Multilevel Multivariate Meta-analysis with Application to Choice Overload

We introduce multilevel multivariate meta-analysis methodology designed to account for the complexity of contemporary psychological research data. Our methodology directly models the observations from a set of studies in a manner that accounts for the variation and covariation induced by the facts that observations differ in their dependent measures and moderators and are nested within, for example, papers, studies, groups of subjects, and study conditions. Our methodology is motivated by data from papers and studies of the choice overload hypothesis. It more fully accounts for the complexity of choice overload data relative to two prior meta-analyses and thus provides richer insight. In particular, it shows that choice overload varies substantially as a function of the six dependent measures and four moderators examined in the domain and that there are potentially interesting and theoretically important interactions among them. It also shows that the various dependent measures have differing levels of variation and that levels up to and including the highest (i.e., the fifth, or paper, level) are necessary to capture the variation and covariation induced by the nesting structure. Our results have substantial implications for future studies of choice overload.

[1]  M. Lepper,et al.  The Construction of Preference: When Choice Is Demotivating: Can One Desire Too Much of a Good Thing? , 2006 .

[2]  Lawrence Joseph,et al.  Impact of approximating or ignoring within‐study covariances in multivariate meta‐analyses , 2008, Statistics in medicine.

[3]  Jacob Cohen,et al.  A power primer. , 1992, Psychological bulletin.

[4]  U. Böckenholt,et al.  Choice overload: A conceptual review and meta-analysis , 2015 .

[5]  S. Raudenbush,et al.  A multivariate mixed linear model for meta-analysis. , 1996 .

[6]  B. Schwartz The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less , 2004 .

[7]  John T. Gourville,et al.  Overchoice and Assortment Type: When and Why Variety Backfires , 2005 .

[8]  H. Oppewal,et al.  More choice is better: Effects of assortment size and composition on assortment evaluation , 2005 .

[9]  B. Scheibehenne,et al.  Less may be more when choosing is difficult: choice complexity and too much choice. , 2010, Acta psychologica.

[10]  D. Harville Maximum Likelihood Approaches to Variance Component Estimation and to Related Problems , 1977 .

[11]  G. Wolford,et al.  Buying Behavior as a Function of Parametric Variation of Number of Choices , 2007, Psychological science.

[12]  A. Chernev Product Assortment and Individual Decision Processes , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[13]  Richard D Riley,et al.  Multivariate meta‐analysis: the effect of ignoring within‐study correlation , 2009 .

[14]  P. Todd,et al.  What Moderates the Too-Much-Choice Effect? , 2009 .

[15]  A. Chernev Decision Focus and Consumer Choice Among Assortments , 2006 .

[16]  A. Chernev When More Is Less and Less Is More: the Role of Ideal Point Availability and Assortment in Consumer Choice This Research Argues That Choices from Different Size Assort- Ments Are a Function of the Degree to Which Consumers Have , 2022 .

[17]  K. Diehl,et al.  Great Expectations?! Assortment Size, Expectations, and Satisfaction , 2008 .

[18]  Alexander Chernev,et al.  Feature Complementarity and Assortment in Choice , 2005 .

[19]  Alexander Chernev,et al.  Assortment Size and Option Attractiveness in Consumer Choice among Retailers , 2009 .

[20]  Chien-Huang Lin,et al.  The effect of variety on consumer preferences: The role of need for cognition and recommended alternatives , 2006 .

[21]  H. Akaike A new look at the statistical model identification , 1974 .

[22]  Ulf Böckenholt,et al.  Single Paper Meta-Analysis: Benefits For Study Summary, Theory-Testing, and Replicability , 2017 .

[23]  G. Robinson That BLUP is a Good Thing: The Estimation of Random Effects , 1991 .

[24]  Betsy Jane Becker,et al.  Multivariate meta-analysis. , 2000 .

[25]  Ulf Böckenholt,et al.  You Cannot Step Into the Same River Twice , 2014, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[26]  Maureen Morrin,et al.  Plan Format and Participation in 401(k) Plans: The Moderating Role of Investor Knowledge , 2012 .

[27]  P. Todd,et al.  Can There Ever Be Too Many Options? A Meta-Analytic Review of Choice Overload , 2010 .

[28]  F Mosteller,et al.  Meta-analysis of multiple outcomes by regression with random effects. , 1998, Statistics in medicine.

[29]  B. Fasolo,et al.  The effect of choice complexity on perception of time spent choosing: When choice takes longer but feels shorter , 2009 .

[30]  A. Sela,et al.  Variety, Vice, and Virtue: How Assortment Size Influences Option Choice , 2008 .

[31]  John W. Payne,et al.  The adaptive decision maker: Name index , 1993 .

[32]  Y. Inbar,et al.  Decision speed and choice regret: When haste feels like waste , 2011 .

[33]  B. Kahn,et al.  The "visual preference heuristic": The influence of visual versus verbal depiction on assortment processing, perceived variety, and choice overload , 2014 .

[34]  S. Iyengar,et al.  The Mere Categorization Effect: How the Presence of Categories Increases Choosers' Perceptions of Assortment Variety and Outcome Satisfaction , 2008 .

[35]  Selin A. Malkoc,et al.  Choosing Here and Now vs. There and Later: The Moderating Role of Psychological Distance on Assortment Size Preferences , 2012 .

[36]  G. Haynes,et al.  Testing the boundaries of the choice overload phenomenon: The effect of number of options and time pressure on decision difficulty and satisfaction , 2009 .

[37]  Ulf Böckenholt,et al.  Adjusting for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis , 2016, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[38]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  The adaptive decision maker , 1993 .