Camaraderie in Crime: Shared Self-control Decisions and Affiliation

Self-control decisions very often involve an element of both social influence and social consequence, and consumers exhibiting high levels of self-control experience greater social acceptance for a number of reasons. For example, these individuals are more likely to display pro-social behavior (DeWall, Baumeister and Vohs 2008), appear trustworthy (Righetti and Finkenauer 2011), and self-monitor more effectively (Finkel et al. 2006). It has even been suggested that self-control exists for the very purpose of facilitating group membership (Baumeister, Schmeichel and Vohs 2007) by ensuring that our behavior that is coordinated with that of our peers. However, previous research on the social outcomes of self-control decisions has generally employed actor-observer scenarios or actor-influencer scenarios (McFerran et al 2010, Ackerman et al. 2009, VanDellen and Hoyle 2010) and has very rarely examined shared self-control decisions or taken the perspective of a participating peer. However, no research that we are aware of has ever examined the potential outcomes of shared self-control decisions. As there are two key elements of a shared self-control decision – the peer(s) and the object of the decision itself – we offer a new conceptual framework to examine consumer self-control decisions in social settings and explore the outcomes of shared self-control decisions regarding 1) affiliation and 2) product experience.