Portrait of Professor Zachary Estes

Professor Zachary Estes

Professor of Marketing

Bayes Business School, Faculty of Management

Contact

Visit Zachary Estes

Bunhill Row

Postal address

Bayes Business School
106 Bunhill Row
London
EC1Y 8TZ
United Kingdom

About

Overview

Zachary Estes (PhD in Psychology, Princeton University) is Professor of Marketing, Co-Director of the Behavioural Research Lab, and Director of the PhD in Management at Bayes Business School (formerly Cass), City University of London. He has served on the editorial boards of various journals in both psychology and marketing, including as Associate Editor of the Journal of Consumer Psychology (currently) and as Associate Editor of Cognitive Science (previously). His research on cognition, emotion, and consumer behavior has been awarded funding by granting agencies, has been published in psychology and marketing journals including Cognitive Psychology, Emotion, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Experimental Psychology - General, Journal of Marketing, and Psychological Science, and has been reported in popular media worldwide including BBC Radio, Scientific American, New Scientist, MarketingWeek, The New Yorker, Huffington Post, Forbes, and The Atlantic. He is also the proud winner of teaching awards at the University of Warwick (UK) and Bocconi University (Italy).

Employment

  • Professor of Marketing, Bayes Business School (formerly Cass), Jul 2020 – present
  • Professor of Marketing, Bocconi University, Jan 2012 – Aug 2020
  • Associate Professor of Psychology, University of Warwick, Sep 2005 – Jan 2012
  • Assistant Professor of Psychology, University of Georgia, Sep 2001 – Sep 2005

Expertise

Primary topics

  • Consumer Behaviour
  • Marketing

Publications

  1. Sharma, V. and Estes, Z. (2024). Seeing is smelling: Pictures improve product evaluations by evoking olfactory imagery. International Journal of Research in Marketing. doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2024.02.001.

    [publisher’s website]

  2. Hodges, B.T., Estes, Z. and Warren, C. (2024). Intel Inside: The Linguistic Properties of Effective Slogans. Journal of Consumer Research, 50(5), pp. 865–886. doi:10.1093/jcr/ucad034.

    [publisher’s website]

  3. Estes, Z. and Streicher, M.C. (2022). Getting a Handle on Sales: Shopping Carts Affect Purchasing by Activating Arm Muscles. Journal of Marketing, 86(6), pp. 135–154. doi:10.1177/00222429211061367.

    [publisher’s website]

  4. Streicher, M.C., Estes, Z. and Büttner, O.B. (2021). Exploratory Shopping: Attention Affects In-Store Exploration and Unplanned Purchasing. Journal of Consumer Research, 48(1), pp. 51–76. doi:10.1093/jcr/ucaa054.

    [publisher’s website]

  5. Adelman, J.S., Estes, Z. and Cossu, M. (2018). Emotional sound symbolism: Languages rapidly signal valence via phonemes. Cognition, 175, pp. 122–130. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2018.02.007.

    [publisher’s website]

  6. Estes, Z., Brotto, L. and Busacca, B. (2018). The value of art in marketing: An emotion-based model of how artworks in ads improve product evaluations. Journal of Business Research, 85, pp. 396–405. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.10.017.

    [publisher’s website]

  7. Streicher, M.C. and Estes, Z. (2016). Multisensory interaction in product choice: Grasping a product affects choice of other seen products. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 26(4), pp. 558–565. doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2016.01.001.

    [publisher’s website]

  8. Streicher, M.C. and Estes, Z. (2016). Shopping to and fro: Ideomotor compatibility of arm posture and product choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 26(3), pp. 325–336. doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2015.12.001.

    [publisher’s website]

  9. Kuperman, V., Estes, Z., Brysbaert, M. and Warriner, A.B. (2014). Emotion and language: Valence and arousal affect word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(3), pp. 1065–1081. doi:10.1037/a0035669.

    [publisher’s website]

  10. Adelman, J.S. and Estes, Z. (2013). Emotion and memory: A recognition advantage for positive and negative words independent of arousal. Cognition, 129(3), pp. 530–535. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2013.08.014.

    [publisher’s website]

  11. Estes, Z. and Felker, S. (2012). Confidence Mediates the Sex Difference in Mental Rotation Performance. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41(3), pp. 557–570. doi:10.1007/s10508-011-9875-5.

