Context effects and models of preferential choice: Implications for consumer behavior

Marketing Theory

Volumn 7, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 39-58

  Busemeyer, Jerome R ^a   Barkan, Rachel ^b   Mehta, Shailendra ^c   Chaturvedi, Alok ^c  

^a CHINA EUROPE INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS SCHOOL   (China)

^b BEN GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV   (Israel)

^c PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

attraction; choice models; compromise; reference point; similarity

Indexed keywords

EID: 84990351359     PISSN: 14705931     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1470593107073844     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Adaval, R. and Monroe, K.B. (2002) ‘Automatic Construction and Use of Contextual Information forProduct and Price Evaluations’, Journal of Consumer Research 28(4): 572–588.
2. Becker, G., Degroot, M.H. and Marschak, J. (1963) ‘Probabilities of Choices Among Very Similar Objects: AnExperiment to Decide Between Two Models’, Behavioral Science 8(4): 306–311.
3. Block, H.D. and Marschak, J. (1960) ‘Random Orderings and Stochastic Theoriesof Response’, in I. Olkin, S. Ghurye, W. Hoeffding, W. Madow and H. Mann (eds) Contributions to Probability and Statistics, pp.97–132. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
4. Bock, R.D. and Jones, L.V. (1968) The Measurement and Prediction of Judgment andChoice. San Francisco, CA: Holden-Day.
5. Brenner, L., Rottenstreich, Y. and Sood, S. (1999) ‘Comparison, Grouping and Preferences’, Psychological Science 10(3): 225–229.
6. Busemeyer, J.R., Barkan, R., Mehta, S. and Chaturvedi, A. (2003) ‘Comparing Models of PreferentialChoice’, Technical Report, http://www.cogs.indiana.edu/Publications/techreps2003/253/index.html
7. Busemeyer, J.R. and Johnson, J.G. (2004) ‘Computational Models of DecisionMaking’, in D. Koehler and N. Harvey (eds) Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making, pp.133–154. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Co.
8. Busemeyer, J.R. and Townsend, J.T. (1993) ‘Decision Field Theory: A Dynamic Cognition Approach to Decision Making’, Psychological Review 100: 432–459.
9. De Soete, G., Feger, H. and Klauer, K.C. (eds) (1989) New Developments in Probabilistic ChoiceModeling. Amsterdam: North Holland.
10. Dhar, R. (1997) ‘Consumer Preference for No-Choice Option’, Journal of Consumer Research 24: 215–231.
11. Dhar, R. and Glazer, R. (1996) ‘Similarity in Context: Cognitive Representation and Violation ofPreference and Perceptual Invariance in Consumer Choice’, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 67(3): 280–293.
12. Dhar, R., Nowlis, S.M. and Sherman S.J. (2000) ‘Trying Hard or Hardly Trying: An Analysis of Context Effects in Choice’, Journal of Consumer Psychology 9(4): 189–200.
13. Dhar, R. and Simonson, I. (1999) ‘Making Complementary Choices in Consumption Episodes:Highlighting versus Balancing’, Journal of Marketing Research 36: 29–44.
14. Dhar, R. and Simonson, I. (2003) ‘The Effect of Forced Choice on Choice’, Journal of Marketing Research 40: 146–160.
15. Diederich, A. (2003) ‘MDFT Account of Decision Making under Time Pressure’, Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 10(1): 157–166.
16. Edgell, S.E. and Geisler W.S. (1980) ‘A Set-theoretic Random Utility Model of Choice Behavior’, Journal of Mathematical Psychology 21(3): 265–278.
17. Feinberg, F.M., Kahn, B.E. and Mcalister, L. (1992) ‘Market Share Response When Consumers Seek Variety’, Journal of Marketing Research 29(1): 227–237.
18. Gigerenzer, G. and Selten, R. (eds) (2001) Bounded Rationality: The Adaptive Toolbox. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
19. Guo, F.Y. and Holyoak, K.J. (2002) ‘Understanding Similarity in Choice Behavior: Connectionist Model’, in Wayne D. Gray and Christian D. Schunn (eds) Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Conference of theCognitive Science Society, pp. 393–398. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
20. Harless, D.W. and Camerer, C. (1994) ‘The Predictive Validity of Generalized Expected Utility Theories’, Econometrica 62(6): 1251–1289.
21. Haykin, S. (1994) Neural Networks. New York: Macmillan.
22. Heath, T.B. and Chatterjee, S. (1995) ‘How Entrants Affect Multiple Brands: A Dual Attraction Mechanism’, Advances in Consumer Research 18: 768–771.
