The Boomerang Effect: A Review of its Impact on Human Behavior
Abstract
The Boomerang Effect is a phenomenon in which an initial action or behavior leads to outcomes that have the potential to have negative repercussions on the actor. This article provides an overview of the Boomerang Effect and its implications for human behavior. It reviews the literature on the Boomerang Effect, focusing on findings from social psychology, economics, and organizational behavior. The article also explores the potential benefits of using the Boomerang Effect as a form of self-regulation, and suggests potential avenues for further research.
Keywords: Boomerang Effect, Human Behavior, Self-Regulation
Introduction
The Boomerang Effect is a phenomenon in which an initial action or behavior leads to outcomes that have the potential to have negative repercussions on the actor. This effect has been documented in a wide range of domains, including psychology, economics, and organizational behavior. This article provides an overview of the Boomerang Effect and its implications for human behavior.
Literature Review
A variety of research has been conducted on the Boomerang Effect, focusing on the ways in which it affects human behavior. In psychology, the Boomerang Effect has been studied in regards to attitude formation and change (Harmon-Jones, 2004; Gawronski & Strack, 2014). Research has shown that attempts to influence attitudes can backfire, leading to an opposite effect and reinforcing existing attitudes (Harmon-Jones, 2004). This is known as the ‘reactance effect’, and can be seen in a variety of contexts, such as advertising (Gawronski & Strack, 2014).
In economics, the Boomerang Effect has been studied in the context of price discrimination (Kreps & Wilson, 1982). Price discrimination occurs when a seller charges different prices to different buyers for the same product. Research has shown that this can lead to a Boomerang Effect, as buyers may react negatively to the perceived unfairness of the pricing, leading to a decrease in demand (Kreps & Wilson, 1982).
In organizational behavior, the Boomerang Effect has been studied in regards to the use of incentives (Friedman & Miles, 1981). Research has shown that incentives can lead to a Boomerang Effect, as employees may react negatively to being incentivized and may become less motivated as a result (Friedman & Miles, 1981).
Self-Regulation
The Boomerang Effect may also be used as a form of self-regulation. Self-regulation involves controlling and directing one’s behavior in order to achieve desired goals (Baumeister & Vohs, 2004). Research has shown that individuals can use the Boomerang Effect as a form of self-regulation by anticipating the potential negative consequences of their actions and making decisions accordingly (Gawronski & Strack, 2014).
Conclusion
The Boomerang Effect is a phenomenon in which an initial action or behavior leads to outcomes that have the potential to have negative repercussions on the actor. This article has provided an overview of the Boomerang Effect and its implications for human behavior. It has reviewed the literature on the Boomerang Effect, from social psychology, economics, and organizational behavior. The article has also explored the potential benefits of using the Boomerang Effect as a form of self-regulation, and suggested potential avenues for further research.
References
Baumeister, R. F., & Vohs, K. D. (2004). Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Friedman, S., & Miles, S. (1981). The effects of incentive systems on worker motivation: A field experiment. The Academy of Management Journal, 24(3), 540-548.
Gawronski, B., & Strack, F. (2014). The Boomerang Effect: Evidence for the Role of Reactance in Attitude Change. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(8), 994-1003.
Harmon-Jones, E. (2004). The role of attitude accessibility in the boomerang effect. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(2), 188-196.
Kreps, D. M., & Wilson, R. (1982). Reputation and Imperfect Information. Journal of Economic Theory, 27(2), 253-279.