Everyday decisions present consumers with several trade-offs. In turn, these trade-offs can influence the decision outcome. The authors show that the level at which people construe a choice can affect trade-off making, such that a high construal of a choice decreases comparative trade-offs relative to a low construal. They use six studies to illustrate the idea in three important trade-off-relevant context effects. The results show that a high (versus a low) construal decreases the compromise and background-contrast effects and increases the attraction effect by reducing attribute-level trade-offs.
BettmanJames R., LuceMary F., and PayneJohn W., (1998), “Constructive Consumer Choice Processes,”Journal of Consumer Research, 25(December), 187–217.
2.
BrileyDonnel A., MorrisMichael W., and SimonsonItamar, (2000), “Reasons as Carriers of Culture: Dynamic Versus Dispositional Models of Cultural Influence on Decision Making,”Journal of Consumer Research, 27(September), 157–78.
3.
ChernevAlexander, (2005), “Context Effects Without a Context: Attribute Balance as a Reason for Choice,”Journal of Consumer Research, 32(September), 213–23.
4.
DharRavi, NowlisStephen M., and ShermanSteven J., (2000), “Trying Hard or Hardly Trying: An Analysis of Context Effects in Choice,”Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9(4), 189–200.
5.
DharRavi, and SimonsonItamar, (2003), “The Effect of Forced Choice on Choice,”Journal of Marketing Research, 40(May), 146–60.
6.
DharRavi, and WertenbrochKlaus, (2000), “Consumer Choice Between Hedonic and Utilitarian Goods,”Journal of Marketing Research, 37(February), 60–71.
7.
DroletAimee, LuceMary Frances, and SimonsonItamar, (2009), “When Does Choice Reveal Preference? Moderators of Heuristic Versus Goal Based Choice,”Journal of Consumer Research, 36(June), 137–47.
8.
FiedlerKlaus, SeminGun R., FinkenauerCatrin, and BerkelIngrig, (1995), “Actor-Observer Bias in Close Relationships: The Role of Self-Knowledge and Self-Related Language,”Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(5), 525–38.
9.
FörsterJens, FriedmanRonald S., and LibermanNira, (2004), “Temporal Construal Effects on Abstract and Concrete Thinking: Consequences for Insight and Creative Cognition,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(August), 177–89.
10.
FujitaKentaro, HendersonMarlone D., EngJuliana, TropeYaacov, and LibermanNira, (2006), “Spatial Distance and Mental Construal of Social Events,”Psychological Science, 17(April), 278–82.
11.
HuberJoel, PayneJohn W., and PutoChristopher, (1982), “Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis,”Journal of Consumer Research, 9(June), 105–114.
12.
IdsonLorraine C., and MischelWalter, (2001), “The Personality of Familiar and Significant People: The Lay Perceiver as a Social-Cognitive Theorist,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(4), 585–96.
13.
KahnemanDaniel, and FrederickShane, (2002), “Representativeness Revisited: Attribute Substitution in Intuitive Judgment,” in Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment, GilovichT., GriffinD., and KahnemanD., eds. New York: Cambridge University Press, 49–81.
14.
LibermanNira, SagristanoMichael D., and TropeYaacov, (2002), “The Effect of Temporal Distance on Level of Mental Construal,”Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(6), 523–34.
15.
LibermanNira, and TropeYaacov, (1998), “The Role of Feasibility and Desirability Considerations in Near and Distant Future Decisions: A Test of Temporal Construal Theory,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(July), 5–18.
16.
MalkocSelin A., ZaubermanGal, and UluCanan, (2005), “Consuming Now or Later? The Interactive Effect of Timing and Attribute Alignability,”Psychological Science, 16(May), 411–17.
17.
MishraSanjay, UmeshU.N., and StemDonald E.Jr., (1993), “Antecedents of the Attraction Effects,”Journal of Marketing Research, 30(August), 331–49.
18.
MouraliMehdi, BockenholtUlf, and LarocheMichel, (2007), “Compromise and Attraction Effects Under Prevention and Promotion Motivations,”Journal of Consumer Research, 34(August), 234–47.
19.
NisbettRichard E., CaputoCraig, LegantPatricia, and MarecekJeanne, (1973), “Behavior as Seen by the Actor and as Seen by the Observer,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27(2), 155–64.
20.
NussbaumShiri, TropeYaacov, and LibermanNira, (2003), “Creeping Dispositionism: The Temporal Dynamics of Behavior Prediction,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(3), 485–97.
21.
PayneJohn. W., BettmanJames R., and JohnsonEric J., (1988), “Adaptive Strategy Selection in Decision Making,”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14(July), 534–52.
22.
PocheptsovaAnastasiya, AmirOn, DharRavi, and BaumeisterRoy F., (2009), “Deciding Without Resources: Psychological Depletion and Choice in Context,”Journal of Marketing Research, 46(June), 344–55.
23.
SimonsonItamar, (1989), “Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects,”Journal of Consumer Research, 16(September), 158–74.
24.
SimonsonItamar, and NowlisStephen M., (2000), “The Role of Explanations and Need for Uniqueness in Consumer Decision Making: Unconventional Choices Based on Reasons,”Journal of Consumer Research, 27(June), 49–68.
25.
SimonsonItamar, and TverskyAmos, (1992), “Choice in Context: Tradeoff Contrast and Extremeness Aversion,”Journal of Marketing Research, 29(August), 281–95.
26.
TropeYaacov, and LibermanNira, (2003), “Temporal Construal,”Psychological Review, 110(July), 403–421.
27.
TverskyBarbara, (2003), “Structures of Mental Spaces: How People Think About Space,”Environment and Behavior, 35(1), 66–80.
