choice deferral
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

27
(FIVE YEARS 0)

H-INDEX

7
(FIVE YEARS 0)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ioannis Evangelidis ◽  
Jonathan Levav ◽  
Itamar Simonson

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 447
Author(s):  
Xiao-Ming LI ◽  
Song-Yuan JIANG
Keyword(s):  

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehdi Mourali ◽  
Zhiyong Yang ◽  
Frank Pons ◽  
Derek Hassay

2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 208-225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jordan Etkin ◽  
Anastasiya Pocheptsova Ghosh

Abstract Consumers’ choices are often accompanied by unrelated incidental moods. The positive mood caused by receiving a compliment, for example, may persist when one is choosing what service to book or which product to buy. How might being in a positive mood affect consumers’ subsequent, unrelated choices? The present research demonstrates that being in a positive mood can make consumers more likely to defer choice. Four studies show that when choosing requires trade-offs between important choice attributes, being in a positive (vs. neutral) mood makes choosing more difficult and therefore increases the likelihood of deferring choice altogether. The findings further understanding of how incidental factors shape choice processes and outcomes and the role of emotions in decision making.


2017 ◽  
Vol 51 (9/10) ◽  
pp. 1631-1649 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nitika Garg ◽  
J. Jeffrey Inman ◽  
Vikas Mittal

Purpose Choice deferral (making no choice at all) is a common phenomenon, especially when individuals face a difficult decision. This is further exacerbated in the presence of negative incidental emotions which can have a wide-ranging influence on various aspects of decision-making. Previous research suggests that process (vs outcome) accountability might be more effective at mitigating the effect of irrelevant factors. This paper aims to examine whether accountability attenuates emotion effects on choice and examines the differences in the efficacy of the two accountability types. Design/methodology/approach The paper uses the appraisal tendency framework to propose differences between same valenced emotions on choice deferral and predicts the moderating role of process versus outcome accountability. Two experiments are conducted to test the predictions and the results analyzed using logistic regression. Findings The authors find that outcome and process accountability have different moderating effects on emotion and choice deferral relationship: under outcome accountability, angry individuals are more likely to defer choice while under process accountability, differences in choice across emotion conditions are attenuated. As predicted, differences between anger and fear on the certainty appraisal and thereby information processing, mediate the effects of emotion on choice deferral in the outcome (but not process) condition. Originality/value This research studies the intersection of two developing research streams, affect and accountability, by focusing on specific affective states (anger and fear) and specific accountability types (outcome and process) in the important context of decision avoidance in consumer behavior. Thus, theoretical understanding in both domains is advanced and the benefits of specific accountability types clarified. Key implications for consumers and future research directions are also discussed.


2017 ◽  
Vol 170 ◽  
pp. 417-425 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonardo Pejsachowicz ◽  
Séverine Toussaert

2016 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcel Lichters ◽  
Claudia Brunnlieb ◽  
Gideon Nave ◽  
Marko Sarstedt ◽  
Bodo Vogt

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document