Would you like to review more for top marketing journals? This interactive, in-person workshop will help you learn how to write fair, thorough, and constructive reviews. You’ll write a review prior to attending the session, and then you’ll work with other attendees during the session to identify key strengths and weaknesses of the paper and priorities for moving forward in the review process. A plenary discussion with current editors of JMR, JM, and IJRM will highlight the benefits of serving as a reviewer and provide tips for writing effective and constructive reviews.

The workshop is targeted at early career scholars (assistant professors, post-docs, research fellows, PhD students in their last year), and the ideal participant would have submitted at least one paper to a leading marketing journal.

AMA Event Policies

The post 2026 Reviewer Workshop—Advice from the Editors appeared first on American Marketing Association.

Co-chaired by Professors Anders Gustafsson, Markus Giesler, and Samantha N. Cross, this unique event will foster growth and collaboration among pre-tenure scholars who aspire to publish in leading marketing journals. The Consortium offers the opportunity to learn from experienced researchers and engage in hands-on, collaborative sessions designed to refine your research for top-tier journal submissions.

Attendees will learn directly from top scholars, receive detailed feedback on their research and improve their chances of publishing in high-impact journals. Last year’s participants consistently noted the workshop as high quality and said it was worth arriving a day early to the 2026 Winter AMA Conference. What drew such positive responses? The direct access to leading researchers, the depth of feedback sessions, and the focused environment for advancing your work. This year’s workshop promises the same caliber of mentorship and peer interaction. Ready to experience it yourself? We want to see your submission!

Excited about this event? Spread the word: #AMAShethEarlyCareer2026

Submission Guidelines and Details

Why Attend?

Learn directly from leading marketing scholars and enhance your research for top-tier journal publications.

Build lasting relationships with your cohort of early career researchers in marketing.

Gain invaluable feedback on your work to maximize its impact in high-impact marketing journals.

Sharpen your contribution by dialoguing with editorial leaders from our field’s top journals.

Event Structure

The workshop will begin with Presentations by Experienced Researchers who have published in major journals (e.g., Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, Journal of Consumer Research, Marketing Science) and/or served as editors or associate editors for these publications. These experts will share insights on navigating the publication process, choosing impactful research topics, and addressing key challenges in the field.

The second half of the workshop will be dedicated to an Interactive Session for Early Career Scholars. Participants will develop and refine their research ideas, receiving feedback from peers and experienced faculty. The goal is to help shape your research into a well-aligned paper for submission to a leading marketing journal and cover important topics such as career development.

A networking reception will take place at the close of the consortium on February 12.

Important Dates

• Abstract submission deadline: November 10, 2025
• Notification of acceptance: December 1, 2025
• Workshop date: February 12, 2026
• Closing Reception: February 12, 2026

Co-Chairs

Markus Giesler

Consumer Researcher & Professor of Marketing
Schulich School of Business – York University

Visit Profile: www.mgiesler.com

Anders Gustafsson

Research Professor – Department of Marketing
BI Norwegian Business School

Visit Profile: ama.marketing/AG

Samantha Cross

Associate Professor
F.W. Olin Distinguished Professor of Global Business

Visit Profile: ama.marketing/SC

AMA Event Policies

The post 2026 AMA-Sheth Foundation Early Career Consortium appeared first on American Marketing Association.

Marketing academia stands at a pivotal moment. The work we do extends far beyond publishing research—it shapes how we mentor students, influence organizations, and lead within our institutions. Whether you’re preparing for your first faculty position, navigating the tenure process, refining your teaching methods, or stepping into administrative roles, your career path deserves dedicated attention and support. The 2026 Summer Academic Conference recognizes that professional growth happens across multiple dimensions, and every stage of your academic journey matters.

Plan to join us in Denver, CO, to connect with colleagues who share your commitment to excellence in all aspects of academic life. Through curated workshops, panels, and collaborative sessions, you’ll gain practical strategies for advancing your scholarship, teaching effectiveness, and leadership capabilities. This conference creates space for doctoral students seeking job market guidance, clinical faculty exploring new pedagogical approaches, and experienced professors transitioning into administrative positions. Together, we’ll build the knowledge, relationships, and momentum that fuel meaningful careers in marketing academia.

Check back for registration information.

In-Person and Virtual Options

During the 2026 AMA Summer Academic Conference in Denver, CO, July 24-26, we will explore how marketing academics can strengthen their impact across scholarship, teaching, and organizational leadership at every career stage.

If you cannot join us in Denver, select virtual programming will be available on Monday, July 20.