    [publisher’s website]

  12. Estes, Z., Gibbert, M., Guest, D. and Mazursky, D. (2012). A dual‐process model of brand extension: Taxonomic feature‐based and thematic relation‐based similarity independently drive brand extension evaluation. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(1), pp. 86–101. doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2011.11.002.

    [publisher’s website]

  13. Estes, Z., Golonka, S. and Jones, L.L. (2011). Thematic Thinking. pp. 249–294. doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-385527-5.00008-5.

    [publisher’s website]

  14. Estes, Z. and Jones, L.L. (2009). Integrative priming occurs rapidly and uncontrollably during lexical processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138(1), pp. 112–130. doi:10.1037/a0014677.

    [publisher’s website]

  15. Estes, Z., Verges, M. and Barsalou, L.W. (2008). Head Up, Foot Down. Psychological Science, 19(2), pp. 93–97. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02051.x.

    [publisher’s website]

Chapters (3)

  1. (2012). Lexical priming: Associative, semantic, and thematic infl uences on word recognition. In Visual Word Recognition Volume 2 (pp. 56–84). Psychology Press.
  2. Jones, L.L. and Estes, Z. (2012). Lexical priming: Associative, semantic, and thematic influences on word recognition. Visual Word Recognition Volume 2: Meaning and Context, Individuals and Development (pp. 44–72). ISBN 978-0-203-10697-6.
  3. Estes, Z., Golonka, S. and Jones, L.L. (2011). Thematic Thinking. The Apprehension and Consequences of Thematic Relations. (pp. 249–294).

Conference papers and proceedings (3)

  1. Bocchi, E., Scopelliti, I. and Estes, Z. (2023). Set Composition Induces People To Buy More. European Association for Consumer Research 6-8 July, Amsterdam.
  2. Hodges, B., Warren, C. and Estes, Z. (2016). More than words: A psycholinguistic perspective on the properties of effective brand slogans.
  3. Thompson, P. and Estes, Z. (2010). Phonetic symbolism for size and shape.

Journal articles (44)

  1. Ruzeviciute, R., Kamleitner, B., Estes, Z. and Biswas, D. (2023). Sniffing the distance: Scents can make objects appear closer. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 91, pp. 102104–102104. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2023.102104.

    [publisher’s website]

  2. Polyakova, A., Estes, Z. and Ordanini, A. (2020). Free upgrades with costly consequences. European Journal of Marketing, 54(4), pp. 691–712. doi:10.1108/ejm-03-2018-0168.

    [publisher’s website]

  3. Estes, Z. and Barsalou, L.W. (2018). A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis of Spatial Interference From Linguistic Cues: Beyond Petrova et al. (2018). Psychological Science, 29(9), pp. 1558–1564. doi:10.1177/0956797618794131.
  4. Guest, D., Gibbert, M., Estes, Z., Mazursky, D. and Lam, M. (2016). Modulation of taxonomic (versus thematic) similarity judgments and product choices by inducing local and global processing. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 28(8), pp. 1013–1025. doi:10.1080/20445911.2016.1212057.

    [publisher’s website]

  5. Guest, D., Estes, Z., Gibbert, M. and Mazursky, D. (2016). Brand Suicide? Memory and Liking of Negative Brand Names. PLOS ONE, 11(3). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0151628.

    [publisher’s website]

  6. Jones, L.L. and Estes, Z. (2015). Convergent and divergent thinking in verbal analogy. Thinking & Reasoning, 21(4), pp. 473–500. doi:10.1080/13546783.2015.1036120.

    [publisher’s website]

  7. Estes, Z., Verges, M. and Adelman, J.S. (2015). Words, objects, and locations: Perceptual matching explains spatial interference and facilitation. Journal of Memory and Language, 84, pp. 167–189. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2015.06.002.

    [publisher’s website]

  8. Streicher, M.C. and Estes, Z. (2015). Touch and Go: Merely Grasping a Product Facilitates Brand Perception and Choice. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 29(3), pp. 350–359. doi:10.1002/acp.3109.

