Almost everyone practices secret consumer behaviors at one time or another, consuming things/paying for services that they keep secret from those close to them; the guilt leads to greater relationship investment

Secret consumer behaviors in close relationships. Danielle J. Brick, Kelley Gullo Wight, Gavan J. Fitzsimons. Journal of Consumer Psychology, June 30 2022. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1315

Abstract: Although close relationships are often characterized by openness and disclosure, in the present research, we propose that there are times when individuals choose not to tell close others about their consumer behavior, keeping it a secret. For example, one partner may eat a candy bar on the way home from work, hide a package that was delivered to the house, or hire a cleaning service and not tell the other partner. We theorize that this type of consumer behavior is both common and mundane. That is, the consumption itself is minor—and has likely been done with the partner's knowledge in the past—but is being intentionally kept from the partner. We further investigate whether such behavior has downstream effects on the relationship, despite its mundaneness. Five studies support our conceptualization of secret consumer behaviors in close relationships and illustrate one consequence: guilt from secret consumption leads to greater relationship investment. This research explores a common, yet understudied, area of consumer behavior and highlights areas for future research. Thus, we contribute to the literature by being the first work to examine emotional, behavioral, and relational aspects of secret consumer behavior.

General Discussion

People commonly keep consumption a secret from close others. It tends to be mundane consumer behavior, but due to the nature of secrecy (i.e., intentional nondisclosure), it can have consequences for the relationship. By investigating the nature of secret consumer behaviors in relationships and examining emotional, behavioral, and relational outcomes, this research contributes to the literatures on close relationships (e.g., Brick & Fitzsimons, 2017; Caprariello & Reis, 2011; Finkel et al., 2015; Wight et al., 2022), social influences (e.g., Argo, 2020; Dzhogleva & Lamberton, 2014; McFerran et al., 2010; Ordabayeva & Chandon, 2011; Wood & Hayes, 2012), and secrecy in consumption (e.g., He et al., 2021; Rodas & John, 2020). This research also opens the door for future research to examine many more questions regarding the antecedents, methods, and consequences of secret consumer behavior (SCB) in close relationships. In the present research, we were agnostic as to why people keep SCBs, but future research should investigate relational motivations of SCBs. For example, one reason why an individual could choose to keep a SCB from a close other is to avoid a fight (e.g., secretly buying a shirt to avoid fighting about spending money). Another reason could be to help their partner (e.g., secretly eating candy in order to help their partner stick to their diet). In the shirt example, the person is keeping the secret for prevention reasons, and, in the candy example, the person is keeping the secret for promotion reasons (e.g., Regulatory Focus Theory; Higgins, 1998). Similarly, while we find that most people engage in SCB in close relationships, future research could examine antecedents to the tendency to do so. For example, consumers with a high need for independence may be more likely to engage in SCB, since it could give a sense of autonomy within an otherwise interconnected relationship. Another possibility is that attachment styles within a given relationship (Bowlby, 1982) affect the propensity to engage in SCB within that relationship. Those with a secure attachment to their relationship may ironically be more likely to keep SCBs as they may feel more confident that it would not threaten the relationship. In line with prior relational work (e.g., Slepian et al. 2017), we focused on the intent to conceal and were agnostic about the way in which the secret was kept. However, there are multiple ways in which individuals may keep a secret (e.g., omission, avoidance, lying; Thomas & Jewell, 2019). Future research could explore whether there are differences in relational outcomes depending upon the method for keeping the secret (e.g., lying may make the same SCB seem more severe than if it were kept via omission). Relatedly, we focused on relatively mundane consumer behaviors, but it is possible that some SCBs are more severe. In such cases, their relational outcomes may reflect the negative outcomes of the more severe general secrets that are typically studied in social psychology. While we do not find evidence of this in the current research (all interactions with how big of a deal the SCB is on both guilt and relationship investment are non-significant, p’s > .18), future research seems warranted. 

Additionally, while we focus on the effects of keeping SCBs (as opposed to disclosure), future research on confession seems warranted. Prior work has shown that confessing selfcontrol failures can affect subsequent self-control (Lowe & Haws, 2019); might confessing SCBs increase feelings of visibility and therefore decrease future secrecy? Could it bring people closer together? This reasoning opens questions about the potential relational effects of confessing SCBs depending upon to whom the secret is confessed: targets or non-targets. Future research could also examine other relational outcomes of SCB, such as relationship satisfaction or interpersonal goal pursuit. Individuals must navigate both inter- and intra-partner goals within close relationships, and sometimes the goals may not be aligned. For example, perhaps Partner A has a goal to lose weight, while Partner B does not. Would it be better for their relationship satisfaction, and perhaps for Partner A’s goal pursuit, if Partner B consumes pizza in secret? Research on invisible support (Bolger et al., 2000) suggests that it might, but future research should explore these questions. Finally, future research could explore other consequences for the partner from whom the SCB is kept. In a dyadic study of romantic partners’ spending on and satisfaction with Valentine’s Day, we found secret consumption can have positive downstream outcomes for the partner. Specifically, we found that Partner A’s guilt from engaging in SCB was associated with greater spending on Valentine’s Day for Partner B, and this, in turn, increased Partner B’s satisfaction with how Valentine’s Day went (see MDA for more information on this study). This provides initial evidence that SCB could have positive downstream consequences for the partner, but future research should explore this finding in more detail. In conclusion, the current work identifies secret consumer behavior as a common, but understudied, phenomenon in close relationships and demonstrates consequences of this behavior. We hope the current work will inspire researchers to pursue additional questions in this exciting area