Comparison Effects on Preference Construction

Ravi Dhar · Stephen M. Nowlis · Steven J. Sherman

136 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Consumer Research

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics Consumer Behavior and Marketing Influence Consumer Market Behavior and Pricing

Abstract

Consumers frequently compare alternatives to make similarity and preference judgments. Recent research suggests that the construction of both similarity and preference judgments can be captured by a feature-matching model that allows for shifts in the relative weights assigned to the various features of the alternatives being compared. An implication of this model is that engaging in one comparative process (e.g., similarity) can influence the relative weight assigned to the features that are considered in a second comparative judgment (e.g., preference). Our main proposition that the type and direction of the initial comparison process has a systematic effect on subsequent preference judgments and choice was tested in a series of studies. One study, which focused on alternatives about which consumers have information in memory, shows that the direction of an initial comparison task that elicits differences between two options systematically alters their relative attractiveness in a subsequent preference task. In two subsequent studies, the effect of engaging in an initial comparison task on subsequent preference judgments was tested for stimulus-based choice sets. The results on choice deferral and choice satisfaction were consistent with the notion that engaging in similarity/dissimilarity comparisons altered the relative weight assigned to common and unique features for the two alternatives. Mouselab was used to support the decision mechanisms underlying the effect of the initial similarity/dissimilarity judgments. An additional study examined how the effect of adding common features on subsequent preference was also contingent on the initial comparison task. We conclude with a study involving real consequences and a discussion of the theoretical and practical goals of our findings.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 136 citations exist upstream.

References

1977Features of similarity.1986Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship.1988Adaptive strategy selection in decision making.1983A Logit Model of Brand Choice Calibrated on Scanner Data 1993Respects for similarity.1997Consumer Preference for a No‐Choice Option 1999The Effect of Time Pressure on Consumer Choice Deferral 1972Choice by elimination

Cited by

2007How Can Measures of Subjective Well-Being Be Used to Inform Public Policy?2007The cost of richness: The effect of the size and diversity of decision sets on post-decision regret.2005The Effect of Explicit Reference Points on Consumer Choice and Online Bidding Behavior 2003Innovations in Product Functionality: When and Why Are Explicit Comparisons Effective?2002The Effect of Introducing a New Brand on Consumer Perceptions of Current Brand Similarity: The Roles of Product Knowledge and Involvement 2004The Brand Positivity Effect: When Evaluation Confers Preference

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.