We explore how preferences for attributes are constructed when people choose between multiattribute options. As found in prior research, we observed that while people make decisions, their preferences for the attributes in question shift to support the emerging choice, thus enabling confident decisions. The novelty of the studies reported here is that participants repeated the same task 6 to 8 weeks later. We found that between tasks, preferences returned to near their original levels, only to shift again to support the second choice, regardless of which choice participants made. Similar patterns were observed in a free-choice task (Study 1) and when the favorableness of options was manipulated (Study 2). It follows that preferences behave in an elastic manner: In the absence of situational pressures, they rest at baseline levels, but during the process of reaching a decision, they morph to support the chosen options. This elasticity appears to facilitate confident decision making in the face of decisional conflict.
ArielyD.LoewensteinG.PrelecD. (2003). Coherent arbitrariness: Stable demand curves without stable preferences. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118, 73−105.
2.
ArielyD.NortonM. I. (2008). How actions create – not just reveal – preferences. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 13–16.
3.
BettmanJ. R.LuceM. F.PayneJ. W. (1998). Constructive consumer choice processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 25, 187–217.
4.
BettmanJ. R.LuceM. F.PayneJ. W. (2008). Preference construction and preference stability: Putting the pillow to rest. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 18, 170–174.
5.
BlanchardS. J.CarlsonK. A.MeloyM. G. (2014). Biased predecisional processing of leading and nonleading alternatives. Psychological Science, 25, 812–816.
6.
CarlsonK. A.PearoL. K. (2004). Limiting predecisional distortion by prior valuation of attribute components. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 94, 48–59.
7.
CarpenterS. M.YatesJ. F.PrestonS. D.ChenL. (2016). Regulating emotions during difficult multiattribute decision making: The role of pre-decisional coherence shifting. PLoS ONE, 11(3), Article e0150873. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0150873
8.
ChenM. K.RisenJ. L. (2010). How choice affects and reflects preferences: Revisiting the free-choice paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 573–594.
9.
DeKayM. L.MillerS. A.SchleyD. R.ErfordB. M. (2014). Proleader and antileader information distortion and their effects on choice and postchoice memory. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 125, 134–150.
10.
DeKayM. L.StoneE. R.MillerS. A. (2011). Leader-driven distortion of probability and payoff information affects choices between risky prospects. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 24, 394–411.
11.
DeKayM. L.StoneE. R.SorensonC. M. (2012). Sizing up information distortion: Quantifying its effect on the subjective values of choice options. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 349–356.
12.
EdwardsW.NewmanJ. R. (1982). Multiattribute evaluation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
13.
GlöcknerA.BetschT.SchindlerN. (2010). Coherence shifts in probabilistic inference tasks. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 23, 439–462.
14.
GlöcknerA.EngelC. (2013). Role-induced bias in court: An experimental analysis. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26, 272–284.
15.
GoethalsG. R.ReckmanR. F. (1973). The perception of consistency in attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 9, 491–501.
16.
GrecoV.RogerD. (2001). Coping with uncertainty: The construction and validation of a new measure. Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 519–534.
17.
HammondJ. S.KeeneyR. L.RaiffaH. (1999). Smart choices: A practical guide to making better decisions. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
18.
HeiderF. (1960). The gestalt theory of motivation. In JonesM. R. (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1960 (pp. 145–172). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
19.
HoefflerS.ArielyD. (1999). Constructing stable preferences: A look into dimensions of experience and their impact on preference stability. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 8, 113–139.
20.
HolyoakK. J.SimonD. (1999). Bidirectional reasoning in decision making by constraint satisfaction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128, 3–31.
KivetzR.NetzerO.SchriftR. Y. (2008). The synthesis of preference: Bridging behavioral decision research and marketing science. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 18, 179–186.
23.
LichtensteinS.SlovicP. (Eds.). (2006). The construction of preference. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
24.
McClellandJ. L.RumelhartD. E., & the PDP Research Group. (1986). Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition: Vol. 2. Psychological and biological models. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
25.
ReadS. J.VanmanE. J.MillerL. C. (1997). Connectionism, parallel constraint satisfaction processes, and Gestalt principles: (Re)introducing cognitive dynamics to social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 26–53.
26.
RussoJ. E.CarlsonK. A.MeloyM. G.YongK. (2008). The goal of consistency as a cause of information distortion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 456–470.
27.
SamuelsonP. A. (1938). A note on the pure theory of consumer’s behaviour. Economica, 5, 61–71.
28.
SchwartzB.WardA.MonterossoJ.LyubomirskyS.WhiteK.LehmanD. R. (2002). Maximizing versus satisficing: Happiness is a matter of choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1178–1197.
29.
SimonD.HolyoakK. J. (2002). Structural dynamics of cognition: From consistency theories to constraint satisfaction. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 283–294.
30.
SimonD.KrawczykD. C.BleicherA.HolyoakK. J. (2008). The transience of constructed preferences. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 21, 1–14.
31.
SimonD.KrawczykD. C.HolyoakK. J. (2004). Construction of preferences by constraint satisfaction. Psychological Science, 15, 331–336.
32.
SimonD.SnowC. J.ReadS. J. (2004). The redux of cognitive consistency theories: Evidence judgments by constraint satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 814–837.
33.
SimonD.StenstromD. M.ReadS. J. (2015). The coherence effect: Blending cold and hot cognitions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 369–394.
SimonsonI. (2008b). Will I like a “medium” pillow? Another look at constructed and inherent preferences. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 18, 155–169.
36.
StarmerC. (2000). Developments in non-expected utility theory: The hunt for a descriptive theory of choice under risk. Journal of Economic Literature, 38, 332–382.
37.
ThagardP. (2002). Coherence in thought and action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
38.
Von NeumannJ.MorgensternO. (1944). Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
WertheimerM. (1967). Laws of organization in perceptual forms. In EllisW. D. (Ed.), A source book of gestalt theory (pp. 71–88). New York, NY: Humanities Press. (Original work published 1923)
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
