The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Effect of Time Pressure on Consumer Choice Deferral
Abstract
This article investigates the effect of time pressure on choice deferral. Recent research suggests that the likelihood of deferral is contingent on the ease of making the selection decision (which option to choose) as well as the overall attractiveness of the selected alternative. We focus on how time pressure systematically impacts choice deferral by increasing the use of noncompensatory decision rules in the selection decision and by increasing the relative emphasis placed on the unique features in the deferral decision (whether to choose). Consistent with the hypotheses, we find over a series of five studies that time pressure (1) decreases choice deferral when choice involves high conflict but not when conflict is low, (2) reduces the impact of shared features on choice deferral, and (3) decreases choice deferral for sets with common bad and unique good features (approach-approach conflict) but not for sets with common good and unique bad features (avoidance-avoidance conflict). We further show that greater attention to the unique features is not a general property of decision making under time pressure but rather a consequence of the primacy of the selection decision over the deferral decision. Consistent with this premise, time pressure did not decrease the relative attention paid to common features when the task was described as purely a deferral decision. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.
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
Adaptive strategy selection in decision making.
Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1988) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.14.3.534 · Cited by 1,955
Choice under Conflict: The Dynamics of Deferred Decision
Tversky, A., & Shafir, E. (1992) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00047.x · Cited by 1,013
Cited by
When choice is demotivating: can one desire too much of a good thing?
Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (2000) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.995 · Cited by 2,878
Can There Ever Be Too Many Options? A Meta-Analytic Review of Choice Overload
Scheibehenne, B., Greifeneder, R., & Todd, P. M. (2010) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/651235 · Cited by 1,070
Hennig-Thurau, T., Walsh, G., & Walsh, G. (2003) · International Journal of Electronic Commerce · doi:10.1080/10864415.2003.11044293 · Cited by 939
Choice overload: A conceptual review and meta-analysis
Chernev, A., Böckenholt, U., & Goodman, J. (2015) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2014.08.002 · Cited by 858
Peng, L., Zhang, W., Wang, X., & Liang, S. (2019) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2018.11.007 · Cited by 325
Metadata
- Authors
- Dhar, R., & Nowlis, S. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Consumer Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1999-03
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 369-384
- ISSN
- 0093-5301 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5277
- OpenAlex
- W2013343894
- Cited by
- 477
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 2.43
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Effect of Time Pressure on Consumer Choice Deferral. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/209545
- The paper
- Dhar, R., & Nowlis, S. M. (1999). The Effect of Time Pressure on Consumer Choice Deferral. Journal of Consumer Research. https://doi.org/10.1086/209545
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.