some thoughts of repetition in the moment is enough to create much of the satiating effects of choosing. In contrast, asking participants to rate clarity each time had no effect on satiation. The underlying mechanism here seems specific to the notion of reflection on the repetition of the experience itself, and not the repetition of asking the same question again and again. That is, the potential annoyance of answering a question each time did not increase satiation the same as making repetition salient did, and this account does not explain our findings. Beyond showing thoughts of repetition as an underlying process, this study also helped rule out some alternative explanations. It could be argued that the mediation in Study 2 did not fully capture thoughts of repetition in the moment because the measure could be taken only after the experience. Thoughts of repetition were instead directly manipulated in the present study to further establish causality and the role of this theoretical construct of ongoing reflections during the experience. This study also showed that the underlying process was exclusive to thoughts about repetition (as thoughts of clarity had no effect). The specificity of this result rules out the explanation that asking about thoughts of repetition became boring, acted as a marker of consumption (Wansink, 2004), or depleted regulatory resources (Vohs et al., 2008). We also performed additional analyses that ruled out decision time and stimuli mix as explanations (see Web Appendix). As well, we tested for any differences in attrition rates (Zhou & Fishbach, 2016). Consistent with our other studies, the overall attrition rate was low (11.34%), and did not differ by conditions (see Web Appendix). Choosing increased satiation because it triggered reflections on the overall repetitiveness inherent in the ongoing experience. Study 5
some thoughts of repetition in the moment is enough to create much of the satiating effects of choosing. In contrast, asking participants to rate clarity each time had no effect on satiation. The underlying mechanism here seems specific to the notion of reflection on the repetition of the experience itself, and not the repetition of asking the same question again and again. That is, the potential annoyance of answering a question each time did not increase satiation the same as making repetition salient did, and this account does not explain our findings. Beyond showing thoughts of repetition as an underlying process, this study also helped rule out some alternative explanations. It could be argued that the mediation in Study 2 did not fully capture thoughts of repetition in the moment because the measure could be taken only after the experience. Thoughts of repetition were instead directly manipulated in the present study to further establish causality and the role of this theoretical construct of ongoing reflections during the experience. This study also showed that the underlying process was exclusive to thoughts about repetition (as thoughts of clarity had no effect). The specificity of this result rules out the explanation that asking about thoughts of repetition became boring, acted as a marker of consumption (Wansink, 2004), or depleted regulatory resources (Vohs et al., 2008). We also performed additional analyses that ruled out decision time and stimuli mix as explanations (see Web Appendix). As well, we tested for any differences in attrition rates (Zhou & Fishbach, 2016). Consistent with our other studies, the overall attrition rate was low (11.34%), and did not differ by conditions (see Web Appendix). Choosing increased satiation because it triggered reflections on the overall repetitiveness inherent in the ongoing experience. Study 5
z2g0121645381.docx