先前错失选项的数量对不作为惯性的调节机制

在以往涉及不作为惯性的研究中,个体通常只是错失了1个先前选项.本研究旨在考察当之前错失了多个选项后,不作为惯性是否仍会出现,并深入探讨估价和后悔因素在不作为惯性产生或消失中的作用.结果发现,先前错失选项的数量对不作为惯性具有调节作用:当先前只错失了1个选项时,出现了不作为惯性,当先前已错失了两个选项时,不作为惯性消失了.中介分析发现,这一调节作用可被预期后悔所中介.结果表明,预期后悔是导致个体在错失多个选项后不作为惯性消失的主要原因.     

Dealing with missed opportunities: Action vs. state orientation moderates inaction inertia

Inaction inertia refers to the effect that missing a more attractive opportunity decreases the likelihood to act on an attractive current opportunity in the same domain. We studied the influence of how people cope with negative decision outcomes (i.e., action vs. state orientation) on this inaction inertia effect. Experiment 1 used an experimental induction of action vs. state orientation and confirmed our prediction that state oriented people showed more inaction inertia than action oriented people. Experiment 2 replicated these results with a measure of chronic action orientation and showed a mediating effect of valuation of the current opportunity. Experiment 3 showed that temporal segregation of the current from the missed opportunity decreased inaction inertia effects for state oriented, but not for action oriented people. We discuss the implications of these results for the inaction inertia and action vs. state orientation literatures.     

Decoupling the past from the present attenuates inaction inertia

Inaction inertia is the phenomenon that one is not likely to act upon an attractive opportunity after having bypassed an even more attractive opportunity. We investigated the boundary conditions of this inaction inertia effect. Based on the mental accounting literature and the transaction decoupling literature we predicted and found in three experiments that tight coupling of the forgone to the current opportunity is a necessary condition for inaction inertia to occur. Inaction inertia decreased when information about the missed opportunity was ambiguous (Experiment 1), when the past opportunity required an extra step to obtain (Experiment 2) and when the past and present opportunity decreased in comparability (Experiment 3). The theoretical and practical implications of the results are discussed in view of the literature on inaction inertia and on judgment and decision-making. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Inaction inertia in retirement saving

In retirement saving, many people miss out on early opportunities to save and subsequently fail to take adequate actions for a long time thereafter. We examined whether these two observations—the initial failure to act and the subsequent inertia—could be related through the phenomenon of inaction inertia. In Experiment 1 (N = 180), participants were less likely to save for retirement when the difference in annual return between the current opportunity and the missed opportunity was large versus small. In Experiment 2 (N = 180), participants were less likely to start saving for retirement when reminded of a missed opportunity 10 years ago versus 1 year ago. These data constitute the first demonstration of inaction inertia in retirement saving: People's reluctance to act on attractive saving opportunities may be induced by their previous inaction. In Experiment 3 (N = 340) and Experiment 4 (N = 628), we find that the observed inertia is the product of a tendency to underestimate exponential growth combined with a focus on past opportunities. Building on this mechanism, Experiment 5 (N = 916) provided evidence for a potential remedy; the inaction inertia effect completely disappeared when focus was shifted from required contributions to future outcomes.     

How consumers respond to the behavior of missing a free gift promotion: inaction inertia effect on products offered as free gifts

Inaction inertia describes the phenomenon that an individual is unlikely to act on an attractive opportunity after having bypassed an even more attractive one. The results of two experiments indicate that after missing an initial opportunity to obtain a product as a free gift during a promotional period, the inaction inertia effect reduces the likelihood of consumers buying the product at a discounted price (second, inferior opportunity), particularly if the free gift has a high regular price. Additionally, according to the results of Experiment 2, those consumers are less likely to buy a product that has been offered previously as a free gift when a greater total quantity of the free gift is offered during a promotional period. Moreover, the mediation analysis results indicate that anticipated regret and valuation significantly impact the mediating role of inaction inertia.     

