Buying an electric car: A rational choice or a norm-directed behavior?

The diffusion of electric cars can contribute to more sustainability in the transport sector, but diffusion rates in most countries are still low. We investigated motives for electric car adoption in German households from an environmental psychology perspective. The public debate focuses on rational aspects such as the purchase price or new technological demands (e.g., limited range and a new charging system). Psychological research on energy-related investment decisions in households confirms the relevance of rational motives, but additionally points to the importance of norm-directed motives (moral and social norms). We investigated the relevance of different motives in an online questionnaire with n = 220 members of German households interested in buying a new car. The questionnaire included possible rational and norm-related predictors of electric car adoption. We tested three action models to explain adoption intention: An adjusted technology acceptance model (TAM), an adjusted norm activation model (NAM), and an integrative model with predictors from both models. We analyzed the hypothesized models with path analyses. All models explained a substantial share of variance in adoption intention. The explained share of variance in the NAM was higher than in the TAM and comparably high to the integrative model. The results demonstrate the important role of moral and social motives for households’ investment decisions. Additionally, the technology’s perceived usefulness was an important rational motive. We discuss the context dependency of the results, as household members might have little knowledge about the new technology during the early stages of a technology’s diffusion process. The results strongly suggest broadening political support schemes, such as informational and image campaigns, as a way to more effectively foster electric car diffusion. More comprehensive assessments appear to be necessary in future analyses of electric car adoption as well as energy-related investment decisions.     

Decision-making competence in everyday life: The roles of general cognitive styles,decision-making styles and personality

Research indicates that decision-making competence in everyday life is associated with certain decision-making styles. The aims of this article are to extend this research by examining (a) the extent to which general cognitive styles explain variance in decision-making competence over and above decision-making styles, and (b) the extent to which personality explains variance in decision-making competence over and above both types of style variable. Participants (N = 355) completed measures of everyday decision-making competence (Decision Outcomes Inventory), decision styles (Decision Style Questionnaire; Maximization Inventory), cognitive styles (the Cognitive Styles Inventory; Rational-Experience Inventory), and the Big Five personality variables (IPIP Big-Five factor scales). The results indicate that cognitive styles offer no incremental validity over decision-making styles in predicting decision-making competence, but that personality does offer substantial incremental validity over general cognitive styles and decision-making styles. Jointly decision-making styles and personality account for a substantial amount of variance in everyday decision-making competence.     

The path or the goal? Decision vs. information focus in biased information seeking after preliminary decisions

Research on the phenomenon of selective exposure to information demonstrates that after preliminary or final decisions, people show a preference for supporting rather than conflicting information (confirmation bias). In this article, we examine conditions that increase or decrease distortions in the search for information. We report on four experiments indicating that the confirmation bias is influenced by whether people focus on their decision or on the presented pieces of information during the information search. Focusing on the decision, for example, because a reward for a correct decision is promised or simply because participants repeatedly think of it, increases the confirmation bias. On the other hand, if participants focus on the available pieces of information because they have to invest money in order to search for information or because they have to evaluate the individual pieces of information, the confirmation bias decreases. Implications for theoretical understanding and interventions for decision-making situations are discussed.     

Psychological determinants of decision attitude

Decision attitude — an analog of risk attitude — is the propensity to make (or avoid making) a decision: in decision aversion, a person finds it more desirable to receive through fiat the better of two options than to have a choice between them; in decision seeking, the choice is more desirable, even though it can lead to nothing better than the best option. Both decision aversion and decision seeking were found in hypothetical scenarios. Experimental manipulations and subjects' justifications point to anticipated regret, fear of blame for poor outcomes, and desire for equitable distributions as sources of decision aversion. One source of decision seeking (for self) and decision aversion (when deciding for others) appears to be the desire for the self-determination of the affected parties. We consider the implications of our results for personal choice and public policy decisions.     

The personality of meaning in life: Associations between dimensions of life meaning and the Big Five

The goal of the current study was to identify aspects of personality that are associated with different ways in which people find meaning in life. This was achieved using constrained principal component analysis (CPCA) on data from 322 university students, who completed the Sources of Meaning and Meaning in Life questionnaire and the Big Five Aspects Scale. CPCA demonstrated that personality traits and life meaning are associated, but not redundant, with one another. Specifically, respondents with high scores on lower-level aspects of Openness to Experience tended to derive meaning from questioning, learning and challenging tradition, whereas those with high scores on aspects of Conscientiousness and Extraversion tended to derive meaning from success at work, health, and family. Results suggest that personality traits are associated with variations in the domains used to derive meaning in life, and demonstrate the utility of CPCA as an innovative statistical technique for the study of individual differences.     

The distortion of criteria after decision-making

The results of two experiments indicate that decision-makers separately distort their interpretations of decision criteria and evaluations of information in a manner that justifies their decisions. In Study 1, participants reported a yes/no decision either before or after they rated the applicable decision criterion and problem information. Participants distorted their criterion and information ratings more when they reported their decisions before, rather than after, they rated the decision criterion and problem information. Study 2 demonstrated that distortion of decision criterion ratings occurred after a decision had been made whereas distortion of information evaluations occurred during the process of reaching a decision. These results are consistent with a two-stage model of decision-making in which the distortion of decision criteria is distinct from the distortion of decision information.