A dual-system framework to understand preference construction processes in choice†
Corresponding Author
Ravi Dhar
Yale School of Management, 135 Prospect Street, New Haven, CT 06511, USA
⁎Corresponding author.Search for more papers by this authorMargarita Gorlin
Yale School of Management, 135 Prospect Street, New Haven, CT 06511, USA
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Ravi Dhar
Yale School of Management, 135 Prospect Street, New Haven, CT 06511, USA
⁎Corresponding author.Search for more papers by this authorMargarita Gorlin
Yale School of Management, 135 Prospect Street, New Haven, CT 06511, USA
Search for more papers by this authorWe thank Shane Frederick, Ran Hassin, and Itamar Simonson for their helpful suggestions.
Abstract
Building on the dual-system theory of judgment, we propose an intuitive and deliberate framework for understanding the effects of preference construction in choice. We argue that while certain choice effects can be attributed primarily to rapid, unintentional, and intuitive processing, others arise from intentional and deliberate processing. We use this distinction to group choice effects previously identified in the literature, discuss evidence in support of the dual-system framework of preference construction, and propose new research directions. Since the defining property of intuitive versus deliberate mental processes is the degree to which they engage working memory, the proposed framework sheds light on how these previously identified effects will change with conditions such as the availability of cognitive resources. We conclude by calling for additional research to explore the interplay between intuitive and deliberate processing to determine which processes are implicated in generating a preference, as well as research on new moderators of choice effects based on the difference in the amount of willful information processing that underlies decision making.
References
- H. Aarts, R. Custers. Preparing and motivating behavior outside of awareness. Science. 2008; 319 (5870): 1639.
- Adam L. Alter, Daniel M. Oppenheimer, Nicholas Epley, Rebecca N. Eyre. Overcoming intuition: Metacognitive difficulty activates analytic reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General. 2007; 136 (4): 569–576.
- Nalini Ambady, Robert Rosenthal. Thin slices of expressive behavior as predictors of interpersonal consequences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin. 1992; 111 (2): 256–274.
- Aron K. Barbey, Steven A. Sloman. Base-rate respect: From ecological rationality to dual processes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 2007; 30 (3): 241–254.
- John A. Bargh. Losing consciousness: Automatic influences on consumer judgment, behavior, and motivation. The Journal of Consumer Research. 2002; 29 (2): 280–285.
- Jonah Berger, Michaela Draganska, Itamar Simonson. The influence of product variety on brand perception and choice. Marketing Science. 2007; 26 (4): 460–472.
- James R. Bettman. Correlation, conflict, and choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 1993; 19 (4): 931.
- James R. Bettman, Mary Frances Luce, John W. Payne. Constructive consumer choice processes. The Journal of Consumer Research. 1998; 25 (3): 187–217.
- Tanya L. Chartrand, John A. Bargh. Nonconscious motivations: Their activation, operation, and consequences. In Abraham Tesser, Diederik A. Stapel, Joanne V. Wood, eds. Self and motivation: Emerging psychological perspectives. Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association. 2002, 13–41.
10.1037/10448-001 Google Scholar
- Tanya L. Chartrand, Joel Huber, Baba Shiv, Robin J. Tanner. Nonconscious goals and consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Research. 2008; 35 (2): 189–201.
- V. Denes Raj. Conflict between intuitive and rational processing: When people behave against their better judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1994; 66 (5): 819.
- Ravi Dhar. Consumer preference for a no-choice option. Journal of Consumer Research. 1997; 24 (2): 215–231.
- Ravi Dhar, Nathan Novemsky. Beyond rationality: The content of preferences. Journal of Consumer Psychology. 2008; 18 (3): 175–178.
- Ravi Dhar, Stephen M. Nowlis. The effect of time pressure on consumer choice deferral. Journal of Consumer Research. 1999; 25 (4): 369–384.
- Ravi Dhar, Stephen M. Nowlis, Steven J. Sherman. Trying hard or hardly trying: An analysis of context effects in choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates). 2000; 9 (4): 189–200.
- Ravi Dhar, Steven J. Sherman. The effect of common and unique features in consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Research. 1996; 23 (3): 193–203.
- Utpal M. Dholakia, Itamar Simonson. The effect of explicit reference points on consumer choice and online bidding behavior. Marketing Science. 2005; 24 (2): 206–217.
- Seyour Epstein. Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. American Psychologist. 1994; 49 (8): 709–724.
- S.R. Epstein, V. Denes-Raj Pacini, H. Heier. Individual differences in intuitive–experiential and analytical–rational thinking styles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1996; 71: 390–405.
- Jonathan St BT. Evans. Hypothetical thinking: Dual processes in reasoning and judgement, Psychology Press, 3. 2007.
10.4324/9780203947487 Google Scholar
- Jonathan St BT. Evans. On the resolution of conflict in dual process theories of reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning. 2007; 13 (4): 321–339.
- Jonathan St BT. Evans, Keith Stanovich. Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science. 2013; 8 (3): 223–241.
- Shane Frederick. Automated choice heuristics. In Thomas Gilovich, Dale Griffin, Daniel Kahneman, eds. Heuristics of intuitive judgment: Extensions and applications. New York: Cambridge University Press. 2002, 548–558.
10.1017/CBO9780511808098.032 Google Scholar
- Shane Frederick, Nathan Novemsky, Jing Wang, Ravi Dhar, Stephen Nowlis. Opportunity cost neglect. Journal of Consumer Research. 2009; 36 (4): 553–561.
- Jonathan Haidt. The new synthesis in moral psychology. Science. 2007; 316 (5827): 998–1002.
- David A. Houston, Steven J. Sherman. Cancellation and focus: The role of shared and unique features in the choice process. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 1995; 31 (4): 357–378.
