Kivetz, Netzer, and Srinivasan (2004) make an important contribution to the theory of choice models by demonstrating through a rigorous analysis of four alternative models that the compromise effect systematically affects choice in a wide range of conditions. The value and impact of their work can be enhanced by extensions that examine key underlying institutional variables that may shape the nature and scope of compromise effects. The authors provide a set of issues that further research can effectively pursue in the context of institutional buying processes and the purchase of complex solutions rather than individual products.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BettmanJames R., LuceMary Frances, and PayneJohn W., (1998), “Cognitive Consumer Choice Processes,”Journal of Consumer Research, 25(December), 187–217.
2.
ChristensenClayton, M., (1997), The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail.Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
3.
DharRavi, (1997), “Consumer Preference for a No-Choice Option,”Journal of Consumer Research, 24(2), 215–31.
4.
DharRavi, and GlazerRashi, (2003), “Hedging Customers,”Harvard Business Review, 81(May), 86–92.
5.
DharRavi, and SimonsonItamar, (2003), “The Effect of Forced Choice on Choice,”Journal of Marketing Research, 40(May), 146–60.
6.
GigerenzerGerd, (2000), Adaptive Thinking: Rationality in the Real World.New York: Oxford University Press.
7.
HamiltonRebecca, W., (2003), “Why Do People Suggest What They Do Not Want? Using Context Effects to Influence Others' Choices,”Journal of Consumer Research, 29(March), 492–506.
KivetzRan, NetzerOded, and SrinivasanV., (2004), “Alternative Models for Capturing the Compromise Effect,”Journal of Marketing Research, 41(August), 237–57.
10.
MarchJames, G., (1978), “Bounded Rationality, Ambiguity, and the Engineering of Choice,”Bell Journal of Economics, 9(Autumn), 587–608.
11.
SimonHerbert, A., (1955), “A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice,”Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69(February), 99–118.
12.
SimonsonItamar, and TverskyAmos, (1992), “Choice in Context: Tradeoff Contrast and Extremeness Aversion,”Journal of Marketing Research, 29(August), 281–95.
13.
SlovicPaul, (1995), “The Construction of Preference,”American Psychologist, 50(August), 364–71.
14.
TetlockPhilip, E., (2000), “Cognitive Biases and Organizational Correctives: Do Both Disease and Cure Depend on the Politics of the Beholder?”Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(2), 293–326.
15.
WernerfeltBirger, (1995), “A Rational Reconstruction of the Compromise Effect: Using Market Data to Infer Utilities,”Journal of Consumer Research, 21(March), 627–33.
