Ryan Hamilton

As the 2026 FIFA World Cup unfolds across North America, Emory University’s Goizueta Business School experts are available to help media explore the business stories behind the world’s biggest sporting event, from the economics of hosting and ticket pricing to global sponsorship, player brands and the psychology of fandom. Goizueta’s World Cup 2026 Business Hub brings together faculty who can provide timely, research-backed commentary on the commercial, cultural and consumer forces shaping the tournament as it moves from match to match, city to city and story to story. Featured Topics The Economics of Hosting Infrastructure investment, tourism revenue, real estate, local labor markets and the broader financial impact of hosting World Cup matches. The Science of Fandom What drives global fan devotion, audience loyalty and engagement across stadiums, broadcasts and digital platforms. Ticket Pricing and Demand Dynamic pricing, hospitality packages, travel costs and how extraordinary demand shapes the fan experience at major global events. Brand Strategy and Global Sponsorship How companies evaluate World Cup sponsorships, build global campaigns and measure the return on major sports partnerships. The Rise of the Player Brand How star footballers build, extend and monetize personal brands that reach far beyond the pitch. Media can visit Goizueta’s World Cup 2026 Business Hub to explore available experts and connect directly with the right source for their story.

Why buy vintage? Reasons abound. It’s kinder to the environment. It’s usually cheaper. It’s back in style. But did you know it may also address a deep-seated psychological need for stability amid upheavals? Vintage consumption—that is, buying previously owned items from an earlier era—acts as a means to connect the past, present, and future. That connection across time can be reassuring, most especially in times of uncertainty. When you really want to buy a leather jacket that’s older than you are, it may be enlightening to consider the circumstances. This vintage insight reveals itself in research by Ryan Hamilton, associate professor of marketing at Goizueta Business School. In an award-winning article titled “Stitching time: Vintage consumption connects the past, present, and future,” Hamilton—along with coauthors Gulen Sarial-Abi, Kathleen Vohs, and Aulona Ulqinaku—uncovered why we may want to turn to something old when we perceive threats to our worldviews. Notably, multiple studies have shown thoughts of death to increase the appeal of items that have already stood the test of time. The Psychological Appeal of Thrifting In psychology, “meaning frameworks” are how we, as human beings, interpret and understand our lives as meaningful and valuable. Threats to our meaning frameworks—i.e., the pillars propping up our worldviews—can include thoughts of death, unsettling economic upheavals, and other existential challenges. In order to explore the effects of meaning threats on our preference for vintage, Hamilton and coauthors designed several studies. Their pilot test measured the physical health of nursing home residents. It then measured their preferences for vintage items, controlling for other variables. The results held up the researchers’ hypothesis: Vintage items—be they books, watches, bicycles, or luggage—were more strongly preferred over their modern versions by elderly participants in poorer health, presumably those most likely to have mortality on their minds. Six subsequent studies used different variables to see if the main hypothesis continued to hold up. It did, while at the same time revealing more information about the mechanisms at work. Ryan Hamilton Associate Professor of Marketing Death or Dental Pain In one study, for example, researchers prompted participants with death reminders. They had to contemplate and write about their own deaths to make sure mortality was top of mind. Researchers prompted a control group with reminders of dental pain. Both groups then answered a 12-question survey about their desire for structure (e.g., set routines and practices) at that particular moment. But there was another element in this study: contemplating wearing a watch from the 1950s. As predicted by the main hypothesis, death cues were associated with participants reporting that they desired more structure. The only exceptions was for those who imagined an old watch ticking on their wrists. Vintage consumption seemed to act as a buffer against unsettling thoughts of death for them. What is going on here? As noted above, the researchers theorize and show that vintage objects tend to connect our thoughts of the past, present, and future. These mental, intertemporal connections tend to be reassuring—“a hidden factor” in our preferences and choices, as Hamilton notes. More than Nostalgia One might think nostalgia—a sentimental longing for the past—could also be at work. Feeling nostalgic for one’s own past and social connections can buffer against meaning threats, as previous research has shown. But this paper was designed to tease out nostalgia. It focused on vintage’s connections across time regardless of one’s personal experiences. “This study allowed us to clearly show that people respond differently to something they believe to be old,” as Hamilton explains. “It’s not just something that has a retro look, which was one of my favorite aspects of this project.” Hamilton and his coauthors achieved this by having participants evaluate identical items thought to be genuinely vintage or replicas. And the results were robust. Retro replicas, which can prompt nostalgia, did not have the same psychological impact as items believed to be genuinely old. For instance, 20-year-olds who find a watch from the 1950s reassuring can’t feel nostalgic about the design personally. They can, however, feel a connection across time—and that came through in the study. Retail Therapy on the Rise? Hamilton’s research here follows his broader interest in consumer psychology, branding, and decision-making. “When we’re buying things, we may think it’s based on strict utility maximization. However, it also might be making us feel better in some way,” says Hamilton. Shopping can serve as an emotional management strategy—for better or for worse. Although it was outside the scope of this particular investigation (and all participants were over age 18), the insights gleaned here may help explain why 21st-century teenagers seem to be particularly avid “thrifters” these days. “I don’t want to overstate our findings. But it’s at least possible that the appeal of vintage for teenagers is boltstered by a sense of permanence and endurance that helps them during times of upheaval,” Hamilton says. It turns out a 30-year-old leather jacket might help its new owner feel better on many levels. So is it any wonder that vintage shopping is surging in uncertain times? Fashion magazines, such as Vogue and GQ, are following the vintage craze closely in 2024. Concern for climate change and the Earth’s finite resources may present two intertwined reasons to buy old things: those two things are environmental and psychological. If tumultuous times continue amid contentious elections, wars, and other threats, it seems safe to bet on vintage. Ryan Hamilton is associate professor of Marketing at Emory University Goizueta Business School. If you're a journalist looking to know about this topic, simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.

