A Review of Consumer Embarrassment as a Public and Private

Aradhna Krishna Kelly B. Herd University of Michigan University of Connecticut

Nilufer€ Z. Aydınoglu Kocß University

Invited and Accepted by Deborah Roedder John, Editor

Whether the result of mispronouncing a fancy brand name, miscalculating a tip, purchasing a sensitive pro- duct, or stumbling into a product display, embarrassment is an important part of the consumer landscape. Embarrassment has traditionally been considered a social emotion, one that can only be experienced in public. In this paper, we offer a comprehensive review of consumer embarrassment and consider situations in which embarrassment can consumer behavior in both public and private contexts. We define embarrassment using this broader conceptualization and outline the transgressions that might trigger embarrassment in con- sumption contexts. We also discuss the diverse implications of embarrassment for consumer behavior, and review the strategies that both consumers and practitioners can use to mitigate embarrassment and its nega- tive consequences. We this framework will stimulate new research on consumer embarrassment in both public and private contexts. Keywords embarrassment; emotion; coping; appraisal; self-consciousness

Introduction left open! They do not notice you and you quickly run back to your room. You know what they were doing, but Imagine you are walking through a crowded upscale bar. you have never seen it before. You feel uncomfortable You do not see the few steps going down and you trip and hide under the covers. and fall, dropping the martini in your hand. As people In all the examples above, you would likely feel approach you to help, you quickly get up and walk back embarrassed. But, what is “embarrassment?” toward the bar, and looking down. Embarrassment has typically been defined as a Picture the following: as you are about to leave work social emotion whereby one feels an aversive state after a long day, you exit your cubicle, only to look of abashment and chagrin associated with down and realize that your fly is wide open; not only unwanted mishaps or social predicaments (Goff- that, but the tip of your white shirt is clearly sticking man, 1955; Miller, 1995; Modigliani, 1968). The first out of your pants. Fortunately, by now the office is two examples above are consistent with this defini- deserted. But, you still feel mortified as you think of the tion. In example 1, the embarrassment stems from many co-workers who could have noticed it under other others seeing you fall—you are clumsy and there is circumstances. a public scene; in example 2, you imagine all of the Visualize yourself as an 8-year-old waking up in the co-workers who might have seen your fly open middle of the night. You are on your way to the bath- and felt too uncomfortable to say anything. How- room. You glance in the direction of your parents’ bed- ever, in example 3, no one sees your transgression room, only to see them having sex – the door has been and you do not imagine them doing so. Impor- tantly, you do not necessarily imagine anyone Received 9 January 2018; accepted 5 December 2018 — Available online 17 December 2018 judging you the negative come from you All authors contributed equally to this research. judging yourself. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to The idea that embarrassment can also be a pri- Aradhna Krishna, Stephen M. Ross School of Business, Univer- sity of Michigan, 701 Tappan St., Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1234, vate emotion, and be experienced without a real or USA or Kelly B. Herd, School of Business, University of Con- necticut, 2100 Hillside Road, U1041, Storrs, CT 06269, USA or Nilufer€ Z. Aydınoglu, College of Administrative Sciences and _ Economics, Kocß University, Rumelifeneri Yolu, Sarıyer, Istanbul, © 2018 Society for Consumer Psychology 34450, Turkey. Electronic mail may be sent to aradhna@ All rights reserved. 1057-7408/2019/1532-7663 umich.edu or [email protected] or [email protected]. DOI: 10.1002/jcpy.1086 2 Krishna et al. imagined audience, has only recently begun to We first outline what embarrassment is and how receive attention in psychology and consumer it operates. We posit that in order for embarrass- behavior research (Babcock, 1988; Higuchi & ment to ensue, a transgression (that violates socially Fukada, 2002; Krishna, Herd, & Aydinoglu, 2015). accepted conventions or personal codes of conduct) This paper provides a review of consumer embar- occurs in a public or private context, and is then rassment, considering both the public and private appraised by others or by oneself. We highlight perspectives, with the goal of stimulating research common transgressions that cause embarrassment on embarrassment in the consumer context. We in general, and more specifically in consumption next discuss the overall conceptual framework that contexts. Some of these transgressions have will structure this review. received extensive consideration in previous Embarrassment is widespread and can impact research, but many have not. consumers in a multitude of ways. The vast major- Our conceptual framework also considers how ity of research emphasizes consumer embarrass- embarrassment—both felt and anticipated—can be ment in a public context. While the private view measured and differentiated from related has received much less academic attention, it can such as and . We also acknowledge and be equally detrimental, particularly in relation to review individual differences that may moderate consumer behavior. To establish this standpoint, we embarrassment and its downstream consequences. provide an integrated review of consumer embar- Our framework then highlights the diverse implica- rassment, using the framework outlined in Figure 1. tions of embarrassment for consumer behavior, evi- In doing so, we hope to improve our understanding denced by the various coping strategies that of what consumer embarrassment is, how it can be consumers use to manage or prevent embarrass- measured, and how it can most effectively be man- ment and its negative consequences, as well as aged—both by consumers and marketers. While practitioner interventions that aid in this coping. much of consumer embarrassment research consid- Finally, we offer suggestions for future research. ers a single trigger or a specific way to manage Throughout the review, we emphasize important embarrassment, we hope that our framework will similarities between public and private embarrass- encourage future research to examine multiple ele- ment as well as ways in which they diverge. Our ments of embarrassment, and their complex and framework highlights that embarrassment— multi-faceted relationships. whether occurring in a public or private context—

Defining embarrassment (A broader view) Measuring embarrassment Coping with embarrassment

Social context • in public • in private

Embarassment Consumer Transgression • Felt and anticipated embarrassment responses • • Related emotions General triggers • Behavioral • (shame, guilt, , ) Consumption context • Cognitive/Attitudinal triggers

Appraisal Moderators of • Marketer Other-Appraisal embarrassment General • Self-Appraisal interventions • Embarrassability (that aid in coping) • Other individual differences (e.g., gender, self-construal, familiarity)

Figure 1. Overall conceptual framework. A Review of Consumer Embarrassment 3 may arise due to self- or other-appraisal, can be embarrassment, defines embarrassment as an emo- measured via self-reports, and may result in similar tional reaction to “unintentional and undesired physiological manifestations (e.g., blushing). Many social predicaments or transgressions” (Edelmann, transgressions that cause embarrassment, such as 1985, p. 223). The key element of this definition is tripping or misremembering a name, result in the that individuals are concerned with how others will same emotional experience whether in a public or perceive and appraise them (Edelmann, 1985; Sch- private context. However, public and private lenker & Leary, 1982). Research on consumer embarrassment may also diverge in important embarrassment predominantly follows this public ways, such as in subsequent consumer responses to account, requiring the observation and evaluation embarrassing transgressions. For example, while of real or imagined audiences in order to occur embarrassment often causes a to flee a situa- (e.g., Dahl, Manchanda, & Argo, 2001; Lau-Gesk & tion, particularly in a public context, such an inten- Drolet, 2008). tion may offer no reprieve when embarrassment Based on this public view of embarrassment, occurs in private and is due to one’s self-appraisal researchers have developed several models to (Krishna et al., 2015). explain its effect. Building off of Erving Goffman’s We next discuss how embarrassment has been early research in sociology (1955), the dramaturgic defined in the literature, and offer our own broader model suggests embarrassment occurs when people definition that considers embarrassment across pub- are unable to sustain a certain image in order to lic and private contexts and as a result of other- attain desired impressions (Parrott, Sabini, & Silver, and self-appraisal. 1988; Sabini, Siepmann, Stein, & Meyerowitz, 2000). Shakespeare’s famous line “All the world’s a stage” is often used to describe Goffman’s theory (Joosse, 2012). In front of others, we may be uncertain of Defining Embarrassment (A Broader View) how to behave or unable to sustain a particular Embarrassment has been defined in many ways identity, which prompts uncertainty and embarrass- with researchers focusing on the emotional state ment. According to this model, embarrassment will itself, the associated mishaps or predicaments, their not occur in private (i.e., backstage), because indi- appraisal, and the contexts in which it arises. viduals drop their societal roles and concerns. Simi- Researchers generally agree that when embar- larly, the social evaluation model (Manstead & rassed, we feel uncomfortable, awkward, foolish, Semin, 1981; Miller, 1996) and the loss of self-esteem flustered, nervous, and surprised (Goffman, 1955; model (Edelmann, 1987; Modigliani, 1971) empha- Miller, 1992). Where previous definitions of embar- size that embarrassment stems from perceived rassment diverge the most, is regarding the type of undesired appraisal by others or individuals’ con- transgression that triggers embarrassment, the cerns about how others might appraise them. social context in which the transgression occurs Public embarrassment has been tested in a vari- (public or private), and the nature of the appraisal ety of consumer experiments, the majority of which (by self or by others). Given their centrality to our focus on sensitive products such as condoms (Dahl understanding of consumer embarrassment, we et al., 2001; Moore, Dahl, Gorn, & Weinberg, 2006), first discuss social context and appraisal, and then self-help books (Kumar, 2008), or hearing aids turn to the types of transgressions that might cause (Iacobucci, Calder, Malthouse, & Dulachek, 2002). embarrassment. For example, Dahl et al. (2001) show that con- sumers report higher levels of embarrassment when purchasing condoms in front of a confederate (vs. Social Context and Appraisal no confederate) at a real pharmacy, but only when While embarrassment is pervasive in the con- they are less familiar with the product category. In sumer landscape, in both public and private con- a second study, consumers purchase condoms from texts, the vast majority of research suggests a vending machine in an empty but open bathroom embarrassment must occur in a public context and or in an out-of-order empty bathroom. Again, when due to others’ appraisal. We consider how embar- consumers are less familiar with the product cate- rassment has been defined as both a public and pri- gory, they experience greater embarrassment in the vate emotion, and then offer our own integrated open (vs. out-of-order) bathroom, imagining others definition that considers both viewpoints: walking in and seeing their purchase. Although Public (Social) view of embarrassment. The domi- consumers and practitioners alike often focus on nant perspective, the public (social) view of public embarrassment in relation to sensitive 4 Krishna et al. products, embarrassment may influence consumer the private failure and private success conditions. behavior in a variety of other public contexts— Originally, it was posited that loss of situational ranging from speed dating to concerns about how subjective-public-esteem was a necessary condition to dress in a fancy restaurant (Kumar, 2008; Wan, for embarrassment. . . (but, there is) a possibility 2013). Even mundane consumption practices such that loss of situational self-esteem may, after all, be as redeeming coupons may be seen as embarrassing a sufficient condition for embarrassment” (p. 24). in a public context (Brumbaugh & Rosa, 2009). However, and as he states, even in the private con- Private view of embarrassment. By contrast, dition, the results from the anagrams are given to Babcock (1988) suggests that although embarrass- another person in the group, and are not com- ment often appears as a response to the feared pletely private, highlighting the need for further reaction of an audience, it best reflects a concern empirical work. with upholding personal standards, not merely a Focusing more directly on the possibility of concern over what others will think. As such, embarrassment also occurring in private, Higuchi Babcock (1988), Babcock and Sabini (1990) violation and Fukada (2002) conduct a study in which they of personal standards model suggests embarrass- present participants with two embarrassing scenes ment occurs due to a self-perceived discrepancy representing either public (e.g., falling over on a between one’s personal standards and how one crowded platform) or private (e.g., failing an exami- has actually behaved. Similar to other self-consis- nation due to lack of studying) contexts. Partici- tency theories (e.g., cognitive dissonance), conflict pants then rate the scene in terms of how much between one’s behavior and personal beliefs create they believe the experience would lead to embar- distress (Leary & Kowalski, 1997), in this case, rassment. The authors conclude that public embar- embarrassment. rassment is driven by concerns of social evaluation Babcock (1988) articulates this theory with an and uncertainty about how to act around others, example: imagine an individual, who defines him- and that private embarrassment is caused by incon- self based on intelligence and independence, has sistency with one’s self-image and lower feelings of difficulty completing a Calculus problem set and self-worth. ends up looking up answers in the back of his Krishna et al. (2015) develop a typology which book. He may feel embarrassed even though he highlights that embarrassment can occur across believes no one knows of this transgression and no public and private contexts and due to other- and one ever will. Babcock and Sabini (1990) conduct self-appraisal. They test this typology in several several follow-up experiments to test this theory studies. For example, in one study, they ask partici- and find that this type of personal standard viola- pants to imagine experiencing incontinence (the tion is particularly embarrassing when it is per- involuntary leaking of urine); participants then read ceived by the individual as “out of character.” about a drug-purchasing experience for their prob- Integrated view of embarrassment. Some lem, either through a physical (public) or an online researchers have considered both the public and the (private) drugstore. Prior to reading the purchase private aspects of how embarrassment may be gen- scenario, participants are primed for other- versus erated. In Modigliani’s (1971) model, “esteem in the self-appraisal by writing about and providing eyes of the other” (i.e., one’s perceived situational examples for either their own general evaluations public esteem or social image) affects “esteem in of themselves as a person or their perceptions of the eyes of self” (i.e., situational self-esteem), and others’ evaluations. The authors find evidence for the latter is what causes embarrassment. Modigliani embarrassment across all four quadrants of their tests for this model by asking participants to solve typology. hard (leading to failure) or easy (leading to success) Building on this integrated view, we offer a anagrams as part of a group. He considers two sce- broader definition of embarrassment that considers narios: in the public case, others see the participant public and private social contexts as well as other- solving the anagrams; in the private case, they do and self-appraisal: Embarrassment reflects an aver- not. Interestingly, although Modigliani proposes sive emotional state in which one feels chagrin fol- and tests for an indirect model through public eval- lowing deliberation on perceived negative appraisal uation, he also finds support for a “private embar- by others or negative appraisal by oneself for trans- rassment” model directly through self-esteem; gressions that occur either in public or in private however, he does not discuss this model in detail contexts. or explore it further. In his words, “The sole unex- Our definition recognizes a conceptualization of pected result. . .is the significant difference between embarrassment that is broader than what has A Review of Consumer Embarrassment 5 traditionally been considered, extending beyond This conceptualization of embarrassment empha- requirements of “social presence” and “other- sizes that social context and appraisal are orthogo- appraisal.” While Krishna et al. (2015) demonstrate nal. Most research in psychology and consumer that embarrassment can exist in both public and behavior assumes that embarrassment caused by private contexts and due to other- or self-appraisal, any transgression that occurs in a public context is we build on this typology to further articulate how due to concerns about appraisal by others, which the transgressions and the individual’s deliberation results in lower perceptions of one’s presented self on context and appraisal may differ across these sit- (quadrant 1 in Table 1; e.g., Blair & Roese, 2013; uations. We present this integrated view in Table 1. Goffman, 1955). The individual, in turn, deliberates We also note where previous research rests within on the situation from the audiences’ perspective this conceptualization, based on how it incorporates who observes and appraises the transgression. social context and appraisal into the definition of Embarrassment arises due to concerns of others’ embarrassment. negative evaluations of one’s presented self. In