Expert Workshops

Presented by leading experts, these 75-minute workshops are focused on emerging research and teaching techniques and tools. 

Why Attend?

Receive valuable feedback on your research from leading scholars and get guidance to help prepare your work for publication.

Engage in dynamic conversations on the latest marketing innovations and build meaningful connections with researchers, reviewers, and editors—advancing your career and gaining fresh perspectives on the field.

Dive deeper into current events and innovative topics in marketing through insightful Expert and Intensive Workshops facilitated by prominent academics in the industry.

Celebrate the achievements of our community at the largest AMA Academic Awards Luncheon, where we’ll honor the AMA-EBSCO-RRBM Annual Award for Responsible Research in Marketing winners, the Robert J. Lavidge Global Marketing Research Award recipient, and more.

Conference Co-Chairs

Kay Peters

UC Davis & University of Hamburg

Kelly Hewett

Colorado State University

Kim Whitler

University of Virginia

AMA Event Policies

The post 2026 AMA Summer Academic Conference appeared first on American Marketing Association.

Around the world, marketing scholars, policymakers, and societal decision-makers are grappling with complex, interdependent challenges—from climate change and health inequities to data privacy and financial inclusion. These issues cross national, disciplinary, and institutional borders, and addressing them requires a collective, boundary-spanning approach. Recognizing and challenging these boundaries is essential to fostering more inclusive, innovative, and impactful research. By deliberately looking beyond these boundaries—both literal and figurative—we can discover alternative approaches and draw on examples of research, collaborations, and policies that meaningfully improve the well-being of individuals, businesses, societies, and the planet.

The 2026 Marketing & Public Policy Conference convenes in Ottawa, Ontario, marking the first time this conference has been held outside the United States. As the national capital of a country known for its pluralism and progressive social policies, Ottawa offers a compelling context for engaging in global dialogue. Explore research that examines the scope of marketing & public policy scholarship and reflects a diverse range of voices, disciplines, contexts and methodologies to address shared challenges and drive impactful marketing and public policy solutions.

Join us in Ottawa, Ontario, on May 16-18, 2026, to amplify global voices, address shared challenges, and increase the impact of marketing and policy research.

Why Attend?

Be part of an intimate community focused on advancing marketing’s role in addressing critical policy issues.

Co-create research-driven solutions that promote resilience and social impact through collaboration with academic and industry leaders.

Explore emerging insights at the intersection of marketing, public policy, and innovation.

Build meaningful relationships with experts and peers who share your commitment to impactful, interdisciplinary work.

Junior Scholars Workshops

Jump-start your conference experience by arriving early to connect with fellow scholars and receive mentorship on your work.

LEARN MORE

Conference Co-Chairs

Monica LaBarge

Queen’s University

Jacob Brower

Queen’s University

Michael Mulvey

University of Ottawa

AMA Event Policies

The post 2026 AMA Marketing and Public Policy Conference appeared first on American Marketing Association.

As the AMA’s first conference outside the U.S., Bridging at the Frontiers highlights marketing’s unique role in connecting diverse ideas, geographies and priorities while exploring the boundaries of innovation and practice. In today’s world of transition—marked by geopolitical tensions, within-country polarization and ideological contests, environmental challenges and the transformative impact of AI—marketers must navigate complex trade-offs and seize opportunities to create meaningful value.

The 2026 theme emphasizes the dual challenge of bridging divides—local and global, technological and human, ideological and practical—while advancing the frontiers of what marketing can achieve. How can marketing leaders respond to shifting societal norms and skepticism toward policies of sustainability and inclusion while fostering trust across diverse audiences? What role can AI play in transforming customer journeys while driving ethical innovation and equitable growth, such as balancing personalization with privacy and fairness? How can firms manage the dynamic tension between global ambitions and local relevance, ensuring their strategies resonate across distinct cultural and economic contexts?

Join us to explore these pressing questions and opportunities, from rethinking how marketing helps to balance resilience and efficiency in rapidly evolving markets to leveraging emerging technologies to address societal challenges. Together, we’ll bridge the gap between academia and practice, connect global trends with local realities, and chart new frontiers for marketing in a dynamic and interconnected world in transition.

Why Attend?

Hear new perspectives from colleagues across the discipline at this premier marketing research event, where top-tier scholars will present their compelling research. 

Engage in conversations about the latest research topics with researchers, reviewers and editors using our inclusive community and contribute to a more comprehensive approach to marketing.

Connect with like-minded scholars through various learning and networking opportunities.

