Pain and Preferences: Observed Decisional Conflict and the Convergence of Preferences

Decision making often entails conflict. In many situations, the symptoms of such decisional conflict are conspicuous. This article explores an important and unexamined question: How does observing someone else experiencing decisional conflict impact our own preferences? The authors show that observing others\u27 emotional conflict and agony over an impending decision makes the observer\u27s preferences converge to those of the conflicted actor (i.e., choose similarly). Thus this article contributes to the social influence literature by demonstrating that observers\u27 preferences are not only influenced by an actor\u27s ultimate choice, but also by the process leading to this choice. For example, in one experiment, participants\u27 real monetary donations to one of two charities converged to those of a paid confederate who agonized over the decision. Six studies demonstrate this effect and show that it is triggered by empathy and a greater sense of shared identity with the conflicted actor. Accordingly, the studies show the effect is more pronounced for individuals with a greater tendency to empathize with others, and that convergence occurs only if participants deem the actor\u27s conflict warranted given the decision at hand. The authors also demonstrate important implications of this effect in contexts of group decision making

Complicating Choice

A great deal of research in consumer decision-making and social-cognition has explored consumers' attempts to simplify choices by bolstering their tentative choice candidate and/or denigrating the other alternatives. The present research investigates a diametrically opposed process, whereby consumers complicate their decisions. It is demonstrated that, in order to complicate their choices, consumers increase choice conflict by over-weighing small disadvantages of superior alternatives, converging overall evaluations of alternatives, distorting information they retrieve from memory, selectively interpret information, reversing the ordinal value of attributes, and even choosing less preferred alternatives. Further, the results from nine studies support a unifying theoretical framework, namely the effort-compatibility principle. Specifically, it is argued that consumers strive for compatibility between the effort they anticipate and the effort that they actually exert. When a certain decision seems more difficult than initially expected, a simplifying process ensues. However, when the decision feels easier to resolve than was anticipated (e.g., when consumers face an important, yet easy choice), consumers artificially construct a more effortful choice

Complicating Decisions: The Work Ethic Heuristic and the Construction of Effortful Decisions

The notion that effort and hard work yield desired outcomes is ingrained in many cultures and affects our thinking and behavior. However, could valuing effort complicate our lives? In the present article, the authors demonstrate that individuals with a stronger tendency to link effort with positive outcomes end up complicating what should be easy decisions. People distort their preferences and the information they search and recall in a manner that intensifies the choice conflict and decisional effort they experience before finalizing their choice. Six experiments identify the effort-outcome link as the underlying mechanism for such conflict-increasing behavior. Individuals with a stronger tendency to link effort with positive outcomes (e.g., individuals who subscribe to a Protestant Work Ethic) are shown to complicate decisions by: (a) distorting evaluations of alternatives (Study 1); (b) distorting information recalled about the alternatives (Studies 2a and 2b); and (3) distorting interpretations of information about the alternatives (Study 3). Further, individuals conduct a superfluous search for information and spend more time than needed on what should have been an easy decision (Studies 4a and 4b)

The Illusion of Multitasking and Its Positive Effect on Performance

Multitasking is pervasive. With technological advancements, the desire, ability, and often necessity to engage in multiple activities concurrently are paramount. Although multitasking refers to the simultaneous execution of multiple tasks, most activities that require active attention cannot actually be done simultaneously. Therefore, whether a certain activity is considered multitasking is often a matter of subjective perception. The current paper demonstrates the malleability of what people perceive as multitasking, showing that the same activity may or may not be construed as multitasking. Importantly, although engaging in multiple tasks may diminish performance, we find that, holding the activity constant, the mere perception of multitasking actually improves performance. Across 23 incentive-compatible studies, totaling 6,768 participants, we find that those who perceived an activity as multitasking were more engaged, and consequently outperformed those who perceived that same activity as single-tasking

The Impact of Income Tax and Redistribution of Tax Money on Productivity, Satisfaction, and Perceptions of Fairness

Consumers face different levels of taxation and redistribution of tax money, which can influence perceptions and behavior. Across four studies, we show that people's intuitions of how different income tax schemes influence productivity, satisfaction, and perceptions of fairness do not match how people actually respond in an experimental pay-per-performance setting

sj-pdf-1-mrj-10.1177_00222437221107593 - Supplemental material for You Must Have a Preference: The Impact of No-Preference Communication on Joint Decision Making

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-mrj-10.1177_00222437221107593 for You Must Have a Preference: The Impact of No-Preference Communication on Joint Decision Making by Nicole You Jeung Kim, Yonat Zwebner, Alixandra Barasch and Rom Y. Schrift in Journal of Marketing Research</p

Do Costly Options Lead to Better Outcomes? How the Protestant Work Ethic Influences the Cost–Benefit Heuristic in Goal Pursuit

People often assume that costlier means lead to better outcomes, even in the absence of an objective relationship in the specific context. Such cost–benefit heuristics in goal pursuit have been observed across several domains, but their antecedents have not been fully explored. In this research, the authors propose that a person's tendency to use cost–benefit heuristics depends on the extent to which that person subscribes to the Protestant Work Ethic (PWE), an influential concept originally introduced to explain the rise of capitalism. The PWE is a core value predicated on the work-specific belief that hard work leads to success, but people who subscribe strongly to it tend to overgeneralize and align other work-unrelated cognitions for consistency. Across ten studies (N = 1,917) measuring and manipulating PWE, robust findings show that people who are high (vs. low) in PWE are more likely to use cost–benefit heuristics and are more likely to choose costlier means in pursuit of superior outcomes. Suggestions are provided for how marketers may identify consumers high versus low in PWE and tailor their offerings accordingly