Choice consistency and strength of preference

Alós–Ferrer, Carlos; Garagnani, Michele

doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2020.109672

Cited by 16 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Following a standard approach, we the main analysis estimates an additive random utility model (RUM) which considers a given utility function plus an additive noise component (e.g., Thurstone, 1927;Luce, 1959;McFadden, 2001). The estimation procedure employs well-established techniques as used in many recent contributions (Van Gaudecker et al, 2011;Conte et al, 2011;Moffatt, 2015;Alós-Ferrer & Garagnani, 2020;Garagnani, 2020;Alós-Ferrer et al, 2019, 2021. We provide a short description in Appendix A.…”

Section: Utility Estimationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strength of preference and decisions under risk

Alós–Ferrer

Garagnani

2022

J Risk Uncertain

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Influential economic approaches as random utility models assume a monotonic relation between choice frequencies and “strength of preference,” in line with widespread evidence from the cognitive sciences, which also document an inverse relation to response times. However, for economic decisions under risk, these effects are largely untested, because models used to fit data assume them. Further, the dimension underlying strength of preference remains unclear in economics, with candidates including payoff-irrelevant numerical magnitudes. We provide a systematic, out-of-sample empirical validation of these relations (both for choices and response times) relying on both a new experimental design and simulations.

show abstract

Section: Utility Estimationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strength of preference and decisions under risk

Alós–Ferrer

Garagnani

2022

J Risk Uncertain

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This relationship held after controlling for Bidding-|SVD| and response time from the first presentation of the choice. Participants were also more likely to change their mind when options were closer together in separately estimated SV, Bidding-|SVD|: β = −0.58, z = −5.3, p < 0.0001, and when they made their first decision more slowly, β = 0.29, z = 4.02, p < 0.0001 (see [56]). This analysis was performed on the data from E1 only, wherein the two presentations of the MCQ questions were identical.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intertemporal choice reflects value comparison rather than self-control: insights from confidence judgements

Bulley

Lempert

Conwell

et al. 2022

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intertemporal decision-making has long been assumed to measure self-control, with prominent theories treating choices of smaller, sooner rewards as failed attempts to override immediate temptation. If this view is correct, people should be more confident in their intertemporal decisions when they ‘successfully’ delay gratification than when they do not. In two pre-registered experiments with built-in replication, adult participants ( n = 117) made monetary intertemporal choices and rated their confidence in having made the right decisions. Contrary to assumptions of the self-control account, confidence was not higher when participants chose delayed rewards. Rather, participants were more confident in their decisions when possible rewards were further apart in time-discounted subjective value, closer to the present, and larger in magnitude. Demonstrating metacognitive insight, participants were more confident in decisions that better aligned with their separate valuation of possible rewards. Decisions made with less confidence were more prone to changes-of-mind and more susceptible to a patience-enhancing manipulation. Together, our results establish that confidence in intertemporal choice tracks uncertainty in estimating and comparing the value of possible rewards—just as it does in decisions unrelated to self-control. Our findings challenge self-control views and instead cast intertemporal choice as a form of value-based decision-making about future possibilities. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Thinking about possibilities: mechanisms, ontogeny, functions and phylogeny’.

show abstract

“…That is, a slight shift in preference for one option may not affect choice at all if the preference for another option remains higher. Yet, when preferences between options become similar due to such a preference shift, consumers become indifferent between the options and may exhibit choice inconsistency over time (Al os-Ferrer and Garagnani, 2021). Furthermore, when a shift in relative preferences is large enough, it can lead to change in choice: consumers not only give the option with longer delivery time a relatively higher preference rating, but they will also choose this one over other options with shorter delivery time.…”

Section: Ijpdlm 5311mentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of social vs environmental sustainability information disclosure on consumer choice of delivery time with varying sustainability concerns

Viet

Leeuw

Herpen

2023

IJPDLM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis paper investigates the impact of sustainability information disclosure on consumers' choice of order-to-delivery lead-time in relation to consumers' sustainability concern.Design/methodology/approachBased on two choice experiments with participants from the Netherlands (n = 348) and the United Kingdom (n = 1,387), the impact of sustainability information disclosure was examined in connection with consumers' concerns for environmental and social sustainability. Information on environmental impact (carbon emission) and social impact (warehouse workers and drivers' well-being) was considered and compared.FindingsDisclosing sustainability impact information significantly increased consumers' preference and choice for longer delivery times, with equivalent effects for environmental and social impact information. Consumers' relevant (environmental or social) sustainability concern as personality traits enhanced effects on preferences, as did priming of environmental concern.Research limitations/implicationsFuture research may consider differences between product categories or e-commerce companies' reputation in sustainability activities.Practical implicationsThe findings provide opportunities for online retailers to influence consumer choice of delivery time, especially through disclosing environmental and/or social sustainability information.Originality/valueThis study fills a gap in the literature on sustainability information disclosure to actively steer consumer choice of delivery time, particularly regarding the effect of social sustainability impact information in comparison to its environmental counterpart.

show abstract

Choice consistency and strength of preference

Cited by 16 publications

References 23 publications

Strength of preference and decisions under risk

Strength of preference and decisions under risk

Intertemporal choice reflects value comparison rather than self-control: insights from confidence judgements

The impact of social vs environmental sustainability information disclosure on consumer choice of delivery time with varying sustainability concerns

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About