TY - JOUR
T1 - Consumer trust and advice acceptance
T2 - The moderating roles of benevolence, expertise, and negative emotions
AU - White, Tiffany Barnett
N1 - Funding Information:
This research was funded, in part, by funds from Duke University under an award from the General Electric Fund. The findings, opinions, and recommendations expressed in this article are mine and are not necessarily those of Duke University or the General Electric Fund. I am grateful to Jim Bettman, Julie Edell, and Ashok Lalwani for their insights and comments on earlier drafts of this article. I am also grateful to Linda Tuncay for outstanding research assistance. Finally, a special thanks is due the anonymous Journal of Consumer Psychology reviewers for their guidance and suggestions.
PY - 2005
Y1 - 2005
N2 - I explored advice acceptance for high-stakes decisions (i.e., those with subjectively important and risky outcomes), focusing on the relative influence of two components of consumer trust - benevolence and expertise - as well as perceived emotional decision difficulty. Participants solicited advice from experts when their decisions were low in perceived emotional difficulty but favored the advice of predominantly benevolent providers when making highly emotionally difficult decisions. Although consumers who faced emotionally difficult decisions were willing to trade off expertise for benevolence, they did not perceive this non-normative trade-off to influence decision quality. Instead, the results support a "stress buffering" effect whereby consumers were more confident in the accuracy of predominantly benevolent providers' advice.
AB - I explored advice acceptance for high-stakes decisions (i.e., those with subjectively important and risky outcomes), focusing on the relative influence of two components of consumer trust - benevolence and expertise - as well as perceived emotional decision difficulty. Participants solicited advice from experts when their decisions were low in perceived emotional difficulty but favored the advice of predominantly benevolent providers when making highly emotionally difficult decisions. Although consumers who faced emotionally difficult decisions were willing to trade off expertise for benevolence, they did not perceive this non-normative trade-off to influence decision quality. Instead, the results support a "stress buffering" effect whereby consumers were more confident in the accuracy of predominantly benevolent providers' advice.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=18744411887&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=18744411887&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1207/s15327663jcp1502_6
DO - 10.1207/s15327663jcp1502_6
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:18744411887
SN - 1057-7408
VL - 15
SP - 141
EP - 148
JO - Journal of Consumer Psychology
JF - Journal of Consumer Psychology
IS - 2
ER -