, cluster analyses revealed strong retailer brands and demonstrate the significance of con-
that measures of shopping and buying motives can serve as an sumer research to furthering our knowledge of retail brands and
effective segmentation approach for online retailers. A series of customer loyalty.
implications from the research are offered regarding the devel- To begin, Borghini et al. (2009) report the results of an ethno-
opment of various communication strategies. graphic study focused upon the themed brand retail environment,
Arnold and Reynolds (2009) report findings from two stud- American Girl Place. The authors find that retail brand ideol-
ies (including both a laboratory study and a field study) which ogy is based upon the varied moral and social values reflected
focus upon promotion and prevention orientations and mood throughout the physical retail environment. As their qualita-
regulation abilities. The research also investigates the relation- tive data reveal and their article effectively argues, retailers
ships between the two regulatory focus orientations and mood should consider more multi-faceted depictions of their brands,
monitoring, clarity and repair, as well as perceptions of hedo- as opposed to more focused and single-minded positioning
nic and utilitarian shopping values. Reynolds and Harris (2009), strategies. In a second article, the relationships between retailer
using survey responses from 380 consumers, employ structural offline and online images are investigated by Kwon and Lennon
equation modeling to investigate a series of proposed theoretical (2009). Based upon the results of two experiments, their find-
relationships. Briefly, the article describes correlates of dys- ings demonstrate the important influence of offline brand image
functional consumer behavior taken from their study of actual on online beliefs. Likewise, positive and negative online perfor-
dysfunctional incidents. The authors also offer several interest- mance impacts subsequent beliefs for both traditional and online
ing suggestions for improving managerial practices related to channels. In addition, and similar to other findings in consumer
customer service. research (Ahluwalia 2002; Mizerski 1982; Patrick, MacInnis,
and Park 2007), both offline and online attitudes are impacted
Promotion effects significantly by negative information.
Retailer loyalty programs are now pervasive in the market-
Given that the impact of promotions on sales is often tangi- place. Their increasing growth is evidence of their appeal to
ble and immediate coupons and price discounts are attractive to consumers and their benefit to retailers. Based upon a survey of
retailers as a reliable means of increasing sales (Neslin 2002). 481 customers of a regional supermarket chain, Demoulin and
Research into the effects of price promotions, including price Zidda (2009) investigate determinants of likelihood of adoption
discounts and coupons, has been extensive (Monroe 2003). The and the time to adoption as aspects of the loyalty card adop-
two articles in this section build upon this research by study- tion process. The results indicate that primary determinants of
 Editorial / Journal of Retailing 85 (3, 2009) 239–244 241

adoption include commitment to the store, perceived risk, and determine the impact that a steadily decreasing discounting tac-
perceived complexity of the loyalty program. tic has on consumer store loyalty and the image that consumer’s
The remaining article in the special issue reports the results associate with the long-term use of this tactic. Finally, research
of three studies, using both survey data in studies 1 and 2 and, is warranted investigating the effects of retailer trade promo-
for study 3, aggregated data involving 71 stores. Specifically, tions offering incentives and consumer reactions toward these
Chaudhuri and Ligas (2009) investigate the positive relation- incentives.
ships among merchandise value, affect, and both repurchase The extensive review by Puccinelli et al. (2009) offers a
loyalty and attitudinal loyalty. In addition, the effects of attitudi- comprehensive summary of issues worthy of future research.
nal loyalty on willingness to pay a premium are demonstrated, Overlapping with the outline of this Special Issue, Puccinelli et
while evidence is also reported that retailer differentiation mod- al. (2009, p. 17) organize their suggestions for future research in
erates the effect of merchandise value on store affect. terms of “goals, memory, involvement, attitudes, affect, atmo-
spherics, and attributions”. Our own experiences suggest that,
Implications for future research among the ideas listed, the following topics appear particularly
deserving of attention by consumer researchers: the effects on
Each of the 13 articles in this special issue offers a variety of decision-making of congruity of shopping goals and retail envi-
ideas for future research, as well as implications for retail prac- ronments, the role of consumer attributions in the formation of
tice. Below, we offer some additional research topics pertaining satisfaction judgments, and the influence of in-store sales promo-
to the four categories covered in this special issue: (1) informa- tions on product evaluations and decision-making. In addition,
tion processing, (2) affect and trait influences, (3) promotion, consumer researchers should investigate non-traditional alterna-
and (4) retail image and customer loyalty. tive decision processes within retailing contexts similar to the
Future research regarding consumer information processing four-phase circular decision “journey” perspectives identified by
and retailing could consider the ways in which consumer’s Court et al. (2009).
