The assumption that consumers prefer better quality options over worse ones seems almost definitional. However, a variety of marketplace examples suggest that consumers sometimes choose content that is “so bad it's good,” such as Tommy Wiseau's The Room or Rebecca Black's “Friday,” over apparently better alternatives (e.g., those of mediocre quality). In 12 preregistered studies (N = 5393) across several content domains (e.g., jokes, talent show auditions), we provide the first controlled, empirical demonstration of consumer preferences for badness (i.e., choosing options because consumers expect them to be bad). We provide initial evidence that these preferences are rooted in expectations of entertainment value from the worst available option. Preferences for these options emerge more frequently when their deviations from quality standards are perceived as benign (i.e., inconsequential). Accordingly, such preferences are less prevalent when consumption is consequential, and involves utilitarian goals or monetary costs. We conclude by exploring the extent to which dimensions such as humor, absurdity, esthetic quality, and utilitarian value underlie so-bad-it's-good perceptions, and highlight several open questions to spark future research.

中文翻译：

---

糟糕也是好事：消费者何时以及为何更喜欢糟糕的选择

消费者更喜欢质量更好的产品而不是质量更差的产品的假设似乎几乎是确定的。然而，各种市场例子表明，消费者有时会选择“虽然糟糕但却很好”的内容，例如汤米·维索的《房间》或丽贝卡·布莱克的《星期五》，而不是明显更好的替代品（例如质量平庸的内容）。 在跨多个内容领域（例如笑话、才艺表演试镜）的12 项预先注册研究（N = 5393）中，我们首次提供了消费者对不良偏好的受控、实证证明（即，因为消费者期望它们是不良的而选择选项）。我们提供的初步证据表明，这些偏好植根于对最差可用选项的娱乐价值的期望。当这些选项与质量标准的偏差被认为是良性的（即无关紧要的）时，对这些选项的偏好会更频繁地出现。因此，当消费是重要的并且涉及功利主义目标或货币成本时，这种偏好就不那么普遍。最后，我们探讨了幽默、荒诞、审美品质和功利价值等维度在多大程度上构成了“坏是好”的观念，并强调了几个悬而未决的问题，以激发未来的研究。