When consumers choose where to shop, they often consider a store’s price image —does the store have a reputation for having lower or higher prices than its competitors? A store’s reputation for lower prices doesn’t happen by chance. Choosing a pricing strategy is one of the biggest pricing decisions a retailer makes. In “When is HILO Low? Price Image Formation Based on Frequency versus Depth Pricing Strategies,” a recently published paper in the Journal of Consumer Research, co-authors Ryan Hamilton, associate professor of marketing, Ramnath Chellappa, associate dean and Goizueta term professor of information systems and operations management, and Daniel Sheehan, associate professor of marketing and supply chain at the University of Kentucky’s Gatton College of Business and Economics, explore a gap in existing pricing strategy research. “Our research doesn’t threaten the validity of the previous research,” said Hamilton, “but what it does do is point to the limited generalizability of the previous research.” This is because previous pricing strategy research used the same research paradigm: It emphasized consumers’ perspectives as they compared prices simultaneously across multiple stores. Hamilton, Chellappa, and Sheehan wondered what would happen if they studied consumers as they compared prices of products within a store, instead of across stores. When they did so, the authors found that “many of the prominent findings of previous research are reversed,” they wrote. “We propose that when stores’ prices are evaluated one at a time, or in isolation, consumers will rely on the most salient contextual clues available—within-category price information—when forming a price image.” For example, rather than research the price of peanut butter across multiple grocery stores, shoppers often evaluate the price of peanut butter by comparing the prices of the brands on the shelf in front of them. To illustrate their point, the authors explore two basic pricing strategies: a frequency pricing strategy and a depth pricing strategy. Every Day Low Pricing (EDLP) is a frequency strategy where stores offer small price advantages over their competitors on many items. Walmart employs an EDLP strategy. A common depth strategy is a high-low (HILO) pricing strategy. HILO offers infrequent, but deep, price advantages over competitors. Macy’s utilizes this strategy. “The conventional wisdom is that EDLP equals low price,” explained Hamilton. But he and his co-authors argue that in a non-theoretical environment, the effectiveness of EDLP strategies is less clear. The trio hypothesized that the context in which consumers encounter prices has important implications. Specifically, that the frequency advantage of EDLP identified in earlier research was limited to those scenarios where customers were able to simultaneously compare prices across multiple stores. In contrast, they argue that a depth advantage, one resulting from HILO pricing, will be more likely when consumers evaluate store prices separately. “Without simultaneous comparisons across stores, consumers shift from using across-store prices as reference points to using within-category reference prices. As a result of this shift, deep price advantages are easier to evaluate than frequent price advantages and therefore more influential on customers’ formation of price image,” they write. “Because our theoretical account is based on within-category external reference prices, we predict that a depth store is likely to be evaluated as having a lower price image than a frequency store even when consumers are exposed to the prices of just one store,” they write. The authors tested their hypothesis using six separate experiments. All but one of the experiments studied national brands commonly found in grocery stores. (The other experiment used televisions.) In the experiments where participants saw store prices simultaneously, the experiment replicated the frequency advantage noted in previous research. But when participants did not have simultaneous price information across stores, the previous findings didn’t hold “What we found is that if you distance those prices comparisons even a little bit -showing a price on one webpage and then seeing a price on another webpage that’s enough to completely reverse the findings,” explained Hamilton. In an isolated setting, “a couple of really low prices” will better communicate a store’s low-price image, said Hamilton. “That’s the big story.” While excited about the findings of their research, Hamilton is quick to point out the limits of their hypothesis, such as when pricing information isn’t readily available or when the consumer isn’t familiar with the brands of the product they wish to buy. “People want a simple answer that works everywhere, but it’s more nuanced than that,” said Hamilton. “This [hypothesis] is going to work better under certain set of circumstances than others because people process price information differently.” The insights aren’t only useful for retailers. While using a store’s price image to shop can be efficient from a consumer standpoint, assuming that the prices are low solely because the store has a reputation for low prices isn’t always the case. A retailer’s price image has vulnerabilities. Not everything at Costco is cheaper than it is at Whole Foods. Southwest Airlines may not always be cheaper than Delta Air Lines. “If you’re shopping for things you really care about,” advised Hamilton, “it might be worth doing more across-store price comparisons.” Chellappa is excited about how the paper addresses gaps in traditional economic models of pricing. “While much research in economics and information systems focuses on the availability of information for price comparison, the cognitive aspect of ‘how’ consumers compare and process such information is only explicated by studies such as ours. Looking at pricing through a behavioral lens, capturing consumers’ real shopping behavior reveals great insights that will be useful for firms,” he said. Interested in learning more about consumer behavior and Price Image Formation Based on Frequency versus Depth Pricing Strategies? Then let us help with your coverage and questions. Ryan Hamilton and Ramnath Chellappa are both available to speak regarding this important topic simply click on either expert's icon now to arrange an interview today.