23. Herne, K. (1998) ‘Testing the Reference-Dependent Model: An Experiment onAsymmetrically Dominated Reference Points’, Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 11(3): 181–192.
24. Hey, J.D. and Orme, C. (1994) ‘Investigating Generalizations of Expected Utility Theories UsingExperimental Data’, Econometrica 62(6): 1291–1326.
25. Hsee, C.K. and Leclerc, F. (1998) ‘Will Products Look More Attractive when Evaluated Jointly orwhen Evaluated Separately’, Journal of Consumer Research 25: 176–186.
26. Hsee, C.K., Loewenstein, G.F., Blount, S. and Bazerman, M.H. (1999) ‘Preference Reversals Between Joint and Separate Evaluations ofOptions: A Review and Theoretical Analysis’, Psychological Bulletin 125(5): 576–590.
27. Huber, J., Payne, J.W. and Puto, C. (1982) ‘Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations ofRegularity and the Similarity Hypothesis’, Journal of Consumer Research 9(1): 90–98.
28. Lehmann, D.R. (1972) ‘Judged Similarity and Brand Switching Data as Similarity Measures’, Journal of Marketing Research 9(3): 331–334.
29. Lehmann, D.R. and Pan, Y. (1994) ‘Context Effects, New Brand Entry, and Consideration Sets’, Journal of Marketing Research 31: 364–374.
30. Luce, R.D. (1959) Individual Choice Behavior: A TheoreticalAnalysis. New York: Wiley.
31. Luce, R.D. and Suppes, P. (1965) ‘Preference, Utility, and SubjectiveProbability’, in R.D. Luce, B. Bush and E. Galanter (eds) Handbook of Mathematical Psychology Vol.3, pp.249–410. New York: Wiley.
32. McFadden, D. (1981) ‘Econometric Models of ProbabilisticChoice’, in C.F. Manski and D. McFadden (eds) Structural Analysis of Discrete Data with EconomicApplications, pp. 198–272. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33. Mellers, B.A. and Biagini, K. (1994) ‘Similarity and Choice’, Psychological Review 101: 505–518.
34. Nowlis, S.M. and Simonson, I. (2000) ‘Sales Promotions and the Choice Context as Competing Influenceson Consumer Decision Making’, Journal of Consumer Psychology 9(1): 1–16.
35. Payne, J.W., Bettman, J.R. and Johnson, E.J. (1993) The Adaptive Decision Maker. New York: Cambridge University Press.
36. Prelec, D., Wernerfelt, B. and Zettelmeyer, F. (1997) ‘The Role of Inference in Context Effects: Inferring What YouWant from What is Available’, Journal of Consumer Research 24(1): 118–125.
37. Ratneshwar, S., Pechman, C. and Shocker, A.D. (1996) ‘Goal Derived Categories and the Antecedents of Across Category Consideration’, Journal of Consumer Research 23(3): 240–250.
38. Roe, R.M., Busemeyer, J.R. and Townsend, J.T. (2001) ‘Mulitalternative Decision Field Theory: A Dynamic ConnectionistModel of Decision Making’, Psychological Review 108(2): 370–392.
39. Sen, S. (1998) ‘Knowledge, Information Mode and the Attraction Effect’, Journal of Consumer Research 25(1): 64–77.
40. Simonson, I. (1989) ‘Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects’, Journal of Consumer Research 16: 158–174.
41. Simonson, I. and Nowlis, S.M. (2000) ‘The Role of Explanations and Need for Uniqueness in ConsumerDecision Making: Unconventional Choices Based on Reasons’, Journal of Consumer Research 27(1): 49–68.
42. Simonson, I. and Tversky, A. (1992) ‘Choice in Context: Tradeoff Contrast and Extremeness Aversion’, Journal of Marketing Research 29: 281–295.
43. Sjoberg, L. (1977) ‘Choice Frequency and Similarity’, Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 18: 103–115.
44. Svenson, O. and Maule, A.J. (eds) (1993) Time Pressure and Stress in Human Judgment andDecision Making. New York: Plenum Press.
45. Thurstone, L.L. (1959) The Measurement of Values. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
46. Tversky, A. (1972a) ‘Elimination by Aspects: A Theory of Choice’, Psychological Review 79(4): 281–299.
47. Tversky, A. (1972b) ‘Choice by Elimination’, Journal of Mathematical Psychology 9(4): 341–367.
48. Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1991) ‘Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference Dependent Model’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 106(4): 1039–1061.
49. Tversky, A. and Sattath, S. (1979) ‘Preference Trees’, Psychological Review 86(6): 542–573.
50. Tversky, A. and Simonson, I. (1993) ‘Context Dependent Preferences’, Management Science 39: 1179–1189.
51. Usher, M. and McClelland, J.L. (2001) ‘Loss Aversion and Inhibition in Dynamical Models ofMultialternative Choice’, Psychological Review 108(3): 550–592.