Celebrate milestones within the community as AMA honors the 2026 AMA Fellows cohort, the 2026 AMA-Irwin-McGraw-Hill Distinguished Marketing Educator Award recipient, and other distinguished winners.

Maximize Your Time Onsite

Conference Co-Chairs

Michael Haenlein

ESCP Business School

K. Sudhir

Yale University

Ela Veresiu

York University

Meet the 2026 Conference Track Chairs

AMA Event Policies

The post 2026 AMA Winter Academic Conference appeared first on American Marketing Association.

Relive the #AMASummer Excitement

Data Revolution: Empowering Humanity

Data plays an increasingly expansive role across life and commerce today, not just as a tool for business growth but as a force that can drive positive global change. As a melting pot of diversely informed disciplines (psychology, sociology, economics, computer science), marketing is uniquely positioned to capitalize on and be informed by the ongoing data revolution. Marketing provides insights into our self-perception, our view of others, our assessment of how others perceive us and our ideas for improving our world. It shapes market existence and function. Yet, to maximize opportunities through data requires us to think differently. As scholars developing deep theoretical knowledge, we must harness the value of diverse and novel data that will require nothing short of a revolution defined by new methods, new theories and collaborations across diverse disciplines (e.g., medicine, public health, law, urban planning). Mainly, it will require an openness and a hunger for unique perspectives that can enrich our own.

Join us in Chicago on August 22-24 for the 2025 Summer Academic Conference to explore a platform that will enable collaborations, forge strong relationships, inspire courageous thoughts, and ultimately nurture the human aspects of our community. 

In-Person and Virtual Options

During the 2025 AMA Summer Academic Conference in Chicago, IL, August 22-24, we will illustrate how marketing plays a vital role in maximizing opportunities through data to drive positive global change.

If you cannot join us in Chicago, select virtual programming will be available on Monday, August 18.

Advertisement

Expert Workshops

Presented by leading experts, these 75-minute workshops are focused on emerging research and teaching techniques and tools. 

View Expert Workshops

DocSIG Pre-Conference

DocSIG is excited to reintroduce a dedicated doctoral pre-conference happening on August 22, in response to the high demand for mentoring and peer networking opportunities among PhD students. We aim to provide early-career scholars with robust support as they navigate coursework, develop dissertation ideas, prepare for the job market, and transition into their academic careers.

Why Attend?

Receive valuable feedback on your research from leading scholars and get guidance to help prepare your work for publication.

Engage in dynamic conversations on the latest marketing innovations and build meaningful connections with researchers, reviewers, and editors—advancing your career and gaining fresh perspectives on the field.

Dive deeper into current events and innovative topics in marketing through insightful Expert and Intensive Workshops facilitated by prominent academics in the industry.

Celebrate the achievements of our community at the largest AMA Academic Awards Luncheon, where we’ll honor the AMA-EBSCO-RRBM Annual Award for Responsible Research in Marketing winners, the Robert J. Lavidge Global Marketing Research Award recipient, and more.

Conference Co-Chairs

Colleen Harmeling

Florida State University

Tonya Bradford

University of California, Irvine

Adithya B Pattabhiramaiah

Georgia Tech University

Meet the 2025 Conference Track Chairs

AMA Event Policies

The post 2025 AMA Summer Academic Conference appeared first on American Marketing Association.

In an era where ratings and reviews shape consumer behavior and business reputation, the format in which performance scores are presented can dramatically alter how they are perceived. Firms like Uber, Amazon, and TripAdvisor present scores in a variety of formats: incremental (a raw score per occurrence), cumulative (updated average scores), or a combination thereof. A recent Journal of Marketing Research article examines the impact of incremental scores versus cumulative averages on judgments and why these matter for managers, platform designers, and policymakers.

It demonstrates that the presentation of performance scores—whether as cumulative averages, individual (incremental) scores, or a combination—can significantly influence how people evaluate products, services, or individuals. The authors find that when a generally well-performing entity receives a negative score, people view it as less damaging when the information is presented in a cumulative format. This presentation reduces negativity bias and helps prevent overreactions such as customer churn. However, incremental formats make single bad scores stand out more strongly, which could be helpful in contexts where managers want to stress accountability or encourage improvement.

The implications are far-reaching. For example, a restaurant with fluctuating quality may benefit from incremental formats that highlight recent improvements, while a ride-sharing app might prefer cumulative scores to maintain a stable reputation. The study also reveals that when both formats are presented together, users tend to focus more on the most extreme score—especially if it is negative—suggesting that hybrid formats may not provide the balance designers expect.

