Choice Processing in Emotionally Difficult Decisions

Choice conflicts between one's important values may cause negative emotion. This article extends the standard effort-accuracy approach to explaining task influences on decision processing by arguing that coping goals will interact with effort minimization and accuracy maximization goals for negatively emotion-laden decision tasks. These coping goals may involve both a desire to process in a thorough, accurate manner and a desire to avoid particularly distressing aspects of processing. On the basis of this extended framework, the authors hypothesized and found in 3 experiments that decision processing under increasing negative emotion both becomes more extensive and proceeds more by focusing on one attribute at a time. In particular, increased negative emotion leads to more attribute-based processing at the beginning of the decision process. The results are inconsistent with views that negative emotion acts only as an incentive or only as a source of decision complexity. Individuals make decisions by using a wide variety of processing strategies, ranging from normative procedures that process all relevant information and explicitly consider trade-offs between attributes to more heuristic procedures that use information selectively and avoid trade-offs between attributes. For a number of years, behavioral decision research has addressed how properties of choice tasks influence these decision-processing strategies (Einhom & Hogarth, 1981; Payne, Bettman, & Johnson, 1992). Decision makers are often depicted as deciding how to decide on the basis of trade-offs between the accuracy of various decision strategies and the cognitive effort required to implement those strategies. Thus, research has investigated both the factors affecting the relative effort needed for various strategies (e.g., task complexity, information format, and response mode) and the factors influencing the relative accuracy of various rules or the importance of making an accurate decision (e.g., correlation among attributes and incentives; see Payne, Bettman, & Johnson, 1993, for a review).