Instructions Topic: Social Exclusion and Housing 2. Thesis: clear statement of argument at the outset (ideally in the introduction), novelty! 3. Research: breadth and depth of research focusing on...

1 answer below »

Instructions
Topic: Social Exclusion and Housing
2. Thesis: clear statement of argument at the outset (ideally in the introduction), novelty!
3. Research:
eadth and depth of research focusing on argument.
4. Analysis: critical, interdisciplinary, depth, focus on argument, logic, balance
5. Originality: novelty, insight, thought-provoking. 
6. Evidence: primarily scholarly references to support claims; avoid quotations, instead paraphrase authors’ ideas using your own words and citing source.
7. Readings:  Course readings have been provided as attachments below. References to course readings do not necessarily have to be central to argument. However, reference to some course material is required. Outside readings welcome.
 8. Organization: clear structure throughout paper i.e. introduction, development of argument by articulating the key claims with supportive references, conclusion
 9. Style: clarity, flow, avoid long sentences and paragraphs, co
ect citation format (any but be consistent e.g. APA[1], McGill or the like) and grammar.
10. Length: maximum 5 double-spaced pages. Do not waste space and time describing the topic without developing your argument or discussing issues that are not central to the argument of your paper.
11. Deadline: April 6th, 2022

untitled
122
� 2012 by JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH, Inc. ● Vol. 40 ● June 2013
All rights reserved XXXXXXXXXX/2013/ XXXXXXXXXX$10.00. DOI: XXXXXXXXXX/668900
Show Me the Honey! Effects of Social
Exclusion on Financial Risk-Taking
ROD DUCLOS
ECHO WEN WAN
YUWEI JIANG
This research examines the effects of social exclusion on a critical aspect of con-
sumer behavior, financial decision-making. Specifically, four lab experiments and
one field survey uncover how feeling isolated or ostracized causes consumers to
pursue riskier but potentially more profitable financial opportunities. These daring
proclivities do not appear driven by impaired affect or self-esteem. Rather, inter-
personal rejection exace
ates financial risk-taking by heightening the instrumen-
tality of money (as a substitute for popularity) to obtain benefits in life. Invariably,
the quest for wealth that ensues tends to adopt a riskier but potentially more
lucrative road. The article concludes by discussing the implications of its findings
for behavioral research as well as for societal and individual welfare.
Social exclusion (i.e., being alone, isolated, or ostracized,sometimes with explicit declarations of dislike, but
other times not; Baumeister et al. 2005; Williams 2007) is
a rather common experience. Romantic relationships dis-
solve; people are ignored at parties or in office conversa-
tions; offers of friendship are rebuffed. Suggestive of the
universality of the phenomenon, metaphors such as “getting
the cold shoulder,” “being left behind,” or “getting dumped”
are found in numerous languages around the world. And
while one might hope that recent advances in communi-
Rod Duclos ( XXXXXXXXXX) is assistant professor of marketing at
the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay,
Hong Kong. Echo Wen Wan ( XXXXXXXXXX) is associate professo
of marketing at the University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong.
Yuwei Jiang ( XXXXXXXXXX) is assistant professor of marketing
at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong. This
esearch was supported in part by the Asian Center for Branding and
Marketing and the Research Grants Council of Hong Kong via grants
DAG08/09.BM09 and GRF XXXXXXXXXXawarded to the first author; grant HKU
752908H awarded to the second author; and grants PolyU 4-ZZ6C, PolyU
A-PK03, GRF 5442/10H, and ECS 5514/12H awarded to the third author.
For their help with prior versions of this manuscript, the authors are in-
debted to Jim Bettman, Bob Wyer, and the members of the review team.
Special thanks are also extended to Rashmi Adaval, Amy Dalton, Maria
Galli, Jiewen Hong, Tom Meyvis, A� Mukhopadhyay, A. V. Muthukrish-
nan, Jaideep Sengupta, Mark Wu, Rongrong Zhou, Fuzz, Paul, and Spot.
For co
espondence, please contact Rod Duclos.
Ann McGill served as editor and Baba Shiv served as associate editor fo
this article.
Electronically published December 6, 2012
cation technologies and social media decrease the prevalence
of social exclusion, recent research shows that modern so-
cieties have in fact become lonelier places in the last 40
years. Twenge, Catanese, and Baumeister XXXXXXXXXXfound, fo
instance, that people entertain fewer stable relationships and,
as a result, feel generally less connected to others. In the
same vein, Putnam (1995, 2000) found that Americans today
are less likely to join organizations and visit friends than
were their elder generations. Finally, statistics from the US
Census Bureau XXXXXXXXXXreveal that the proportion of citizens
living alone doubled from 13% in 1960 to 26% at the turn
of the twenty-first century. Part of this growth, note Twenge
et al. (2002), is caused by the sharp increase in divorce
ates, another clear indicator of unstable social relations.
Noting the prevalence and sometimes severe conse-
quences of social exclusion, Mead et al XXXXXXXXXXwere the
first to examine this phenomenon’s ramifications for con-
sumption behavior. Most notably, these authors found that
thwarting consumers’ need for social connection leads them
to spend strategically in service of affiliation. For illustra-
tion, relative to control, excluded participants in their studies
were more likely to buy a product symbolic of group mem-
ership, tailor their spending preferences to those of an in-
teraction partner, spend money on an unappealing food fa-
vored by a peer, and try cocaine if doing so granted them