process information from Twitter, blogs, and social network
sites such as Facebook and MySpace. In addition, research is Reviewers
warranted regarding how consumer’s process price information
sorted in different manners. For example, researchers are encour- The Editors and Guest Editors would like to express their
aged to understand the effects of sorting prices from high to low sincere appreciation to the following reviewers who provided
versus from low to high and how this sorting affects consumer expert advice with respect to the manuscripts submitted for pub-
behavior. lication consideration. Their time and effort were instrumental in
Researchers interested in affect and its impact on retail- the development of this Special Issue of the Journal of Retailing.
ing should consider studying consumer emotional intelligence
which has recently received interest from consumer researchers Dale Achabal Santa Clara University
(Kidwell, Hardesty, and Childers 2008a, 2008b). Specifically, Kusum Ailawadi Dartmouth College
Bruce Alford Louisiana Tech University
emotional intelligence has been shown to aid consumer deci- Chris Allen University of Cincinnati
sion making as well as reduce caloric intake (Kidwell, Hardesty, Mark Alpert University of Texas – Austin
and Childers 2008a). Moreover, being emotionally calibrated Eduardo Andrade University of California – Berkeley
reduces the impact of impulsive behavior and the effective- Craig Andrews Marquette University
ness of the vividness of food displays (Kidwell, Hardesty, and Mark Arnold Saint Louis University
Todd Arnold Oklahoma State University
Childers 2008b). Future research could be conducted to assess Eric Arnould University of Wyoming
the role of consumer emotional intelligence with respect to Henry Assael New York University
the persuasiveness of retail advertising and retail sales tactics. Barry Babin Louisiana Tech University
These investigations may lend insights into the degree to which Julie Baker Texas Christian University
consumer emotional intelligence aids consumers from being Tom Baker Clemson University
Mike Barone University of Louisville
unnecessarily impacted by retailer persuasion attempts. Sharon Beatty University of Alabama
Retailing research related to promotion could investigate how Ray Benedicktus Florida State University
far consumers are willing to travel to save money at retail stores. Matt Bernthal University of South Carolina
Additional research is also warranted regarding how consumers Abhijit Biswas Wayne State University
respond to easy to compute price discounts ($5.00–$4.00) ver- Hulda Black University of Kentucky
Elizabeth Blair Ohio University
sus more difficult to compute price promotions ($4.97–$3.96). Julia Blose College of Charleston
Finally, research might be conducted to understand the word Jim Boles Georgia State University
signals provided by retailers (e.g., Blowout Sale) and how con- Paula Bone West Virginia University
sumers respond to these promotion signals. Andre Bonfrer Singapore Management University
Research related to retail image and customer loyalty might Gaël Bonnin Edhec Business School
Amanda Bower Washington and Lee University
investigate how consumers respond to receiving a better deal Michael Brady Florida State University
than someone else in the marketplace and their resulting per- Karin Braunsberger University of South Florida
ceptions of fairness toward the retailer. Future research might Steven Brown University of Houston
also extend the work by Tsiros and Hardesty (forthcoming) to
242 Editorial / Journal of Retailing 85 (3, 2009) 239–244

Al Burns Louisiana State University Haeran Jae Virginia Commonwealth University

James Burroughs University of Virginia Robert Jewell Kent State University
Alan Bush University of Memphis Jean Johnson Washington State University
Ron Bush University of West Florida Mike Jones University of Tennessee –
Meg Campbell University of Colorado Chattanooga
Brad Carlson Texas Tech University Lynn Kahle University of Oregon
Jay Carlson Union College Velitchka Kaltcheva Loyola Marymount University
Les Carlson Clemson University Wagner Kamakura Duke University
Rajesh Chandrashekaran Fairleigh Dickinson University Patrick Kaufmann Boston University
Jean-Charles Chebat HEC – Montreal Carol Kaufman- Rutgers University
Allan Chen Texas A&M University Scarborough
Cathy Cole University of Iowa James Kellaris University of Cincinnati
Larry Compeau Clarkson University Roger Kerin Southern Methodist University
June Cotte University of Western Ontario Blair Kidwell University of Kentucky
Anthony Cox Indiana University – IUPUI Ginny Kidwell University of Kentucky
David Crockett University of South Carolina Tracey King American University