Managers can use these insights to tailor score presentation formats to different user segments. Novices may benefit from incremental feedback that encourages progress, while experts prefer cumulative scores that reflect long-term performance. The authors also suggest that dynamically switching formats could help platforms manage user expectations and behavior, though this approach may introduce confusion if not carefully designed.

Ultimately, this research highlights a subtle yet powerful lever for influencing consumer judgment. By rethinking how scores are presented, organizations can more effectively manage perceptions, foster trust, and achieve desired outcomes.

We had a chance to connect with one of the authors to learn more about their study and gain additional insights:

Q: Your research examines how the presentation format of quantitative scores affects decision makers’ evaluations. Did you have any observations that sparked your interest in reviewing the phenomenon closely and studying its consequences?

A: Yes, my two coauthors, Arne and Jeroen, are typically incredibly observant of the marketplace. Also, for this project, I actually learned it from them. They noticed that platforms like Uber, at the time, were using cumulative rating formats, while another app, Lyft, was using incremental formats. Building on that observation, we also looked at discussions on Reddit to see what people were saying about these differences. These different formats might have effects, and it became a nice combination of marketplace observation and psychological inquiry. We began asking: what kind of things vary in the marketplace? Do companies differ in their approaches, and could that have an impact?

If different companies are using various formats, there may be a reason behind it. Sometimes, companies haven’t thought it through, but in other cases, especially with tech companies, they have very deliberate reasons for their choices. From a psychological perspective, that makes it especially interesting to delve deeper. That was the starting point of this research.

Q: The research indicates that the presentation format has a significant impact on decision making when scores deviate. How do you suspect these findings would hold (or differ) in the context where performance expectations are less standardized and tend to be more subjective, such as creative services?

A: That is a good question. We haven’t thoroughly examined subjective domains, and several factors may be at play here. One thing to consider is that when it comes to highly subjective matters, people sometimes have strong preexisting preferences. For example, if I like the paintings of a particular artist, I will still appreciate them regardless of the score. In such cases, when people have strong preferences, ratings don’t matter much, and so the rating format likely won’t matter either.

On the other hand, in situations where people don’t have firm preexisting opinions, such as wine tasting, ratings can serve as a crucial cue. Many people lack in-depth expertise (strong preexisting opinions) in wine, so they tend to rely more on ratings (e.g., on an app like Vivino), whereas experts tend to depend less on them. Therefore, it can go either way, depending on how strong people’s preexisting preferences are.

It may also depend on the decision environment. When buying online without direct access to the product, ratings become more influential. If we do have direct access or if rich visual information is available, heavy reliance on ratings decreases. However, on many online platforms, ratings are among the primary pieces of information that influence purchase decisions.

Q: Among the many interesting findings in your study, were there any results that surprised you? If so, could you share which aspects stood out to you the most?

A: Yes, two findings were astonishing. Based on initial observations, one might have predicted that the combined format—which shows both cumulative and incremental ratings—would produce evaluations somewhere in between the two. For instance, if people see a negative score alongside a positive overall average, one might expect them to weigh both pieces of information and arrive at a more moderate judgment. However, consistent with theory on sensitivity to extremes, we found that evaluations in the combined format aligned entirely with the incremental presentation. When they encounter a negative score, it is challenging to ignore, and it strongly pulls down their overall evaluation.

Equally surprising was the strength of this effect. The effect sizes were much larger than we anticipated. To illustrate, in one of our studies, we asked participants to consider a product with an average rating of 4.2 based on five scores, four of which were maximum ratings. When asked to infer the missing score, many participants still significantly overestimated it. Instead of recognizing that the missing score must have been 1, participants often assumed it was a 2 or 3. In other words, the overall average of 4.2 seemed to “pull” their inference upward, making the extreme negative observation less salient than it genuinely was. People may systematically misestimate underlying scores, even in cases where the math is simple.

Q: Did you observe or imagine any unintended downsides to using cumulative formats, for instance, situations where critical problems might be masked rather than addressed? Can managers detect or avoid sweeping serious negative feedback under the rug in an average-based system?

A: Yes, this is a very real concern. One situation we examined was how cumulative formats can obscure recent performance issues, particularly in contexts such as app evaluations. For example, a local TV station had an app that initially received decent ratings. However, after a significant update, the app’s performance declined. Despite this, the cumulative score remained relatively high, masking the recent problems. In such cases, managers need to look beyond the overall average and examine incremental scores to understand what’s happening in the present.

