Executive Summary
Regulatory fit is conceptualized as the increase in motivational intensity that results when people pursue their goals in a manner that matches their regulatory orientation of striving toward nurturance versus security, leading to an “it-just-feels-right” feeling. In this article, the authors review how people may experience regulatory fit, and discuss potential areas for further research. The authors propose that there are two distinct approaches that bring about the it-just-feels-right experience. The first is process based: People experience fit when they engage in activities that fit their orientation. The second approach is outcome based: People experience fit when they focus on outcomes that fit their orientation. The authors suggest an interesting area for further research that involves the investigating boundary conditions of regulatory fit's effects on persuasion. In particular, the authors highlight the apparent paradoxical role of involvement. They suggest that the level of involvement that gives rise to the experience of regulatory fit can be different from the level of involvement when people experience fit. More specifically, they suggest that unmotivated people may be more likely to rely on their regulatory orientation and thus experience regulatory fit. However, when the fit experience is activated, it injects motivation, leaving people feeling more engaged.
Finally, the authors discuss some broader implications of regulatory fit on theory development and practice in consumer psychology. In particular, they propose three possible mechanisms by which regulatory fit may lead to improved health and discuss the degree to which the “just-right feeling” may play a role in goal-sustaining experiences related to subjective well-being.
One implication that arises from the current conceptualization is that if regulatory fit indeed occurs whenever people engage in actions or decision-making processes consistent with the natural tendencies of their regulatory orientation, fit effects may be observed with more frequency and regularity than is currently reported. Consumers may experience fit (or nonfit) when they are shopping for a car, depending on whether their needs for achievement and growth or safety and security are more salient and whether the benefits offered by the product match or conflict with their needs. For example, someone considering buying a Volvo sedan with his or her family (i.e., safety needs are emphasized) or a Porsche convertible when shopping by him- or herself (i.e., achievement needs are emphasized) is likely to experience fit, whereas the same consumer buying a Volvo sedan by him- or herself or a Porsche with his or her family is likely to experience a nonfit. Thus, many everyday activities may either sustain or diminish people’s regulatory orientation, depending whether these activities fit or conflict with their orientation.
From a policy perspective, the subjective feeling of fit has important consequences for the work on health care. For example, to the degree that regulatory fit enhances motivational intensity and self-confidence, people who experience regulatory fit may be more likely to expend resources on careful consideration of important but emotionally aversive information, which often forms the basis of preventative health messages. People who experience regulatory fit may also be more willing to take early detection tests (e.g., mammograms, prostate-specific antigen tests), the cost of which is potentially receiving bad news but the benefit of which is being in a better position to prevent or proactively combat disease. In contrast, the feeling of nonfit may be comparable to a state of psychological discomfort or “feeling wrong” and thus may be resource depleting or constraining. Reduced resources as the result of regulatory nonfit may mitigate the effectiveness of appeals to get tested and suppress intentions to comply with treatments or undergo subsequent tests.
Regulatory fit may also lead to improved health because of its effect on self-control. Recent research shows that people who experience regulatory fit are better able to resist temptation. In this light, regulatory fit may not be the direct cause of improved health, but it may indirectly aid health outcomes through its impact on preventative testing and self-regulation.
Finally, regulatory fit may be closely tied to subjective well-being and happiness. That is, to the degree that fit correlates with increased confidence and motivational intensity, subjective well-being and happiness may also increase. In this light, the article aims to make both theoretical and practical contributions by carving out fruitful avenues of further research to provide a stronger theoretical grounding for extant work (e.g., flow experiences, which have been linked to increased creativity and innovation) and shed light on individual well-being (e.g., improving health).
Biography
Jennifer L. Aaker is General Atlantic Professor of Marketing in the Graduate School of Business at Stanford University. Professor Aaker received her BA in Psychology from University of California, Berkeley, and her doctoral degree in Marketing from Stanford University. Professor Aaker’s area of expertise lies in consumer psychology, focusing on how people across distinct cultural contexts feel, think about, and experience events in different (and sometimes very similar) ways. She also focuses on understanding emotions and the psychology of consumer–brand relationships. Her research has been published in marketing and psychology journals; she has been honored with several awards; and she sits on the editorial review boards of Journal of Consumer Research (for which she is an associate editor), Journal of Marketing Research, and Journal of Consumer Psychology.
Angela Y. Lee is Associate Professor of Marketing in the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University. She teaches Marketing Management and Marketing Research and has served as the faculty advisor of the Global Initiatives in Management class for China and South Africa. Professor Lee’s expertise is in consumer behavior. Her research interests include consumer learning, effects of memory on product evaluations and brand choice, motivation and affect, and cross-cultural similarities and differences in information processing.
J Marketing Research, Volume 43, Number 1, February 2006
View Table of Contents.