Literature DB >> 10682197

Value seeking and prediction-decision inconsistency: why don't people take what they predict they'll like the most?

C K Hsee1.   

Abstract

In this research, it is proposed that, when making a choice between consumption goods, people do not just think about which option will deliver the highest consumption utility but also think about which choice is most consistent with rationales--beliefs about how they should make decisions. The present article examines a specific rationale, value seeking. The value-seeking rationale refers to the belief that one should choose the option in a choice set that has the highest monetary value. Studies 1 and 2 show that value seeking could lead to a prediction-decision inconsistency, predicting a high consumption utility from one option but choosing another option. Study 3 shows that the prediction-decision inconsistency could be created even by "illusory" (as opposed to truly monetary) values and that the inconsistency could be turned on or off through empirical manipulation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10682197     DOI: 10.3758/bf03212963

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  6 in total

1.  Value seeking and prediction-decision inconsistency: why don't people take what they predict they'll like the most?

Authors:  C K Hsee
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1999-12

Review 2.  Specious reward: a behavioral theory of impulsiveness and impulse control.

Authors:  G Ainslie
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1975-07       Impact factor: 17.737

Review 3.  The case for motivated reasoning.

Authors:  Z Kunda
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 17.737

4.  Accountability: a social magnifier of the dilution effect.

Authors:  P E Tetlock; R Boettger
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  1989-09

5.  Accountability and judgment processes in a personality prediction task.

Authors:  P E Tetlock; J I Kim
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  1987-04

6.  Reason-based choice.

Authors:  E Shafir; I Simonson; A Tversky
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1993 Oct-Nov
  6 in total
  4 in total

1.  Value seeking and prediction-decision inconsistency: why don't people take what they predict they'll like the most?

Authors:  C K Hsee
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1999-12

2.  What Do You Think Would Make You Happier? What Do You Think You Would Choose?().

Authors:  Daniel J Benjamin; Miles S Kimball; Ori Heffetz; Alex Rees-Jones
Journal:  Am Econ Rev       Date:  2012-08

3.  Initial examination of priming tasks to decrease delay discounting.

Authors:  Christine E Sheffer; James Mackillop; Arislenia Fernandez; Darren Christensen; Warren K Bickel; Matthew W Johnson; Luana Panissidi; Jami Pittman; Christopher T Franck; Jarrett Williams; Merlin Mathew
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2016-05-11       Impact factor: 1.777

4.  Can Marginal Rates of Substitution Be Inferred From Happiness Data? Evidence from Residency Choices.

Authors:  Daniel J Benjamin; Ori Heffetz; Miles S Kimball; Alex Rees-Jones
Journal:  Am Econ Rev       Date:  2014-11
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.