This issue is not limited to apps. Service contexts such as restaurants, for instance, can vary significantly in quality over time. A place might have been excellent in the past but could be struggling now. If customers only see the cumulative score, they might miss these recent dips in quality. On the other hand, some services are inherently variable, experiencing random hiccups that aren’t sustained. In those cases, a cumulative score might be more representative of the overall experience.

Therefore, yes, cumulative formats can mask critical problems, and managers should exercise caution. They need to monitor recent feedback and not rely solely on averages, and they should actively do so. Otherwise, they risk overlooking serious issues that could impact customer satisfaction and retention.

Q: Can you envision a system where different user groups (novice/experts, high-value/low-value customers) would benefit from tailored score presentation formats? How might platforms segment their audience or dynamically switch formats to maximize desired behavioral outcomes?

A: Absolutely. The format of score presentation should align with the platform’s goals and the characteristics of its users. For example, if the goal is to encourage users to get started or continue engaging with a service, incremental formats can be more motivating. Imagine a course where the scores are 2, 3, 3, and then a sudden 5. Seeing the incremental progress might encourage someone to keep going. In contrast, a cumulative score might make the journey seem steep or discouraging, despite a recent maximum score.

There may also be the psychological impact of losing a perfect score. For instance, if someone has a cumulative score of 5 and then receives a 4, they may feel as though they’ve lost something valuable. This is a real issue: Some people react strongly to losing a perfect rating, as seen in platforms like Uber. Although we haven’t directly tested these scenarios, they are interesting and relevant.

Different users respond differently to feedback. Some are encouraged by seeing improvement, while others might be discouraged by a dip in their average. Platforms could segment users based on their behavior or preferences and present scores in a format that best supports their engagement. This kind of dynamic tailoring could be a powerful tool for influencing user behavior and satisfaction.

Q: If you could extend this research in any direction, which new context or type of platform would you benefit most from experimenting with score presentation formats, and why?

A: A promising direction would be to explore the dynamic switching of formats, where platforms change how scores are presented based on user behavior or context. For example, if a user receives a series of high scores (say, five 5s) and then gets a 1, the platform might switch to a cumulative format to soften the impact. However, if the user improves again, it may revert to an incremental format. However, this kind of switching can be confusing. Users may not understand why the format changed or what it means for their performance.

Cumulative formats are challenging for users to interpret. They require users to understand that they need to improve to increase their score consistently. This can feel like a slow climb, especially after a setback. The interplay between shifting formats, user expectations, and the pursuit of a perfect score creates a complex psychological landscape.

We’ve only studied one or two sequences that could realistically occur in the real world, but there’s a lot more to explore. Platforms like ride-sharing apps, educational tools, and fitness trackers could benefit from experimenting with different formats. Understanding how users respond to these changes can help platforms design more effective feedback systems that support motivation, satisfaction, and long-term engagement.

Source: Christophe Lembregts, Jeroen Schepers, and Arne De Keyser (2023), “Is It as Bad as It Looks? Judgments of Quantitative Scores Depend on Their Presentation Format,” Journal of Marketing Research, 61 (5), 937–54. doi:10.1177/00222437231193343.

Go to the Journal of Marketing Research

The post The Psychology of Feedback Design: How the Same Ratings Look Better (or Worse) Depending on Format appeared first on American Marketing Association.

We uncover a powerful insight: the key to increasing AI adoption lies not in technical sophistication but in emotional engagement. When AI feels magical, it inspires curiosity, excitement, and trust. Harnessing this emotional response can unlock new opportunities for innovation and growth across industries.

This sense of wonder drives a willingness to adopt AI, even though these users often perceive AI as less capable or ethical than those with greater AI literacy.

In contrast, consumers with higher AI literacy take a more critical view of AI, focusing on its technical limitations and ethical concerns. This group is less likely to see AI as magical and, as a result, is slower to adopt new tools or products.

Implications for Marketers and Product Designers

This gap in adoption behavior has significant implications for marketers, product developers, and policymakers. It challenges the common assumption that tech-savvy consumers are the leading edge of AI adoption. Instead, businesses targeting lower-literacy audiences can emphasize AI’s awe-inspiring potential to drive engagement and usage.

For example, marketing campaigns showcasing AI’s ability to generate lifelike images, analyze complex patterns, or offer empathetic care can resonate deeply with consumers who view these capabilities as extraordinary. By focusing on the “magic” of AI, brands can tap into the sense of wonder that drives adoption.

Marketing campaigns showcasing AI’s ability to generate lifelike images, analyze complex patterns, or offer empathetic care can resonate deeply with consumers who view these capabilities as extraordinary.