Not all missed opportunities cast the same shadow: Voluntary inaction reduces the “sting” of missed sales promotions

How do consumers who miss extremely attractive sales promotions respond to merely attractive opportunities they later encounter when prices return to higher levels? The literature on inaction inertia suggests that the more attractive the missed opportunity, the less likely a consumer is to accept the subsequently encountered inferior opportunity, indicating that consumers may stay undecided. Thus, consumers are believed to be negatively influenced by the shadow of the attractive opportunities they missed. This has adverse consequences for both consumer and firm welfare. Yet, we sometimes do see consumers buying even after missing a sale. We draw from the literature on regret and personal responsibility to hypothesize the conditions that would allow the consumer to remain uninfluenced by the attractiveness of the missed opportunity. In three studies, we find support for the idea that personal responsibility for missing the first opportunity allows consumers to be less influenced by its attractiveness when they see a second inferior opportunity compared to conditions in which they were not personally responsible for missing the first opportunity; this bodes well both for consumer and marketer welfare.     

失望情绪在不作为惯性产生中的作用

以往不作为惯性领域的研究发现, 当个体没有获得先前更优机会是源于他人或外界等不可控因素时, 个体仍会倾向于继续放弃当前次优机会, 且后悔情绪未能对此进行解释。本研究认为失望情绪适用于解释此种情况下的不作为惯性, 或可成为后悔情绪解释的有效补充。本研究通过两个实验首次探讨了失望情绪在不作为惯性产生中的作用。结果发现, 各自变量对失望情绪（体验失望和预期失望）和作为可能性均具有一致的影响力, 且预期失望在不作为惯性的产生中具有中介作用。本研究表明, 失望情绪可能也是导致不作为惯性的一个重要因素。     

Inaction inertia,regret, and valuation: A closer look

Inaction inertia is the phenomenon that one is not likely to act on an attractive opportunity after having bypassed an even more attractive opportunity. So far, all published work has assumed a causal role for the emotion regret in this effect. In a series of 5 experiments we found no support for this regret explanation. In these experiments factors that influenced regret did not influence inaction inertia, and factors that influenced inaction inertia did not influence regret. In addition, in two experiments we found evidence that missing the initial opportunity leads to a devaluation of the later offer. We propose that, in some cases, regret may be a by-product of this devaluation, rather than a cause of inaction inertia.     

Regret, Valuation, and Inaction Inertia

In three experiments we sought to determine the cause of the “inaction inertia” effect, which occurs when bypassing an initial opportunity decreases the likelihood that a subsequent similar action will be taken. Experiment 1 required some participants to estimate their likelihood of buying shoes as a function of the magnitude and geographical location of an earlier forsaken bargain; others estimated their amount of regret over failing to take advantage of the bargain. The inverse relation between regret and propensity to buy strongly implicated regret as the cause of inaction inertia. In Experiment 2 we found evidence that experienced regret over having missed an earlier bargain rather than anticipated regret over paying too much for the subsequent purchase was the source of our participants' inaction inertia. In Experiment 3 we demonstrated through a mediational analysis that those who had missed a large bargain placed a significantly lower value on the subsequent purchase opportunity than those who earlier had missed a more modest bargain. This difference in valuation, along with experienced regret, are two factors which play a significant mediational role in the inaction inertia effect.     

The impact of different product formats on inaction inertia

ABSTRACT

The inaction inertia effect describes situations in which a person rejects an opportunity after having forgone a relatively superior opportunity. This study explores whether product format (hedonic vs. utilitarian) affects the inaction inertia effect. The authors build on previous findings that show comparisons of utilitarian benefits are easier than hedonic benefits, and hedonic consumption (vs. utilitarian consumption) usually generates greater pleasure. The authors propose that people show higher inaction inertia after they have missed a superior utilitarian consumption opportunity than after they have missed a superior hedonic consumption opportunity. This prediction was tested and supported in three different experiments. Moreover, the authors found that differences in comparability between products, rather than the hedonic pleasure, explain differences in inaction inertia effects. These findings contribute to the inaction inertia literature and marketing practice.     

