Context-dependent preferences

The standard theory of choice---based on value maximization---associates with each option a real value such that, given an offered set, the decision maker chooses the option with the highest value. Despite its simplicity and intuitive appeal, there is a growing body of data that is inconsistent with this theory. In particular, the relative attractiveness of x compared to y often depends on the presence or absence of a third option z, and the "market share" of an option can actually be increased by enlarging the offered set. We review recent empirical findings that are inconsistent with value maximization, and present a context-dependent model that expresses the value of each option as an additive combination of two components: a contingent weighting process that captures the effect of the background context, and a binary comparison process that describes the effect of the local context. The model accounts for observed violations of the standard theory and provides a framework for analyzing context-dependent preferences.

[1]  F. Restle.  Psychology of judgment and choice , 1961 .

[2]  A. Parducci.  Category judgment: a range-frequency model. , 1965, Psychological review.

[3]  A. Tversky.  Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice. , 1972 .

[4]  Michael H. Birnbaum,et al.  Using contextual effects to derive psychophysical scales , 1974 .

[5]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[6]  J. Payne,et al.  Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity & the Similarity Hypothesis. , 1981 .

[7]  Joel Huber,et al.  Market Boundaries and Product Choice: Illustrating Attraction and Substitution Effects , 1983 .

[8]  Jaap Van Brakel,et al.  Foundations of measurement , 1983 .

[9]  A. Tversky,et al.  Contingent weighting in judgment and choice , 1988 .

[10]  I. Simonson,et al.  Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects , 1989 .

[11]  Peter P. Wakker,et al.  Additive Representations of Preferences , 1989 .

[12]  A. A. J. Marley,et al.  Context dependent probabilistic choice models based on measures of binary advantage , 1991 .

[13]  A. Tversky,et al.  Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model , 1991 .

[14]  Douglas H. Wedell.  Distinguishing Among Models of Contextually Induced Preference Reversals , 1991 .

[15]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias , 1991 .

[16]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  Behavioral decision research: A constructive processing perspective. , 1992 .

[17]  A. Tversky,et al.  Choice in Context: Tradeoff Contrast and Extremeness Aversion , 1992 .

[18]  R. A. Lakshmi-Ratan,et al.  An aggregate contextual choice model for estimating demand for new products from a laboratory choice experiment , 1992 .