Balancing Wonder and Responsibility

This approach comes with a caution. Although lower AI literacy fosters adoption through magical thinking, it may also leave these consumers vulnerable to misuse or misrepresentation. For instance, users may overestimate AI’s capabilities or fail to recognize its limitations, leading to ethical and practical challenges.

Marketers and policymakers must strike a balance between highlighting AI’s potential and promoting informed usage. Clear messaging about AI’s capabilities and boundaries can help prevent misunderstandings while maintaining the sense of wonder that encourages adoption.

Another key challenge involves the role of education. As AI literacy increases, the perception of AI as magical diminishes. While education is crucial for fostering responsible use, it may inadvertently dampen adoption by reducing the sense of awe that motivates initial engagement. Policymakers and educators need to design programs that enhance understanding without eroding the excitement that drives consumers to explore new technologies.

Tailoring Strategies to Audience Perceptions

The study also highlights the broader implications of consumer perceptions for AI integration. Businesses should consider how AI is positioned within their offerings, ensuring that messaging aligns with the target audience’s level of understanding and emotional response.

For example, companies developing AI-powered tools for creative industries might focus on the “magic” of artistic generation, appealing to less tech-savvy consumers. Meanwhile, brands targeting professionals or experts might emphasize transparency and accuracy, addressing the more critical lens through which these audiences view AI.

Ultimately, the findings suggest that marketers and product developers must tailor their strategies to different segments of the population. By understanding how consumers perceive and interact with AI, businesses can create products and campaigns that resonate more effectively with their audiences.

Source: Stephanie Tully, Chiara Longoni, and Gil Appel, “Lower Artificial Intelligence Literacy Predicts Greater AI Receptivity,” Journal of Marketing, 89 (5), 1–20.

Go to the Journal of Marketing

The post Those Who Know Less About AI are More Likely to Adopt It appeared first on American Marketing Association.

A recent Journal of Marketing Research study by Katherine L. Christensen and Suzanne B. Shu explores exactly this phenomenon. They call it the heritage discount: the tendency for sellers of sentimental or heritage goods to accept lower prices from buyers who share a meaningful connection to the goods’ past. Surprisingly, this happens even when sellers believe the buyer would have been willing to pay more.

They call it the heritage discount: the tendency for sellers of sentimental or heritage goods to accept lower prices from buyers who share a meaningful connection to the goods’ past. Surprisingly, this happens even when sellers believe the buyer would have been willing to pay more.

How the Heritage Discount Affects Markets

The implications of this research extend far beyond individual sales, shaping outcomes for consumers, marketers, and policymakers alike. Heritage value plays a role in massive industries—from the $58 billion self-storage market and the $43 trillion U.S. housing market to the $200 billion secondhand sector and the $450 billion collectibles market.

For marketers, these insights open the door to designing new products and experiences that help consumers maintain a connection to their heritage, whether through family heirlooms, brand storytelling, or collaborations like 23andMe’s partnership with Airbnb’s heritage travel. Such efforts can create offerings that resonate across generations.

Heritage framing also carries weight in the policy sphere. Conservationists, for example, may increase support for protecting natural resources by highlighting their ties to past generations, reducing the public’s willingness to lease or sell them for short-term gain.

Curious about the bigger picture, we asked the authors to share additional takeaways from their study:

Q: Your research uncovers a surprising “heritage discount,” whereby sellers are willing to accept lower prices from buyers with shared heritage. What emotional or psychological dynamics might explain this? Were there any reactions or patterns that genuinely surprised you during your studies?

Dr. Shu: From a more theory-driven perspective, I’ve done other work on the endowment effect and psychological ownership. What intrigued me about this project and what Kate brought into it was that you usually put more value on it when you own something. That’s the endowment effect.

But with heritage, we were proposing something different: you might be willing to accept a lower price. That’s the opposite of the endowment effect, and that flip was fascinating. I’m always curious when a well-established finding in the literature is robust across many studies but then you discover a specific context where it reverses.

In this case, the heritage discount shows up when you sell to someone who can continue the story and respect that heritage. For instance, if Kate were selling her teacups to a collector who didn’t care about continuing the heritage, she would ask for a higher price. But if the buyer valued the teacup’s heritage and wanted to keep it alive, she’d be willing to accept less.

To me, that’s the most interesting part: the heritage discount only applies when the buyer is someone who will keep the story and the heritage alive.