Darren Dahl University of British Columbia Yuliya Komarova University of South Carolina
Lenita Davis University of Alabama Nevena Koukova Lehigh University
Albert Della Bitta University of Rhode Island Robert Kozinets York University
Devon DelVecchio Miami (Ohio) University Ram Krishnan University of Miami
Michelle DeMoss Stetson University Balaji Krishnan University of Memphis
Paul Dholakia Rice University Monica Kukar-Kinney University of Richmond
Kristin Diehl University of Southern California V. Kumar Georgia State University
Todd Donovan Colorado State University Charles Lamb Texas Christian University
Pam Ellen Georgia State University Stacy Landreth Grau Texas Christian University
Brian Engelland Mississippi State University Tim Landry University of Alabama – Huntsville
Jennifer Escalas Vanderbilt University Tatiana Levit University of Regina
Hooman Estalami Fordham University Michael Levy Babson College
Michael Etzel University of Notre Dame Donnie Lichtenstein University of Colorado
Paul Farris University of Virginia Joan Lindsey-Mulliken California Polytechnic State
Larry Feick University of Pittsburgh University
O. C. Ferrell University of New Mexico Tina Lowrey University of Texas – San Antonio
Robert Fisher University of Western Ontario Michael Luckett University of South Florida
Leisa Flynn Florida State University Jason Lueg Mississippi State University
John Ford Old Dominion University Karen Machleit University of Cincinnati
Traci Freling University of Texas – Arlington Selin Malkoc University of Minnesota
Shankar Ganesan University of Arizona Raj Manchanda University of Manitoba
Ellen Garborino Case Western Reserve University Tamara Mangleburg Florida Atlantic University
Judith Anne Garretson Folse Louisiana State University Ken Manning Colorado State University
James Gentry University of Nebraska Marlys Mason Oklahoma State University
Mary Gilly University of California – Irvine Trey Maxham University of Virginia
Ron Goldsmith Florida State University Sarah Maxwell Fordham University
Joe Goodman Washington University in St. Louis Tridib Mazumdar Syracuse University
Ronald Goodstein Georgetown University Rick McFarland Kansas State University
Stephen Goodwin Illinois State University Martin Mende University of Kentucky
Dhruv Grewal Babson College Vikas Mittal Rice University
Mitch Griffin Bradley University Anthony Miyazaki Florida International University
Steve Grove Clemson University Bruce Money Brigham Young University
Julie Guidry Louisiana State University Sonia Monga University of South Carolina
Michael Guiry Ramapo College Ashwani Monga University of South Carolina
Gregory Gundlach University of North Florida Todd Mooradian College of William & Mary
Rebecca Hamilton University of Maryland Margeurite Moore University of South Carolina
Jay Handelman Queen’s University Rob Morgan University of Alabama
Richard Hanna Northeastern University Maureen Morrin Rutgers University
Eric Harris Pittsburgh State University Vicki Morwitz New York University
Kelly Haws Texas A&M University Dave Mothersbaugh University of Alabama
Diana Haytko Missouri State University Carol Motley Florida A&M University
Carrie Heilman University of Virginia Francis Mulhern Northwestern University
Ron Hess College of William & Mary Albert Muniz DePaul University
Kelly Hewett Bank of America Vishal Narayan Cornell University
Charlie Hofacker Florida State University Gergana Nenkov Boston College
Doug Hoffman Colorado State University Jennifer Nevins Appalachian State University
Elizabeth Howlett University of Arkansas Leonardo Nicolao University of Texas – Austin
Sam Hui University of Pennsylvania Ron Niedrich Louisiana State University
Michael Hui Chinese University of Hong Kong Dave Ortinau University of South Florida
Gary Hunter Illinois State University Amy Ostrom Arizona State University
Gopal Iyer Florida Atlantic University Cele Otnes University of Illinois
 Editorial / Journal of Retailing 85 (3, 2009) 239–244 243

Rob Palmatier University of Washington Lan Xia Bentley College

Mark Parry University of Washington Richard Yalch University of Washington
Joann Peck University of Wisconsin Gergana Yordanova Boston College
Barbara Phillips University of Saskatchuan Gal Zauberman University of Pennsylvania
Ron Pimentel California State University Kay Zhang Bowling Green State University
Nicole Ponder Mississippi State University
Thom Porter University of North Carolina –
Wilmington
Kate Pounders Louisiana State University
Cait Poyner University of Pittsburgh References
Chris Pullig Baylor University
Suresh Ramanathan University of Chicago Ahluwalia, Rohini (2002), “How Prevalent is the Negativity Effect in Consumer
Brian Ratchford University of Texas – Dallas Environments?,” Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (September), 270–9.
