The reference dependence roots of inaction inertia: A query theory account.

Inaction inertia is the tendency to forego an opportunity after missing a significantly better opportunity. We show that inaction inertia is rooted in reference dependence. This is consistent with prior work finding that smaller discounts are devalued and inertia is motivated by avoidance of loss. We further illuminate the process by showing that consumers treat the missed discount (rather than the regular price) as a reference point relative to which a smaller discount feels like a loss. Missing a significantly better deal causes people to focus first and foremost on thoughts critical of the current deal. Notably, consumers who miss a smaller discount also construe the second deal as a loss, even if they take it. This research integrates inaction inertia and reference dependence theory using query theory analysis to contextualize inaction inertia with biases such as loss aversion, anchoring, and the default effect

Indirect effect of missed deal on gain / loss frame through reference point focus.

Indirect effect of missed deal on gain / loss frame through reference point focus.</p

Correlations of predictor variables.

Inaction inertia is the tendency to forego an opportunity after missing a significantly better opportunity. We show that inaction inertia is rooted in reference dependence. This is consistent with prior work finding that smaller discounts are devalued and inertia is motivated by avoidance of loss. We further illuminate the process by showing that consumers treat the missed discount (rather than the regular price) as a reference point relative to which a smaller discount feels like a loss. Missing a significantly better deal causes people to focus first and foremost on thoughts critical of the current deal. Notably, consumers who miss a smaller discount also construe the second deal as a loss, even if they take it. This research integrates inaction inertia and reference dependence theory using query theory analysis to contextualize inaction inertia with biases such as loss aversion, anchoring, and the default effect.</div

Inaction inertia scenarios.

Inaction inertia is the tendency to forego an opportunity after missing a significantly better opportunity. We show that inaction inertia is rooted in reference dependence. This is consistent with prior work finding that smaller discounts are devalued and inertia is motivated by avoidance of loss. We further illuminate the process by showing that consumers treat the missed discount (rather than the regular price) as a reference point relative to which a smaller discount feels like a loss. Missing a significantly better deal causes people to focus first and foremost on thoughts critical of the current deal. Notably, consumers who miss a smaller discount also construe the second deal as a loss, even if they take it. This research integrates inaction inertia and reference dependence theory using query theory analysis to contextualize inaction inertia with biases such as loss aversion, anchoring, and the default effect.</div

Fig 3 -

a. Indirect effect of missed deal on likelihood of purchase through thought focus. b. Indirect effect of missed deal on likelihood of purchase through thought order.</p

Methods Paper: Materials + Codebooks

Materials for Methods Paper Studies 1-

Methods Paper: Data + Analyses

Analyses for Methods Paper Studies 1-

Survey-Software Implicit Association Tests: A Methodological and Empirical Analysis

The Implicit Association Test (IAT) is widely used in psychology. Unfortunately, the IAT cannot be run within online surveys, requiring researchers who conduct online surveys to rely on third-party tools. We introduce a novel method for constructing IATs using online survey software (Qualtrics); we then empirically assess its validity. Study 1 (student n = 239) found good psychometric properties, expected IAT effects, and expected correlations with explicit measures for survey-software IATs. Study 2 (MTurk n = 818) found predicted IAT effects across four survey-software IATs (d’s = 0.82 [Black-White IAT] to 2.13 [insect-flower IAT]). Study 3 (MTurk n = 270) compared survey-software IATs and IATs run via Inquisit, yielding nearly identical results and intercorrelations expected for identical IATs. Survey-software IATs appear reliable and valid, offer numerous advantages, and make IATs accessible for researchers who use survey software to conduct online research. We present all materials, links to tutorials, and an open-source tool that rapidly automates survey-software IAT construction and analysis