Table 1 Embarrassment Across Social Context and Appraisal

Social context

Appraisal In Public: Others are present In Private: No others are present

Other-Appraisal Transgression: An incident violating social Transgression: An incident violating social (Real or Imagined) conventions occurs conventions occurs Social context: Actor is in public context and Social context: Actor is in private context and perceives or imagines observation of imagines the possibility of observation of transgression by others present transgression by others not currently present Appraisal: Actor deliberates on his/her perceptions Appraisal: Actor deliberates on his/her perceptions of others’ appraisal of the transgression of imagined others’ appraisal of the transgression Transgression example: “Your expired credit card is Transgression example: “Your expired credit card is declined at a checkout line in store, and you declined while trying to make an online don’t have fallback cash. You feel uncomfortable purchase. You cancel the transaction since your while everyone waits for you sort the situation other cards are not available. You can’t help and cancel your purchase.” imagining what others would think if they had observed the incident.” Subset of prior research in this quadrant: e.g. Blair Subset of prior research in this quadrant: e.g. Dahl and Roese (2013), Dong et al. (2013), Eller, et al. (2001), Edelmann (1981), Miller (1996) Koschate, and Gilson (2011), Goffman (1955), Grace (2007, 2009), Keltner and Buswell (1996), Miller (1995), Modigliani (1968), Parrott et al. (1988) Self-Appraisal Transgression: An incident violating social Transgression: An incident violating social conventions or personal codes of conduct occurs conventions or personal codes of conduct occurs Social context: Actor is in public context, but no Social context: Actor is in private context, hence no others observe transgression or the actor does others observe transgression (self as observer) not attend to others’ observation (self as observer) Appraisal: Actor deliberates on his/her own Appraisal: Actor deliberates on his/her own appraisal of the transgression appraisal of the transgression Transgression example: “Your expired credit card is Transgression example: “Your expired credit card is declined at a checkout line in store, and you declined while trying to make an online don’t have fallback cash. You don’t necessarily purchase. You cancel the transaction since your focus on the impression you have left on the other cards are not available. You can’t help cashier or others, but you feel so stupid and thinking how stupid you are and feel ridiculous uncomfortable while you sort the situation and to have gotten yourself into this situation.” cancel your purchase.” Prior research in this quadrant: Krishna et al. (2015) Prior research in this quadrant: Babcock (1988), Higuchi and Fukada (2002), Krishna et al. (2015) 6 Krishna et al. quadrant 2, the transgression occurs in private, (“What computer brand is named after a fruit?”)at without anyone present; however the individual a bar trivia night. This might be an embarrassing imagines the possibility of observation and apprai- transgression because everyone agrees such a ques- sal by others (e.g., Dahl et al., 2001). Embarrass- tion is common knowledge, and for an adult not to ment is caused by concerns about possible negative know the answer is surprising and violates a social evaluations of these imagined others. In the other convention. In contrast, Babcock (1988) recognizes two quadrants, a transgression occurs in public that embarrassment may occur following a trans- (quadrant 3) or in private (quadrant 4). Irrespective gression in which “one has acted in a way that is of the social context, in these latter quadrants, the inconsistent with one’s persona, that is, that one self is the key observer and embarrassment ensues has violated one’s personal standards” (p. 460). For through negative self-appraisal; others’ observation example, as a business professor, one might read a and appraisal does not necessarily occur or need BusinessWeek article and misunderstand a somewhat not be imagined (e.g., Babcock, 1988; Krishna et al., complex marketing concept. Here, no socially 2015). We further articulate how embarrassment accepted codes of conduct are violated, but embar- may differ across the four quadrants of Table 1 rassment occurs due to a breach of one’s own per- with an example of having one’s credit card sonal standards. declined (see Table 1; see also Figure 2 for a gra- We recognize that embarrassment can be experi- phic representation of the example across the four enced when one violates a socially accepted con- quadrants). vention or personal code of conduct, and that the We next focus, in more detail, on embarrassing nature of the transgression may differ based on transgressions and see how they may differ across who is appraising the situation. While other-apprai- the quadrants of Table 1—what might trigger sal typically reflects a social convention violation, embarrassment in public or in private social con- self-appraisal may lead to embarrassment when texts and due to other- or self-appraisal. either a social convention or personal code of con- duct is violated (see Table 1). Next, we consider a wider array of transgres- Embarrassing Transgressions sions that might trigger embarrassment. We discuss The dominant, public, view of embarrassment general triggers that have received consideration in suggests that embarrassment usually follows a psychology and further develop our understanding transgression in the form of violation of socially of triggers of embarrassment in a consumption con- accepted codes of conduct (Miller & Leary, 1992). text. For example, one might feel embarrassment when General triggers. Researchers from psychology shouting out the wrong answer on an easy question have considered a variety of triggers that may

Public context Private context

Declined! Declined!

Other- Appraisal

Declined! Declined!

Self- Appraisal

Figure 2. An example of how embarrassment differs across social context and appraisal (Original graphic design commissioned from www.fiverr.com/quickcartoon). Table 2 Triggers of Consumer Embarrassment