The effects of social comparison on inaction inertia

In this paper, we examine inaction inertia in a social context where the decision-maker is among others who are faced with similar current and past opportunities. We specifically investigate whether the likelihood of taking advantage of a current opportunity after having missed a previous, relatively superior opportunity depends on whether a referent other did or did not take advantage of the previous opportunity. We report results from three studies that provide evidence for the interplay between the past actions and inactions of a referent other and the extent of inaction inertia displayed by a focal decision-maker. We also show that the proximity of the other and the valence of the relationship between the decision-maker and the other influence the extent to which the decision of the other impacts the likelihood to take action. And, finally, we show that regret mediates the relationship between the decision of the other with respect to the past opportunity and the decision-maker's likelihood of taking advantage of the current opportunity.     

不作为惯性产生的原因、条件及应用

不作为惯性指如果个体先前已错过了一个更优的机会, 当次一些的类似机会再出现时(但仍好于一般情况), 个体会倾向于继续放弃这一机会。本文首先简要介绍了不作为惯性的概念、操作定义和基本研究方法; 然后着重探讨了导致不作为惯性的原因及相关实证研究, 目前研究者普遍认为后悔情绪和估价是导致不作为惯性的两个主要原因; 随后探讨了不作为惯性产生的条件及在市场营销及股票市场中的应用研究; 最后未来研究需要更加注重研究方法上的改进以及对不作为惰性的原因探讨。     

做会后悔还是不做会后悔?——自我调节模式对不作为惯性的影响

从消费者的不作为惯性反应差异出发,探讨运动模式和评估模式的消费者在错过第一次合意机会、面对第二次次优机会时购买可能性的差异及原因。通过3个研究发现,相比评估模式的消费者而言,运动模式的消费者具有更高的二次购买可能性。在自我调节模式影响次优购买可能性的过程中,预期后悔起到重要的中介作用。此外,研究还发现,当第二次次优机会中提供了与第一次机会中的产品类似但不同的替代产品时,运动模式和评估模式消费者之间的购买可能性差异消失了。     

Inaction Inertia in the Stock Market1

Based on the inaction inertia effect, it was hypothesized that investors who missed an opportunity to leave a “bear market” will be less likely to sell the stock at a later opportunity when facing a grave loss. Participants in a stock‐market computer game were given an opportunity to sell their stock for a moderate gain. Having missed this initial opportunity and now facing a grave loss, these participants were less likely to sell their stock compared to participants whose potential loss was not as grave, or compared to participants facing the same magnitude of loss who had no previous opportunity to leave the market. Analysis of the time spent by participants on reading relevant information concerning the stock market suggests that this tendency toward continued inaction was not the result of careful deliberation over market trends. The results are discussed in terms of counterfac‐tual thinking and anticipated regret.     

The Effect of Multiple Reference Points and Prior Gains and Losses on Managers′ Risky Decision Making

This study examines the impact of two contextual features of decision settings on managers′ risky behavior. Considerable research indicates that decision makers exhibit risk avoiding or risk taking behavior depending upon whether options are viewed as gains or losses with respect to a given reference point. We argue in this paper that multiple points of reference are important determinants of risky behavior in many decision contexts, and that research should explicitly consider their effect to fully understand and predict risky behavior. The analysis of contextual features is extended to consider the impact of prior gains and losses in the second part of the paper. Seventy-two professional corporate managers participated in two experiments that involved a corporate investment decision setting. The setting exemplifies a context that has both multiple important points of reference and prior gains and losses. The data indicated that the presence of multiple relevant reference points results in a complex pattern of risky behavior, where managers′ decisions to accept or avoid risk were affected by the relative positions of risky alternatives with respect to two important points of reference. In particular, a mixture of risk taking and risk avoiding occurred for options between the relevant reference points. The managers were also found to be more willing to accept risk after experiencing a prior gain as opposed to a prior loss. These findings point to the importance of considering such task characteristics when attempting to predict and understand risky behavior across a variety of task contexts.     