Q: How might the concept of heritage connection help brands support sustainability goals, such as encouraging product longevity, reducing waste, or fostering intergenerational value?

Dr. Christensen: One of the significant trends we’re seeing right now is the rise of vintage. While our paper primarily focuses on transactions, we define heritage goods as goods linked to the past, whether historically or symbolically.

The idea that the past carries symbolic value can increase how much heritage buyers value a product. This is particularly relevant when people use vintage items, such as fashion inspired by the ’90s or ’70s. By wearing these pieces, people aren’t just dressing themselves—they are bringing a piece of their past into the present and sharing it with others. This act becomes a “gift,” offering a glimpse into a different world.

If sellers believe that the past carries value, they may also be more willing to sell. The past can be defined in many ways: an era, a community’s history, even a nation’s identity. That’s why we see a rise in vintage fashion and, in some cases, a rise in nationalism. Both are ways people try to connect to the past.

This concept plays out in sustainability and the environment, too. Think about how people connect to the human past and are tied to the land (in meaningful ways). For example, I recently learned that my uncle’s family were Adirondack guides who once took Theodore Roosevelt through the Adirondacks. When I return to those mountains, I experience them differently—I feel connected to that history, which increases the value of the place for me.

Q: How can environmental organizations and policymakers leverage your findings that framing natural resources as shared heritage reduces public support for exploitation?

Dr. Christensen: National parks provide one of the easiest examples of an intergenerational tie to the land. For me, that’s also my tie to the Adirondack Mountains. I was just there recently, and I had this powerful feeling that the trees were changing, connecting me back to my grandmother, even though she’s no longer here. That is why the natural landscape holds tremendous value to me.

I think that’s something you see often in regional marketing: how it ties people to the past. You also see it in the national parks. Their retro branding, for instance, emphasizes the idea of connecting to your ancestors. In a way, the parks themselves are marketed as a type of heritage good.

There’s also this initiative where fourth graders get a free national parks pass for a year, and their whole family can enjoy it. That’s positioned almost like a gift parents can give their kids—something that connects to what they did as children while creating new memories for the next generation.

So, the parks are marketed as timeless destinations, where parents, children, and even grandparents can share a sense of continuity and connection across generations

Q: Your research touches on the power of heritage in shaping value, but heritage can also be a sensitive area, especially regarding things like Indigenous crafts, national symbols, or traditional foods. What can marketers learn from your findings about why some communities push back against the commercialization of culturally significant goods?

Dr. Christensen: If you look at almost any nation’s history, there’s usually an original group that owned it, and then there was a loss of ownership. So, when another group comes in, and it’s not the original group, not the Indigenous group in your example, it can feel like a massive loss of heritage connection. If the transaction is viewed as purely about money, then that sense of loss and disutility is very high.

Often, when we see cultural trends that borrow from historically disempowered groups, there’s a sense that the practice isn’t really connected to the past. It’s just being used as a visual signifier. And that disconnect leads to tremendous backlash.

One of the most interesting examples I’ve seen in the work of some wonderful colleagues, focuses on restoring heritage to people who have lost that connection. The forced relocation of many Indigenous communities has had a lasting impact. In their new locations, these communities often lose traditional access to vital resources, such as water needed for growing crops. Unlike those who were not forcibly moved, they may lack the resources or the ability to maintain a connection to their ancestral lands and history.

Rebuilding that connection strengthens the whole ecosystem. It’s not just the consumer. The producer makes the food and knows how to cook it, and then the consumer eats it. When all those layers feel connected to heritage, I hypothesize that the value increases for the end user and everyone along the line. Everyone who opts in wants to maintain that link to the past.

But it also matters who is doing it. Sometimes, groups want to separate from others’ histories because, in a sense, it’s not theirs, and that creates complications. Heritage can become competitive, and tensions around commercialization often emerge.

Q: In today’s digital world, consumers express their identities through social media memories, digital collectibles, and even AI-generated family stories. Do you see a heritage connection evolving in these virtual spaces?

Dr. Christensen: The growing digital world may increase our need to connect to the past. In terms of how it happens technically, social media makes it much faster and easier. Right now, you can create a virtual person or save your mom’s phone messages from the human desire to preserve memories. As people contemplate how to connect with and share their own memories, they find value in these digital artifacts. These things give us value as human beings, and I believe we’re losing some of that, which is why I think there’s a growing need for heritage in the digital world. It’s now easier to create products that resurface those connections. For example, how do we bring back memories from childhood? They’re there, just buried.