Trigger Explanation General example Consumption context example

Prominent Consumption Context Interpersonal Awkward social encounter Inappropriate interpersonal encounter Being berated by a family member in Arguing with concierge in a hotel Interactions public Center of attention (positive) Being the target of public Being praised by the teacher in front Receiving an excessive compliment from a criticism or banter of the class service employee in front of a new date Center of attention (negative) Receiving excessive praise or Receiving a series of negative comments People commenting about your expensive attention from others on an Instagram post purse when they have much simpler ones Products, Bodily- or sex-related topics Public display or discussion of Watching a sex scene on TV with family Purchasing online pornography or gas Services, sexual or bodily issues prevention medication Communications Other sensitive topics Discussions around money, Making an adverse comment about a Losing one’s cool with a service politics, religion, etc. religious domain at a dinner party employee Consumer Clumsiness and physical Involuntary physical actions, mishaps Tripping, falling, spilling Knocking down a pile of cans in a Incompetence actions supermarket display Uncertainty Not knowing how to behave, what to Being underdressed at a formal function Attending a 5-course dinner at a nice do in a situation restaurant and not knowing what utensils to use Intellectual Not knowing or forgetting something Forgetting the name of an acquaintance Not being able to describe a basic that is expected product problem to a service clerk Physical appearance Self-consciousness around Being conscious about one’s large chest Purchasing large-size clothing or 7 Embarrassment Consumer of Review A appearance-related underwear characteristics Identity Signals Identity-related Breeches to self-image “Liking” a controversial public figure Holding onto one’s attachment to an on Facebook outdated brand 8 Krishna et al. cause embarrassment, the vast majority of which during the purchase and consumption of products reflect a violation of social convention in public and services that are themselves regarded as contexts and due to other-appraisal. Edelmann embarrassing (e.g., Dahl et al., 2001; Grace, 2007)— (1981), for example, proposes a classification of trig- here, the transgression typically violates social con- gers of embarrassment with six categories: failure vention. Embarrassment can also manifest in other to confirm the self-image that was presented to consumer contexts that have received little if any others (e.g., performing poorly in a presentation to attention in academic research, for example, when colleagues), loss of poise and social skill (e.g., stum- voting or sharing controversial political opinions. bling on a rug or forgetting someone’s name), fail- We focus on each of these consumption domains, ure to mesh (e.g., realizing a person is more and discuss the corresponding triggers of embar- important than one assumed), breach of privacy rassment in relation to our conceptualization, and (e.g., bodily noise), overpraise (e.g., being made the also consider transgressions that may violate either undeserving center of attention), and empathic reac- social conventions or personal codes of conduct. tion to someone else’s embarrassment (e.g., watch- Embarrassing interpersonal interactions. Much of ing an extremely bad comedian). Metts and Cupach the marketplace involves interacting with another (1989) develop a similar set of categories, again human being—whether a salesperson or a service reflecting violations of social conventions in public provider, or with other consumers. Previous research contexts and due to other-appraisal: faux pas (inten- examines how such interpersonal interactions in tional acts that prove to be inappropriate when the retail settings can prompt embarrassment, and influ- correct interpretation of the situation becomes clear, ence a variety of consumer behaviors, even when the for example, wearing informal attire to a formal product or service itself is not embarrassing (e.g., function), mistake (intentional acts that would be Grace, 2007, 2009; Verbeke & Bagozzi, 2003). These appropriate but are incorrectly executed, for exam- triggers include awkward social encounters and center ple, forgetting to turn off one’s cell phone before an of attention effects, which both require the presence of important meeting), accident (unintentional acts others (public context). While the center of attention that are inappropriate to the situation, for example, triggers embarrassment through other-appraisal, spilling coffee, tripping), and recipient (predica- awkward social encounters may prompt embarrass- ments arising for the individual due to the behavior ment through other- or self-appraisal. of others, for example, being criticized, receiving Grace (2007) examines the effects of awkward excessive praise). social encounters (i.e., improper, inappropriate or Consumption context triggers. Research on con- ungraceful acts, expression of emotions, and verbal sumer embarrassment is relatively newer, and is blunders) on felt embarrassment and repatronage. predominantly focused on identifying and under- In one experiment, she asks participants to report standing specific isolated instances, as opposed to their own personal embarrassing experiences as such comprehensive categorization attempts of dif- consumers. One participant recalls a particularly ferent triggers. In fact, almost all of the various trig- vivid service encounter: gers identified in psychology also apply to consumption contexts. Consumption contexts, how- I entered a lingerie shop to buy a nice gift for ever, also have their unique characteristics and my girlfriend of 1 year. I approached the coun- specific implications for how felt or anticipated ter and told the sales assistant that I wanted to embarrassment may affect individuals, and should buy some lingerie for my girlfriend. As I am offer additional insights into how embarrassment in my 40s, she must have assumed I was mar- works. In Table 2, we build on various categoriza- ried (which I have never been), and she very tion attempts from psychology and previous sarcastically and loudly snapped at me “why research on consumer embarrassment to propose a don’t you buy some nice lingerie for your wife more comprehensive list of the types of triggers instead!!!!” I was shocked and extremely that are most relevant to consumer behavior, and embarrassed. I don’t know what her problem those that may violate either social conventions or was, but I left in a hurry never to return (and personal codes of conduct. never to forget). I will stick to buying choco- The proposed set of triggers can manifest across lates for my girlfriend in future, it is a lot a range of consumption domains and contexts. Pre- safer!(Grace, 2007, p. 278) vious work demonstrates that consumer embarrass- ment is typically triggered through transgressions The author finds that this type of embarrassment in interpersonal encounters in the market, and caused by service providers is particularly A Review of Consumer Embarrassment 9 damaging, leading to greater felt embarrassment sensitive to buy, ranging from regular products and a higher likelihood of avoiding shopping at such as toothpaste, to moderately sensitive products that store again compared to triggers by other con- such as burial arrangements, and to condemned or sumers. Marketers can offer careful staff training not marketable products such as hard drugs and and standardize service encounters (e.g., design ser- murder for hire. More commonly, products and ser- protocols) in order to mitigate this sort of con- are embarrassing if consumers need or want sumer embarrassment (Grace, 2009). them but are reluctant to seek them out or are Being the center of attention, both negatively, such uncomfortable discussing openly. The majority of as when being the subject of criticism, but also posi- research considering these triggers emphasizes pub- tively, such as when receiving excessive praise, can lic context and others’ appraisal, though some also prompt embarrassment (Metts & Cupach, research has begun to consider how and when 1989). In consumption domains, such negative or these triggers may also prompt consumer embar- positive attention may come from salespeople or rassment in private contexts and due to self-apprai- other consumers, and may trigger embarrassment. sal (Krishna et al., 2015). In fact, Esmark, Nobleb, and Breazeale (2017) Embarrassment due to consumer incompe- demonstrate that simply perceiving that an tence. Embarrassment research from psychology employee is watching a shopper can create embar- documents a variety of triggers based on instances rassment, causing the shopper to either perma- of individual errors and perceived personal failures, nently or temporarily leave the store. The authors which might also directly apply to consumption find, in a field study, that shoppers are significantly contexts. The simple case of clumsiness and involun- more likely to abandon their purchase than to place tary physical actions can generate consumer embar- the product in their cart, when such eye contact is rassment if the triggering incidents occur as part of made with a confederate dressed as an employee. consumption domains—as in the case of knocking Embarrassing products, services, and marketing com- down a pile of cans in a supermarket display. Such munications. Much of the research on consumer acts of consumer clumsiness or physical errors have embarrassment focuses on products and services not yet been the topic of academic study, but could that are inherently more embarrassing than others. be explored as cases of transgressions in public con- Purchase and consumption of these products and sumption contexts. services, such as contraceptives, erectile dysfunction Concerns over incompetent might also be drugs, or treatment for impaired hearing, are gener- triggered through uncertainty or intellectual errors ally deemed embarrassing, as demonstrated in the when consumers might feel stupid for not knowing studies we reviewed in the introduction (Dahl or for forgetting something expected. In a consump- et al., 2001; Iacobucci et al., 2002; Krishna et al., tion context, a consumer might mispronounce a 2015). A predominant portion of such products per- brand name or foreign food when ordering off the tain to bodily- or sex-related topics. Other examples menu. Consumers may seek to demonstrate their noted in previous research include, but are not lim- knowledge when purchasing or reviewing prod- ited to, personal hygiene articles, gas-prevention ucts, but such actions come with potential for medication, pornography, and some medical ser- appearing incompetent to others or oneself (Lutz & vices such as venereal disease treatment, vasec- Reilly, 1974). For example, one may avoid sharing tomies, and abortions (e.g., Dahl et al., 2001; Fost, negative word-of-mouth experiences as doing so 1996; Lau-Gesk & Drolet, 2008; Rehman & Brooks, may signal the individual was unable to get a good 1987; Song, Huang, & Li, 2017; Wilson & West, price, is unknowledgeable about a product or is just 1981). “an overall incompetent consumer” (Philip & Ash- The dominant focus within the field of consumer worth, 2013). behavior has been on such embarrassing, controver- Consumers’ concerns over their physical appear- sial, or so-called “unmentionable” products and ser- ance might also prompt feelings of incompetence, vices (Wilson & West, 1981), which might also and trigger public and private consumer embarrass- relate to other sensitive topics such as political views, ment. Particularly for young women, more than religion, or controversial issues. In their conceptual 50% of whom report being dissatisfied with their paper, Wilson and West (1981) present an overview bodies (Bearman, Presnell, Martinez, & Stice, 2006), of unmentionable products, and suggest a “scale of consumption related to physical appearance, such unmentionability” based on society’s and buyers’ purchasing larger sized clothing, might prompt own attitudes toward specific products. This scale embarrassment. Beyond altering purchase behavior, includes products that would be considered this embarrassment can stimulate other actions such 10 Krishna et al. as compensatory consumption behavior (Dong, embarrassed to say otherwise. In 1982, a poll Huang, & Wyer, 2013). We will revisit this idea showed Tom Bradley, Los Angeles’ first African- while discussing coping with embarrassment. American mayor and a Democrat leading the polls Embarrassment due to negative identity sig- over his white Republic competitor in the race for nals. While much of the research on identity, Governor. When Bradley lost, political scientists uniqueness, and self-expression emphasize their concluded some voters opted to misrepresent their benefits for consumer well-being (e.g., Berger & voting plans in order to avoid anticipated embar- Heath, 2008; Richins, 1994), certain actions may rassment or perceptions of racism (Payne, 1988). come with risk of embarrassment through identity- More recently, Krishna (2016) suggested that voting related triggers. For example, relationships with cer- for Donald Trump over Hilary Clinton in the 2016 tain brands may be embarrassing (Grant & Walsh, U.S. Presidential race may have been perceived as 2009). This “brand embarrassment” may lead con- violating an expected social convention for some sumers to disown favored brands if they perceive voters, leading them to report an “undecided” vote or anticipate feelings of awkwardness or discomfort in the polls, even though they knew they would in using them (Leith & Baumeister, 1996). ultimately vote for Trump; and that this would Beyond traditional consumption, academics and have been one reason for the inaccuracy of the journalists have recently acknowledged the role of polls. identity-related triggers of embarrassment in con- We acknowledge that the instances discussed sumer behavior beyond typical purchase and con- here are not necessarily a fully exhaustive list of the sumption domains, and into the sharing and possible transgressions that might trigger embar- spreading of ideas. Specifically, embarrassment rassment in consumer contexts. We hope that this influences social media use and how we portray discussion and the contents of Table 2, including ourselves online, particularly in conjunction with the examples provided for each category, will stim- various products and brands. Based on personal ulate researchers to think of other triggers not and cultural perceptions, if consumers have tastes included, and also to explore how and when these and preferences, they think will cause others to triggers could occur in public or private contexts. judge them, they are less likely to exhibit these For instance, awkward social encounters may only preferences on social media. In one study con- occur in public, but concerns about one’s physical ducted by Spotify, men and women show highly appearance or competence could exist in either con- similar musical tastes (Van Buskirk, 2014); however, text. Similarly, each of these experiences may Facebook reveals major differences in artists prompt other-appraisal, self-appraisal, or some “liked,” because men seem to publicly affiliate combination of the two. We provided an example themselves with artists they perceive to be more of how one trigger would align with the four quad- masculine. Finally, it may come as a little rants of our integrated conceptualization of embar- that although irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and rassment (the declined credit card as an example of migraines are similarly prevalent, the Facebook consumer error, as presented in Table 1) and will group for migraine sufferers is 2.5 times larger than return to this discussion as an interesting avenue that for consumers from IBS (Stephens- for future research later. Davidowitz, 2017). Identity-related embarrassment concerns may also influence the predictability of political polls, Measuring Embarrassment and could be used to explain the discrepancies between election polls and observed results In the following sections, we first consider felt and (Krishna, 2016, reproduced in Scientific American, anticipated embarrassment; these related, but distinct PBS NewsHour, and The Daily Mail; Williams, emotional experiences are often discussed inter- 2016). Just as concerns of anticipated embarrass- changeably within experimental research. We dis- ment can lead to response biases in other forms of cuss the many direct and indirect ways in which marketing research (Fisher, 1993), when asked embarrassment, both felt and anticipated, can be about future votes, consumers may over-report measured via self-reports, physiological manifesta- plans to vote for candidates they perceive to be tions, and behavioral tendencies, and how each of more popular (Krishna, 2016; Williams, 2016). This these measures are similar or different based on effect, known as the Bradley Effect, is a well-stu- whether the embarrassment occurs in public or in died political phenomenon in which voters tell poll- the private context. We then consider other related sters what they want to hear, because they are emotions such as shame and guilt that often occur A Review of Consumer Embarrassment 11 in conjunction with embarrassment. Finally, we rec- experience is often quite similar whether embarrass- ognize that not all individuals experience embar- ment is prompted by other- or self-appraisal and rassment in the same way and consider individual whether it occurs in a public or private context. differences, which may moderate embarrassment in There may, however, be important differences with a consumer context. regard to behavioral tendencies. We discuss this in further detail below. Self-reported embarrassment. The most widely Felt and Anticipated Embarrassment recognized self-report multi-item scale within con- Our definition of embarrassment emphasizes felt sumer behavior was used by Dahl et al. (2001), embarrassment in response to an embarrassing who asked participants how “embarrassed/uncom- transgression that has occurred or is occurring. fortable/awkward” (7-point scales anchored at “not However, thinking about possible transgressions at all” and “very”) they felt when purchasing con- might trigger anticipated embarrassment, which can doms (also used by Blair & Roese, 2013; Grace, result in a similar emotional experience and can 2007; Krishna et al., 2015; Moore et al., 2006). Other be measured in similar ways (e.g., Bagozzi, Baum- research includes different items that are also clo- gartner, Pieters, & Zeelenberg, 2000; Cohen, Pham, sely related to embarrassment, such as “not at ease, & Andrade, 2008; Roseman, Wiest, & Swartz, ridiculous, stupid, laughable” (Barnier & Valette- 1994). Florence, 2006), “constrained, mortified, self-con- Given the challenges of creating negative emo- scious” (Lau-Gesk & Drolet, 2008; Modigliani, tional experiences in the lab or in online studies, 1971), or “humiliated, foolish, frustrated” (Grace, much of the experimental research across psychol- 2007). As suggested by Krishna et al. (2015) empiri- ogy and consumer behavior involve participants cal work and our current conceptualization, the responding to hypothetical scenarios or accounts of same self-report measures can effectively be used past experiences, which actually captures antici- for multiple types of embarrassment across public pated or remembered embarrassment, but is pre- and private contexts. sented as a proxy for felt embarrassment. For Similar multi-item scales for self-reported embar- example, Tangney, Miller, Flicker, and Barlow rassment have been used in both psychology and (1996) examine embarrassment in an experimental consumer behavior research to capture felt and context by asking participants to remember and anticipated embarrassment. For instance, in one provide detailed written accounts of past embar- study, Apsler (1975) has participants engage in four rassing experiences, and then to rate those experi- either high- or low-embarrassment tasks, such as ences in terms of “how much they experienced laughing for 30 s as if they had just heard a funny being embarrassed (self-conscious/blushed)”. joke or imitating a 5-year-old having a temper tan- In Blair and Roese’s (2013) experiments studying trum versus counting aloud or walking around a embarrassing products and shopping basket com- room. Participants then indicate their reactions to position, participants are told to imagine that they each task by rating them on bipolar adjective scales: are in a store purchasing the products listed on “at ease – self-conscious, poised – awkward, con- their screens (e.g., anti-odor foot powder vs. black strained – free, unembarrassed – embarrassed.” t-shirt) and to report “how embarrassed (uncom- Similarly, in consumer behavior research, Dahl fortable/awkward) they would feel”. In this case, et al. (2001) have participants go through actual participants may be envisioning how they would experiences of condom purchases (for instance, in a feel or perhaps remembering how they have felt in pharmacy or from a vending machine), while similar past experiences. This is just one example to Krishna et al. (2015) have participants respond to highlight that “felt embarrassment” is actually quite scenarios of purchasing Viagra using the same 3- challenging to capture. Below we review some cle- item scale of “embarrassed/uncomfortable/awk- ver ways in which researchers create embarrassing ward” (7-point scales anchored at “not at all” and experiences and capture the emotion via both direct “very”). and indirect measures. Physiological manifestations. Emotions are usu- We consolidate some of these diverse measure- ally accompanied by physiological manifestations in ment approaches in a typology that captures self- the form of internal sensations and external dis- reported embarrassment, and the physiological plays, which have been used by previous research manifestations and behavioral tendencies associated to measure felt embarrassment. For instance, Tang- with embarrassment (e.g., Grace, 2007) (see ney et al. (1996) ask participants to provide detailed Table 3). The overall emotional and physiological written accounts of remembered personal 12 Krishna et al. embarrassing experiences, after which they rate Focusing on direct measurement of physiological their internal sensations at that time, through mea- manifestations, Harris (2001) demonstrates elevated sures such as “I felt physically smaller” or “I felt heart rate and blood pressure during embarrassing blushed,” on 5-point scales anchored at “the feeling experiences. She asks study participants to sing the was mild” and “the feeling was extremely intense.” Star Spangled Banner in front of a video camera and Similarly, Krishna et al. (2015) ask participants to an experimenter, followed by a resting period. rate the physiological changes they thought they Baseline and continuous physiological measures are would experience in the described embarrassing taken through all phases, using a noninvasive small scenarios, based on their agreement with the mea- finger cuff. Harris reports elevated blood pressure sures: “I would feel my face turning red” and “I and heart rate levels for the embarrassment phase. would feel blood rushing through my body” (7- Participants’ heart rates return back to normal dur- point scales anchored at “not at all likely” and ing the resting period; however, blood pressure “very likely”). They find that the expected internal remains elevated. Similarly, Miller (1987) focuses on sensations for anticipated embarrassment are simi- another physiological marker, electrodermal activity lar in nature across social context and other- vs. (EDA), which captures below-skin sweating self-appraisal, but could differ in intensity such that through observing changes in the resistance of the public embarrassment leads to greater feelings of skin to small electrical currents. In one of his stud- blood compared to embarrassment in private ies, he reports increased levels of EDA for partici- contexts. pants while watching someone perform

