The Influence of Task Difficulty on Context Effect - Compromise and Attraction Effects

Lee

2023

EJM

Purpose Integrating conceptual perspectives from social exclusion, thinking style and context effects, this study aims to examine how different types of social exclusion influence attraction and compromise effects. Design/methodology/approach Eight studies were conducted. To establish the causal relationship between social exclusion types and context effects, this study uses experimental designs in all studies. Findings The attraction effect is stronger when consumers feel rejected than ignored, whereas the compromise effect is stronger when they feel ignored than rejected. Consumers who feel rejected increase their propensity to think holistically, which in turn leads to their choice preferences for asymmetrically dominant options. Conversely, those who feel ignored increase their propensity to think analytically, which in turn leads to their choice preferences for compromise options. Research limitations/implications The findings show that consumer preferences for one option over the other alternatives in choice contexts are susceptible to subtle differences in the manner that exclusion is communicated. The studies are limited to recall tasks and scenarios that previous research has shown to be effective. Future research may use actual exclusion to corroborate this study’s findings. Practical implications Marketing practitioners may benefit from this study’s findings when it comes to an increase in the relative share of their target brand against their competitor brands by introducing a third option. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this research is the first to provide evidence that exclusion communicated in an explicit manner produces the attraction effect, whereas exclusion communicated in an implicit manner produces the compromise effect. Given that threatening situations often influence individuals’ preferences and choices, how social exclusion shapes cognitive processes is an empirical question worthy of investigation.

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attraction and compromise effects under social exclusion

Lee

2023

EJM

“…2) Task difficulty Lee et al (2016) demonstrated through four experiments that when task selection became more difficult, the compromise effect was weakened. According to the resource-matching hypothesis, tasks become more difficult for decision makers when the available cognitive resources cannot match the required cognitive resources.…”

Section: Decision Environment Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Research Review and Prospect of Compromise Effect

Li¹

2020

JSS

The rational choice theory holds that consumers will always choose the product with the maximum utility, while the context effect emphasizes that consumers' choice will change with the change of the situation, and the rational decision is not always made. As a model of context effect, the compromise effect points out that when an extreme option is added to the selection set, the original option will become a compromise option and become more attractive. On the basis of a systematic review of the literature related to the compromise effect, this paper summarizes and prospects the compromise effect. First of all, this paper introduces the concept of the compromise effect, and the similarities and differences between the compromise effect, the context effect and the attraction effect. Secondly, this paper discusses the formation mechanism of compromise effect from the perspective of reason seeking, loss aversion and rational decision-making. Third, based on the literature review, this paper discusses the impact factors of the compromise effect. Finally, this paper puts forward the enlightenment of the compromise effect to the marketing practice, and points out the future research direction.

“…Since the proportion choosing the decoy also rises (though minimally), the technique for calculating the effect varies depending on whether the proportion selecting the decoy is included. Based on a detailed description of computational techniques in Malaviya and Sivukumar's study (1998) and the most commonly used techniques (e.g., Lee et al, 2016;Malkoc et al, 2013;Pocheptsova et al, 2009), we decided to compute the difference in target choices when the decoy was absent and when it was present, without normalizing the target's share to account for the decoy share. Therefore, the participants who chose the decoy option were not included in the comparisons.…”

Section: Measuring the Attraction Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Financial Product Choices: Does Attribute Preference Help Avoid the Attraction Effect?

Bačová

Hanák²

2019

The attraction effect occurs when a third option is added to two seemingly equivalent options but it competes against only one of the original options. This increases the likelihood of the dominating option being chosen. In attraction effect studies, it is assumed that both attributes of the options are of equal importance to the decision maker. We aimed to examine whether attribute preference would affect the occurrence of the attraction effect when choosing financial products. A total of 487 undergraduate students were randomly assigned to groups with the financial product choice of two or three options. We found that when participants had no clear attribute preference the attraction effect occurred more frequently. Those with a clear preference for one attribute succumbed to the effect only when choosing a product unfamiliar to them. The research sheds light on two conditions of the attraction effect: the product familiarity and the attribute preference.