The irrelevant-menu affect on valuation

Experimental Economics

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 309-333

  Sonsino, Doron ^a  

^a The College of Management ^*  (Israel)

Author keywords

Assimilation vs. contrast; Framing; Menu dependent valuation

Indexed keywords

EID: 77955096200     PISSN: 13864157     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10683-010-9243-7     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Andersen, S., Harrison, G. W., Lau, M. I., & Rutström, E. E. (2006). Elicitation using multiple price list formats. Experimental Economics, 9(4), 383-405.
2. Ariely, D., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2003). 'Coherent arbitrariness': stable demand curves without stable preferences. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(1), 73-105.
3. Bettman, J. R., Johnson, E. J., & Payne, J. W. (1990). A componential analysis of cognitive effort in choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 45, 111-139.
4. Birnbaum, M. H. (1999). How to show that 9>221: collect judgments in a between-subject design. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 243-249.
5. de Martino, B., Kumaran, D., Seymour, B., & Dolan, R. J. (2006). Frames, biases, and rational decision-making in the human brain. Science, 313(5787), 684-687.
6. Dunegon, K. J., Duchon, D., & Barton, S. L. (1992). Affect, risk and decision criticality: replication and extension in business settings. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 53(3), 335-351.
7. Förster, J., Liberman, N., & Kuschel, S. (2008). The effect of global versus local processing styles on assimilation versus contrast in social judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(4), 579-599.
8. Green, W. H. (2003). Econometric analysis. New York: Prentice Hall.
9. Greenwald, A. G. (1976). Within-subjects designs: to use or not to use. Psychological Bulletin, 83(2), 314-320.
10. Herne, K. (1999). The effects of decoy gambles on individual choice. Experimental Economics, 2(1), 31-40.
11. Huber, L., Payne, J. W., & Puto, C. (1982). Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(1), 90-98.
12. Isen, A. M. (2008). Positive affect and decision making. In M. Lewis, J. M. Haviland-Jones, & L. F. Barrett (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford.
13. Isen, A. M., & Patrick, R. (1983). The effect of positive feelings on risk-taking: when the chips are down. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 31, 194-202.
14. Isen, A. M., Shalker, T. E., Clark, M., & Karp, L. (1978). Affect, accessibility of material in memory, and behavior: a cognitive loop. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(1), 1-12.
15. Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2007). Frames and brains: elicitation and control of response tendencies. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(2), 45-46.
16. LeBoeuf, R. A., & Shafir, E. (2003). Deep thoughts and shallow frames: on the susceptibility to framing effects. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 16(2), 77-92.
17. Luce, R. D., & Raiffa, H. (1957). Games and decisions. New York: Wiley.
18. Mano, H. (1994). Risk-taking, framing effects and affect. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 52, 216-245.
19. Mazzotta, M. J., & Opaluch, J. J. (1995). Decision-making when choices are complex: a test of Heiner's hypothesis. Land Economics, 71(4), 500-515.
20. McElroy, T., & Seta, J. J. (2003). Framing effects: an analytic-holistic perspective. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39(6), 610-617.
21. McKelvey, R. D., & Zavoina, W. (1975). A statistical model for the analysis of ordinal level dependent variables. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 4, 103-120.
22. Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (2000). The "relative self": informational and judgmental consequences of comparative self-evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(1), 23-38.
23. Mussweiler, T., Ruter, K., & Epstude, K. (2004). The ups and downs of social comparison: mechanisms of assimilation and contrast. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(6), 832-844.
24. Noor, J., & Takeoka, N. (2007). Menu dependent self control. Boston: Boston University.
25. Nygren, T. E., Isen, A. M., Taylor, P. J., & Dulin, J. (1996). The influence of positive affect on the decision rule in risk situations: focus on outcome (and especially avoidance of loss) rather than probability. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 66(1), 59-72.
26. Schwarz, N., & Bless, H. (1992). Constructing reality and its alternatives: an inclusion/exclusion model of assimilation and contrast effects in social judgment. In L. L. Martin & A. Tesser (Eds.), The construction of social judgments (pp. 217-245). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
27. Stapel, D. A. (2007). In the mind of the beholder: the interpretation comparison model of accessibility effects. In D. A. Stapel & J. Suls (Eds.), Assimilation and contrast in social psychology (pp. 143-164). New York: Psychological Press.
28. Stapel, D. A., & Koomen, W. (2001). I, we, and the effects of others on me: how self-construal moderates social comparison effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(5), 766-781.
29. Wedell, D. H., & Pettibone, J. C. (1996). Using judgments to understand decoy effects in choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67(3), 326-344.
30. Wilson, T. D., Houston, C. E., Etling, K. E., & Brekke, N. (1996). A new look at anchoring effects: basic anchoring and its antecedents. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 125(4), 387-402.
31. Zizzo, J. D. (2009). Experimenter demand effects in economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 13(1), 75-98.