Not Just for Consumers: Context Effects Are Fundamental to Decision Making

Psychological Science

Volumn 24, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 901-908

  Trueblood, Jennifer S ^a   Brown, Scott D ^b   Heathcote, Andrew ^b   Busemeyer, Jerome R ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEWCASTLE   (Australia)

^c INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

attraction effect; compromise effect; decision making; perception; perceptual decision making; preferences; preferential choice; similarity effect

Indexed keywords

EID: 84878806982     PISSN: 09567976     EISSN: 14679280     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0956797612464241     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Anderson N. H.,Weiss D. J.Test of a multiplying model for estimated area of rectangles.American Journal of Psychology. 1971;84:543-548.
2. Busemeyer J. R.,Johnson J. G.Blackwell handbook of judgment & decision making. Koehler D. J.Harvey N., ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing; 2004:133-154.
3. Choplin J. M.,Hummel J. E.Magnitude comparisons distort mental representations of magnitude.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2002;131:270-286.
4. Choplin J. M.,Hummel J. E.Comparison-induced decoy effects.Memory & Cognition. 2005;33:332-343.
5. Dhar R.,Glazer R.Similarity in context: Cognitive representation and violation of preference and perceptual invariance in consumer choice.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1996;67:280-293.
6. Doyle J. R.,O'Connor D. J.,Reynolds G. M.,Bottomley P. A.The robustness of the asymmetrically dominated effect: Buying frames, phantom alternatives, and in-store purchases.Psychology & Marketing. 1999;16:225-243.
7. Hotaling J. M.,Busemeyer J. R.,Li J.Theoretical developments in decision field theory: Comment on Tsetsos, Usher, and Chater (2010).Psychological Review. 2010;117:1294-1298.
8. Huber J.,Payne J. W.,Puto C.Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis.Journal of Consumer Research. 1982;9:90-98.
9. KrantzD. H. (1964). The scaling of small and large color differences (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 6505777).
10. Luce R. D.Individual choice behavior: A theoretical analysis. New York, NY: Wiley; 1959:.
11. Maylor E.,Roberts M.Similarity and attraction effects in episodic memory judgments.Cognition. 2007;105:715-723.
12. Medin D. L.,Schaffer M. M.Context theory of classification learning.Psychological Review. 1978;85:207-238.
13. Nosofsky R. M.Attention, similarity and the identification categorization relationship.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 1986;115:39-57.
14. Pan Y.,O'Curry S.,Pitts R.The attraction effect and political choice in two elections.Journal of Consumer Psychology. 1995;4:85-101.
15. Pettibone J. C.Testing the effect of time pressure on asymmetric dominance and compromise decoys in choice.Judgment and Decision Making. 2012;7:513-523.
16. Pettibone J. C.,Wedell D. H.Examining models of nondominated decoy effects across judgment and choice.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 2000;81:300-328.
17. Pratkanis A. R.,Farquhar P. H.A brief history of research on phantom alternatives: Evidence for seven empirical generalizations about phantoms.Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 1992;13:103-122.
18. Roe R. M.,Busemeyer J. R.,Townsend J. T.Multialternative decision field theory: A dynamic connectionist model of decision making.Psychological Review. 2001;108:370-392.
19. Sedikides C.,Ariely D.,Olsen N.Contextual and procedural determinants of partner selection: Of asymmetric dominance and prominence.Social Cognition. 1999;17:118-139.
20. Simonson I.Choice based on reasons: The case of attraction and compromise effects.Journal of Consumer Research. 1989;16:158-174.
21. Trueblood J. S.Multialternative context effects obtained using an inference task.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2012;19:962-968.
22. Tsetsos K.,Usher M.,Chater N.Preference reversal in multi-attribute choice.Psychological Review. 2010;117:1275-1293.
23. TsetsosK.UsherM.McClellandJ. (2011). Testing multi-alternative decision models with non-stationary evidence. Frontiers in Decision Neuroscience, 5, 63. Retrieved from http://www.frontiersin.org/decision_neuroscience/10.3389/fnins.2011.00063/abstract.
24. Tversky A.Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice.Psychological Review. 1972;79:281-299.
25. Tversky A.,Kahneman D.Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference dependent model.Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1991;107:1039-1061.
26. Tversky A.,Simonson I.Context dependent preferences.Management Science. 1993;39:1179-1189.
27. Usher M.,McClelland J. L.Loss aversion and inhibition in dynamical models of multialternative choice.Psychological Review. 2004;111:757-769.
28. Wedell D. H.Distinguishing among models of contextually induced preference reversals.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 1991;17:767-778.
29. Windschitl P. D.,Chambers J. R.The dud- alternative effect in likelihood judgment.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 2004;30:198-215.