Do we want to preserve the ideas of our grandparents? For some, that might feel weird or even like a violation. But for others, it’s a powerful sense of connection to the past, something they’d likely pay more for not just for themselves but to pass on to future generations. I think that at moments when the future becomes present, the past becomes especially valuable. For example, that intergenerational link suddenly comes alive when you have a child. You’re both giving something to the future and wanting to preserve the past.

Q: How might this shift influence how people assign value or feel a sense of ownership over digital goods, and what could this mean for brands trying to build emotional connections online?

Dr. Shu: For some reason, my social media feeds have been filled lately with stories about people doing DNA testing and trying to trace their ancestors. It’s fascinating how technology makes it so easy now. People say, “I have a grandparent I know nothing about, and I don’t know how to trace them,” but DNA testing opens that door and gives them access. They can then do a bit more searching and find previously impossible connections.

That ability to rediscover heritage is powerful. It also opens space for brands to build emotional and heritage connections. Kate had a great example, but it didn’t make it into the paper, of Airbnb offering heritage-based vacations. Imagine someone whose family was originally from Turkey but lived elsewhere for generations. A descendant might say, “I wish I understood my connection to Turkey.” A trip could then be designed to take them back to their ancestral hometown.

We live in a society where people move around much more than in the past, when several generations might have stayed in the same small town. Today, companies can help people reconnect with their roots and their history. That’s something consumers respond to. They lack that connection and search for it, and brands can help fill that gap.

Source: Katherine L. Christensen and Suzanne B. Shu (2024), “The Role of Heritage Connection in Consumer Valuation,” Journal of Marketing Research, 61 (3), 571–86. doi:10.1177/00222437231182434.

References

Absolute Reports (2023), “7.5% Growth in Self Storage Market by 2023−2028: Exploring the Growing Trend Regional Analysis Competitive Scenario,” GlobeNewswire (March 14), https://www.globenewswire.com/en/news-release/2023/03/14/2626474/0/en/7-5-Growth-in-Self-Storage-Market-by-2023-2028-Exploring-the-Growing-Trend-Regional-Analysis-CompetitiveScenario.html.

Credit Suisse (2020), “Collectibles: An Integral Part of Wealth,” research report, Credit Suisse Research Institute and Deloitte (October).

Market Decipher (2023), “Collectibles Market Size, Statistics, Growth Trend Analysis and Forecast Report, 2023-2033,” https://marketdecipher.com/report/collectibles-market.

ThredUp (2023), “Resale Report,” (accessed August 9, 2023), https://www.thredup.com/resale.

Go to the Journal of Marketing Research

The post The Heritage Discount: The Story Behind the Price appeared first on American Marketing Association.

Melissa Bublitz is the Liz Kramer Professor of Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship at the School of Human Ecology at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. Her research focuses on understanding and influencing behavior to promote the well-being of individuals and the communities where they live and work. Investigating topics such as food and nutrition security, sustainability, and grassroots social change, her research is characterized by a strong commitment to creating real-world impact and is often conducted in partnership with community organizations. She was part of a research team whose paper won the 2022 Thomas C. Kinnear/Journal of Public Policy & Marketing Award. She has been an associate editor at the Journal of Public Policy & Marketing since 2019 and at the Journal of Consumer Psychology since 2021.

Stacey Finkelstein is Professor of Marketing at the College of Business, Stony Brook University. She earned her PhD and MBA at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business. Her research explores factors impacting food choices, health care access and utilization, and vaccine hesitancy. In her ongoing projects, she identifies areas of opportunity and challenges for the use of emerging technologies in health care settings, centering patient needs, preferences, and concerns. In recognition of her research, she received the AMA Marketing and Society Special Interest Group (MASSIG) early career award in 2019 and a best paper award from the Journal of Consumer Affairs in 2021. She has served as the chair of MASSIG from 2023–2025 and as an associate editor at the Journal of Business Research and Journal of Consumer Affairs.

The current editorial team, Jeremy Kees and Beth Vallen, are working with the new team to enable a smooth transition. Bublitz and Finkelstein will begin processing new submissions on April 1, 2026. Kees and Vallen will continue to handle submissions sent out for review or invited for revision prior to April 1.

–JPP&M Editor Selection Committee (Roland Rust [chair], Ron Hill, Linda Alkire, Kelly Martin, Joshua Dorsey, Jeff Inman, and Marilyn Stone)

• Journal of Public Policy & Marketing | Associate Editors
• Journal of Public Policy & Marketing | Editorial Review Board

The post New Editors at the Journal of Public Policy & Marketing appeared first on American Marketing Association.