@article{TopolinskiZuernSchneider2015,
  author    = {Topolinski, Sascha and Z{\"u}rn, Michael and Schneider, Iris K.},
  title     = {What's in and what's out in branding? A novel articulation effect for brand names},
  series = {Frontiers in Psychology},
  volume    = {6},
  journal   = {Frontiers in Psychology},
  number    = {585},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00585},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-143036},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {The present approach exploits the biomechanical connection between articulation and ingestion-related mouth movements to introduce a novel psychological principle of brand name design. We constructed brand names for diverse products with consonantal stricture spots either from the front to the rear of the mouth, thus inwards (e.g., BODIKA), or from the rear to the front, thus outwards (e.g., KODIBA). These muscle dynamics resemble the oral kinematics during either ingestion (inwards), which feels positive, or expectoration (outwards), which feels negative. In 7 experiments (total N = 1261), participants liked products with inward names more than products with outward names (Experiment 1), reported higher purchase intentions (Experiment 2), and higher willingness-to-pay (Experiments 3a-3c, 4, 5), with the price gain amounting to 4-13\% of the average estimated product value. These effects occurred across English and German language, under silent reading, for both edible and non-edible products, and even in the presence of a much stronger price determinant, namely fair-trade production (Experiment 5).},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{HommersLewandEhrmann2012,
  author    = {Hommers, Wilfried and Lewand, Martin and Ehrmann, Dominic},
  title     = {Testing the moral algebra of two Kohlbergian informers},
  series = {Ps{\´i}cologica},
  volume    = {33},
  journal   = {Ps{\´i}cologica},
  number    = {3},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-133917},
  pages     = {515-532},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {This paper seeks to unify two major theories of moral judgment: Kohlberg's stage theory and Anderson's moral information integration theory. Subjects were told about thoughts of actors in Kohlberg's classic altruistic Heinz dilemma and in a new egoistical dilemma. These actors's thoughts represented Kohlberg's stages I (Personal Risk) and IV (Societal Risk) and had three levels, High, Medium, and Low. They were presented singly and in a 3 x 3 integration design. Subjects judged how many months of prison the actor deserved. The data supported the averaging model of moral integration theory, whereas Kohlberg's theory has no way to handle the integration problem. Following this, subjects ranked statements related to Kohlberg's first four stages in a procedure similar to that of Rest (1975). Higher score went with larger effect of Societal Risk as predicted by Kohlberg's theory. But contrary to Kohlberg's theory, no age trends were found. Also strongly contrary to Kohlberg's theory, effects of Personal Risk (Stage I) and Societal Risk (Stage IV) correlated positively.},
  language  = {en}
}