Joe Redden University of Minnesota Arnold, Mark J. and Kristy E. Reynolds (2009), “Affect and Retail Shopping
Kristy Reynolds University of Alabama Behavior: Understanding the Role of Mood Regulation and Regulatory
Nancy Ridgway University of Richmond Focus,” Journal of Retailing, 85 (September).
Shannon Rinaldo Texas Tech University Bagozzi, Richard P., Mahesh Gopinath and Prashanth U. Nyer (1999), “The Role
Anne Roggeveen Babson College of Emotions in Marketing,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Greg Rose University of Washington 27 (2), 184–206.
Randy Rose University of South Carolina Borghini, Stefania, Nina Diamond, Robert V. Kozinets, Mary Ann McGrath,
Bill Ross Penn State University Albert M. Muñiz Jr. and John F. Sherry Jr. (2009), “Why Are Themed Brand-
John Rossiter University of Wollongong stores So Powerful? Retail Brand Ideology at American Girl Place,” Journal
Jason Rowe University of Kentucky of Retailing, 85 (September).
David Schumann University of Tennessee Boyd, D. Eric and Kenneth D. Bahn (2009), “When Do Large Product Assort-
Maura Scott University of Kentucky ments Benefit Customers? An Information-Processing Perspective,” Journal
Kathleen Seiders Boston College of Retailing, 85 (September).
Raj Sethuraman Southern Methodist University Brumbaugh, Anne M. and José Antonio Rosa (2009), “Perceived Discrimination,
Arun Sharma University of Miami Cashier Metaperceptions, Embarrassment, and Confidence as Influencers of
Simon Sheng Adelphi University Coupon Use: An Ethnoracial-Socioeconomic Analysis,” Journal of Retail-
Danny Sherrill University of Memphis ing, 85 (September).
Tim Silk University of British Columbia Burton, Scot, Elizabeth Howlett and Andrea Heintz Tangari (2009), “Food for
Jagdip Singh Case Western Reserve University Thought: How Will the Nutrition Labeling of Quick Service Restaurant
Joseph Sirgy Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State Menu Items Influence Consumers’ Product Evaluations, Purchase Inten-
University tions, and Choices?,” Journal of Retailing, 85 (September).
K Sivakumar Lehigh University Chaudhuri, Arjun and Mark Ligas (2009), “Consequences of Value in Retail
Laura Smarandescu Iowa State University Markets,” Journal of Retailing, 85 (September).
Michael Solomon Auburn University Chen, Serena and Shelly Chaiken (1999), “The Heuristic-Systematic Model in its
Joel Steckel New York University Broader Context,” in Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology, Chaiken
Jeabohm Suh Kansas State University S. and Trope Y., eds. New York, NY: Guilford Press, 73–96.
Tracy Suter Oklahoma State Univesity Chernev, Alexander (2006), “Decision Focus and Consumer Choice among
Scott Swain Northeastern University Assortments,” Journal of Consumer Research, 33 (1), 50–9.
David Szymanksi Texas A&M University Cohen, Joel B. and Charles S. Areni (1991), “Affect and Consumer Behavior,”
Valerie Taylor University of Tennessee – Handbook of Consumer Behavior,, 188–240.
Chattanooga Court, David, Dave Elzinga, Susan Mulder and Ole Jergen Vetvik (2009), “The
Kelly Tian New Mexico State University Consumer Decision Journey,” Mckinsey Quarterly,, 1–11.
Brian Tietje California Polytechnic State Deighton, John (2007), “The Territory of Consumer Research: Walking the
University Fences,” Journal of Consumer Research, 34 (October), 1–4.
Michael Tsiros University of Miami DelVecchio, Devon, Arun Lakshmanan and H. Shanker Krishnan (2009), “The
Gulden Ulkumen University of Southern California Effects of Discount Location and Frame on Consumers’ Price Estimates,”
Ana Valenzuela Baruch College Journal of Retailing, 85 (September).
