IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nathum/v1y2017i1d10.1038_s41562-016-0017.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Coherency-maximizing exploration in the supermarket

Author

Listed:
  • Peter S. Riefer

    (University College London (UCL)
    dunnhumby Ltd)

  • Rosie Prior

    (dunnhumby Ltd)

  • Nicholas Blair

    (dunnhumby Ltd)

  • Giles Pavey

    (dunnhumby Ltd)

  • Bradley C. Love

    (University College London (UCL)
    The Alan Turing Institute)

Abstract

In uncertain environments, effective decision makers balance exploiting options that are currently preferred against exploring alternative options that may prove superior1,2. For example, a honeybee foraging for nectar must decide whether to continue exploiting the current patch or move to a new location3–6. When the relative reward of options changes over time, humans explore in a normatively correct fashion, exploring more often when they are uncertain about the relative value of competing options7–11. However, rewards in these laboratory studies were objective (for example, monetary payoff), whereas many real-world decision environments involve subjective evaluations of reward (for example, satisfaction with food choice). In such cases, rather than choices following preferences, preferences may follow choices with subjective reward (that is, value) to maximize coherency between preferences and behaviour12,13. If so, increasing coherency would lessen the tendency to explore while uncertainty increases, contrary to previous findings. To evaluate this possibility, we examined the exploratory choices of more than 280,000 anonymized individuals in supermarkets over several years. Consumers’ patterns of exploratory choice ran counter to normative models for objective rewards7–9,14—the longer the exploitation streak for a product, the less likely people were to explore an alternative. Furthermore, customers preferred coupons to explore alternative products when they had recently started an exploitation streak. These findings suggest interventions to promote healthy lifestyle choices.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter S. Riefer & Rosie Prior & Nicholas Blair & Giles Pavey & Bradley C. Love, 2017. "Coherency-maximizing exploration in the supermarket," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(1), pages 1-4, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:nathum:v:1:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1038_s41562-016-0017
    DOI: 10.1038/s41562-016-0017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-016-0017
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41562-016-0017?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.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Luca A. Panzone & Natasha Auch & Daniel John Zizzo, 2024. "Nudging the Food Basket Green: The Effects of Commitment and Badges on the Carbon Footprint of Food Shopping," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 87(1), pages 89-133, January.
    2. Farid Anvari & Stephan Billinger & Pantelis P. Analytis & Vithor Rosa Franco & Davide Marchiori, 2024. "Testing the convergent validity, domain generality, and temporal stability of selected measures of people’s tendency to explore," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-23, December.
    3. Fabien Vinckier & Lionel Rigoux & Irma T Kurniawan & Chen Hu & Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde & Jean Daunizeau & Mathias Pessiglione, 2019. "Sour grapes and sweet victories: How actions shape preferences," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-24, January.

    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:nat:nathum:v:1:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1038_s41562-016-0017. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    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.