an opportunity to commence social connections. Seeking to
extend this work, the present paper examines the effects of
social exclusion on another important consumption area,
financial decision-making.
Consumers’ welfare largely depends on the soundness of
their financial decisions (e.g., choosing mortgages, saving
D
ow
nloaded from
https:
academ
ic.oup.com
jc
article/40/1/122/ XXXXXXXXXXby York U
niversity Li
aries user on 05 April 2022
mailto: XXXXXXXXXX
mailto: XXXXXXXXXX
mailto: XXXXXXXXXX
DUCLOS, WAN, AND JIANG 123
to fund college education or retirement, using credit cards
to fund cu
ent consumption, deciding how to pay for health
care and insurance, investing in the stock market, etc.). In
many such domains, however, consumers often lack appro-
priate information and/or knowledge, which renders them
susceptible to serious biases with large personal and societal
consequences. Consistent with this assessment, the 2011
Consumer Financial Literacy Survey by the National Foun-
dation for Credit Counseling (NFCC) reports that 56% of
Americans do not maintain a budget or track their expen-
ditures; 33% do not have any nonretirement savings; 40%
ca
y credit-card debt from month to month; 28% do not
pay all their bills on time; 7% have debt in collection; and
a record 41% would give themselves a grade of C, D, or F
on their knowledge of personal finance.
Admittedly, many environmental and personal factors in-
teract to shape one’s financial decisions. The present work
seeks to examine the influence of one such factor, social
exclusion, on financial risk-taking. Specifically, this article
intends to document when and explain why feeling excluded
fosters riskier but potentially more lucrative decisions by
consumers. With this in mind, our empirical inquiry pre-
views as follows.
Study 1 examines whether feeling excluded from (vs.
included in) a group exercise influences in a seemingly un-
elated gambling survey participants’ preferences for a risk-
ier (i.e., low odds/high reward) but potentially more lucra-
tive lottery. Study 2 ascertains the directional impact of
social exclusion (vs. inclusion) on financial decisions. That
is, does social exclusion foster risk taking or, in contrast,
does inclusion
eed preferences for safer alternatives?
Seeking to consider the role of affect in the process, study
2 also examines whether negative mood in general and sad-
ness in particular influence consumers’ decision making.
Study 3 sheds light on the mechanism by which consumers
come to favor riskier investment schemes. Extending this
effort, study 4 assesses when and why consumers may o
may not make risky financial decisions. In parallel, studies
3 and 4 consider the possible influence of affect and self-
esteem in the process. Finally, study 5 examines the impact
of social exclusion on financial risk-taking outside the lab.
Specifically, study 5 aims to ascertain whether our experi-
mental findings replicate in the real world with heteroge-
neous populations (e.g., in age, income, education) facing
various levels of chronic social exclusion. In sum, our five
studies (i.e., four experiments and one field survey) initiate
a line of research intended to test when and explain why
social exclusion causes financial risk-taking.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
In a social system, people obtain what they want via two
primary means, popularity and money. Popularity refers to
eing liked, supported, or admired to the point where others
are willing to provide (sometimes at a cost to themselves)
what one needs to flourish in life and protect against un-
expected or unwanted events. Similarly, monetary assets can
help secure the resources one needs to maintain control ove
one’s life’s course as well as the autonomy to choose and
pursue the activities consistent with one’s goals, beliefs, and
values.
Because money and group membership can help acquire
similar benefits, consumers are likely to turn to money (as
a substitute for popularity) when their efforts to seek and
or maintain social connections are thwarted. Consistent with
this idea, prior research on the symbolic power of money
finds that, relative to socially included counterparts, ex-
cluded participants are less willing to donate funds for or-
phans; exhibit stronger desires for money (as suggested by
their overestimation of coin sizes); and, finally, experience
more distress when merely thinking about money they spent
previously (Zhou, Vohs, and Baumeister XXXXXXXXXXInterest-
ingly, this psychological distress can be reduced if partici-
pants are allowed to touch money again in a bill-counting
task.
Extending this work, we propose that, in absence of social
support, forlorn consumers will need significantly more
money to secure what they need out of the social system.
As such, experiencing interpersonal rejection should heighten
the instrumentality of money as a means for obtaining benefits
from the world. The ensuing quest for money, we predict,
may foster riskier but potentially more lucrative financial
decision-making. Separate lines of research in the social
sciences support our theorizing and predictions about money
as a means to secure control in life.
Money and Control
For Furhnam (1984), money serves not only to acquire
what one needs, wants, or desires but also to impress and
control others. Similarly, works by Tang XXXXXXXXXXand Yam-
auchi and Templer XXXXXXXXXXstress the power that money af-
fords. Money empowers consumers to control their life by
freeing them from budget constraints, thereby enabling them
to select the products and services best suiting their pre-
ogatives.
The literature on health and well-being also provides evi-
dence suggesting a link between money and control in life.
Using national probability samples, Lachman and Weave
(1998) found that, compared to low-income counterparts,
high-wage earners
Answered Same DayApr 05, 2022

