To Justify or Not to Justify: The Role of Anticipated Regret on Consumers’ Decisions to Upgrade Technological Innovations

Prior research suggests that adoption decisions are primarily based on product features and experiential opportunities, like trial and observation. Our research follows inquiries that identify anticipated regret (AR) as an emotion integral to consumer decision making. Prior research and current retailing practice assume that AR can be alleviated by compelling product attribute-based rationales for immediate purchase. These rationales often take the form of direct attribute comparisons between the current best and the future technologies. Counter-intuitively, we find that giving consumers attribute-based justifications for immediate purchase produces a uniform level of AR and purchase delay regardless of the perceived rate of innovation (PRI). However, under conditions of low PRI and no justification, AR decreases significantly. A clear implication of our findings is that firms marketing current technology should not rush to provide consumers with justifications for immediate upgrade since such communications will remind consumers of what they might miss if they adopt now, resulting in increased AR and purchase delays. Instead, we suggest that retailers focus promotional efforts on highlighting the hedonic benefits consumers experience by adopting today.

Graphical abstract.Figure optionsDownload full-size imageDownload as PowerPoint slideResearch highlights► We investigate the effect of perceived rate of innovation (PRI) on consumers’ timing of upgrade purchases. ► A high PRI leads consumers to delay technology upgrades. ► The effect of PRI is mediated by the anticipated regret (AR) of missing out on future technology. ► Paradoxically, offering decision justifications for upgrades increases consumers’ AR and delays upgrades. ► Decision justification prompts additional counter-factual thoughts which increase AR.