Table 3 Measures of Embarrassment

Measurement Method

Self-Reported Embarrassed-Uncomfortable-Awkward Embarrassment [e.g., Dahl et al. (2001), Blair and Roese (2013), Grace (2007)] Not at ease, ridiculous, stupid, laughable, mortified, self-conscious, humiliated, foolish, frustrated, abashed, flustered, con- strained. . . [e.g., Barnier and Valette-Florence (2006), Lau-Gesk & Drolet; Grace (2007)] Physiological Reported Physiological Manifestations: Manifestations Blushing, shaking, heart racing, nausea, crying [Grace (2007)] (“Underwent physical changes – blushed, heart rate up, etc.”) [Tangney et al. (1996)] “I would feel my face turning red”/“I would feel blood rushing through my body” [Krishna et al. (2015)] “Felt physically smaller/felt isolated from others/felt superior/inferior to others/time moved quickly” [Tangney et al. (1996)] Observed Physiological Manifestations: Heart rate, blood pressure [e.g., Harris (2001)] Stress activation (EDA: Electrodermal activity, sweating) [Miller (1987)] Blushing [e.g., Drummond and Lim (2000), Shearn, Bergman, Hill, Abel, and Hinds (1990, 1992)]: (i)facial blood flow (pulse transducer attached to the forehead) (ii)cheek and ear temperature (surface thermistor) (iii)cheek and ear coloration (photoplethysmography/personal observation by other) Magnetic resonance imaging (i.e., MRI) [Muller-Pinzler et al. (2015)] Behavioral Reported Behavioral Tendencies: Tendencies “Wanted to be with others/hide”/“Wanted to admit/hide what was done”/“Wanted to make amends”/ “Wished had acted differently” [Tangney et al. (1996)] I would“ want to leave the scene/hide from everyone/get away from the situation”/“I should do everything to never be in this situation again” [Krishna et al. (2015)] Observed Behavioral Tendencies: Smiling, self-touching, gaze shifts, looking down. . . [e.g., Keltner (1995), Marcus and Miller (1999)] Attitudes toward embarrassing products or experiences [e.g., Apsler (1975), Keltner (1995), Marcus and Miller (1999)] Purchase intentions toward embarrassing products, e.g., douche vs. shampoo [Lau-Gesk and Drolet (2008)] Choice of embarrassing vs. nonembarrassing products [Kumar (2008)] A Review of Consumer Embarrassment 13 embarrassing acts, and uses this as a proxy for acti- using this methodology, but we would expect simi- vated (empathic) embarrassment in observers. lar neurological reactions across public and private People tend to generally agree upon and accu- contexts and appraisal sources, but this remains an rately identify the expression of embarrassment interesting question for future research. through external signals (e.g., Keltner, 1995; Kelt- Behavioral tendencies. The negative experience ner & Buswell, 1996; Marcus & Miller, 1999). In of felt or anticipated embarrassment typically acti- addition to blushing, embarrassment manifests vates action tendencies such as avoidance, escape, itself in frequent gaze shifts, looking down, smil- and repair. Previous research has attempted to cap- ing, and touching one’s own face. More specifi- ture embarrassment indirectly through self-report cally, Keltner and Buswell (1996) use the following measures of such tendencies. For instance, in their to characterize the embarrassed facial displays study (described in the previous section on physio- used in their research: “a non-Duchenne smile (in- logical measures), Tangney et al. (1996) also ask volving only the zygomatic major muscle which raises participants to rate the embarrassing experiences the corners of the mouth, but not the cheeks), lip press, they had described for resulting tendencies (5-point gaze down, head movement to the left and down, scales, anchored at e.g., “wanted to hide what I had and a face touch” (p. 255, clarification added in done” vs. “wanted to admit what I had done,” and italics; see Figure 3). “wanted to be with others” vs. “wanted to hide Some recent work has begun to use magnetic from others”). resonance imaging (MRI) technology to investigate Krishna et al. (2015) inquire about participants’ neural correlates of felt embarrassment. Muller-Pin- escape versus prevention tendencies through their zler et al. (2015) create conditions of public failure agreement with the statements “I would want to leave for participants as a trigger of embarrassment, by the scene/hide from everyone/get away from the sit- having them engage in a cognitive estimation task uation” and “I should do everything to never be in in the scanner for which bogus feedback about their this situation again,” respectively, on 7-point scales performance is shared with a group of confederates. anchored at “not at all likely” and “very likely.” In The researchers observe that the brain regions relation to our conceptualization, they observe a sig- hypothesized to be associated with an overall feel- nificant difference between different types of public ing of embarrassment are indeed activated (e.g., and private embarrassment in their accompanying dorsal anterior insula: , amygdala: affect and action tendencies. They find that the public (vs. pri- socially evaluative context). To our knowledge, no vate) social context is characterized with stronger research has yet examined private embarrassment escape action tendencies, and that self-appraisal leads to stronger preventive action tendencies compared to other-appraisal, presumably since escaping one’sself is not perceived to be possible. We will revisit these tendencies while discussing coping with consumer embarrassment and consider some strategies that may be effective in a private context and when embar- rassment is driven by self-appraisal. Some researchers opt for a more subtle approach to capture embarrassment from the resulting atti- tudes and behaviors. For instance, Lau-Gesk and Drolet (2008) ask participants to review pre-tested print ads for douche (embarrassing) or shampoo (nonembarrassing) products and then rate the extent to which they would consider buying the advertised product (7-point scales anchored at “def- initely” and “definitely not”). More indirectly, Kumar (2008) asks study participants to choose six products out of a list of nine (with six neutral and three embarrassing products on the list). Kumar’s dependent measure is how likely the participants are to remove embarrassing products from their Figure 3. Prototypical display of embarrassment (reproduced from shopping basket, which the author uses as a proxy Keltner, 1995, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, p. 449). for embarrassment. 14 Krishna et al.