Solution

Amar Kumar answered on Apr 06 2022
16 Votes
Social Exclusion and Housing
Introduction
The review looks at the possibility of social rejection and its materialness to Australian social lodging strategy. We propose an analysis of the possibility of social rejection in light of cu
ent hypothetical and observational investigations from Europe and the United Kingdom. Any assessment of social avoidance, it is recommended, should recognize its worth as a scholarly illustrative thought and its political use to help new sorts of legislative intercession. Hostile to social conduct strategy, for instance, is as often as possible supported in light of the fact that it mitigates the issues of social seclusion looked by occupants in
oad daylight lodging homes.
The discoveries of a survey led for the Australian Housing U
an Research Institute (AHURI) on the pertinence of the idea of social avoidance for Australian social lodging strategy are introduced in this archive. The assessment depended on the idea that, since social avoidance is turning into a more noticeable subject in Australian lodging strategy, it justified further examination. The expression "social avoidance" is regularly used to enhance strategy around the eventual fate of Australian public lodging homes, which are set apart by tricky lodging, high convergences of inhabitants encountering neediness, low salaries, high joblessness, and ho
or rates (see, for example, New South Wales Department of Housing, AHURI and Department of Family and Community Services 1999; Randolph and Judd 2000). The idea of fighting social avoidance was as of late placed into impact in South Australia, with the new Rann Labor Government laying out a Social Inclusion Unit in 2002, with the pronounced need areas of wiping out vagrancy and raising training consistency standards (Australian Labor Party 2002).
Social Exclusion in Different Societal Dimensions
A few onlookers propose that the idea's utility comes in its accentuation on the different angles or areas of regular day to day existence where disparities happen (see, for instance, Madanipour 1998; de Haan 1999; Vo
uba 2000). They additionally underline the meaning of associating these angles.
For instance, Sommerville (1998) recognizes three sorts of social rejection: monetary, political, and moral. Comparable components are underscored by Madanipour (1998), who incorporates the financial, political, and social domains. Avoidance in the financial, political, and social fields is alluded to by De Haan (1999). Avoidance and social combination issues range from stresses over admittance to interpersonal organizations and help to empowering admittance to assets, majority rule independent direction, and normal social...
SOLUTION.PDF

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here