选择集复杂性对诱饵效应的影响

IF 1.8 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED Journal of Behavioral Decision Making Pub Date : 2024-02-02 DOI:10.1002/bdm.2373
Jacob M. Stanley, Douglas H. Wedell
{"title":"选择集复杂性对诱饵效应的影响","authors":"Jacob M. Stanley,&nbsp;Douglas H. Wedell","doi":"10.1002/bdm.2373","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Studies of contextual choice typically use three option choice sets to evaluate how preference relations depend on the values of a third decoy option. However, often real-world decisions are made using choice sets with many more than three alternatives, such as in online shopping. Three experiments tested for attraction and compromise decoy effects in choice sets that varied the number and ordering of alternatives using a within-subjects preferential choice grocery shopping task. In Experiment 1, attraction and compromise effects were significantly reduced as alternatives increased from three to nine. Experiment 2 found significantly greater attraction effects in nine alternative choice sets ordered by attributes compared with a random ordering. Experiment 3 used eye tracking and found significant attraction effects in choice sets with 3, 9, and 15 alternatives, but the effect was reduced with increasing alternatives. Eye tracking revealed that participants engaged in more by-dimension comparisons as the number of alternatives increased, but, contrary to previous research, the proportion of by-alternative to by-dimension transitions was not linearly predictive of decoy effects. With increased alternatives, the proportion of the total information attended to decreased, leading to worse choice outcomes, and participants were more likely to engage in a lexicographic decision-making strategy.</p>","PeriodicalId":48112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bdm.2373","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of choice set complexity on decoy effects\",\"authors\":\"Jacob M. Stanley,&nbsp;Douglas H. Wedell\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/bdm.2373\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Studies of contextual choice typically use three option choice sets to evaluate how preference relations depend on the values of a third decoy option. However, often real-world decisions are made using choice sets with many more than three alternatives, such as in online shopping. Three experiments tested for attraction and compromise decoy effects in choice sets that varied the number and ordering of alternatives using a within-subjects preferential choice grocery shopping task. In Experiment 1, attraction and compromise effects were significantly reduced as alternatives increased from three to nine. Experiment 2 found significantly greater attraction effects in nine alternative choice sets ordered by attributes compared with a random ordering. Experiment 3 used eye tracking and found significant attraction effects in choice sets with 3, 9, and 15 alternatives, but the effect was reduced with increasing alternatives. Eye tracking revealed that participants engaged in more by-dimension comparisons as the number of alternatives increased, but, contrary to previous research, the proportion of by-alternative to by-dimension transitions was not linearly predictive of decoy effects. With increased alternatives, the proportion of the total information attended to decreased, leading to worse choice outcomes, and participants were more likely to engage in a lexicographic decision-making strategy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48112,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bdm.2373\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bdm.2373\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bdm.2373","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对情境选择的研究通常使用三个选项的选择集来评估偏好关系如何取决于第三个诱饵选项的值。然而,现实世界中的决策往往是使用多于三个备选方案的选择集做出的,例如在网上购物中。有三项实验利用主体内优先选择杂货店购物任务,测试了选择集中不同数量和排序的备选方案的吸引和折中诱饵效应。在实验 1 中,当备选方案从 3 个增加到 9 个时,吸引和妥协效应明显减弱。实验 2 发现,与随机排序相比,按属性排序的九套备选方案的吸引效应明显更大。实验 3 使用了眼动追踪,发现在有 3、9 和 15 个备选方案的选择集中,吸引力效应非常明显,但随着备选方案的增加,这种效应有所减弱。眼动追踪显示,随着备选方案数量的增加,参与者参与了更多的分维度比较,但与之前的研究相反,从备选方案到分维度的转换比例并不能线性地预测诱饵效应。随着备选方案的增加,所关注的全部信息的比例会下降,从而导致更差的选择结果,而且参与者更有可能采用词典决策策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Impact of choice set complexity on decoy effects

Studies of contextual choice typically use three option choice sets to evaluate how preference relations depend on the values of a third decoy option. However, often real-world decisions are made using choice sets with many more than three alternatives, such as in online shopping. Three experiments tested for attraction and compromise decoy effects in choice sets that varied the number and ordering of alternatives using a within-subjects preferential choice grocery shopping task. In Experiment 1, attraction and compromise effects were significantly reduced as alternatives increased from three to nine. Experiment 2 found significantly greater attraction effects in nine alternative choice sets ordered by attributes compared with a random ordering. Experiment 3 used eye tracking and found significant attraction effects in choice sets with 3, 9, and 15 alternatives, but the effect was reduced with increasing alternatives. Eye tracking revealed that participants engaged in more by-dimension comparisons as the number of alternatives increased, but, contrary to previous research, the proportion of by-alternative to by-dimension transitions was not linearly predictive of decoy effects. With increased alternatives, the proportion of the total information attended to decreased, leading to worse choice outcomes, and participants were more likely to engage in a lexicographic decision-making strategy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The Journal of Behavioral Decision Making is a multidisciplinary journal with a broad base of content and style. It publishes original empirical reports, critical review papers, theoretical analyses and methodological contributions. The Journal also features book, software and decision aiding technique reviews, abstracts of important articles published elsewhere and teaching suggestions. The objective of the Journal is to present and stimulate behavioral research on decision making and to provide a forum for the evaluation of complementary, contrasting and conflicting perspectives. These perspectives include psychology, management science, sociology, political science and economics. Studies of behavioral decision making in naturalistic and applied settings are encouraged.
期刊最新文献
Correction to The Effect of a Default Nudge on Experienced and Expected Autonomy: A Field Study on Food Donation Equivalence Framing and the Construction of Advocacy Messages Predicting Emotional and Behavioral Reactions to Collective Wrongdoing: Effects of Imagined Versus Experienced Collective Guilt on Moral Behavior Reference-Dependent Risk-Taking in the NBA The Relative Importance of the Contrast and Assimilation Effects in Decisions Under Risk
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1