Sajeev Varki University of South Florida Demoulin, Nathalie T.M. and Pietro Zidda (2009), “Drivers of Customers’ Adop-
Alladi Venkatesh University of California – Irvine tion and Adoption Timing of a New Loyalty Card in the Grocery Retail
Peter Verhoef University of Groningen Market,” Journal of Retailing, 85 (September).
Glenn Voss Southern Methodist University Fitzsimons, Gavan J. (2000), “Consumer Response to Stockouts,” Journal of
Janet Wagner University of Maryland Consumer Research, 27 (2), 249–66.
Rebecca Walker Naylor Ohio State University Ge, Xin, Paul R. Messinger and Jin Li (2009), “Influence of Soldout Products
Gianfranco Walsh University of Koblenz – Landau on Consumer Choice,” Journal of Retailing, 85 (September).
Sijun Wang California Polytechnic State Hoyer, Wayne D. and Deborah J. MacInnis (2010), “Consumer Behavior,” Fifth
University – Pomona Edition Mason, Ohio: South-Western Cengage Learning.
James Ward Arizona State University Keller, Kevin Lane (2008), “Strategic Brand Management,” Third Edition Upper
Danny Weathers Louisiana State University Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Barton Weitz University of Florida Kidwell, Blair, David M. Hardesty and Terry Childers (2008a), “Emotional
Jerome Williams University of Texas Calibration Effects on Consumer Choice,” Journal of Consumer Research,
Russ Winer New York University 35 (December), 611–2.
Joyce Wolburg Marquette University , and
Nancy Wong Georgia Institute of Technology (2008b), “Consumer Emotional Intelligence: Conceptualization, Measure-
Charlie Wood University of Tulsa ment, and the Prediction of Consumer Decision Making,” Journal of
Consumer Research, 35 (1), 154–66.
244 Editorial / Journal of Retailing 85 (3, 2009) 239–244

Kukar-Kinney, Monika, Nancy M. Ridgway and Kent B. Monroe (2009), “The Patrick, Vanessa M., Deborah J. MacInnis and C. Whan Park (2007), “Not as
Relationship between Consumers’ Tendencies to Buy Compulsively and Happy as I Thought I’d Be? Affective Misforecasting and Product Evalua-
Their Motivations to Shop and Buy on the Internet,” Journal of Retailing, tions,” Journal of Consumer Research, 33 (March), 479–8.
85 (September). Puccinelli, Nancy M., Ronald C. Goodstein, Dhruv Grewal, Robert Price, Priya
Kwon, Wi-Suk and Sharron J. Lennon (2009), “Reciprocal Effects between Mul- Raghubir and David Stewart (2009), “Customer Experience Management in
tichannel Retailers’ Offline and Online Brand Images,” Journal of Retailing, Retailing: Understanding the Buying Process,” Journal of Retailing, 85 (1),
85 (September). 15–30.
Levy, Michael and Barton A. Weitz (2007), “Retailing Management,” Sixth Reynolds, Kate L. and Lloyd C. Harris (2009), “Dysfunctional Customer
Edition Burr Ridge, IL: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. Behavior Severity: An Empirical Examination,” Journal of Retailing, 85
Mizerski, Richard W. (1982), “An Attribution Explanation of the Disproportion- (September).
ate Influence of Unfavorable Information,” Journal of Consumer Research, Tsiros, Michael and David M. Hardesty, “Ending a Price Promotion: Retracting
9 (December), 301–10. it in One Step or Phasing it out Gradually,” Journal of Marketing, in press.
Monga, Ashwani and Ritesh Saini (2009), “Currency of Search: How Spending
Time on Search is Not the Same as Spending Money,” Journal of Retailing, David M. Hardesty ∗
85 (September).
University of Kentucky, United States
Monroe, Kent B. (2003), “Pricing: Making Profitable Decisions,” Third Edition
Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. William O. Bearden
Moorthy, Sridhar, Brian T. Ratchford and Debabrata Talukdar (1997), “Con- University of South Carolina, United States
sumer Information Search Revisited: Theory and Empirical Analysis,” ∗ Corresponding
Journal of Consumer Research, 23 (March), 263–77. author.
Neslin, Scott A. (2002), “Sales Promotion,” Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science E-mail address: [Link]@[Link]
Institute, Relevant Knowledge Series. (D.M. Hardesty)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.