Experimental studies reveal self-construal impacts decision-making and emotional responses in business events, suggesting communication strategies to boost attendance.
Purpose While prior studies have examined event attendance from the perspectives of satisfaction and event quality, few have investigated how stress and self-construal shape participation intentions. This study aims to bridge this gap by investigating how self-construal affects attendees’ emotional and cognitive responses and attendance decisions in utilitarian and hedonic business events. Design/methodology/approach Two scenario-based experimental studies were conducted. Study 1 examined how chronic self-construal moderates participation intentions across event types (utilitarian vs hedonic). Study 2 investigated how priming self-construal through pre-event communication messages interacts with event type, with emotional and cognitive engagement as mediators. Findings Results indicated that attendees with an independent self-construal prefer utilitarian events, while those with an interdependent self-construal do not exhibit a strong preference for either type. Emotional and cognitive engagement mediated the effects of self-construal and event type on participation intentions. Priming independent self-construal enhanced engagement with utilitarian events, highlighting the role of event framing in shaping attendee behavior. Research limitations/implications This study highlights the roles of both chronic and primed self-construal in message framing to encourage business event attendance, offering practical communication strategies for event planners and organizers to boost participation. Originality/value This study extends self-construal theory by linking it to stress and decision-making in business events. Findings provide actionable insights for event organizers to tailor communication strategies and design stress-mitigating experiences that align with attendees’ self-construal orientations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jing Li (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: