کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
888501 | 1471851 | 2015 | 13 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |
• We examine impact of single-stage vs. two-stage decisions on hedonic choice-share.
• Using two-stage decisions increases hedonic choice share.
• The above is explained via a regulatory focus account.
• Two-stage decisions reduces prevention focus, thus increasing hedonic choice share.
When choosing from multiple options, decision-makers may directly choose an option (single-stage decision), or initially shortlist a subset of options, and then choose an option from this shortlist (two-stage decision). Past work suggests that these two decision formats should lead to the same final choice when information about the choice alternatives is held constant. In contrast, this research demonstrates a novel effect: two-stage decisions increase preference for hedonic (vs. utilitarian) options. A regulatory focus account explains this effect. In a two-stage process, after shortlisting, decision-makers feel that they have sufficiently advanced their prevention goals, and this reduces their prevention focus during the final choice stage. Reduced prevention focus, in turn, enhances hedonic preference. Four studies across different decision contexts illustrate this effect and support the underlying process mechanism. The findings suggest that the formal structure of a decision (single-stage vs. two-stage) leads to systematic differences in decision-makers’ choices.
Journal: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes - Volume 130, September 2015, Pages 123–135