This feels like the right choice: how decision aids may facilitate affect-based valuation

References

• Albarracín, D., & Kumkale, G. T. (2003). Affect as information in persuasion: A model of affect identification and discounting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(3), 453–469. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.453
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avnet, T., Pham, M. T., & Stephen, A. T. (2012). Consumers’ trust in feelings as anformation. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(4), 720–735. https://doi.org/10.1086/664978
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193–209. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_3
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Batson, C. D., Kobrynowicz, D., Dinnerstein, J. L., Kampf, H. C., & Wilson, A. D. (1997). In a very different voice: Unmasking moral hypocrisy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(6), 1335–1348. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.6.1335
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D., & Damasio, A. R. (1997). Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy. Science, 275(5304), 1293–1295. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.275.5304.1293
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beckmann, J., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (1987). Deliberative versus implemental states of mind: The issue of impartiality in predecisional anf postdecisional information processing. Social Cognition, 5(3), 259–279. doi:10.1521/soco.1987.5.3.259
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cambridge University Press. (n.d.). Catalyst. Cambridge Dictionary. Retrieved 23 July 2020, from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/worterbuch/englisch/catalyst.
   Google Scholar
• Chang, H. H., & Pham, M. T. (2013). Affect as a decision-making system of the present. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(1), 42–63. https://doi.org/10.1086/668644
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clore, G. L. (1994). What is the function of emotions? Why emotions are felt. In P. Ekman, & R. J. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of emotions: Fundamental questions (pp. 103–111). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clore, G. L., Gasper, K., & Garvin, E. (2001). Affect as information. In J. P. Forgas (Ed.), Handbook of affect and social cognition (pp. 121–144). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Douneva, M., Jaffé, M. E., & Greifeneder, R. (2019). Toss and turn or toss and stop? A coin flip reduces the need for information in decision-making. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 83, 132–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2019.04.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dwenger, N., Kübler, D., & Weizsäcker, G. (2019). Flipping a coin: Evidence from university applications. Journal of Public Economics, 167, 240–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.09.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elster, J. (1987). Taming chance: Randomization in individual and social decisions. The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, 105–179.
   Google Scholar
• Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon-Hecker, T., & Olivola, C. Y. (2019). Randomizing the tracks: A robust preference for randomization over inaction and directed-action in moral dilemmas [Poster presentation]. SPUDM conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon-Hecker, T., Rosensaft-Eshel, D., Pittarello, A., Shalvi, S., & Bereby-Meyer, Y. (2017). Not taking responsibility: Equity trumps efficiency in allocation decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146(6), 771–775. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000273
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greene, J. D. (2007). The secret joke of Kant’s soul. In W. Sinnott-Armstrong (Ed.), Moral psychology. The neuroscience of morality: Emotion disease and development (pp. 35–80). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Greene, J. D., Sommerville, R. B., Nystrom, L. E., Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science, 293(5537), 2105–2108. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1062872
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heckhausen, H., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (1987). Thought contents and cognitive functioning in motivational versus volitional states of mind. Motivation and Emotion, 11(2), 101–120. doi:10.1007/BF00992338
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsee, C. K., & Rottenstreich, Y. (2004). Music, pandas, and muggers: On the affective psychology of value. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133(1), 23–30. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.133.1.23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsee, C. K., Rottenstreich, Y., & Xiao, Z. (2005). When is more better? On the relationship between magnitude and subjective value. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14(5), 234–237. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00371.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huntsinger, J. R., Isbell, L. M., & Clore, G. L. (2014). The affective control of thought: Malleable, not fixed. Psychological Review, 121(4), 600–618. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037669
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inbar, Y., Cone, J., & Gilovich, T. (2010). People’s intuitions about intuitive insight and intuitive choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(2), 232–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020215
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaffé, M. E., Douneva, M., & Greifeneder, R. (2020). Solve the dilemma by spinning a penny? On using random decision-making aids. Judgment and Decision Making, 15(4), 561–571. http://journal.sjdm.org/20/200214/jdm200214.pdf
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaffé, M. E., & Greifeneder, R. (2021). This outcome feels right! Subjective evaluations of coin flip outcomes reflect previously stated preferences. PLoS One, 16(7), e0253751. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253751
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaffé, M. E., Reutner, L., & Greifeneder, R. (2019). Catalyzing decisions: How a coin flip strengthens affective reactions. PLoS One, 14(8), e0220736, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220736
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow (S. and G. Farrar (ed.)).
