A tale of two biases: choosing versus rejecting and the decision-by-sampling model

ABSTRACT

When subjects are exposed to irrelevant background numbers, the decision-by-sampling model maintains that the subjective value of a particular target attribute is determined by its relative rank position within the range of background numbers. The subjective distance will be telescoped (shrink) when the irrelevant numbers lie between (above and/or below) two target attribute values. Prior research indicates that telescoping the two lottery prizes increases preference for the riskier, higher value (enriched) lottery prize versus the safer, low-value (impoverished) prize, whereas shrinking the subjective distance increases preference for the low risk, smaller value (impoverished) prize. According to the compatibility hypothesis, relative preference for an impoverished option over the enriched option should also increase when subjects are invited to reject, rather than select, an option. The compatibility hypothesis posits that a reject instruction makes negative attributes more salient to the decision-maker. The current study tests whether the relative preference for the impoverished prize predicted by decision-by-sampling model (in a decision environment that fosters the compression of the subjective distance) may be exacerbated when the decision is framed with a reject instruction. Our results fail to support both the predicted moderating effect of task instructions (choose versus reject) on decisions predicted by the decision-by-sampling model and the predictions of the compatibility hypothesis and decision-by-sampling model. The discussion considers the absolute, rather than relative, size of the impoverished option and the quantity of choose/reject decisions as possible explanations for the inconsistency of our results with those reported in previous studies.

KEYWORDS:

• decision-by-sampling
• compatibility hypothesis
• choose versus reject
• priming, bias

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This research was sponsored by a research grant from the Hasan School of Business, Colorado State-University-Pueblo;Hasan School of Business, Colorado State University-Pueblo [Summer Research Grant]

Notes on contributors

Ian Brennan

Ian Brennan is professor of marketing at the Hasan School of Business, Colorado State University-Pueblo, Pueblo, CO. His current research interests include brand placement and priming. He has published in The International Journal of Advertising, The Journal of Promotion Management, Psychology and Marketing, The Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, Decision Support Systems, and Marketing Intelligence and Planning. E-mail [email protected]