IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/aumajo/v28y2020i4p263-272.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Choose Quickly! The Influence of Cognitive Resource Availability on the Preference between the Intuitive and Externally Recommended Options

Author

Listed:
  • Kim, Jungkeun
  • Kim, Jae-Eun
  • Marshall, Roger

Abstract

The issue addressed by this research is when does a decision-maker select his or her intuitive, default, option and when the option suggested by someone else? We introduce the idea that cognitive resource availability is a key to this question. When there are limited cognitive resources available either due to knowledge deficiencies or, perhaps, time pressure then the default option is more likely to be selected. When there is plenty of cognitive resource available, then it is more likely that a decision favoring a recommended option is made. We support this hypothesis with three experiments; within the context of buying a digital camera, in the Ultimatum Game, and in a decoy choice situation. The findings have significance in that they support and explicate current theory, and also to practice in that there are public services, as well as competitive business situations, when a particular choice outcome is socially beneficial.

Suggested Citation

  • Kim, Jungkeun & Kim, Jae-Eun & Marshall, Roger, 2020. "Choose Quickly! The Influence of Cognitive Resource Availability on the Preference between the Intuitive and Externally Recommended Options," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 263-272.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:aumajo:v:28:y:2020:i:4:p:263-272
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ausmj.2020.06.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1441358220300586
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ausmj.2020.06.009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simonson, Itamar, 1989. "Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(2), pages 158-174, September.
    2. Shiv, Baba & Huber, Joel, 2000. "The Impact of Anticipating Satisfaction on Consumer Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 27(2), pages 202-216, September.
    3. Broniarczyk, Susan M & Alba, Joseph W, 1994. "The Role of Consumers' Intuitions in Inference Making," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(3), pages 393-407, December.
    4. Johnson, Joseph G. & Raab, Markus, 2003. "Take The First: Option-generation and resulting choices," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 215-229, July.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:7:y:2012:i:4:p:513-523 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Lee, Jacob C. & Kim, Jungkeun & Kwak, Kyuseop, 2018. "A multi-attribute examination of consumer conformity in group-level ordering," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 41-48.
    7. Dholakia, Utpal M. & Gopinath, Mahesh & Bagozzi, Richard P., 2005. "The role of desires in sequential impulsive choices," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 98(2), pages 179-194, November.
    8. Tompkinson, Paul & Bethwaite, Judy, 1995. "The ultimatum game: raising the stakes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 439-451, August.
    9. Shugan, Steven M, 1980. "The Cost of Thinking," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 7(2), pages 99-111, Se.
    10. Kim, Jungkeun & Hwang, Euejung & Phillips, Megan & Jang, Sungha & Kim, Jae-Eun & Spence, Mark T. & Park, Jongwon, 2018. "Mediation analysis revisited: Practical suggestions for addressing common deficiencies," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 59-64.
    11. Yaniv, Ilan, 2004. "Receiving other people's advice: Influence and benefit," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 1-13, January.
    12. Wen Mao & Harmen Oppewal, 2012. "The attraction effect is more pronounced for consumers who rely on intuitive reasoning," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 339-351, March.
    13. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    14. Kathleen D. Vohs & Ronald J. Faber, 2007. "Spent Resources: Self-Regulatory Resource Availability Affects Impulse Buying," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 33(4), pages 537-547, January.
    15. Furse, David H & Punj, Girish N & Stewart, David W, 1984. "A Typology of Individual Search Strategies among Purchasers of New Automobiles," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 10(4), pages 417-431, March.
    16. Bethwaite, Judy & Tompkinson, Paul, 1996. "The ultimatum game and non-selfish utility functions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 259-271, April.
    17. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    18. Young Eun Huh & Joachim Vosgerau & Carey K. Morewedge, 2014. "Social Defaults: Observed Choices Become Choice Defaults," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 41(3), pages 746-760.
    19. Dhar, Ravi & Nowlis, Stephen M, 1999. "The Effect of Time Pressure on Consumer Choice Deferral," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(4), pages 369-384, March.
    20. Johnson, Eric J & Hershey, John & Meszaros, Jacqueline & Kunreuther, Howard, 1993. "Framing, Probability Distortions, and Insurance Decisions," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 35-51, August.
    21. Jungkeun Kim, 2017. "The influence of graphical versus numerical information representation modes on the compromise effect," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 397-409, September.
    22. Jungkeun Kim & Jae-Eun Kim & Jongwon Park, 2012. "Effects of cognitive resource availability on consumer decisions involving counterfeit products: The role of perceived justification," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 869-881, September.