Often when researchers measure and discuss embarrassment, shame, and guilt, the researchers embarrassment, they must consider it with respect ask study participants to describe multiple different to related negative self-conscious emotions such as events that made them feel each target emotion. shame and guilt. In the next section, we discuss The 757 instances generated by the participants are these sometimes intertwined emotional experiences coded into 45 categories such as physical pratfall, to clarify what constitutes embarrassment as a dis- violation of privacy, failure at duties, and damage crete emotion. to others or objects. Based on a review of the cate- gories, the authors conclude that embarrassment is associated with transgressions of conventions that Related Emotions govern public interactions (public embarrassment), Embarrassment is often confused with shame, shame with failure to meet important personal stan- guilt, social anxiety, and regret, which are some- dards (private embarrassment per our conceptual- times felt alongside each other. Consider for a ization), and guilt with actions that harm others or moment, giving a bad speech: you might be embar- violate duties. rassed about your performance, while also feeling Krishna et al. (2015) focus on public versus pri- anxious about the large audience looking at you, vate social context more closely (in their study 1 shame about your inadequacy, regret for not where they ask participants to report own embar- preparing better, and guilt for poorly representing rassing experiences), and also measure other emo- your superior. Thus, when measuring embarrass- tions such as shame, guilt, , , etc. for ment, researchers often consider these other related the recalled embarrassing instances. As expected, emotions. embarrassment is the most intensely felt emotion In fact, early research in psychology treated for both public and private contexts, followed by embarrassment as synonymous with shame and shame. The authors do not find any significant dif- social anxiety (Izard, 1971; Lewis, 1971). How- ferences in the intensity of reported embarrassment ever, some later conceptual and empirical work or shame across public and private contexts. has focused on establishing embarrassment and Krishna et al.’s (2015) research suggests context is the other discrete emotions as unique experi- not enough to distinguish embarrassment and ences. For instance, Keltner and Buswell (1996) shame. focus on differential facial expressions of these Building on our conceptualization, we differenti- emotions. In their study, participants view slides ate embarrassment from related emotions by focus- of facial expressions for 14 emotions, each posed ing on the content of specific transgressions. In by the same two female and two male individu- order for any of these emotions to occur, a negative als. These emotions include, for example, anger, transgression takes place, which is perceived to be disgust, and , as well as the likely relevant and harmful to one’s well-being. Where facial displays for embarrassment, shame, and they differ, though, is in the content of the incident guilt (established by Keltner, 1995). Participants and the aspect of personal well-being at stake have 10 s to review each slide and to select “the (Lazarus, 1991). While embarrassing transgressions word that best matched the emotion displayed are characterized by violations of social conventions bythepersonintheslide.” Participants accu- or personal codes of conduct, guilt is said to be rately identify the displays of embarrassment and triggered when the individual perceives violation of shame, that is, the emotions acted out as embar- duties or real or potential harm to others in his rassment and shame are also identified as embar- behaviors (Tangney, 1991). Shame, on the other rassment and shame. Participants rarely judge hand, occurs following perceived failure to live up displays of embarrassment as shame (7%) or the to significant others’ expectations as well as one’s displays of shame as embarrassment (3.4%), sup- superordinate personal expectations (Lazarus, porting the assertion that they are distinct emo- 2001). Regret ensues in relation to tions. Accordingly, the experience and over personal decision-making and perception that manifestation of these related emotions include one has made a wrong choice (Inman & Zeelen- unique aspects, which are also inherently recog- berg, 2002). Anxiety, can be triggered by any inci- nized by laypersons. dent that prompts uncertainty or existential threat In another study, Keltner and Buswell (1996) (Lazarus, 2001). attempt to identify the conceptual distinctiveness of On the whole, the same transgression might selected discrete emotions by focusing on their dif- have multiple components or could be interpreted ferential triggers. In an effort to differentiate differently based on individual or contextual A Review of Consumer Embarrassment 15 factors, creating perceived threat for these different embarrassed” to “not the least embarrassed” (e.g., aspects of well-being, and triggering multiple emo- “You are muttering aloud to yourself in an appar- tions simultaneously. Previous research also notes ently empty room when you discover someone else that in empirical work, related emotions, such as is there”). All scenarios in this scale refer to trans- embarrassment and shame, are found to co-occur gressions that occur in a public context and suggest based on the same transgression, but with the one direct or implied appraisal by others. being felt more intensely (Borg, Staufenbeil, & By contrast, the Susceptibility to Embarrassment Scherer, 1988; Kaufman, 1989). To further articulate Scale assesses personality characteristics related to these differences, we return to our discussion of the embarrassment rather than reactions to potentially example of having one’s credit card declined during embarrassing situations. It captures an individual’s a purchase, and consider how that transgression propensity to feel emotionally exposed, vulnerable, that might trigger these different negative self-con- and concerned about making mistakes in front of scious emotions. If, for example, you forgot your others. Participants respond to statements such as card had reached its limit and you actually have “Sometimes I just feel exposed” and “I feel inade- another card sitting at home, you may experience quate when I am talking to someone I just met” on embarrassment. If the reason you have reached 7-point scales anchored at “not at all like me” and your credit limit is because you recently lost your “very much like me”. While the scale also includes job and now cannot pay for basic necessities, you general statements such as “I feel unsure of myself” may feel shame. If you anticipate calls from debt and “I am not easily embarrassed (reversed),” most collectors, anxiety may result. If you realize you of the items emphasize public embarrassment and overspent on frivolous purchases and cannot pay other-appraisals similar to the Embarrassability for basic needs, you may feel guilt. Finally, if you Scale. Researchers could consider developing an purchased an expensive item that cannot be embarrassability scale or adding measures to these returned, which is causing the problem, regret is scales based on our broader view. For example, more likely. Also, the evaluative processes and items like “What other people think of me is very experience of these discrete emotions might further important” could be supplemented with “What I trigger related emotional reactions, such as regret- think of myself is very important”. ting your carelessness on keeping track of your Other individual differences. Past research has financials after you go through the embarrassing studied the correlation between embarrassment experience of having your card declined. (and embarrassability) and individual difference The nature and magnitude of all discrete emo- variables such as gender, self-esteem, familiarity, tions, and embarrassment specifically, will inher- and culture. Interestingly, women tend to be more ently depend on individual characteristics, which easily embarrassed than men (Miller, 1995) and we discuss next. work harder than men to remediate embarrassment (Gonzales, Pederson, Manning, & Wetter, 1990). For instance, Parrott et al. (1988) present study partici- Moderators of Embarrassment pants embarrassing story contexts involving dating Not all consumers experience embarrassment in and sex (e.g., asking a coworker out for a date and the same way. Research recognizes that some indi- being declined, making a sexual advance toward a viduals are more prone to experiencing embarrass- date and being declined). After imagining them- ment than others (e.g., Miller, 1995; Modigliani, selves in the situation, participants respond to the 1968). We first discuss this general disposition of question “At this point in time, how embarrassed embarrassability as a central moderator of embar- do you feel?” on a 7-point scale anchored at “not at rassment research, and then review other individual all” and “extremely”. The authors find that women differences that can also moderate consumers’ levels report being more embarrassed than men. of embarrassment. High self-esteem can be an effective buffer Embarrassability. Modigliani’s (1968) Embar- against embarrassment as an individual trait. Past rassability Scale and Kelly and Jones’ (1997) Suscep- research demonstrates negative correlation between tibility to Embarrassment Scale are the most general self-esteem and embarrassability (e.g., Kelly prominent trait measures that consider proneness to & Jones, 1997; Modigliani, 1968). The explanation embarrassment. The Embarrassability Scale asks behind these findings reflects the commonly held participants to rate how embarrassed they might public view of embarrassment: high self-esteem feel in various potentially embarrassing scenarios inhibits one’s of others’ negative evalua- on a 9-point scale ranging from “acutely tions and might decrease the severity of 16 Krishna et al. embarrassment felt in public. We posit that Researchers interested in new products and inno- researchers should also consider self-esteem in rela- vation adoption could further consider embar- tion embarrassment across both public and private rassment, and how familiarity and education can contexts and due to both other- and self-appraisal. minimize this perceived risk as it relates to both For example, some research suggests that self- other- and self-appraisal. esteem affects individual’s self-judgment and Limited research has considered how some related negative emotional experiences (e.g., other individual or cultural factors interact with shame), but only when an event is interpreted from embarrassability. Embarrassment has been shown a third-person (i.e., other-appraisal) perspective. to operate similarly across diverse cultures with When interpreted from a first-person (i.e., self- its triggers, processes, and consequences (e.g., appraisal) perspective, self-esteem has no effect on Edelmann et al., 1989). However, a cultural con- the individual’s emotional reactions (Libby, Valenti, trast may be in its potential severity across collec- Pfent, & Eibach, 2011). Thus, while high self-esteem tivist and individualist cultures in relation to how might protect against the negative effects of other’s the self is construed. More specifically, interdepen- appraisal, high self-esteem may do little to protect dent self-construal is shown to be positively corre- against embarrassment due to self-appraisal. lated with a greater concern for public image and Extant research recognizes that self-esteem may accordingly increased propensity for embarrass- be delineated into specific aspects such as appear- ment, whereas independence is associated with ance self-esteem, academic self-esteem, and social lower embarrassability (e.g., Singelis, Bond, Shar- self-esteem (Marsh, 1986). It is feasible that these key, & Lai, 1999). As suggested in the process individual aspects of self-esteem (vs. a more global explanation, this research follows the public view self-esteem) may influence consumers’ embarrass- of embarrassment focusing on other-appraisal. Our ment across contexts. For example, one’s high aca- broader conceptualization suggests an opposite demic self-esteem may protect when embarrassed prediction for how private embarrassment, over failing a spelling bee in front of others, but through self-appraisal, might relate more posi- only when embarrassment is due to others’ apprai- tively with independent self-construal, and sal and not one’s own self-appraisal where it can remains to be tested. Future research could also backfire in line with one’s higher personal stan- consider how other individual differences such as dards of oneself. self-concept clarity (i.e., the extent to which con- Previous research in both psychology and con- tents of an individual’s self-concept are clearly sumer behavior also recognizes a negative corre- defined, internally consistent, and stable; Camp- lation between familiarity and embarrassability bell, 1990) might also influence both public and (Dahl et al., 2001; Miller, 1996). Because uncer- private aspects of embarrassment. tainty surrounding social situations and the related indecisiveness in terms of how to behave has been shown to be an important precursor of Coping with Consumer Embarrassment embarrassment (Miller, 1995; Silver, Sabini, Par- rott, & Silver, 1987), it follows naturally that a Marketers have long tried to smooth the path to lack of familiarity with a situation can be a dri- purchase and consumption of potentially embar- ver of public embarrassment. This individual dif- rassing products and awkward service experiences. ference, in particular, has interesting implications Our review of the various triggers of consumer for marketers, and should be considered in rela- embarrassment in the previous section highlights tion to private embarrassment and self-appraisal the potential adverse implications of embarrass- as well. For example, marketers selling “really ment in the marketplace further. We first review new” and unfamiliar sensitive products may mit- the strategies used by consumers in this section to igate embarrassment through informative adver- cope with embarrassment, and then discuss the tising which seeks primarily to educate various techniques marketers employ to assist in consumers about the product and enhance feel- this coping. ings of familiarity. Such attempts might help to redefine perceived social conventions and also Consumer Responses personal codes of conduct. Many new products (e.g., Google Glass, the Segway) failed because Consumers usually have to cope with anticipated of concerns of embarrassment coupled with pro- or felt embarrassment in consumption contexts. duct category unfamiliarity (Annacchino, 2003). While their inclination may be to avoid A Review of Consumer Embarrassment 17 embarrassing products or awkward service experi- Consumers may also seek to purchase potentially ences, when avoidance is not possible, they need to embarrassing products from salespeople who are of find ways to manage or repair the negative conse- similar age and gender, and whom they find to be quences of felt embarrassment. Building on Folk- less attractive. In one study, Wan and Wyer (2015) man and Lazarus’ (1988) model of stress and ask female participants to test a thermal waist belt. coping, Moore et al. (2006) identify that coping Each of the participants is placed in a room where with embarrassment can be behavioral, where the she can try on the waist belt and also see some emphasis is on changing or avoiding the perceived advertising posters about the product. The posters embarrassment trigger (e.g., “I do not buy this pro- are manipulated to show the belt as an embarrass- duct”), or cognitive, where the emphasis is on ing (weight-reduction) or nonembarrassing (muscle- managing the distressing emotion by changing ) product. A physically attractive man interpretation of the situation (e.g., “I shouldn’tbe serves as the salesperson to all the participants; embarrassed because everybody buys condoms”). however, he is presented as either attractive (wear- Both types of coping may be used in a given situa- ing a well-fitted t-shirt and styled hair) or of aver- tion (Folkman & Lazarus, 1988). age attractiveness (wearing an oversize t-shirt and Behavioral strategies. Consumers often develop ungroomed, with glasses that are found to detract their own specific strategies to avoid, escape, or from his attractive appearance). Participants in the repair embarrassment in the marketplace. For embarrassing condition report lower purchase example, a consumer may avoid buying condoms intentions when the salesperson is attractive than or using condoms when embarrassment is antici- when he is not. pated (Brackett, 2004). Consumer embarrassment, Blair and Roese (2013) examine another - felt or anticipated, can also lead individuals to leave ing behavioral strategy consumers use to manage or avoid potentially negative service experiences. or avoid embarrassment in a shopping context. For example, many consumers report avoiding cer- Prior research and intuition suggest that when pur- tain health-related services, and when they do seek chasing a potentially embarrassing product (e.g., healthcare, they report a tendency to avoid dis- diarrhea medication), consumers may benefit from cussing potentially embarrassing healthcare ques- adding other products to their shopping basket, tions with their service providers, which has because the extra products may detract from the important health, social, and economic conse- focal (embarrassing) product (Brackett, 2004). Pic- quences for individuals and at a societal level ture an excited teenage couple purchasing condoms (Hook et al., 1997; McCambridge & Consedine, at a local drugstore. Concerned that the cashier 2014). may judge them, they quickly add a collection of When public embarrassment is anticipated, some other items: candy bars, toothpaste, and magazines consumers may choose to do online shopping, to with the that the condoms may go unno- minimize exposure to others when buying embar- ticed. In their research, Blair and Roese (2013) sug- rassing products, and other consumers may shop in gest, however, that this tactic may not always be physical stores but in low-store-traffic hours, in effective. Purchasing additional products lowers order to minimize exposure to the observation and embarrassment only when the additional purchases appraisal of others. Consumers may also avoid are perceived to counterbalance (vs. complement) potentially embarrassing experiences by not shop- the undesired identity communicated via the ping in their own neighborhood for sensitive prod- embarrassing product. Across five studies, the ucts (Moore et al., 2006), or avoid specific shopping authors find that products that are perceived to be venues if they anticipate awkward service encoun- related may actually exacerbate embarrassment ters. In all these situations, consumers either try to (e.g., a bottle of lotion and a box of tissues are more be alone, or around others who ignore them as a closely related to condoms than to anti-gas medi- means of behavioral coping with public embarrass- cine). ment (Dahl et al., 2001; Lau-Gesk & Drolet, 2008). Dong et al. (2013) report a different behavioral Interestingly, shoplifting is one extreme way to strategy to avoid social attention. They find that avoid interacting with salespeople (Mitchell, Bala- when prompted with embarrassing scenarios, con- banis, Schlegelmilch, & Cornwell, 2009). Products sumers prefer to wear larger and darker sunglasses such as hemorrhoid creams and condoms are some in order to symbolically “hide their face” and avoid of the most commonly stolen items “simply because social attention. Note that the authors do not explic- they may be too embarrassing to obtain in a legiti- itly test whether consumers feel more anonymous mate manner” (Toth, 2007, p. 2). when wearing sunglasses; this could be an 18 Krishna et al. interesting avenue for future research. Consumers able to cope with and experience less embarrass- may also be inclined to repair a threatened self- ment when purchasing certain sensitive but essen- image when faced with embarrassment through tial products (e.g., condoms, HIV testing kits) in reparatory or compensatory purchases. Specifically, either public or private contexts. when consumers with low self-esteem are embar- rassed, they are more likely to purchase cosmetics Marketer Interventions that Aid in Coping with (Dong et al., 2013), which have been shown to Embarrassment repair one’s threatened self-image. Cognitive/Attitudinal strategies. Marketers and Marketers also make efforts to help consumers consumers alike tend to emphasize behavioral avoid or minimize embarrassment, most of which strategies for coping; but, they should also consider centers around public embarrassment and other- the positive impact of cognitive strategies to avoid appraisal. One such technique is to change product embarrassment. As outlined earlier, embarrassment packaging. Marketers can consider how the colors is a self-conscious emotion and requires deliberation and details of the package design may increase con- in order to be experienced (Lazarus, 1991). Thus, by spicuousness of the product and influence public changing the nature of deliberation, embarrassment embarrassment, both at the time of purchase and can be minimized, even when the trigger cannot be during usage. For instance, Barbara E. Kahn notes, completely avoided. “If you have a feminine hygiene product and you Moore et al. (2006) outline seven positive can change the packaging to make it look very thoughts, under the umbrella term of “cognitive design-y and sophisticated, that helps that it strategies,” which individuals can use to manage doesn’t look like some medical weird thing in your negative emotion-focused cognitions when pur- check-out basket” (Knowledge@Wharton, 2014). chasing embarrassing products. For example, the One group of students developed a discreet pack- authors ask participants to picture themselves age for sanitary napkins (see Figure 4a). They rec- buying condoms and further instruct them to ognized a problem in the marketplace: women are manage the negative affect with various thought often embarrassed to carry feminine products. exercises (e.g., think “I shouldn’t be embarrassed Thus, the students developed a package in which because condoms are important to have and the product information is displayed on one side of use.”) Utilizing these thought exercises do reduce the package, which can then be flipped to show embarrassment. Researchers and practitioners only a brown bag. Similarly, companies such as interested in these types of cognitive coping Trojan offer condoms in an “elegant travel case” mechanisms for consumers can look toward other that “fits discreetly in your pocket or purse” (see research in psychology that considers how indi- Figure 4b). viduals may mentally disengage, deny the nega- Other similar techniques in assisting consumers tive consequences of an event, or positively with their own behavioral coping strategies could reinterpret the negative event in some way when be to offer alternative purchase methods such as dealing with negative emotional experiences (Yi & vending machines or online sales and mail deliv- Baumgartner, 2004). Specifically, in the case of ery of sensitive products to minimize the threat of embarrassment, consumers may cope with the public observation and appraisal (Kumar, 2008). negative experience by denying their feelings of As discussed earlier, however, these kinds of mar- awkwardness, reappraising the situation as not keting strategies will not be effective in offsetting embarrassing, or planning to engage in some the negative consequences of violations of per- rational action intended to eliminate the threat sonal codes of conduct or social conventions as a (Laux & Weber, 1991). source of private embarrassment. Some marketers, Our broader view of embarrassment, outlined perhaps recognizing this limitation, instead focus previously (Table 1), suggests that these cognitive their efforts on changing social conventions and strategies will be very valuable in reducing embar- lifting individual stigmas around sensitive prod- rassment in private contexts with self-appraisal ucts and services. Wilson and West (1981) suggest since behavioral coping strategies will not be that some embarrassing products such as sanitary equally applicable in these situations (Krishna et al., napkins might require hyperactive marketing to 2015). If marketers can offer these cognitive strate- overcome a resistance threshold that inherently gies to change social or individual perceptions exists in the category. This strategy is nicely around social norms and conventions, and also per- exemplified by Tampax, a leading tampon com- sonal codes of conduct, consumers may be better pany, and Thinx, a “period-proof” underwear A Review of Consumer Embarrassment 19

