Worthy of Your Binge: How Media Momentum Drives Satisfaction in Clumped Consumption
with Cait Lamberton and Robert Meyer
Binge-watching – the uninterrupted consumption of multiple episodes of serialized media – has been widely embraced by consumers and companies alike, with shows regularly labeled as “binge-worthy,” and released in ways that facilitate this “clumped” style of consumption. But what do consumers experience as truly binge-worthy – that is, likely to leave them satisfied when binge-watched? We propose that a show’s binge-worthiness is determined by consumers’ perception of its media momentum: the positive interaction of the show’s perceived complexity (i.e., the degree of cognitive effort necessary to follow the plot) and resonance (i.e., the degree of cognitive and emotional involvement the plot offers). In 6 pre-registered experiments and one secondary data analysis, we first validate that the positive interaction of these two factors in one episode predicts consumers’ craving and expected utility from continuing to watch the next, providing evidence for the importance of media momentum in driving clumped consumption. Subsequently, we manipulate media momentum through stimuli selection, finding that satisfaction for content higher in momentum is harmed by a staggered viewing compared to low-momentum content, such that high momentum shows create greater satisfaction when watched in clumped rather than separate format. By contrast, satisfaction with separated watching increases as perceived media momentum falls.
When “Netflix and Chill” Leaves us Cold: Binge-Watching, Opportunity Costs, and Regret
with Cait Lamberton
Media companies often position their shows as “binge-worthy,” suggesting they believe binge-watching (i.e., viewing multiple episodes of the same show in immediate succession) is a valuable option for consumers. But when are consumers likely to choose to “Netflix and Chill”? And when does this choice turn out to be satisfying or regrettable? Results from 6 experiments and one secondary dataset suggest that intentional binge-watching is more likely when energy is scarce and available time abundant–an effect driven by considerations of binge-watching’s low energy-related and high time-related opportunity costs. Further, shows binged under such “optimal” conditions (e.g., low energy, abundant time) receive higher ratings than shows binged under non-optimal conditions. However, if after the experience consumers focus on the high time-related opportunity costs of binge-watching rather than the low energy-related ones, regret will emerge. This effect will attenuate if consumers decision to binge-watch is made less costly by future time availability. Thus, we encounter the paradox of binge-watching: the very same conditions that make it a good choice can also lead us to regret, depending on the resources and opportunity cost considered, and the moment of their consideration.
Strategic Procrastination: A Mechanism for Managing Scarce Resources
with Barbara Mellers
Procrastination has been defined as: “a voluntary delay in an intended course of action despite expecting to be worse off for the delay” (Steel, 2007). However, voluntarily delaying action, whether one expects dire consequences or not, may be a strategy aimed at managing resources in the best possible way. When energy and time are scarce, some people may decide to wait (save effort), or act (spend effort), based on their estimates of the risks involved – the risk of failing if one procrastinates too long and the risk of wasting effort if one acts too soon (spending unnecessary amounts of time on the task). They may also believe that, if they wait, they will recover from their procrastination by receiving a boost in focus from the time pressure while decreasing the cost of effort, hence performing better at a lower cost. The accuracy of their beliefs and calibration of risks determines their success in doing so. Hence, some people are strategic when they procrastinate because they believe that by delaying actions, they will decrease the total amount of time spent on the task and increase the level of quality, making procrastination an efficiency-driven strategy. In a longitudinal study, we find that a small percentage of participants believe they work better under pressure, prefer to work on the last possible day and perform better (at least directionally) when they can follow their preferred schedule rather than working day-by-day. These findings provide initial evidence of strategic procrastination.