𝔖 Bobbio Scriptorium
✦   LIBER   ✦

Testing the tyranny of too much choice against the allure of more choice

✍ Scribed by Chris M. White; Ulrich Hoffrage


Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
2009
Tongue
English
Weight
182 KB
Volume
26
Category
Article
ISSN
0742-6046

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

✦ Synopsis


Abstract

When choosing among several options, people often defer choice. Previous research found that choice deferral can increase and/or decrease as the number of available options increases. To understand these contradictory findings, the assumption was made that people may defer choice for either of two reasons. The number of deferrals made in a controlled laboratory experiment that were inferred to be due to no options being good enough, decreased as the number of options increased. In contrast, the number of deferrals inferred to be due to there being uncertainty regarding which option was the best, increased. Observing these two effects simultaneously helps to explain the inconsistent results observed in previous research. It is also shown that these assumptions can account for the various relationships previously observed between the size of the choice set and the probability of choice deferral. Β© 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.


πŸ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES


Leaving the store empty-handed: Testing
✍ Ryan K. Jessup; Elizabeth S. Veinott; Peter M. Todd; Jerome R. Busemeyer πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 2009 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 472 KB

## Abstract Economic theories of choice suggest that more options are better, and people should prefer choosing from among more options to find their most valued alternative. But in an intriguing counter‐example, Iyengar and Lepper (2000) observed that while people were attracted to more options wh

Choices and preferences: testing the eff
✍ Gloria A. Moss; Gerald Vinten πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 2001 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 187 KB

## Abstract This paper presents exploratory research comparing French and UK life assurance literature. It highlights a number of critical differences in the approaches taken between the two countries, and places these in the context of the literature on cultural differences. The differences are il