(a) Prototype feminine hygiene product packaging* (Regular) (Flipped) Product information is displayed Product information is not displayed

(b) “Discreet travel pack” condom packaging example

Figure 4. Product packaging examples to minimize public embarrassment. (a) Prototype feminine hygiene product packaging *Used with designers’ permission (https://www.packagingoftheworld.com/2016/04/sanitary-napkins-student-project.html; Shah & Chougule, 2016).(b)“Discreet travel pack” condom packaging example. company, both of which have made efforts to General Discussion and Avenues for Future normalize discussion on menstruation through Research their advertisements, social media, and other com- munications. Similarly, Depend, an adult diaper How embarrassing it is to be human. – Kurt company, created an “underawareness” campaign Vonnegut in which they “show the world that wearing a different kind of underwear is no big deal” (see Embarrassment is a pervasive and powerful emo- Figure 5). In their advertisements and social tion that can affect consumers in varied and mean- media campaigns, they depict attractive young ingful ways. Whether the result of leaving a consumers wearing Depend (without pants) while restaurant with spinach in one’s teeth or toppling going about their daily business; they also encour- over while practicing yoga at a public studio, age consumers to share their own “pants drop” embarrassment is an important part of the con- images with the hashtag #DropYourPants sumer landscape, and has received limited attention (McQuilken, 2014). Rather than focusing specifi- in the literature, which is surprising given its ubiq- cally on their product or brand, they emphasize uitous nature. Embarrassment—or concerns about shifting cultural norms and minimizing embarrass- anticipated embarrassment—influence consumers in ment surrounding an entire product category. a variety of contexts ranging from purchasing prod- Other companies in product categories such as ucts, to political voting, to socializing with friends. hair-regrowth medication (e.g., Rogaine) may ben- Our review provides a conceptual framework to efit from a similar marketing strategy, which may improve our understanding of what consumer mitigate different types of embarrassment across embarrassment is, how it operates, and how it can public and private context, as well as other- and most effectively be managed, to stimulate new self-appraisal. research within this domain. 20 Krishna et al.

Figure 5. Depend’s “underawareness” campaign: Marketing communication example to minimize (public and private) embarrassment from category.

