IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/v33y2006i2p211-219.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When Choosing Is Not Deciding: The Effect of Perceived Responsibility on Satisfaction

Author

Listed:
  • Simona Botti
  • Ann L. McGill

Abstract

Prior research has found differences in satisfaction for choosers and nonchoosers of the same outcome. Two studies show that differentiability of the choice-set options moderates this effect. When options are more differentiated, choice enhances consumers' satisfaction with positive and dissatisfaction with negative outcomes; when options are less differentiated, choosers experience the same level of satisfaction as nonchoosers, regardless of the option valence. We test the hypothesis that the effect of outcome differentiability is due to differences in perceived responsibility and subsequent self-credit and self-blame for the decision outcome. A third study separates the effects of differentiability from random choice. (c) 2006 by JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH, Inc..

Suggested Citation

  • Simona Botti & Ann L. McGill, 2006. "When Choosing Is Not Deciding: The Effect of Perceived Responsibility on Satisfaction," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 33(2), pages 211-219, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:33:y:2006:i:2:p:211-219
    DOI: 10.1086/506302
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/506302
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/506302?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. Rachel Baker, 2018. "Understanding College Students’ Major Choices Using Social Network Analysis," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 59(2), pages 198-225, March.
    2. Diwan, Faizan. & Makana, Grace. & McKenzie, David & Paruzzolo, Silvia., 2015. "Women business training programme in Kenya : impact of incentives," ILO Working Papers 994874113402676, International Labour Organization.
    3. Sara Kim & Rocky Peng Chen & Ke Zhang, 2016. "Anthropomorphized Helpers Undermine Autonomy and Enjoyment in Computer Games," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 43(2), pages 282-302.
    4. Gu, Yangjie & Wu, Yuechen, 2023. "Highlighting supply-abundance increases attraction to small-assortment retailers," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 99(3), pages 420-439.
    5. Ferreira, João V. & Hanaki, Nobuyuki & Tarroux, Benoît, 2020. "On the roots of the intrinsic value of decision rights: Experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 110-122.
    6. Ekström, Mathias, 2018. "The (un)compromise effect," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 10/2018, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics, revised 16 May 2018.
    7. Hornik, Jacob & Miniero, Giulia, 2009. "Synchrony effects on customers' responses and behaviors," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 34-40.
    8. Hajer Bachouche, 2016. "L'empowerment to select dans les campagnes de RSE : Une étude qualitative exploratoire," Post-Print hal-01619957, HAL.
    9. Böhm, Robert & Halevy, Nir & Kugler, Tamar, 2022. "The power of defaults in intergroup conflict," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    10. Botti, Simona & Hsee, Christopher K., 2010. "Dazed and confused by choice: How the temporal costs of choice freedom lead to undesirable outcomes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 161-171, July.
    11. Mary Steffel & Elanor F Williams & Vicki MorwitzEditor & Andrea MoralesAssociate Editor, 2018. "Delegating Decisions: Recruiting Others to Make Choices We Might Regret," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 44(5), pages 1015-1032.
    12. Aimee Dinnin Huff & June Cotte, 2013. "Complexities of Consumption: The Case of Childcare," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 72-97, April.
    13. Hsee, Christopher K. & Shen, Luxi & Zhang, Shirley & Chen, Jingqiu & Zhang, Li, 2012. "Fate or fight: Exploring the hedonic costs of competition," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 119(2), pages 177-186.
    14. Ekström, Mathias, 2021. "The (un)compromise effect: How suggested alternatives can promote active choice," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    15. Kwak, Kyuseop & Duvvuri, Sri Devi & Russell, Gary J., 2015. "An Analysis of Assortment Choice in Grocery Retailing," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 19-33.
    16. Kim, Aekyoung & Briley, Donnel, 2020. "Finding the self in chance events," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 853-867.
    17. Quentin André & Ziv Carmon & Klaus Wertenbroch & Alia Crum & Douglas Frank & William Goldstein & Joel Huber & Leaf Boven & Bernd Weber & Haiyang Yang, 2018. "Consumer Choice and Autonomy in the Age of Artificial Intelligence and Big Data," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 5(1), pages 28-37, March.
    18. Katharine M. Howie & Lifeng Yang & Scott J. Vitell & Victoria Bush & Doug Vorhies, 2018. "Consumer Participation in Cause-Related Marketing: An Examination of Effort Demands and Defensive Denial," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 147(3), pages 679-692, February.
    19. Wang, Ziwei & Wei, Xia & Tang, Xiaomeng, 2024. "The effects of QR-pay scanning modes on consumer product evaluations," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    20. Janina Garbas & Sebastian Schubach & Martin Mende & Maura L. Scott & Jan H. Schumann, 2023. "You want to sell this to me twice!? How perceptions of betrayal may undermine internal product upgrades," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 286-309, March.
    21. David A. Comerford & Nick Hanley, 2017. "The External Validity of Consequential Stated Preference Studies: a comment," Discussion Papers in Environment and Development Economics 2017-02, University of St. Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.
    22. Zhang, Mingyue & Chen, Haipeng (Allan), 2024. "Risk-taking to restore negative self-view: The effect of autonomy and subjective business on financial risk-taking," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    23. Kull, Alexander J. & Heath, Timothy B., 2016. "You decide, we donate: Strengthening consumer–brand relationships through digitally co-created social responsibility," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 78-92.
    24. LeBoeuf, Robyn A. & Shafir, Eldar & Bayuk, Julia Belyavsky, 2010. "The conflicting choices of alternating selves," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 111(1), pages 48-61, January.
    25. Simona Botti & Susan Broniarczyk & Gerald Häubl & Ron Hill & Yanliu Huang & Barbara Kahn & Praveen Kopalle & Donald Lehmann & Joe Urbany & Brian Wansink, 2008. "Choice under restrictions," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 183-199, December.

    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:oup:jconrs:v:33:y:2006:i:2:p:211-219. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcr .

    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.