Explore the vast range of titles available.

•Gift givers prefer to give gift cards to luxury stores.•Gift recipients prefer to receive non-luxury gift cards as gifts.•Resellers demand and buyers pay lower prices for luxury gift cards.•Valuation of gift cards is mediated by their perceived utility as gifts. Gift cards account for a $200 billion market in the US, yet little is known about consumers’ preferences and valuations of different gift cards. We examine how average US consumers feel about exchanging luxury brand gift cards (LGCs) versus non-luxury brand gift cards (NLGCs). Using secondary data analyses, surveys, and experiments, we demonstrate two asymmetries: between valuations of LGCs versus NLGCs and between valuations of gift cards by givers versus recipients. We show that LGCs are valued less than NLGCs with identical price tags. LGCs are more likely to be swapped or sold. Resellers demand and buyers pay lower prices for LGCs. These effects are mediated by the perceived utility of the gift cards as gifts and moderated by a person’s role in the gifting process. Gift givers value and prefer to give LGCs more, whereas recipients prefer and value NLGCs more.

Research on gift giving has devoted considerable attention to understanding whether and how givers succeed in choosing gifts that match recipients' tastes. On the contrary, this article focuses on how recipients' appreciation for a gift depends on the match between the gift and the giver. Four studies demonstrate that recipients are particularly appreciative when they receive gifts that figuratively match the giver, i.e., that contain references to the giver's characteristics, because they perceive such gifts as more congruent with the giver's identity. This effect is not conditional on inferences recipients might make about the giver's motivations or on whether recipients have a good relationship with the giver, but relies on the match concerning core rather than peripheral characteristics of the giver. Importantly for our understanding of identity-based motivation, these findings demonstrate in a gift-giving context that identity-congruence not only drives consumer behavior, but is also appreciated in other people.

Doctoral education, a key component of higher education in the United States, is performing well. It educates future professors, researchers, innovators, and entrepreneurs. It attracts students and scholars from all over the world and is being emulated globally. This success, however, should not engender complacency. A Data-Based Assessment of Research-Doctorate Programs in the United States provides an unparalleled dataset that can be used to assess the quality and effectiveness of doctoral programs based on measures important to faculty, students, administrators, funders, and other stakeholders. This report features analysis of selected findings across six broad fields: agricultural sciences, biological and health sciences, engineering, physical and mathematical sciences, social and behavioral sciences, and humanities, as well as a discussion of trends in doctoral education since the last assessment in 1995, and suggested uses of the data. It also includes a detailed explanation of the methodology used to collect data and calculate ranges of illustrative rankings.

Charitable giving in 2013 exceeded $300 billion, but why do we respond to some life-saving causes while ignoring others? In our first two studies, we demonstrated that valuation of lives is associated with affective feelings (self-reported and psychophysiological) and that a decline in compassion may begin with the second endangered life. In Study 3, this fading of compassion was reversed by describing multiple lives in a more unitary fashion. Study 4 extended our findings to loss-frame scenarios. Our capacity to feel sympathy for people in need appears limited, and this form of compassion fatigue can lead to apathy and inaction, consistent with what is seen repeatedly in response to many large-scale human and environmental catastrophes.

Understanding the value that individuals assign to the protection of their personal data is of great importance for business, law, and public policy. We use a field experiment informed by behavioral economics and decision research to investigate individual privacy valuations and find evidence of endowment and order effects. Individuals assigned markedly different values to the privacy of their data depending on (1) whether they were asked to consider how much money they would accept to disclose otherwise private information or how much they would pay to protect otherwise public information and (2) the order in which they considered different offers for their data. The gap between such values is large compared with that observed in comparable studies of consumer goods. The results highlight the sensitivity of privacy valuations to contextual, nonnormative factors.

People are impatient and discount future rewards more when they are asked to delay consumption than when they are offered the chance to accelerate consumption. The three experiments reported here provide a process-level account for this asymmetry, with implications for designing decision environments that promote less impulsivity. In Experiment 1 , a thought-listing procedure showed that people decompose discount valuation into two queries. Whether one considers delayed or accelerated receipt of a gift certificate influences the order in which memory is queried to support immediate versus delayed consumption, and the order of queries affects the relative number of patient versus impatient thoughts. Relative frequency and clustering of impatient thoughts predicts discounting and mediates the discounting asymmetry. Experiment 2 implicated query order causally: When participants listed reasons for immediate versus delayed consumption in the order used spontaneously in acceleration and delay decisions, the discounting asymmetry was replicated; reversing the order in which reasons were listed eliminated the asymmetry. The results of Experiment 3, which used an implicit-memory task, support a memory-interference account of the effect of query order.