    23. Leonard Lee & On Amir & Dan Ariely, 2009. "In Search of Homo Economicus: Cognitive Noise and the Role of Emotion in Preference Consistency," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 36(2), pages 173-187.
    24. Huber, Joel & Payne, John W & Puto, Christopher, 1982. "Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 9(1), pages 90-98, June.
    25. Suri, Rajneesh & Monroe, Kent B, 2003. "The Effects of Time Constraints on Consumers' Judgments of Prices and Products," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(1), pages 92-104, June.
    26. Gavan J. Fitzsimons & Donald R. Lehmann, 2004. "Reactance to Recommendations: When Unsolicited Advice Yields Contrary Responses," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 82-94, September.
    27. Thaler, Richard, 1980. "Toward a positive theory of consumer choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 39-60, March.
    28. Song-Oh Yoon & Itamar Simonson, 2008. "Choice Set Configuration as a Determinant of Preference Attribution and Strength," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 35(2), pages 324-336, June.
    29. repec:cup:judgdm:v:6:y:2011:i:7:p:697-705 is not listed on IDEAS
    30. Bettman, James R. & Johnson, Eric J. & Payne, John W., 1990. "A componential analysis of cognitive effort in choice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 111-139, February.
    31. Ritov, Ilana & Baron, Jonathan, 1992. "Status-Quo and Omission Biases," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 49-61, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cappelletti, Dominique & Mittone, Luigi & Ploner, Matteo, 2014. "Are default contributions sticky? An experimental analysis of defaults in public goods provision," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 331-342.
    2. Simonson, Itamar & Kramer, Thomas & Young, Maia J., 2004. "Effect propensity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 95(2), pages 156-174, November.
    3. Tian, Ye & Li, Yudi & Sun, Jian, 2022. "Stick or carrot for traffic demand management? Evidence from experimental economics," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 235-254.
    4. Katharina Dowling & Daniel Guhl & Daniel Klapper & Martin Spann & Lucas Stich & Narine Yegoryan, 2020. "Behavioral biases in marketing," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 449-477, May.
    5. Calder, Bobby J. & He, Sharlene & Sternthal, Brian, 2023. "Using theoretical frameworks in behavioral research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    6. Gaudeul, Alexia & Crosetto, Paolo, 2019. "Fast then slow: A choice process explanation for the attraction effect," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 386, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    7. DeShazo, J. R. & Fermo, German, 2002. "Designing Choice Sets for Stated Preference Methods: The Effects of Complexity on Choice Consistency," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 123-143, July.
    8. (Gina) Cui, Yuanyuan & (Sam) Kim, Seongseop & Kim, Jungkeun, 2021. "Impact of preciseness of price presentation on the magnitude of compromise and decoy effects," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 641-652.
    9. Kristen E. Duke & On Amir, 2023. "The Importance of Selling Formats: When Integrating Purchase and Quantity Decisions Increases Sales," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(1), pages 87-109, January.
    10. Tyszka, Tadeusz, 1998. "Two Pairs of Conflicting Motives in Decision Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 189-211, June.
    11. Simonson, Itamar & Kramer, Thomas & Young, Maia, 2003. "Effect Propensity: The Location of the Reference State in the Option Space as a Determinant of the Direction of Effects on Choice," Research Papers 1788, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    12. Guney, Begum & Richter, Michael, 2015. "An experiment on aspiration-based choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 512-526.
    13. Wiebke Roß & Jens Weghake, 2018. "Wa(h)re Liebe: Was Online-Dating-Plattformen über zweiseitige Märkte lehren," TUC Working Papers in Economics 0017, Abteilung für Volkswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Clausthal (Department of Economics, Technical University Clausthal).
    14. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    15. Chang, Shin-Shin & Chang, Chung-Chau & Liao, Yen-Yi, 2015. "A joint examination of effects of decision task type and construal level on the attraction effect," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 168-182.
    16. Nasim Mousavi & Panagiotis Adamopoulos & Jesse Bockstedt, 2023. "The Decoy Effect and Recommendation Systems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(4), pages 1533-1553, December.
    17. Belton, Cameron A. & Lunn, Peter D., 2020. "Smart choices? An experimental study of smart meters and time-of-use tariffs in Ireland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    18. Indranil Goswami & Oleg Urminsky, 2016. "When should the ask be a nudge? The Effect of Default Amounts on Charitable Donations," Natural Field Experiments 00659, The Field Experiments Website.
    19. Seidl, C. & Traub, S., 1996. "Rational Choice and the Relevance of Irrelevant Alternatives," Other publications TiSEM 26452450-9ecd-45b4-bc45-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    20. Sandri, Serena & Schade, Christian & Mußhoff, Oliver & Odening, Martin, 2010. "Holding on for too long? An experimental study on inertia in entrepreneurs' and non-entrepreneurs' disinvestment choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 30-44, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:aumajo:v:28:y:2020:i:4:p:263-272. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/australasian-marketing-journal/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.