Sadness increases how much decision makers pay to acquire goods, even when decision makers are unaware of it. This effect is coined the “misery-is-not-miserly effect”. The paper that first established this effect is the second most-cited article appearing in Psychological Science in 2004. In light of its impact, the present study sought to assess whether the misery-is-not-miserly effect would replicate (a) in a novel context and (b) even when another way of alleviating a sense of loss (i.e., compensatory consumption) was available. Results revealed that the effect replicated in the novel context and, despite a prediction otherwise, even when individuals had an opportunity to engage in compensatory consumption. Moreover, a meta-analysis of the original effect and that observed in the present study yielded a small-to-medium effect (Cohen’s d = 0.43). As such, the present study lends evidentiary support to the misery-is-not-miserly effect and provides impetus for future research exploring the impact of sadness on consumer decision-making, specifically, and of emotion on decision processes, more generally.
Garg, Nitika, Lisa A. Williams, and Jennifer S. Lerner. "The Misery-Is-Not-Miserly Effect Revisited: Replication Despite Opportunities for Compensatory Consumption." PLoS ONE 13.6 (June 2018).