Valenced Attributions and Risk in New-Product Decisions: How Why Indicates What's Next

David Forlani, Orville C. Walker

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

10 Scopus citations


Based in a new-product decision-making context, this article poses the question, "how, and to what extent, do prior outcomes, and the reasons given to account for those outcomes, influence a marketing manager's future new-product selection (choice) and support (dollar commitment) decisions?" The study's hypotheses are developed by integrating the motivational qualities of Weiner's attribution theory with the behavioral predictions of four popular risk perspectives: prospect theory, the hot-hand effect, the competency hypothesis, and risk as hazard. The research question is reflected in two sets of hypotheses that experimentally examine the relationship between valenced (was the outcome good or bad) attributions (why did the outcome happen) and changes in the riskiness (chance and size of loss) of managers' new-product introduction decisions. Three-way interactions are found that support the study's attribution-based framework and address predictive differences among the four risk perspectives. Implications for the theories examined and the management of the new-product development process are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)395-432
Number of pages38
JournalPsychology and Marketing
Issue number5
StatePublished - May 2003


Dive into the research topics of 'Valenced Attributions and Risk in New-Product Decisions: How Why Indicates What's Next'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this