Distinguishing among models of contextually induced preference reversals.

Abstract

Previous research has demonstrated that adding a 3rd (decoy) alternative that is dominated by only 1 of the other 2 alternatives in a choice set increases the preference for the dominating alternative (J. Huber, Payne, & Puto, 1982; Tyszka, 1983). By manipulating decoys within subjects, significant preference reversals have been obtained. The processes of 3 classes of models can account for these reversals: (a) The decoy affects the weights assigned to different dimensions, (b) the decoy produces range-frequency effects on the dimensional values of the alternatives, and (c) the perception of dominance directly increases the attractiveness of the targeted alternative. The results of 3 experiments designed to test these models favored a direct effect of dominance. When a dominated decoy was added to a choice set, asymmetrical dominance was demonstrated to be a necessary and sufficient condition for producing the predicted preference reversals. Preference reversals have intrigued decision scientists in much the same way that visual illusions have captured the attention of researchers investigating visual perception. In each case, the respective cognitive system appears to operate reasonably well in the normal environment. Yet, when

Cites (56)

1. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk
   Kahneman, Daniel, Tversky, Amos · 1988 · Decision, Probability and Utility
2. The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice
   Tversky, Amos, Kahneman, Daniel · 1981 · Science
3. Choices, Values, and Frames
   Kahneman, Daniel, Tversky, Amos · 2013 · World Scientific Handbook in Financial Economics Series
4. Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice
   Tversky, Amos · 1972 · Psychological Review
5. Individual Choice Behavior: A Theoretical Analysis.
   Cane, Violet, Luce, R. Duncan · 1960 · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General)
6. Adaptation-Level Theory
   Parducci, Allen, Helson, Harry · 1965 · The American Journal of Psychology
7. Intransitivity of preferences.
   Tversky, Amos · 1969 · Psychological Review
8. Adaptive strategy selection in decision making.
   Payne, John W., Bettman, James R., Johnson, Eric J. · 1988 · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
9. Foundations of Measurement
   1990 · Elsevier eBooks
10. Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis
    Huber, Joel, Payne, John W., Puto, Christopher · 1982 · Journal of Consumer Research

Show all 56 references

Cited by (7)

1. Reason-based choice.
   Shafir, E · 1993 · Cognition
2. Context-Dependent Preferences
   Tversky, Amos, Simonson, Itamar · 1993 · Management Science
3. Multialternative decision field theory: A dynamic connectionst model of decision making.
   Roe, Robert M., Busemeyer, Jermone R., Townsend, James T. · 2001 · Psychological Review
4. The multiattribute linear ballistic accumulator model of context effects in multialternative choice.
   Trueblood, Jennifer S., Brown, Scott D., Heathcote, Andrew · 2014 · Psychological Review
5. Cognitive and Neural Bases of Multi-Attribute, Multi-Alternative, Value-based Decisions
   Busemeyer, Jerome R., Gluth, Sebastian, Rieskamp, Jörg, Turner, Brandon M. · 2019 · Trends in Cognitive Sciences

See all 287