选择支撑改变属性重要性并影响未来选择

IF 1.8 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED Journal of Behavioral Decision Making Pub Date : 2024-08-08 DOI:10.1002/bdm.2401
Martin R. Zemborain, Gita Venkataramani Johar, Anne L. Roggeveen, Asim Ansari
{"title":"选择支撑改变属性重要性并影响未来选择","authors":"Martin R. Zemborain,&nbsp;Gita Venkataramani Johar,&nbsp;Anne L. Roggeveen,&nbsp;Asim Ansari","doi":"10.1002/bdm.2401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Prior research has established that decision-makers engage in a bolstering process by magnifying the value of a previously made choice in order to justify their choices. The current research examines the impact of bolstering on attribute importance weights and future choices. Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrate that after making a choice between a priori comparable options, consumers prefer attributes (e.g., sunlight in an apartment) that they associate with positive features of their chosen option (lot of sunlight) more than attributes they associate (a) with negative features of their chosen option or (b) with positive features of their nonchosen option. These postchoice associations and altered attribute importance weights drive subsequent preferences. In an incentive-compatible study, Experiment 3 demonstrates that bolstering goes beyond choice justification and impacts subsequent choice. After an initial choice, participants choose new products that have positive features consistent with their original chosen option rather than products with positive features consistent with their original nonchosen option. This research contributes to the literature on preference construction by examining the impact of justification for one's previous choices on constructed attribute preferences and subsequent choices.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Choice Bolstering Changes Attribute Importance and Affects Future Choices\",\"authors\":\"Martin R. Zemborain,&nbsp;Gita Venkataramani Johar,&nbsp;Anne L. Roggeveen,&nbsp;Asim Ansari\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/bdm.2401\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>Prior research has established that decision-makers engage in a bolstering process by magnifying the value of a previously made choice in order to justify their choices. The current research examines the impact of bolstering on attribute importance weights and future choices. Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrate that after making a choice between a priori comparable options, consumers prefer attributes (e.g., sunlight in an apartment) that they associate with positive features of their chosen option (lot of sunlight) more than attributes they associate (a) with negative features of their chosen option or (b) with positive features of their nonchosen option. These postchoice associations and altered attribute importance weights drive subsequent preferences. In an incentive-compatible study, Experiment 3 demonstrates that bolstering goes beyond choice justification and impacts subsequent choice. After an initial choice, participants choose new products that have positive features consistent with their original chosen option rather than products with positive features consistent with their original nonchosen option. This research contributes to the literature on preference construction by examining the impact of justification for one's previous choices on constructed attribute preferences and subsequent choices.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48112,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"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.2401\",\"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.2401","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

先前的研究已经证实,决策者会通过放大先前所做选择的价值来证明自己的选择是正确的,从而参与支持过程。当前的研究探讨了 "支持 "对属性重要性权重和未来选择的影响。实验 1 和 2 表明,在对先验可比选项做出选择后,消费者更偏好与所选选项(大量阳光)的积极特征相关联的属性(如公寓中的阳光),而不是与(a)所选选项的消极特征或(b)非所选选项的积极特征相关联的属性。这些选择后的联想和属性重要性权重的改变推动了随后的偏好。在一项与激励相容的研究中,实验 3 证明了支持超出了选择理由的范围,并影响了后续选择。在最初的选择之后,参与者会选择具有与其最初选择一致的积极特征的新产品,而不是具有与其最初非选择一致的积极特征的产品。这项研究通过考察一个人之前选择的合理性对构建属性偏好和后续选择的影响,为偏好构建方面的文献做出了贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Choice Bolstering Changes Attribute Importance and Affects Future Choices

Prior research has established that decision-makers engage in a bolstering process by magnifying the value of a previously made choice in order to justify their choices. The current research examines the impact of bolstering on attribute importance weights and future choices. Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrate that after making a choice between a priori comparable options, consumers prefer attributes (e.g., sunlight in an apartment) that they associate with positive features of their chosen option (lot of sunlight) more than attributes they associate (a) with negative features of their chosen option or (b) with positive features of their nonchosen option. These postchoice associations and altered attribute importance weights drive subsequent preferences. In an incentive-compatible study, Experiment 3 demonstrates that bolstering goes beyond choice justification and impacts subsequent choice. After an initial choice, participants choose new products that have positive features consistent with their original chosen option rather than products with positive features consistent with their original nonchosen option. This research contributes to the literature on preference construction by examining the impact of justification for one's previous choices on constructed attribute preferences and subsequent choices.

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