Differential predictability of preferences and choices

A combined multi-attribute utility and expectancy-value model has repeatedly been found to yield a worse fit to choices than to preference ratings. The present study investigated two possible explanations for this finding. First, people's belief-value structures may change in the choice task as they try to find the best alternative. Second, a difficult choice task may cause the decision maker to use simplifying heuristics. In the first of two experiments, subjective belief-value structures were measured on two occasions separated by about one week. Immediately before the second measurement, different groups of subjects performed a choice task, gave preference ratings, or performed a control task. The results did not support an interpretation of the greater difficulty of predicting choices in terms of changes in belief-value structures. However, the notion of simplifying heuristics received support by the finding that adopting simpler versions of the original model improved the predictions of the choices. In the second experiment, beliefs were measured immediately before or after each of a series of choices or preference ratings. The results indicated that although temporary changes in beliefs may occur, they can hardly provide a full account of the differential predictability of preferences and choices.     

Utility maximization and melioration: Internalities in individual choice

How do people go about choosing between alternatives in relatively simple settings? This study explores some of the variables that past work suggests may be relevant. Volunteer subjects worked for money in six procedures in which the probability of a payment from either of two alternatives was 1.0, but the rate of pay (i.e. the speed with which a payment was delivered or the size of the payment) interacted with the subjects recent allocation of choices, which we define as the ‘internalities’. Because of the internalities, choosing the currently more profitable alternative did not maximize total earnings. Subjects were more likely to fail to maximize when the interaction between present pay and past choices was spread over longer sequences of choices, or when the reward variable was the speed, rather than the value, of each payment. Subjects often disregarded the internalities and were instead guided by the current yields of the two alternatives, which is a frequently observed tendency, called ‘melioration’, in experiments on choices by animals. The tendency toward melioration was only partially counteracted by explicit instructions on how to maximize earnings. We discuss a theoretical framework for melioration that postulates both motivational and cognitive sources.     

The Politics of Choice: Political Ideology and Intolerance of Ambiguity

The authors examine how political ideology impacts consumer preferences for hedonic and utilitarian choices and the underlying reasons for these differences. Five studies indicate that conservatives are less tolerant of ambiguity than liberals, leading to a preference for utilitarian options, whereas liberals are more tolerant of ambiguity leading to a preference for hedonic options. However, these preferences were reversed when utilitarian options were framed as ambiguous and hedonic options were framed as explicit and clear.     

Analyzing pedestrian behavior when crossing urban roads by combining RP and SP data

Considering the high crash rates involving pedestrians on urban roads, it is highly relevant to understanding pedestrian crossing behavior. This paper is the first to combine stated preference (SP) and revealed preference (RP) data to evaluate the impact that individual attributes, trip characteristics, built environment, strategies to prevent unauthorized crossing, and traffic flows have on pedestrians crossing decisions in an urban context. SP and RP surveys were designed and collected in Barranquilla (Colombia) near pedestrian bridges or signalized intersections where direct crossings and a high concentration of pedestrian fatalities related to traffic accidents exist. A logit model was estimated using the data enrichment paradigm. Results show that pedestrians weigh risks and costs when choosing how to cross the road. The trajectories observed in the RP component suggest that people prefer direct crossings; nevertheless, pedestrian bridges and signalized intersections can be attractive alternatives if their location matches the origin or destination of the crossing, and no detour is needed to use them. Waiting time; safety; the fine imposed for jaywalking; personal security, and previous decisions are also variables that influence pedestrian behavior when crossing urban roads. These results can be helpful to urban planners and decision-makers interested in proposing appropriate pedestrian infrastructure. The data pooling technique and the inclusion of a cost-related variable (i.e., fine) allowed computing the willingness to pay and marginal substitution rates for attributes of the built environment and other characteristics associated with the crossing decision. Also, the inclusion of several crossing alternatives and situations allowed assessing pedestrian crossing preferences under different scenarios.     

Personal choice: A blessing or a burden,or both? A cross‐cultural investigation on need for closure effects in two Western and two East‐Asian societies

The present study investigates the role of dispositional need for closure (NFC) in how individuals within a particular culture perceive and appreciate choice. Data sets from the US (283 adults), Europe (263 adults and 427 students), China (218 adults and 309 students) and Singapore (258 students) were collected. The results showed that in Western cultures, people perceived choice in a linear way as either a burden or a blessing, whereas in Chinese culture, such opposition between perspectives did not appear, and individuals generally saw choice as both burden and blessing simultaneously. In Western cultures, high dispositional NFC was strongly associated with viewing choice‐as‐a‐burden, whereas Chinese respondents with a high NFC perceived choice as a blessing and a burden simultaneously. The Singaporean results were similar to the Western pattern. These findings are discussed in terms of the NFC literature and cultural differences in dialectic versus differentiation thinking styles.     

When Intertemporal Rewards Are Hedonic,Larger Units of Wait Time Boost Patience

In intertemporal choices between smaller‐sooner (SS) and larger‐later (LL) rewards, five studies reveal that patience for the LL option is influenced by an interactive effect of the measurement units used to express wait time (large vs. small) and the type of the reward (hedonic vs. utilitarian). Specifically, larger time units boost patience, but more so when rewards are hedonic rather than utilitarian. In line with the numerosity heuristic, the effect of time units on patience is mediated by larger time units shrinking wait time perception. This effect arises because hedonic (vs. utilitarian) rewards promote a reliance on heuristics rather than systematic calculations. Therefore, a more calculative mindset diminishes the effect of units even for hedonic rewards and eliminates the hedonic‐utilitarian asymmetry. These results contribute to research on numerosity, intertemporal choice, and hedonic‐utilitarian differences, and offer a simple tool for practitioners to influence patience.     

Promotional Games: Trick or Treat?

Some marketers use game settings to offer deals. Though research has studied the conditions under which consumers engage in such games, we know little about how they respond to deal offers won through the gaming process. We hypothesize that when faced with deal offers from games, such as scratch cards or trivia quizzes, consumers who are high (vs. low) in choice freedom needs often feel reactance and reject the offer. We find converging evidence for this prediction in both controlled experiments (studies 1 and 3) and in a field study (study 2), when using ethnic backgrounds as a proxy for participants’ choice freedom needs (study 1), when directly measuring these needs (study 2), and when manipulating beliefs about the importance of free choice (study 3).     

How Cross‐Linguistic Differences in the Grammaticalization of Future Time Reference Influence Intertemporal Choices

According to Chen's (2013) Linguistic Savings Hypothesis (LSH), our native language affects our economic behavior. We present three studies investigating how cross‐linguistic differences in the grammaticalization of future‐time reference (FTR) affect intertemporal choices. In a series of decision scenarios about finance and health issues, we let speakers of altogether five languages that represent FTR with increasing strength, that is, Chinese, German, Danish, Spanish, and English, choose between hypothetical sooner‐smaller and later‐larger reward options. While the LSH predicts a present‐bias that increases with FTR‐strength, our decision makers preferred later‐larger options and this future‐bias increased with FTR‐strength. In multiple regressions, the FTR‐strength effect persisted when controlled for socioeconomic and cultural differences. We discuss why our findings deviate from the LSH and ask in how far the FTR‐strength effect represents a habitual constitution of linguistic relativity or an instance of online decision framing.