Patrick and Hagtvedt term this “aesthetic incongruity resolution.” We call it not being shamed by your classy, design-conscious friends.

It turns out consumers are subsceptible to, well, pretty things. Over three years, the 125 participants’ spending habits for shoes, necklaces and furniture were tracked. Participants were given high-end products from either “designer” labels or from luxury retailers that frequently clashed with their aesthetic tastes. After a period of time, subjects were offered the chance to return the products in exchange for money or to keep the product obtained through the study. (A scientific study that gives away luxury goods? Sweet!)

The vast majority of participants opted to keep the luxury goods instead of returning them—and also admitted to buying a slew of cheaper items to complement their luxury product. 

In which Fast Company, like, calls out the middle class or something (note: I would actually be really interested to see a breakdown of this by income because I could see it being true across the board).

Also, though they got “affect” right in the title, the link spelling is “effect.” I THINK both are appropriate (“effect” can be used to mean a result, but “affect” is used on topics of psychology) but still. CONSISTENCY.