Researchers primarily emphasize embarrassment measurement, and coping. Limited research actually as a social emotion, but some more recent work rec- creates embarrassing situations in an experimental ognizes that embarrassment can also be a private context and captures felt embarrassment (see Apsler, emotion, and importantly, that the consequences 1975; Dahl et al., 2001; Harris, 2001; and Miller, 1987 are equivalent whether embarrassment is experi- for notable exceptions). It is worth noting, however, enced in a public or private context. We build upon that anticipated embarrassment may be particularly and further this view by defining embarrassment relevant in a consumption context where embarrass- through an explicit review of (a) the transgressions ment is more often due to “intentional” actions that that may trigger consumer embarrassment, (b) the can be anticipated and controlled (e.g., purchasing social context of the transgression (in public or in condoms) compared to other types of everyday private), and (c) the appraisal of the transgression embarrassment that often occurs more accidentally (by self or by others), recognizing that all three or unintentionally (e.g., tripping). Anticipated must be deliberated on by the individual in order embarrassment is particularly relevant from a man- for embarrassment to be felt or anticipated. agerial perspective as it may lead consumers to avoid As outlined in Table 1, although most research purchasing some products and also influence emphasizes a public context with concern about whether those products are used after purchase i.e., other-appraisal, embarrassment can occur in a pri- consumed at all (e.g., Jiang, Drolet, & Scott, 2018). vate context and as a result of self-appraisal. By Hence, a better understanding of embarrassment defining embarrassment within this conceptualiza- —felt and anticipated— offers important practical tion, our review considers (consumer) embarrass- implications for marketers, public policy makers, ment that extends beyond traditional requirements and individual consumers seeking to mitigate or of social presence and social evaluation. We estab- better cope with this negative emotional experience. lish the discrete nature of embarrassment further through a structured discussion of its measures, Future Research Directions and also by deliberating on how it relates to and differs from other negative self-conscious emotions. Our conceptualization acknowledges that embar- Our review also proposes a more comprehensive rassment is quite similar across public and private categorization of consumption context transgres- contexts—often with similar triggers, measures, and sions that may trigger embarrassment, and how negative consequences. However, as little is known consumers may opt to cope with its consequences. about private embarrassment, more research is Specifically, in line with our conceptualization, we needed to understand its consequences and how emphasize the questions of when consumer embar- best to avoid and cope with this form of embarrass- rassment may be driven by self-appraisal or in pri- ment. For instance, our review suggests that while vate contexts, and how marketers can mitigate felt embarrassment may be similar across public embarrassment in these situations. and private contexts and other- versus self-apprai- As highlighted earlier, due to the challenges of sal (Krishna et al., 2015), anticipated embarrassment creating negative emotional experiences in the lab or may differ. Because consumers typically equate in online studies, much of the experimental research embarrassment with public contexts and appraisal across psychology and consumer behavior dis- of others, they may more readily anticipate embar- cussing embarrassment actually capture anticipated rassment in these situations (e.g., giving a speech in or remembered embarrassment (e.g., Blair & Roese, public, quadrant 1 of Table 1). Thus, one of the 2013; Tangney et al., 1996). We discuss this impor- benefits of our research, in highlighting these other tant point in our consideration of triggers, types of embarrassment, may be to enable A Review of Consumer Embarrassment 21 individuals and marketers to anticipate embarrass- Future work could consider these subtler degrees of ment across the other quadrants. In fact, it is possi- embarrassment across domains and how they exist ble that because consumers are less likely to in conjunction with other emotions (e.g., surprise) in anticipate embarrassment across the three quad- either a public or private consumer context. rants with some aspect of privacy (quadrants 2–4of There is also great potential for research from Table 1), they may even be less prepared when consumer behavior to consider additional measures they do experience embarrassment and therefore of embarrassment especially for such subtle trans- the emotional reaction may be even more detrimen- gressions in the marketplace. Future research on tal. consumer embarrassment can move beyond using Our conceptualization and emphasis on embar- measures of purchase behavior and self-reports, rassment as a deliberative and negative self-con- and instead utilize more complex methodologies scious emotion paves the way for further research such as measurement of physiological manifesta- on other similar emotions (e.g., regret, guilt, tions or physical behavioral displays (e.g., gaze shame). Each of these emotions may occur in public shifts), as suggested by our review of psychology or private contexts and be driven by deliberation research. on other-appraisal, self-appraisal, or some combina- Future research can also try to identify situations tion of the two. Future research can also consider where embarrassment is more damaging—under how and when these other self-conscious emotions the influence of individual or situational factors. may occur simultaneously in public or private con- For instance, a yoga aficionado may be more texts, and how recognition of self-appraisal influ- embarrassed if she stumbles in a yoga class versus ences the emotional experience. a novice. This embarrassment may be particularly One central goal of this work is to stimulate new strong when self-appraisal occurs, regardless of research on embarrassment specific to consumer whether the incident occurs in her private home domains, both in public and private. The overall studio or in front of a large class. While self-esteem structure of the review, as outlined in Figure 1, pro- has been shown to serve as a protection mechanism poses a comprehensive research agenda for future to the negative consequences of embarrassment work on consumer embarrassment that could center (e.g., Modigliani, 1968; Parrott et al., 1988), specific explicitly on the various triggers, measures, or con- self-esteem might trigger harsher self-evaluations. sequences of embarrassment as well as coping Embarrassment is a universal and timeless emo- strategies—any of which could be quite fruitful. For tion, however, what is considered embarrassing may example, we apply prior research from psychology differ across cultures, or even within a culture as on triggers for embarrassment to various consumer social conventions evolve. Existing cross-cultural domains, several of which have received no atten- research on embarrassment is predominantly limited tion in the consumer behavior literature. How to the study of public embarrassability in relation to might being the positive center of attention in a self-construal as discussed earlier (Singelis et al., consumer context (e.g., winning a random drawing 1999). Cross-cultural and temporal research on other at checkout) create feelings of embarrassment? aspects of embarrassment, especially in relation to its Some limited research has considered consumer different or changing triggers, and the different ways incompetence (e.g., Lutz & Reilly, 1974), but feel- consumers might opt to cope with embarrassment, ings of incompetence, or concerns of potential might be a fruitful avenue for future research. Simi- incompetence—in public or private contexts—may larly, some products that were previously considered drive a variety of consumer behaviors. “unmentionable,” such pregnancy tests, may be con- Our review identifies the implications of con- sidered less so in time; on the other hand, products sumer embarrassment in contexts more obviously such as cigarettes or fur coats that may not have associated with embarrassment (e.g., purchasing been embarrassing in the past, may now be embar- diarrhea medication), but also recognizes that embar- rassing to use, in some parts of the world and for rassment can occur in more subtle, nuanced forms, some segments of consumers (Katsanis, 1994). There- as part of the consumption landscape. For example, fore, while Wilson and West (1981) outline some consumers may feel embarrassment after dropping a specific examples of sensitive products, it is impor- shopping list in a puddle outside of the grocery store. tant for marketers to consider these shifts when mak- Consumers may also experience more subtle forms ing marketing decisions, particularly around of embarrassment in other marketplace domains segmentation and targeting. such as social media and political voting, which have The notion of brand embarrassment can also be received little consideration in academic research. studied with a more systematic consideration of 22 Krishna et al. social relationships and reference groups (Escalas & Bagozzi, R. P., Baumgartner, H., Pieters, R., & Zeelenberg, Bettman, 2003). Miller (2001) discusses how some M. (2000). The role of emotions in goal-directed behav- social groups are more likely to “suffer the highest ior. In S. Ratneshwar, D. G. Mick, & C. Huffman potential personal embarrassment from contraven- (Eds.), The why of consumption: Contemporary perspectives – ing the standards of acceptable taste” through their on consumer motives, goals, and (pp. 36 58). New York: Routledge. consumption choices (p. 573). Individuals more Barnier, V. D., & Valette-Florence, P. (2006). Provocative likely to experience embarrassment are those with a sexually appealing advertisements: The influence of clear sense of rules and belongingness when it embarrassment on attitude towards the ad. Advances in comes to fashion or brands; these individuals and Consumer Research, 7, 215–222. groups have stringent guidelines as to what is Bearman, S., Presnell, P., Martinez, E., & Stice, E. (2006). acceptable among and firmly insinuated into their The skinny on body dissatisfaction: A longitudinal social groups (Miller, 2001). study of adolescent girls and boys. Journal of Youth and There are also examples of actions by social Adolescence, 35, 217–229. groups mitigating embarrassment. For example, Berger, J., & Heath, C. (2008). Who drives divergence? Malcolm Gladwell (2002) discusses Hush Puppies Identity signaling, outgroup dissimilarity, and the shoes in The Tipping Point. As he notes, in the early abandonment of cultural tastes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 593–607. 90s, the shoes were considered obsolete and “subur- Blair, S., & Roese, N. J. (2013). Balancing the basket: The ban”, potentially quite embarrassing. But, when a “ ” role of shopping basket composition in embarrassment. group of trendy hipsters in Manhattan began Journal of Consumer Research, 40, 676–691. purchasing the shoes, they became cool, and sud- Borg, I., Staufenbeil, T., & Scherer, K. R. (1988). On the denly not participating in this trend was embarrass- symbolic basis of shame. In K. R. Scherer (Ed.), Facets ing. Limited research considers how social groups of emotion: Recent research (pp. 79–98). Hillsdale, NJ: might influence embarrassment, yet this is an area Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. ripe for research. Brackett, K. P. (2004). College students’ condom purchase – From a managerial perspective, it is unreasonable strategies. Social Science Journal, 41, 459 464. to assume marketers can fully preclude the onset of Brumbaugh, A. M., & Rosa, J. A. (2009). Perceived dis- consumer embarrassment or its negative conse- crimination, cashier metaperceptions, embarrassment, and confidence as influencers of coupon use: An ethno- quences. Still, they may be able to mitigate con- ’ racial-socioeconomic analysis. Journal of Retailing, 85, sumers public and private embarrassment. Offering 347–362. consumers more inconspicuous means of purchase Campbell, J. D. (1990). Self-esteem and clarity of the self- and consumption, such as online sales or discreet concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, packaging strategies, can provide consumers some 538–549. protection from social observation and hence public Cohen, J. B., Pham, M. T., & Andrade, E. B. (2008). The embarrassment. Discreet packaging may even help nature and role of affect in consumer behavior. In C. P. with private embarrassment, but this remains to be Haugtvedt, P. Herr & K. Kardes (Eds.), Handbook of con- tested. We suggest that more work needs to be done sumer psychology (pp. 297–347). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence to address consumers’ concerns for private embar- Erlbaum. rassment—this may require more subtle and com- Dahl, D. W., Manchanda, R. V., & Argo, J. J. (2001). Embarrassment in consumer purchase: The role of plex strategies in which marketers can aid in social presence and purchase familiarity. Journal of Con- shifting social norms and individual standards as to sumer Research, 28, 473–481. what constitutes appropriate behavior. Dong, P., Huang, X. I., & Wyer, R. S. Jr (2013). The illu- sion of saving face: How people symbolically cope with embarrassment. Psychological Science, 24, 2005–2012. References Drummond, P. D., & Lim, H. K. (2000). The significance of blushing for fair- and dark-skinned people. Personal- Annacchino, M. A. (2003). New product development. Bos- ity and Individual Differences, 29, 1123–1132. ton, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann. Edelmann, R. J. (1981). Embarrassment: The state of Apsler, R. (1975). Effects of embarrassment on behavior research. Current Psychological Reviews, 1, 125–138. toward others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol- Edelmann, R. J. (1985). Individual differences in embar- ogy, 32, 145–153. rassment: Self-consciousness, self-monitoring and Babcock, M. K. (1988). Embarrassment: A window on the embarrassability. Personality and Individual Differences, 6, self. JournalfortheTheoryofSocialBehaviour, 18,459–483. 223–230. Babcock, M. K., & Sabini, J. (1990). On differentiating Edelmann, R. J. (1987). The psychology of embarrassment. embarrassment from shame. European Journal of Social Chichester, UK: Wiley. Psychology, 20, 151–169. A Review of Consumer Embarrassment 23