   Google Scholar
• Keren, G., & Teigen, K. H. (2010). Decisions by coin toss: Inappropriate but fair. Judgment and Decision Making, 5(2), 83–101. http://journal.sjdm.org/10/10203/jdm10203.pdf
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langer, E. J. (1975). The illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(2), 311–328. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.32.2.311
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, M. D., & Wagenmakers, E. J. (2013). Bayesian cognitive modeling: A practical course. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Levitt, S. D. (2020). Heads or tails: The impact of a coin toss on major life decisions and subsequent happiness. The Review of Economic Studies, 88(1), 378–405. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdaa016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (2008). The psychology of transcending the here and now. Science, 322(5905), 1201–1205. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1161958
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, S. C., & Reich, T. (2018). To give or not to give? Choosing chance under moral conflict. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(2), 211–233. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loewenstein, G., & Lerner, J. S. (2003). The role of affect in decision making. In R. J. Davidson, K. R. Scherer, & H. H. Goldsmith (Eds.), Handbook of affective sciences (pp. 619–642). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Morvinski, C., & Amir, O. (2018). Liking goes with liking: An intuitive congruence between preference and prominence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 44(6), 944–961. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000471
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muller, D., Yzerbyt, V. Y., & Judd, C. M. (2008). Adjusting for a mediator in models with two crossed treatment variables. Organizational Research Methods, 11(2), 224–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106296639
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84(3), 231–259. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.3.231
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orloff, C. (2019). The Oregon Encyclopedia: Portland Penny. https://oregonencyclopedia.org/articles/portland_penny/#.XcP8i79CefU.
   Google Scholar
• Pham, M. T. (1998). Representativeness, relevance, and the use of feelings in decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(2), 144–159. https://doi.org/10.1086/209532
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pham, M. T. (2008). The lexicon and grammar of affect-as-information on consumer decision making: The GAIM. In M. Wänke (Ed.), Social psychology of consumer behavior (pp. 159–192). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781441605283
   Google Scholar
• Pronin, E. (2007). Perception and misperception of bias in human judgment. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(1), 37–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raghubir, P., & Menon, G. (2005). When and why is ease of retrieval informative? Memory and Cognition, 33(5), 821–832. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193077
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richard, F. D., Bond, C. F., & Stokes-Zoota, J. J. (2003). One hundred years of social psychology quantitatively described. Review of General Psychology, 7(4), 331–363. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.7.4.331
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwarz, N. (2012). Feelings-as-information theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), The handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 289–308). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249215.n15
   Google Scholar
• Schwarz, N., Higgins, E. T., & Sorrentino, R. M. (1990). Feelings as information: Informational and motivational functions of affective states. In Handbook of motivation and cognition (pp. 527–561). The Guilford Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/2072281
   Google Scholar
• Small, D. A., & Loewenstein, G. (2003). Helping a victim or helping the victim: Altruism and identifiability. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 26(1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022299422219
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Small, D. A., Loewenstein, G., & Slovic, P. (2007). Sympathy and callousness: The impact of deliberative thought on donations to identifiable and statistical victims. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 102(2), 143–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.01.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440–463. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018963
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science,185.4157.1124
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Williams, L. E., & Bargh, J. A. (2008). Keeping one’s distance: The influence of spatial distance cues on affect and evaluation. Psychological Science, 19(3), 302–308. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02084.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yzerbyt, V. Y., Muller, D., & Judd, C. M. (2004). Adjusting researchers’ approach to adjustment: On the use of covariates when testing interactions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(3), 424–431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2003.10.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, X., & Zhong, S. (n.d.). Using coin flipping to increase charity giving. In Working Paper (pp. 1–53). https://economics.ucdavis.edu/events/papers/copy_of_423Zhong.pdf
   Google Scholar