    [publisher’s website]

  9. Adelman, J.S. and Estes, Z. (2015). Why to treat subjects as fixed effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(5), pp. 1602–1605. doi:10.1037/xlm0000098.

    [publisher’s website]

  10. Cirrincione, A., Estes, Z. and Carù, A. (2014). The Effect of Ambient Scent on the Experience of Art: Not as Good as It Smells. Psychology & Marketing, 31(8), pp. 615–627. doi:10.1002/mar.20722.

    [publisher’s website]

  11. Adelman, J.S., Sabatos-DeVito, M.G., Marquis, S.J. and Estes, Z. (2014). Individual differences in reading aloud: A mega-study, item effects, and some models. Cognitive Psychology, 68, pp. 113–160. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2013.11.001.

    [publisher’s website]

  12. Mather, E., Jones, L.L. and Estes, Z. (2014). Priming by relational integration in perceptual identification and Stroop colour naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 71(1), pp. 57–70. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2013.10.004.

    [publisher’s website]

  13. Arbore, A. and Estes, Z. (2013). Loyalty program structure and consumers' perceptions of status: Feeling special in a grocery store? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 20(5), pp. 439–444. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2013.03.002.

    [publisher’s website]

  14. Adelman, J.S., Marquis, S.J., Sabatos-DeVito, M.G. and Estes, Z. (2013). The unexplained nature of reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(4), pp. 1037–1053. doi:10.1037/a0031829.

    [publisher’s website]

  15. Estes, Z., Jones, L.L. and Golonka, S. (2012). Emotion Affects Similarity via Social Projection. Social Cognition, 30(5), pp. 584–609. doi:10.1521/soco.2012.30.5.584.

    [publisher’s website]

  16. Gibbert, M., Hampton, J.A., Estes, Z. and Mazursky, D. (2012). The curious case of the refrigerator-TV: Similarity and hybridization. Cognitive Science, 36(6), pp. 992–1018. doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2012.01247.x.
  17. Gibbert, M., Hampton, J.A., Estes, Z. and Mazursky, D. (2012). The Curious Case of the Refrigerator–TV: Similarity and Hybridization. Cognitive Science, 36(6), pp. 992–1018. doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2012.01247.x.

    [publisher’s website]

  18. Greenberg, S.N., Tokarev, J. and Estes, Z. (2012). Affective Orientation Influences Memory for Emotional and Neutral Words. The American Journal of Psychology, 125(1), pp. 71–80. doi:10.5406/amerjpsyc.125.1.0071.

    [publisher’s website]

  19. Badham, S.P., Estes, Z. and Maylor, E.A. (2012). Integrative and semantic relations equally alleviate age-related associative memory deficits. Psychology and Aging, 27(1), pp. 141–152. doi:10.1037/a0023924.

    [publisher’s website]

  20. Stinton, C., Tomlinson, K. and Estes, Z. (2012). Examining reports of mental health in adults with Williams syndrome. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 33(1), pp. 144–152. doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2011.09.002.

    [publisher’s website]

  21. Thompson, P.D. and Estes, Z. (2011). Sound symbolic naming of novel objects is a graded function. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64(12), pp. 2392–2404. doi:10.1080/17470218.2011.605898.

    [publisher’s website]

  22. Pasterski, V., Zwierzynska, K. and Estes, Z. (2011). Sex Differences in Semantic Categorization. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40(6), pp. 1183–1187. doi:10.1007/s10508-011-9764-y.

    [publisher’s website]

  23. Golonka, S. and Estes, Z. (2009). Thematic relations affect similarity via commonalities. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(6), pp. 1454–1464. doi:10.1037/a0017397.

    [publisher’s website]

  24. Simmons, S. and Estes, Z. (2008). Individual differences in the perception of similarity and difference. Cognition, 108(3), pp. 781–795. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.003.

    [publisher’s website]

  25. Estes, Z. and Adelman, J.S. (2008). Automatic vigilance for negative words is categorical and general. Emotion, 8(4), pp. 453–457. doi:10.1037/a0012887.

    [publisher’s website]

  26. Estes, Z. and Jones, L.L. (2008). Relational processing in conceptual combination and analogy. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 31(4), pp. 385–386. doi:10.1017/s0140525x08004548.