Edelmann, R. J., Asendorpf, J., Contarello, A., Zammuner, sociological factors affecting attitudes and behavioral V., Georgas, J., & Villanueva, C. (1989). Self-reported intentions for customers resisting the purchase of an expression of embarrassment in five European coun- embarrassing product. Advances in Consumer Research, tries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 20, 357–371. 30, 236–240. Eller, A., Koschate, M., & Gilson, K. (2011). Embarrass- Inman, J. J., & Zeelenberg, M. (2002). Regret in repeat ment: The ingroup-outgroup audience effect in faux purchase versus switching decisions: The attenuating pas situations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, role of decision justifiability. Journal of Consumer 489–500. Research, 29, 116–128. Escalas, J. E., & Bettman, J. R. (2003). You are what they Izard, C. E. (1971). The face of emotion. New York, NY: eat: The influence of reference groups on consumers’ Appleton-Century-Crofts. connections to brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, Jiang, L., Drolet, A., & Scott, C. A. (2018). Countering 13, 339–348. embarrassment-avoidance by taking an observer’s per- Esmark, C. L., Nobleb, S. M., & Breazeale, M. J. (2017). spective. Motivation and Emotion, 42, 748–762. I’ll be watching you: Shoppers’ reactions to perceptions Joosse, P. (2012). The presentation of the charismatic self of being watched by employees. Journal of Retailing, 93, in everyday life: Reflections on a Canadian new reli- 336–349. gious movement. Sociology of Religion, 73, 174–199. Fisher, R. J. (1993). Social desirability bias and the validity Katsanis, L. (1994). Do unmentionable products still of indirect questioning. Journal of Consumer Research, 20, exist?: An empirical investigation. Journal of Product and 303–315. Brand Management, 3,5–14. Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. (1988). Coping as a mediator Kaufman, G. (1989). The psychology of shame: Theory and treat- of emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, ment of shame-based syndromes. New York, NY: Springer. 54, 466–475. Kelly, K. M., & Jones, W. H. (1997). Assessment of dispo- Fost, D. (1996). No thanks, I’m just browsing. American sitional embarrassability. Anxiety Stress and Coping, 10, Demographics, 18,25–27. 307–333. Gladwell, M. (2002). The tipping point. Boston, MA: Back Keltner, D. (1995). Signs of appeasement: Evidence for the Bay Books. distinct displays of embarrassment, , and Goffman, E. (1955). On face-work: An analysis of shame. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, ritual elements in social interaction. Psychiatry, 18, 441–454. 213–231. Keltner, D., & Buswell, B. N. (1996). Evidence for the dis- Gonzales, M. H., Pederson, J. H., Manning, D. J., & Wet- tinctiveness of embarrassment, shame, and guilt: A ter, D. W. (1990). Pardon my gaffe: Effects of sex, sta- study of recalled antecedents and facial expressions of tus, and consequence severity on accounts. Journal of emotion. Cognition & Emotion, 10, 155–172. Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 610–621. Knowledge@Wharton (2014). Shhh! Marketing embarrass- Grace, D. (2007). How embarrassing! An exploratory ing products in the age of social media. (August 12). study of critical incidents including affective reactions. Retrieved from http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/ Journal of Service Research, 9, 271–284. article/marketing-embarrassing-products/. Grace, D. (2009). An examination of consumer embarrass- Krishna, A. (2016). Voters’ embarrassment and of ment and repatronage intentions in the context of emo- social stigma messed with pollsters’ predictions. tional service encounters. Journal of Retailing and The Conversation, (November 6). Retrieved from Customer Services, 16,1–9. http://theconversation.com/voters-embarrassment-and- Grant, I., & Walsh, G. (2009). Exploring the concept of fear-of-social-stigma-messed-with-pollsters-predictions- brand embarrassment: The experiences of older adoles- 68640. cents. Advances in Consumer Research, 36, 218–224. Krishna, A., Herd, K. B., & Aydinoglu, N. Z. (2015). Wet- Harris, C. R. (2001). Cardiovascular responses of embar- ting the bed at twenty-one: Embarrassment as a private rassment and effects of emotional suppression in a emotion. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25, 476–486. social setting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Kumar, R. (2008). How embarrassing: An examination of 81, 886–897. the sources of consumer embarrassment and the role of Higuchi, M., & Fukada, H. (2002). A comparison of four self-awareness. Advances in Consumer Research, 35, causal factors of embarrassment in public and private 1006–1007. situations. The Journal of Psychology, 136, 399–406. Lau-Gesk, L., & Drolet, A. (2008). The publicly self-con- Hook, E. W., Richey, C. M., Leone, P. A., Bolan, G., scious consumer: Prepared to be embarrassed. Journal of Spalding, C., Henry, K., & Celum, C. L. (1997). Delayed Consumer Psychology, 18, 127–136. presentation to clinics for sexually transmitted diseases Laux, L., & Weber, H. (1991). Presentation of self in cop- by symptomatic patients: A potential contributor to ing with anger and anxiety: An intentional approach. continuing STD morbidity. Sexually Transmitted Dis- Anxiety Research, 3, 233–255. eases, 24, 443–448. Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Progress on a cognitive-motiva- Iacobucci, D., Calder, B. J., Malthouse, E. C., & Dulachek, tional-relational theory of emotion. American Psycholo- A. (2002). Psychological, marketing, physical, and gist, 46, 819–834. 24 Krishna et al.

Lazarus, R. S. (2001). Relational meaning and discrete emo- embarrassment. In M. S. Clark (Ed.), Emotion and social tions. In K. R. Scherer, A. Schorr & T. Johnstone (Eds.) behavior (pp. 202–221). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, research Mitchell, V. W., Balabanis, G., Schlegelmilch, B. B., & (pp. 37–67). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Cornwell, T. B. (2009). Measuring unethical consumer Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1997). Social anxiety. behavior across four countries. Journal of Business Ethics, New York, NY: Guilford Press. 88,395–412. Leith, K. P., & Baumeister, R. F. (1996). Why do bad Modigliani, A. (1968). Embarrassment and embarrassabil- moods increase self-defeating behavior? Emotion, risk ity. Sociometry, 31, 313–326. tasking, and self-regulation. Journal of Personality and Modigliani, A. (1971). Embarrassment, facework, and eye Social Psychology, 71, 1250–1267. contact: Testing a theory of embarrassment. Journal of Lewis, H. B. (1971). Shame and guilt in neurosis. New York: Personality and Social Psychology, 17,15–24. International Universities Press. Moore, S. G., Dahl, D. W., Gorn, G. J., & Weinberg, C. B. Libby, L. K., Valenti, G., Pfent, A., & Eibach, R. P. (2011). (2006). Coping with condom embarrassment. Psychol- Seeing failure in your life: Imagery perspective determi- ogy, Health & Medicine, 11,70–79. nes whether self-esteem shapes reactions to recalled Muller-Pinzler, L., Gazzola, V., Keysers, C., Sommer, J., and imagined failure. Journal of Personality and Social Jansen, A., Frassle, S., Einhauser, W., Paulus, F. M., & Psychology, 101, 1157–1173. Krach, S. (2015). Neural pathways of embarrassment Lutz, R. J., & Reilly, P. J. (1974). An exploration of the and their modulation by social anxiety. NeuroImage, effects of perceived social and performance risk on con- 119, 252–261. sumer information acquisition. Advances in Consumer Parrott, W. G., Sabini, J., & Silver, M. (1988). The roles of Research, 1, 393–405. self-esteem and social interaction in embarrassment. Manstead, A. S., & Semin, G. R. (1981). Social transgres- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14, 191–202. sions, social perspectives, and social . Moti- Payne, G. (1988). Political communication and persuasion. vation and Emotion, 5, 249–261. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. Marcus, D. K., & Miller, R. S. (1999). The perception of Philip, M., & Ashworth, L. (2013). Concealing your con- “live” embarrassment: A social relations analysis of sumer stupidity: How the fear of appearing as an class presentations. Cognition and Emotion, 13, 105–117. incompetent consumer reduces negative word-of- Marsh, H. W. (1986). Global self-esteem: Its relation to mouth. Advances in Consumer Research, 41, 576–577. specific facets of self-concept and their importance. Rehman, S. N., & Brooks, J. R. (1987). Attitudes toward Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1224– television advertisements for controversial products. 1236. Journal of Healthcare Marketing, 7,78–83. McCambridge, S. A., & Consedine, N. S. (2014). For whom Richins, M. L. (1994). Special possessions and the expres- the bell tolls: Experimentally-manipulated disgust and sion of material values. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, embarrassment may cause anticipated sexual healthcare 522–533. avoidance among some people. Emotion, 14, 407. Roseman, I. J., Wiest, C., & Swartz, T. S. (1994). Phenomenol- McQuilken, T. (2014). Kimberly-Clark urges people to ogy, behaviors, and goals differentiate discrete emotions. drop their pants. Brand Marketing, (August 4). Retrieved JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology, 67,206–221. from https://www.adweek.com/brand-marketing/ Sabini, J., Siepmann, J., Stein, J., & Meyerowitz, M. (2000). kimberly-clark-urges-people-drop-their-pants-159284/. Who is embarrassed by what? Cognition and Emotion, Metts, S., & Cupach, W. R. (1989). Situational influence 14, 213–240. on the use of remedial strategies in embarrassing Schlenker, B. R., & Leary, M. R. (1982). Social anxiety and predicaments. Communication Monographs, 56, 151–162. self-presentation: A conceptualization and model. Psy- Miller, R. S. (1987). Empathic embarrassment: Situational chological Bulletin, 92, 641–669. and personal determinants of reactions to the embar- Shah, D., & Chougule, C. (2016). Sanitary napkins (stu- rassment of another. Journal of Personality and Social Psy- dent project). Packaging of the world, (April 05). chology, 53, 1061–1069. Retrieved from https://www.packagingoftheworld.c Miller, R. S. (1992). The nature and severity of self- om/2016/04/sanitary-napkins-student-project.html. reported embarrassing circumstances. Personality and Shearn, D., Bergman, E., Hill, K., Abel, A., & Hinds, L. Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 190–198. (1990). Facial coloration and temperature responses in Miller, R. S. (1995). On the nature of embarrassability: blushing. Psychophysiology, 27, 687–693. , social evaluation, and social skill. Journal of Shearn, D., Bergman, E., Hill, K., Abel, A., & Hinds, L. Personality, 63, 315–339. (1992). Blushing as a function of audience size. Psy- Miller, R. S. (1996). Embarrassment: Poise and peril in every- chophysiology, 29, 431–436. day life. Guilford, CT: Guilford Press. Silver, M., Sabini, J., Parrott, W. G., & Silver, M. (1987). Miller, D. (2001). Consumption: Critical concepts in the social Embarrassment: A dramaturgic account. Journal for the sciences. London, UK: Routledge. Theory of Social Behavior, 17,47–61. Miller, R. S., & Leary, M. R. (1992). Social sources and Singelis, T. M., Bond, M. H., Sharkey, W. F., & Lai, C. S. interactive functions of emotion: The case of Y. (1999). Unpacking culture’sinfluence on self-esteem A Review of Consumer Embarrassment 25

and embarrassability: The role of self-construals. Journal Retrieved from https://insights.spotify.com/us/2014/ of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30), 315–341. 02/10/men-and-women-as-music-fans/. Song, X., Huang, F., & Li, X. (2017). The effect of embar- Verbeke, W., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2003). Exploring the role rassment on preferences for brand conspicuousness: of self- and customer-provoked embarrassment in per- The roles of self-esteem and self-brand connection. Jour- sonal selling. International Journal of Research in Market- nal of Consumer Psychology, 27,69–83. ing, 20, 233–258. Stephens-Davidowitz, S. (2017). Don’t let Facebook make Wan, L. C. (2013). Culture’s impact on consumer com- you miserable. The New York Times, (May 6). Retrieved plaining responses to embarrassing service failure. Jour- from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/06/opinion/ nal of Business Research, 66, 298–305. Sunday/dont-let-facebook-make-you-miserable.html. Wan, L. C., & Wyer, R. S. Jr (2015). Consumer reactions Tangney, J. P. (1991). Moral affect: The good, the bad, to attractive service providers: Approach or avoid? and the ugly. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Journal of Consumer Research, 42, 578–595. 61, 598–607. Williams, J. (2016). The Trump effect. U.S. News & World Tangney, J. P., Miller, R. S., Flicker, L., & Barlow, D. (1996). Report, (July 1). Retrieved from https://www. Are shame, guilt, and embarrassment distinct emotions? usnews.com/news/articles/2016-07-01/are-voters-too- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1256–1269. embarrassed-to-say-they-support-trump. Toth, C. G. (2007). Shyness as a mediating factor in theft of Wilson, A., & West, C. (1981). The marketing of unmen- embarrassing items (dissertation thesis). Los Angeles, CA: tionables. Harvard Business Review, 59,91–102. Alliant International University. Yi, S., & Baumgartner, H. (2004). Coping with negative Van Buskirk, E. (2014). How men and women differ as emotions in purchase-related situations. Journal of music fans: The outliers. Spotify Insights, (February 10). Consumer Psychology, 14, 303–317.