The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Construal Level Theory as an Integrative Framework for Behavioral Decision‐Making Research and Consumer Psychology
Abstract
In this comment to Trope, Liberman and Makslak's lead article, I refrain from any attempt to review or recapitulate the growing body of research in social psychology in general and in consumer science in particular that is explicitly devoted to construal level theory (CLT). Rather, granting the status of CLT as a leading contemporary theory, with rich implications and applications in consumer science, I concentrate on recent phenomena in judgment and decision making for which CLT provides an implicit account. Specifically, CLT affords an integrative framework for understanding a whole variety of preference reversals—a major challenge for students of consumer behavior.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.39.4.341 · Cited by 6,544
Arkes, H. R., & Blumer, C. (1985) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(85)90049-4 · Cited by 2,573 · cited 1×
“To be sure, the relative blindness or myopia for alternative outcomes is related to sunk-cost situations (Arkes & Blumer, 1985), in which prior investment and commitment to an inferior option prevents consumers from choosing a better option (as mentioned in Trope et al.’s target article).”
BackgroundThinking too much: Introspection can reduce the quality of preferences and decisions.
Wilson, T. D., & Schooler, J. W. (1991) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.2.181 · Cited by 1,417 · cited 1×
“When this is the case, small information samples and low expertise may lead to better decisions and higher satisfaction than large samples and high expertise (Fiedler & Kareev, 2006; Hertwig & Pleskac, 2006; Wilson & Schooler, 1991).”
BackgroundSupport theory: a nonextensional representation of subjective probability
Tversky, A., & Koehler, D. J. (1994) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.101.4.547 · Cited by 1,167
Cited by
Maglio, S. J., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2013) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/a0030258 · Cited by 157
Spillover Effects in Seeded Word-of-Mouth Marketing Campaigns
Chae, I., Stephen, A. T., Bart, Y., & Yao, D. (2017) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.2016.1001 · Cited by 135
The roles of sensory perceptions and mental imagery in consumer decision-making
Kim, M., Kim, J.-H., Park, M., & Yoo, J. (2021) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102517 · Cited by 97
Metadata
- Authors
- Fiedler, K.
- Venue
- Journal of Consumer Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-04
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 101-106
- ISSN
- 1057-7408 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7663
- OpenAlex
- W1983829365
- Cited by
- 258
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 2.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