- Yoel Inbar, Simona Botti, Karlene Hanko. Decision speed and choice regret: When haste feels like waste. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2011; 47 (3): 533–540.
- Sheena S. Iyengar, Mark R. Lepper. When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing?. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology December. 2000; 79 (6): 995–1006.
- Eric J. Johnson, John W. Payne. Effort and accuracy in choice. Management Science. 1985; 31 (4): 395–414.
- Daniel Kahneman. Maps of bounded rationality: Psychology for behavioral economics. The American Economic Review. 2003; 93 (5): 1449–1475.
- Daniel Kahneman. Thinking: Fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux. 2011.
- Daniel Kahneman, Shane Frederick. Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. In Thomas Gilovich, Dale Griffin, Daniel Kahneman, eds. Heuristics of intuitive judgment: Extensions and applications. New York: Cambridge University Press. 2002.
10.1017/CBO9780511808098.004 Google Scholar
- Daniel Kahneman, Amos Tversky. Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology. 1972; 3 (3): 430–454.
- Wen Mao, Harmen Oppewal. The attraction effect is more pronounced for consumers who rely on intuitive reasoning. Marketing Letters. 2012; 1–13.
- E.J. Masicampo, Roy F. Baumeister. Toward a physiology of dual-process reasoning and judgment: Lemonade, willpower, and expensive rule-based analysis. Psychological Science (Wiley-Blackwell). 2008; 19 (3): 255–260.
- Sendil Mullainathan, Richard H. Thaler. Behavioral economics. In International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, National Bureau of Economic Research. 2000.
- Nathan Novemsky, Ravi Dhar, Norbert Schwarz, Itamar Simonson. Preference fluency in choice. Journal of Marketing Research (JMR). 2007; 44 (3): 347–356.
- John W. Payne. Contingent decision behavior. Psychological Bulletin September. 1982; 92 (2): 382–402.
- John W. Payne, James R. Bettman, Eric J. Johnson. Behavioral decision research: A constructive processing perspective. Annual Review of Psychology. 1992; 43 (1): 87–131.
- Jonathan C. Pettibone. Testing the effect of time pressure on asymmetric dominance and compromise decoys in choice. Judgment and Decision Making. 2012; 7.4: 513–523.
- Anastasiya Pocheptsova, On Amir, Ravi Dhar, Roy F. Baumeister. Deciding without resources: Resource depletion and choice in context. Journal of Marketing Research (JMR). 2009; 46 (3): 344–355.
- Lawrence J. Sanna, Norbert Schwarz. Metacognitive experiences and hindsight bias: It's not just the thought (content) that counts!. Social Cognition. 2007; 25 (1): 185–202.
- Aner Sela, Jonah Berger, Wendy Liu. Variety, vice, and virtue: How assortment size influences option choice. The Journal of Consumer Research. 2009; 35 (6): 941–951.
- Eldar Shafir. Choosing versus rejecting: Why some options are both better and worse than others. Memory & Cognition. 1993; 21 (4): 546–556.
- Eldar Shafir, Itamar Simonson, Amos Tversky. Reason-based choice. Cognition. 1993; 49 (1–2): 11–36.
- B. Shiv, A. Fedorikhin. Heart and mind in conflict: Interplay of affect and cognition in consumer decision-making. Journal of Consumer Research. 1999; 26: 278–282.
- Itamar Simonson. Choice based on reasons: The case of attraction and compromise effects. The Journal of Consumer Research. 1989; 16 (2): 158–174.
- Itamar Simonson. Will i like a “medium” pillow? Another look at constructed and inherent preferences. Journal of Consumer Psychology. 2008; 18 (3): 155–169.
- Itamar Simonson, James R. Bettman, Thomas Kramer, John W. Payne. Comparison selection: An approach to the study of consumer judgment and choice Working Paper. 2012
- Itamar Simonson, Stephen M. Nowlis. The role of explanations and need for uniqueness in consumer decision making: Unconventional choices based on reasons. Journal of Consumer Research. 2000; 27 (1): 49–68.
- Itamar Simonson, Amos Tversky. Choice in context: Tradeoff contrast and extremeness aversion. Journal of Marketing Research. 1992; 29 (3): 281–295.
10.2307/3172740 Google Scholar
- Steven A. Sloman. The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin January. 1996; 119 (1): 3–22.
- Paul Slovic. Choice between equally valued alternative. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1975; 1: 280–289.
- Paul Slovic. The construction of preference. American Psychologist. 1995; 50 (5): 364–371.
- Keith E. Stanovich. Rationality and the reflective mind. New York: Oxford University Press. 2011.
- Keith E. Stanovich, Maggie E. Toplak. Defining features versus incidental correlates of Type 1 and Type 2 processing. Mind & Society. 2012; 11 (1): 3–13.
10.1007/s11299-011-0093-6 Google Scholar
- Keith E. Stanovich, Richard F. West. Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 2000; 23 (5): 645–665.
- P.E. Tetlock, R. Boettger. Accountability amplifies the status quo effect when change creates victims. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. 1994; 7: 1–23.
- V.A. Thompson, J. Prowse Turner, G. Pennycook. Intuition, reason, and metacognition. Cognitive Psychology. 2011; 63: 107–140.
- Amos Tversky. Features of similarity. Psychological Review July. 1977; 84 (4): 327–352.
- S.C. Wheeler, Kenneth G. DeMarree, Richard E. Petty. Understanding the role of the self in prime-to-behavior effects: The active-self account. Personality and Social Psychology Review. 2007; 11 (3): 234.
- S.C. Wheeler, Richard E. Petty. The effects of stereotype activation on behavior: A review of possible mechanisms. Psychological Bulletin. 2001; 127 (6): 797.
- R.B. Zajonc. Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist. 1980; 35: 151–175.