Purpose Consumer researchers have studied a number of asymmetries between gift-givers and gift-recipients. However, one unexplored potential asymmetry concerns gift-givers’ and gift-recipients’ perceptions of the importance of selecting a good (vs. bad) gift. This paper aims to study this uninvestigated facet of gift-giving. Design/methodology/approach Five experimental studies tested the hypotheses. In each study, participants assumed the role of giver or recipient and read a gifting scenario. Study 1 explored participants’ views on the importance of selecting a good gift by asking them directly. Studies 2-4 instead operationalized the importance of selecting a good gift through participants’ choices between gifts. Studies 1-4 also examined our proposed mechanism pertaining to givers overestimating the negative implications of giving a bad gift. Study 5 examined a theoretically relevant boundary condition: the nature of the giver-recipient relationship. Findings Givers regard it as more important than recipients that a good gift be selected. Critically, this mismatch can manifest as givers making choices that do not align with recipients’ preferences. Drawing on contextualized self-enhancement theory, this study shows that this asymmetry is driven primarily by givers overestimating the negative implications of giving a bad gift as opposed to overestimating the positive implications of giving a good one. Consistent with this account, the effect attenuates when the giver and recipient have a negative (vs positive) relationship and thus givers are not concerned with the negative implications of giving a poor gift. Research limitations/implications The findings enrich the field’s understanding of gift-giving psychology by introducing contextualized self-enhancement theory to the gift-giving literature and demonstrating that givers worry more than they should about the negative implications of giving a bad gift. This study also sheds light on the important role that the nature of the giver–recipient relationship plays in gift-giving phenomena. Limitations of this work are that there are some potential boundary conditions and control variables that the authors did not explore, such as potential cultural differences and the income levels of the giver and recipient. Practical implications This research suggests that gift-givers should not worry as much as they do about the negative implications of giving a bad gift. In many cases, things may not turn out as bad as givers anticipate when they deliver a less-than-ideal gift. This study also shows that givers sometimes make choices that do not match recipients’ preferences, out of a fear of the negative implications that may arise from giving a bad gift. Originality/value This research adds to the gift-giving literature by studying a new facet of gift-giving: whether it is more important to givers or recipients that a good gift be selected. In addition, this work introduces contextualized self-enhancement theory to the gift-giving literature and documents two new asymmetries between givers and recipients: first, givers put more importance on the selection of a good gift than recipients; second, givers overestimate the negative implications of giving a bad gift.

Some of the most meaningful moments in early American literature relied on historical patterns of gift exchange, David Faflik argues in this compelling book. Gift exchange kept a surprising variety of literary objects in circulation across the diverse societies, economies, and cultures of the Americas, from the seventeenth through the nineteenth centuries. From the gifting of a Narragansett grammar as a foundational event in the project of colonization in New England, to the use of Benjamin Franklin's Poor Richard's Almanack in the classrooms of an independent Brazil, to Catharine Maria Sedgwick's fictions framing literature as the object of middle-class gifting, chapters offer an interdisciplinary perspective on book history and literary history in the United States and beyond. Faflik contends that it is because of the wild ways in which books circulated as gifts that works by Franklin, New England colonist Roger Williams, Sedgwick, Walt Whitman, and Emily Dickinson resisted the generic conventions of their day. Offering a revisionist account of how literary meaning is made, The Literary Gift in Early America calls for closer attention to the historical patterns of literary give and take in the Americas.

Introduction Medical improvisation (improv) is gaining recognition as an effective method for enhancing communication skills among healthcare professionals. Successful implementation of medical improv training relies on dynamic refinement of curricula. In this project, we articulate a theoretically grounded framework for modifying a medical improv program that puts the focus on the crucial yet often overlooked process of curriculum refinement in this growing field. Methods We used the Collaborative Improvement Model [1] as a guiding framework for the curriculum revision. Our analytic approach involved a sub-analysis of quantitative and qualitative data collected as a part of the Alda Healthcare Experience (AHE) mixed-methods process evaluation including surveys, in-depth interviews, and observations. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected from key stakeholders of the AHE program including clinical co-facilitators, improv co-facilitators, and participants. Our analysis was guided by interpretive descriptive design, drawing on inductive and deductive approaches as well as quantitative and qualitative mixed-methods triangulation. Results Inductive analysis of co-facilitator interviews revealed four dimensions for interpreting the identified areas of revision: desirability (of the revision), feasibility (of the revision), triangulation (whether different sources of data are divergent or corroborated), and evaluability (whether the revision would confound the program evaluation). We illustrate how this framework is implemented through specific examples from our curriculum revision. Conclusion Our manuscript articulates a theoretically grounded framework for revising medical improv curriculum. This structured yet adaptable framework could be useful for curricular modification in other medical improv and experiential learning curricula.

This study introduces a new version of the adjusted present value (APV) method and ensures its consistent valuation with the cost of capital (CoC) method at the highest level of generalization. The newly developed APV version and equivalent formulae consider stochastic debt and the trade-off between corporate income taxes (CIT) and personal income taxes (PIT), as well as tax benefits and financial distress costs. The value of expected bankruptcy costs aligns with the valuation aspect, enabling practical application of the formulae by valuers. The equivalence also reflects the differing perspectives of tax shields between stockholders and debt holders when PITs are introduced. Ultimately, the results demonstrate that the equivalence in this study aligns with, and can reduce to, previous standard formulae, under their stringent assumptions.