The Reconstruction of Choice Value in the Brain: A Look into the Size of Consideration Sets and Their Affective Consequences

Abstract

It has been proposed that choice utility exhibits an inverted U-shape as a function of the number of options in the choice set. However, most researchers have so far only focused on the "physically extant" number of options in the set while disregarding the more important psychological factor, the "subjective" number of options worth considering to choose-that is, the size of the consideration set. To explore this previously ignored aspect, we examined how variations in the size of a consideration set can produce different affective consequences after making choices and investigated the underlying neural mechanism using fMRI. After rating their preferences for art posters, participants made a choice from a presented set and then reported on their level of satisfaction with their choice and the level of difficulty experienced in choosing it. Our behavioral results demonstrated that enlarged assortment set can lead to greater choice satisfaction only when increases in both consideration set size and preference contrast are involved. Moreover, choice difficulty is determined based on the size of an individual's consideration set rather than on the size of the assortment set, and it decreases linearly as a function of the level of contrast among alternatives. The neuroimaging analysis of choice-making revealed that subjective consideration set size was encoded in the striatum, the dACC, and the insula. In addition, the striatum also represented variations in choice satisfaction resulting from alterations in the size of consideration sets, whereas a common neural specificity for choice difficulty and consideration set size was shown in the dACC. These results have theoretical and practical importance in that it is one of the first studies investigating the influence of the psychological attributes of choice sets on the value-based decision-making process.

Neural correlates of dueling affective reactions to win–win choices

“…Two additional findings lend support to the possibility that choice anxiety ratings and dACC activation are both associated with the evaluation of potential response demands. First, consistent with previous findings implicating dACC in signaling conflict between potential responses/choices (23,(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)40), dACC tracked choice conflict in the current study: activity was greater for high-high than low-high choices (trials that differed in conflict but guaranteed equally rewarding outcomes), in a region overlapping the one that tracked choice anxiety (Fig. 4A).…”

“…In the case of win-win choices, the cost that the decisionmaker must incur is not specific to one of the options but to conflict between all of the options. This and other forms of response conflict have been consistently associated with increased activity in the dACC (21,(25)(26)(27)(28)30). Conflict is also known to generate anxiety-like states (39,50) and has been considered by some to be a central feature of clinical anxiety (51).…”

“…Dorsal regions of the striatum and mPFC associate possible actions (including "internal actions": i.e., control signals) with their expected outcomes and modify these actions according to current demands (13,14,16,(21)(22)(23)(24). One of the most well-studied demands encoded by the dorsal mPFC is response conflict (21,25), including instances of choice conflict similar to those described at the outset (26)(27)(28)(29)(30). Whether dorsal mPFC activity correlates with the anxiety elicited by choice conflict and/or predicts future adjustments to prior choices remains an open question.…”

Neural Substrates of Brand Love: An Activation Likelihood Estimation Meta-Analysis of Functional Neuroimaging Studies

“…Thus, ALE for brand love demonstrated a high convergence of activation mainly in the dorsal striatum, including the putamen and caudate. These regions are related to the reward system (Balleine et al, 2007 ), positive effect (Phan et al, 2002 ), reinforcement learning (Packard and Knowlton, 2002 ; Samejima et al, 2005 ), and the narrowing of preference target size in a choice set (Kim et al, 2014 ). Studies using positron emission tomography (PET) have reported that dopamine release is increased in the dorsal striatum during monetary reward tasks (Koepp et al, 1998 ; Zald et al, 2004 ).…”

The neuropsychology of consumer behavior and marketing

“…Cognitive resources, such as deliberation, memory, and attention, are only devoted to items within the consideration set. At the neural level, consideration set size seems to be related to activity in the striatum, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, and insula (Kim, Shin, & Han, ).…”