Inaction inertia

Inaction inertia occurs when bypassing an initial action opportunity has the effect of decreasing the likelihood that subsequent similar action opportunities will be taken. This overview of the inaction inertia literature demonstrates the impact of inaction inertia on decision making. Based on research on the causes of inaction inertia, we show that it is a multi-determined phenomenon, explained by both valuation and regret considerations. Moreover, we demonstrate how a sour grapes explanation of inaction inertia might integrate these two accounts. Furthermore, we explain when inaction inertia is most likely to occur and how it can be prevented. We conclude that the inaction inertia literature does not only add to our understanding of this intriguing phenomenon, but also contributes to related social psychological phenomena, such as the sunk cost effect, sequential decision making, decision avoidance (e.g., choice deferral, status quo bias, decisional conflict), and procrastination.     

Order Effects in Preference Judgments: Evidence for Context Dependence in the Generation of Preferences

This paper explores the cognitive processes at work in preference generation. It tests the hypothesis that the evaluation process relies on a comparative context of alternatives. Participants in two experiments reviewed pairs of options that included one superficially attractive option and another that was normatively superior in some way but superficially unattractive. Experiment 1 (N= 116) found that when the superficially attractive option was rated first, reported preferences for both options were higher than when the less attractive alternative was rated first. Experiment 2 (N= 177) replicated this order effect on preferences using six pairs of options. I obtained process measures that suggest the effect is attributable to the process by which people generate judgments of preference. Options are rated more positively to the extent that they compare favorably to other real or imagined alternatives; options are rated more negatively to the extent that they compare poorly to their alternatives. These two experiments contribute to the literature on preference generation by specifying a process by which people generate preferences.     

消费决策中的零：零价格效应和零比较效应

数字“0”由于自身所具有的特性(最小的自然数和不可作为被除数),当其与商品的价格维度和属性维度相结合时会对消费者的决策产生影响。已有研究表明商品的零价格和零属性会对消费决策产生影响,即零价格效应和零比较效应。情绪和社会规范是零价格效应产生的心理机制,参照依赖则是零比较效应产生的心理机制。商品价格、商品类型和消费者的心理因素是零价格效应的边界条件;而选项的数量是零比较效应的边界条件。未来的研究可以从不同商品类型、不同社会规范、“价格-损失”与“价格-质量”、注意等角度对零价格效应进行深入研究;也可以从结构匹配模型和齐当别模型的角度进一步探索零比较效应的“比较”机制;可以探讨价格是否能被视为商品的“坏属性”,进而讨论零价格效应和零比较效应二者之间的关系。     

Tradeoffs and theory: the double-mediation model

Most theories of decision making suggest that, when options imply tradeoffs between their attributes, conflict increases as tradeoff size increases, because greater sacrifices are to be incurred in choosing one option instead of another. An alternative view is that conflict decreases as tradeoff size increases, because stronger arguments can be made for any decision. The authors propose a unified model, the double-mediation model, which combines the mediating effects of sacrifice and argumentation. Our model generally predicts an inverse U-shaped relation between tradeoff size and conflict. Results support this prediction. Also, when the decision situation increases the mediating effect of sacrifice relative to that of argumentation, the relation between tradeoff size and conflict changes in an upward direction; conversely, when the decision situation increases the mediating effect of argumentation relative to that of sacrifice, the relation changes in a downward direction. Results support these predictions as well. Commonalities and differences between our model and other formulations are discussed.     

SDG 3: a Missed Opportunity to Transform Understandings and Monitoring of Health,Well-Being and Development?

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) initiative provided a window of opportunity to transform understandings of health and well-being to monitor progress in these areas across the globe between 2015 and 2030. SDG 3 on health and well-being is used to illustrate how this opportunity was missed. Despite widespread global consultations with stakeholders and a global climate of more holistic approaches to health and well-being, SDG3, along with many of the other SDGs, remains stuck in traditional twentieth century discourse about measures of progress. The reasons for this inertia and possible initiatives which might act as a catalyst for change are explored.