The Interactive Choice Aid: A New Approach to Supporting Online Consumer Decision Making

Interactive Choice Aid (ICA) is a decision aid, introduced in this paper, that systematically assists consumers with online purchase decisions. ICA integrates aspects from prescriptive decision theory, insights from descriptive decision research, and practical considerations; thereby combining pre-existing best practices with novel features. Instead of imposing an objectively ideal but unnatural decision procedure on the user, ICA assists the natural process of human decision-making by providing explicit support for the execution of the user’s decision strategies. The application contains an innovative feature for in-depth comparisons of alternatives through which users’ importance ratings are elicited interactively and in a playful way. The usability and general acceptance of the choice aid was studied; results show that ICA is a promising contribution and provides insights that may further improve its usability.

[1]  J. Ford,et al.  Process tracing methods: Contributions, problems, and neglected research questions , 1989 .

[2]  Sean M. McNee,et al.  Interfaces for Eliciting New User Preferences in Recommender Systems , 2003, User Modeling.

[3]  D. Goldstein,et al.  Betting on one good reason : The Take the Best heuristic , 1999 .

[4]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Interactive Decision Aids for Consumer Decision Making in E-Commerce: The Influence of Perceived Strategy Restrictiveness , 2009, MIS Q..

[5]  John W. Payne,et al.  Task complexity and contingent processing in decision making: An information search and protocol analysis☆ , 1976 .

[6]  Andrew Howes,et al.  A framework for understanding human factors in web-based electronic commerce , 2000, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[7]  Robert M. O'Keefe,et al.  Web-based customer decision support systems , 1998, CACM.

[8]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Inducing compensatory information processing through decision aids that facilitate effort reduction: an experimental assessment , 2000 .

[9]  Donna J. Hill.  Preserving Consumer Autonomy in an Interactive Informational Environment Toward Development of a Consumer Decision Aid Model , 1989 .

[10]  Lael J. Schooler,et al.  Center for Adaptive Behavior and Cognition , 2005 .

[11]  Jean-Paul Caverni,et al.  Contributions to decision making , 1995 .

[12]  Ulrich Hoffrage,et al.  When One Cue is not Enough: Combining Fast and Frugal Heuristics with Compound Cue Processing , 2007, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[13]  Gerald Häubl,et al.  "Double Agents": Assessing the Role of Electronic Product Recommendation Systems , 2005 .

[14]  Weiquan Wang.  Design of trustworthy online recommendation agents: explanation facilities and decision strategy support , 2005 .

[15]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  The Effects of Process and Outcome Similarity on Users' Evaluations of Decision Aids , 2008, Decis. Sci..

[16]  Ulrich Hoffrage,et al.  Identifying decision strategies in a consumer choice situation , 2008, Judgment and Decision Making.

[17]  Paolo Viappiani,et al.  Preferences in Interactive Systems: Technical Challenges and Case Studies , 2008, AI Mag..

[18]  Gediminas Adomavicius,et al.  Toward the next generation of recommender systems: a survey of the state-of-the-art and possible extensions , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[19]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  A Two-Process View of Trust and Distrust Building in Recommendation Agents: A Process-Tracing Study , 2008, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[20]  G Gigerenzer,et al.  Reasoning the fast and frugal way: models of bounded rationality. , 1996, Psychological review.

[21]  BenbasatIzak,et al.  The effects of personalizaion and familiarity on trust and adoption of recommendation agents , 2006 .

[22]  Katrin Borcherding,et al.  Biases in multiattribute weight elicitation , 1995 .

[23]  S. Sénécal,et al.  The influence of online product recommendations on consumers' online choices , 2004 .

[24]  U. Hoffrage,et al.  Fast, frugal, and fit: Simple heuristics for paired comparison , 2002 .

[25]  Dan Ariely,et al.  Controlling the Information Flow: Effects on Consumers' Decision Making and Preferences , 2000 .

[26]  R. Hogarth,et al.  Satisfaction in choice as a function of the number of alternatives: When “goods satiate” , 2009 .

[27]  U. Hoffrage,et al.  Testing the tyranny of too much choice against the allure of more choice , 2009 .

[28]  Gülçin Büyüközkan,et al.  Using a multi-criteria decision making approach to evaluate mobile phone alternatives , 2007, Comput. Stand. Interfaces.

[29]  B. Fasolo,et al.  Decision technology. , 2001, Annual review of psychology.

[30]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Trust In and Adoption of Online Recommendation Agents , 2005, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[31]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[32]  J. Jacoby,et al.  Information Acquisition Behavior in Brand Choice Situations , 1977 .

[33]  Rex Eugene Perera.  Optimizing Human-Computer Interaction for the Electronic Commerce Environment , 2000, J. Electron. Commer. Res..

[34]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Attributions of Trust in Decision Support Technologies: A Study of Recommendation Agents for E-Commerce , 2008, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[35]  D. Winterfeldt,et al.  Comparison of weighting judgments in multiattribute utility measurement , 1991 .

[36]  Valerie J. Trifts,et al.  Consumer Decision Making in Online Shopping Environments: The Effects of Interactive Decision Aids , 2000 .

[37]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  E-Commerce Product Recommendation Agents: Use, Characteristics, and Impact , 2007, MIS Q..

[38]  Seth Bullock,et al.  Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart , 1999 .