Selected research
Job Market Paper: When Quantity Provides Security: Financial Constraints Increase Consumer Preferences for Quantity ​
​
Data and materials can be found here: https://osf.io/7sc8k/?view_only=be9278cb5e2a45ec827b40d0d4230280.
Main findings: Consumers with limited financial resources often face tradeoffs in how they allocate their spending. Prior research suggests that, in response to financial constraints, consumers tend to place high value on product longevity, favoring durable purchases that offer sustained utility over time. However, when the decision involves a tradeoff between quantity and durability, this pattern can reverse.
Unlike durability—which measures how long a product lasts under normal conditions—product security refers to a purchase’s ability to sustain consumption during disruptions. Financially constrained consumers, who often experience a diminished sense of control and heightened aversion to uncertainty, may find the prospect of product unavailability especially threatening. As a result, they exhibit stronger preferences for quantity to obtain a sense of security. This security-driven behavior may carry environmental costs, as it can lead to increased consumption of disposable goods and greater waste.
​Maximizing the Impact of CSR Investments: Consumers’ Preferences for Internal versus External CSR Depend on Perceived Culpability
​
​Data and materials can be found here: https://osf.io/zfkw8/?view_only=b3829c811f9f4196b827bc09a9a5cfe5.
Main findings: Companies often face a dilemma when deciding whether to invest in internal CSR (e.g., changing company practices) or external CSR (e.g., charitable donations) to maximize impact. However, this paper finds that consumers’ CSR preferences vary as a function of the perception of corporate culpability. Contrary to prior research which documented preferences for internal CSR, I find that whether consumers prefer internal CSR depends on the degree to which the company is seen as contributing negatively to a social problem. When the company is seen as blameworthy, internal CSR on that social problem is favored because improving internal processes signals greater sincerity and stronger ability to address the issue. However, when the firm is perceived as less culpable, external CSR may yield more favorable consumer responses. In addition, internal CSR can backfire by inadvertently revealing or drawing attention to corporate wrongdoing.
To my knowledge, this paper provides the first evidence that CSR can function not only as a positive signal but also as an unexpected trigger for consumer scrutiny. Overall, these insights carry important practical implications for companies aiming to maximize social and financial impact through CSR efforts.
The Costly Preference for Same-day Delivery of Multiple Benefits
​
Data and materials can be found here: https://osf.io/k4uq9/?view_only=9a30b5eb90614be0b2d8c92c6fee1a6d.
Main findings: people are often willing to delay an earlier product delivery to receive it with another one on the same future date—even when it results in a longer total wait. This runs counter to classical discounting theories and predictions based on prospect theory, which predict a desire to accelerate earlier benefits. Instead, I find that consumers may prefer to integrate the reception of multiple benefits because doing so reduces the psychological burden of waiting. This finding suggests that companies might increase consumer satisfaction and reduce logistical inefficiencies or environmental waste by offering coordinated, same-day delivery options, even if it results in a longer overall wait.