    [publisher’s website]

  27. Estes, Z. and Verges, M. (2008). Freeze or flee? Negative stimuli elicit selective responding. Cognition, 108(2), pp. 557–565. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.03.003.

    [publisher’s website]

  28. Jones, L.L., Estes, Z. and Marsh, R.L. (2008). An asymmetric effect of relational integration on recognition memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61(8), pp. 1169–1176. doi:10.1080/17470210801994997.

    [publisher’s website]

  29. Estes, Z. and Adelman, J.S. (2008). Automatic vigilance for negative words in lexical decision and naming: Comment on Larsen, Mercer, and Balota (2006). Emotion, 8(4), pp. 441–444. doi:10.1037/1528-3542.8.4.441.

    [publisher’s website]

  30. Hampton, J.A., Estes, Z. and Simmons, S. (2007). Metamorphosis: Essence, appearance, and behavior in the categorization of natural kinds. Memory & Cognition, 35(7), pp. 1785–1800. doi:10.3758/bf03193510.

    [publisher’s website]

  31. Estes, Z. and Jones, L.L. (2006). Priming via relational similarity: A copper horse is faster when seen through a glass eye. Journal of Memory and Language, 55(1), pp. 89–101. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2006.01.004.

    [publisher’s website]

  32. Jones, L.L. and Estes, Z. (2006). Roosters, robins, and alarm clocks: Aptness and conventionality in metaphor comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 55(1), pp. 18–32. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2006.02.004.

    [publisher’s website]

  33. Jones, L.L. and Estes, Z. (2005). Metaphor comprehension as attributive categorization☆. Journal of Memory and Language, 53(1), pp. 110–124. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2005.01.016.

    [publisher’s website]

  34. Hampton, J.A., Estes, Z. and Simmons, C.L. (2005). Comparison and Contrast in Perceptual Categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(6), pp. 1459–1476. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.31.6.1459.

    [publisher’s website]

  35. LeBoeuf, R.A. and Estes, Z. (2004). “Fortunately, I'm no Einstein”: Comparison Relevance as a Determinant of Behavioral Assimilation and Contrast. Social Cognition, 22(6), pp. 607–636. doi:10.1521/soco.22.6.607.54817.

    [publisher’s website]

  36. Estes, Z. (2004). Confidence and gradedness in semantic categorization: Definitely somewhat artifactual, maybe absolutely natural. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11(6), pp. 1041–1047. doi:10.3758/bf03196734.

    [publisher’s website]

  37. Estes, Z. and Hasson, U. (2004). The Importance of Being Nonalignable: A Critical Test of the Structural Alignment Theory of Similarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30(5), pp. 1082–1092. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.30.5.1082.

    [publisher’s website]

  38. Estes, Z. (2003). A tale of two similarities: comparison and integration in conceptual combination. Cognitive Science, 27(6), pp. 911–921. doi:10.1016/j.cogsci.2003.01.001.

    [publisher’s website]

  39. Estes, Z. (2003). Domain differences in the structure of artifactual and natural categories. Memory & Cognition, 31(2), pp. 199–214. doi:10.3758/bf03194379.

    [publisher’s website]

  40. Estes, Z. (2003). Attributive and relational processes in nominal combination. Journal of Memory and Language, 48(2), pp. 304–319. doi:10.1016/s0749-596x(02)00507-7.

    [publisher’s website]

  41. Estes, Z. and Ward, T.B. (2002). The Emergence of Novel Attributes in Concept Modification. Creativity Research Journal, 14(2), pp. 149–156. doi:10.1207/s15326934crj1402_2.

    [publisher’s website]

  42. Glucksberg, S. and Estes, A. (2000). Feature accessibility in conceptual combination: Effects of context-induced relevance. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7(3), pp. 510–515. doi:10.3758/bf03214364.

    [publisher’s website]

  43. Estes, Z. and Gucksberg, S. (2000). Similarity and attribution in concept combination: Reply to Wisniewski. Memory & Cognition, 28(1), pp. 39–40. doi:10.3758/bf03211574.

    [publisher’s website]

  44. Estes, Z. and Glucksberg, S. (2000). Interactive property attribution in concept combination. Memory & Cognition, 28(1), pp. 28–34. doi:10.3758/bf03211572.

    [publisher’s website]