IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/v43y2016i4p614-635..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Take It or Leave It: How Choosing versus Rejecting Alternatives Affects Information Processing

Author

Listed:
  • Tatiana Sokolova
  • Aradhna Krishna

Abstract

People can make decisions by choosing or by rejecting alternatives. This research shows that changing a task from choice to rejection makes people more likely to rely on deliberative processing, what we label the task-type effect. To demonstrate this effect, we use a set of established decision biases that can be attenuated under deliberative processing. We show that changing a task from choice to rejection makes people express more consistent preferences between safe and risky options in the Asian disease problem (study 1A) and in financial decision making (study 1B), even with real monetary consequences (study 1C). Further, switching a task from choice to rejection increases the quality of consideration sets in the context of hotel reviews (study 2) and leads to more rational decisions in the context of cell phone plan selection (study 3). Studies 4 and 5 tap into the process underlying the effect of task type. We demonstrate that a rejection task produces decisions similar to those observed in a choice task when decision makers are cognitively depleted (study 4) or encouraged to rely on their feelings (study 5). The findings provide insight into the effect of task type on deliberation and decision outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Tatiana Sokolova & Aradhna Krishna, 2016. "Take It or Leave It: How Choosing versus Rejecting Alternatives Affects Information Processing," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 43(4), pages 614-635.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:43:y:2016:i:4:p:614-635.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jcr/ucw049
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Arnaud Monnier & Manoj Thomas, 2022. "Experiential and Analytical Price Evaluations: How Experiential Product Description Affects Prices [The Utility of an Information Processing Approach for Behavioral Price Research]," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 49(4), pages 574-594.
    2. Besharat, Ali & Romero, Marisabel & Haws, Kelly, 2021. "Customizing calories: How rejecting (vs. selecting) ingredients leads to lower calorie estimation and unhealthier food choices," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 97(3), pages 424-438.
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:1:p:36-56 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. repec:oup:jecgeo:v:50:y:2023:i:2:p:363-381. is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Subramanya Prasad Chandrashekar & Jasmin Weber & Sze Ying Chan & Won Young Cho & Tsz Ching Connie Chu & Bo Ley Cheng & Gilad Feldman, 2021. "Accentuation and compatibility: Replication and extensions of Shafir (1993) to rethink choosing versus rejecting paradigms," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(1), pages 36-56, January.
    6. Errmann, Amy & Kim, Jungkeun & Lee, Daniel Chaein & Seo, Yuri & Lee, Jaeseok & Kim, Seongseop Sam, 2021. "Mindfulness and pro-environmental hotel preference," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    7. Lu, Jingyi & Chen, Yuqi & Fang, Qingwen, 2022. "Promoting decision satisfaction: The effect of the decision target and strategy on process satisfaction," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 1231-1239.
    8. Gustafsson, Peter & Nilsson, Peter & David, Lucinda & Marañon, Antonia, 2021. "Framing energy choices in consumer decision-making Evidence from a random experiment in Sweden," Papers in Innovation Studies 2021/14, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.

    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:43:y:2016:i:4:p:614-635.. 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.