Trying Hard or Hardly Trying: An Analysis of Context Effects in Choice

Several studies have shown that consumer choice is often influenced by the context or the set of alternatives under consideration. Context effects have largely been explained in terms of constructive preferences that are consistent with 2 theoretical accounts—effort minimization and perceptual contrast—that emphasize different underlying motivations. We propose that the effect of time pressure on context effects can be used as a moderating variable to determine which of the 2 motives is supported. Specifically, if context effects bias preferences due to effort minimization, time pressure should increase the magnitude of such effects. In contrast, if context effects arise due to an excessive focus on the relational characteristics of the alternatives provided, time pressure should reduce the magnitude of such effects. We examine this proposition in relation to the compromise effect and a choice between an extreme and an all-average option. We find that the compromise effect and the preference for an all-average alternative are both reduced under time pressure. A study using Mouselab provides additional support for the underlying decision mechanisms. We discuss the theoretical implications of this research and explore its consequences for marketers.

[1]  A. Y. Lee,et al.  Stereotype efficiency reconsidered: encoding flexibility under cognitive load? , 1998, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[2]  A. Tversky,et al.  Context-dependent preferences , 1993 .

[3]  Peter Wright.  The harassed decision maker: Time pressures, distractions, and the use of evidence. , 1974 .

[4]  C. Neil Macrae,et al.  Stereotypes as energy-saving devices: A peek inside the cognitive toolbox. , 1994 .

[5]  Ola Svenson,et al.  Choices and judgments of incompletely described decision alternatives under time pressure , 1990 .

[6]  Alice M. Tybout,et al.  Context Effects at Encoding and Judgment in Consumption Settings: The Role of Cognitive Resources , 1997 .

[7]  R. Dhar.  The Effect of Decision Strategy on Deciding to Defer Choice , 1996 .

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

[9]  G. Bodenhausen.  Stereotypes as Judgmental Heuristics: Evidence of Circadian Variations in Discrimination , 1990 .

[10]  A. Edland.  Time pressure and the application of decision rules: choices and judgments among multiattribute alternatives. , 1994, Scandinavian journal of psychology.

[11]  R. Dhar,et al.  The Effect of Time Pressure on Consumer Choice Deferral , 1999 .

[12]  P. Tetlock,et al.  Accountability: a social magnifier of the dilution effect. , 1989, Journal of personality and social psychology.

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

[14]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Introspection, Attitude Change, and Attitude-Behavior Consistency: the Disruptive Effects of Explaining Why we Feel the Way we Do , 1989 .

[15]  John W. Payne,et al.  Monitoring Information Processing and Decisions: The Mouselab System , 1989 .

[16]  R. Buehler,et al.  Exploring the "planning fallacy": Why people underestimate their task completion times. , 1994 .

[17]  M. F. Luce,et al.  Constructive Consumer Choice Processes , 1998 .

[18]  R. Buehler,et al.  The Role of Motivated Reasoning in Optimistic Time Predictions , 1997 .

[19]  Daniel T. Gilbert,et al.  Seeing Less and Knowing More The Benefits of Perceptual Ignorance , 1988 .

[20]  Ravi Dhar,et al.  Comparison Effects on Preference Construction , 1999 .

[21]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  Compensatory Choice Models of Noncompensatory Processes: The Effect of Varying Context , 1984 .

[22]  R. Zajonc.  Feeling and thinking : Preferences need no inferences , 1980 .

[23]  Itamar Simonson,et al.  The Role of Explanations and Need for Uniqueness in Consumer Decision Making: Unconventional Choices Based on Reasons , 2000 .

[24]  Bas Verplanken,et al.  Need for Cognition and External Information Search: Responses to Time Pressure during Decision-Making , 1993 .

[25]  P. Slovic.  The Construction of Preference , 1995 .

[26]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[27]  Martin Schürmann,et al.  Information Processing in Decision Making under Time Pressure , 1993 .

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

[29]  Ola Svenson,et al.  Time pressure and stress in human judgment and decision making , 1993 .

[30]  Stephen M. Nowlis.  The effect of time pressure on the choice between brands that differ in quality, price, and product features , 1995 .

[31]  O. John,et al.  Automatic vigilance: the attention-grabbing power of negative social information. , 1991, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[32]  R. Fazio,et al.  On the orienting value of attitudes: attitude accessibility as a determinant of an object's attraction of visual attention. , 1992, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[33]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  Adaptive Strategy Selection in Decision Making. , 1988 .

[34]  Ola Svenson,et al.  Framing and Time Pressure in Decision Making , 1993 .

[35]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Thinking too much: introspection can reduce the quality of preferences and decisions. , 1991, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[36]  Eldar Shafir,et al.  Choosing versus rejecting: Why some options are both better and worse than others , 1993, Memory & cognition.

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

[38]  Ravi Dhar,et al.  The Effect of Common and Unique Features in Consumer Choice , 1996 .

[39]  I. Simonson,et al.  Attribute–Task Compatibility as a Determinant of Consumer Preference Reversals: , 1997 .

[40]  Christopher P. Puto,et al.  Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity & the Similarity Hypothesis. , 1981 .

[41]  J. Schooler,et al.  Verbal overshadowing of visual memories: Some things are better left unsaid , 1990, Cognitive Psychology.

[42]  F. Kardes,et al.  The Role of Direction of Comparison, Attribute-Based Processing, and Attitude-Based Processing in Consumer Preference , 1999 .

[43]  Marcia K. Johnson,et al.  The verbal overshadowing effect: Why descriptions impair face recognition , 1997, Memory & cognition.

[44]  Philip E. Tetlock,et al.  Accountability amplifies the status quo effect when change creates victims , 1994 .

[45]  O. Svenson,et al.  Judgment and Decision Making Under Time Pressure , 1993 .

[46]  Anne Edland,et al.  The Effects of Time Pressure on Choices and Judgments of Candidates to a University Program , 1993 .

[47]  C. Macrae,et al.  PROCESSING LOAD AND MEMORY FOR STEREOTYPE-BASED INFORMATION , 1993 .