IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v139y2022icp1231-1239.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Promoting decision satisfaction: The effect of the decision target and strategy on process satisfaction

Author

Listed:
  • Lu, Jingyi
  • Chen, Yuqi
  • Fang, Qingwen

Abstract

Consumers adopt either a choosing or rejection strategy on e-commerce platforms. How do these two decision strategies influence shopping experiences? Prior literature has explored this topic in the context of making decisions for oneself and overlooked making decisions for others. This research shows an effect of the decision target and strategy on process satisfaction. The choosing strategy enhanced process satisfaction more than the rejection strategy for people who made decisions for others compared to people who made decisions for themselves (Studies 1 and 2). When the goal of desirability seeking or undesirability avoidance was explicitly imposed on consumers, the self–other difference disappeared. Choosing induced higher process satisfaction than rejection in consumers who sought desirability compared to consumers who avoided undesirability, regardless of the decision targets (Study 3). This research shows self–other differences in decision satisfaction and presents a novel method for marketers to promote shopping satisfaction.

Suggested Citation

  • Lu, Jingyi & Chen, Yuqi & Fang, Qingwen, 2022. "Promoting decision satisfaction: The effect of the decision target and strategy on process satisfaction," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 1231-1239.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:139:y:2022:i:c:p:1231-1239
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.10.056
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296321007797
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.10.056?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ola Andersson & Håkan J. Holm & Jean-Robert Tyran & Erik Wengström, 2016. "Deciding for Others Reduces Loss Aversion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(1), pages 29-36, January.
    2. Fitzsimons, Gavan J, 2000. "Consumer Response to Stockouts," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 27(2), pages 249-266, September.
    3. Tatiana Sokolova & Aradhna Krishna, 2016. "Take It or Leave It: How Choosing versus Rejecting Alternatives Affects Information Processing," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 43(4), pages 614-635.
    4. Lu, Jingyi & Jia, Huiyuan & Xie, Xiaofei & Wang, Qiuhong, 2016. "Missing the best opportunity; who can seize the next one? Agents show less inaction inertia than personal decision makers," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 100-112.
    5. Heller, Daniel & Levin, Irwin P. & Goransson, Martin, 2002. "Selection of strategies for narrowing choice options: Antecedents and consequences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 1194-1213, November.
    6. Peggy J Liu & Steven K Dallas & Gavan J Fitzsimons & Linda L PriceEditor & Rebecca Walker Reczek, 2019. "A Framework for Understanding Consumer Choices for Others," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 46(3), pages 407-434.
    7. Ahrholdt, Dennis C. & Gudergan, Siegfried P. & Ringle, Christian M., 2019. "Enhancing loyalty: When improving consumer satisfaction and delight matters," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 18-27.
    8. Ganzach, Yoav, 1995. "Attribute Scatter and Decision Outcome: Judgment versus Choice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 113-122, April.
    9. Mourali, Mehdi & Nagpal, Anish, 2013. "The powerful select, the powerless reject: Power's influence in decision strategies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(7), pages 874-880.
    10. Zhang, Shi & Fitzsimons, Gavan J., 1999. "Choice-Process Satisfaction: The Influence of Attribute Alignability and Option Limitation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 77(3), pages 192-214, March.
    11. Anish Nagpal & Parthasarathy Krishnamurthy, 2008. "Attribute Conflict in Consumer Decision Making: The Role of Task Compatibility," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(5), pages 696-705, August.
    12. Lu, Jingyi & Xie, Xiaofei, 2014. "To change or not to change: A matter of decision maker’s role," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 47-55.
    13. Morgan-Thomas, Anna & Veloutsou, Cleopatra, 2013. "Beyond technology acceptance: Brand relationships and online brand experience," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 21-27.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Polman, Evan & Wu, Kaiyang, 2020. "Decision making for others involving risk: A review and meta-analysis," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    2. Mourali, Mehdi & Nagpal, Anish, 2013. "The powerful select, the powerless reject: Power's influence in decision strategies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(7), pages 874-880.
    3. Subramanya Prasad Chandrashekar & Jasmin Weber & Sze Ying Chan & Won Young Cho & Tsz Ching Connie Chu & Bo Ley Cheng & Gilad Feldman, 2021. "Accentuation and compatibility: Replication and extensions of Shafir (1993) to rethink choosing versus rejecting paradigms," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(1), pages 36-56, January.
    4. Chang, Shin-Shin & Chang, Chung-Chau & Liao, Yen-Yi, 2015. "A joint examination of effects of decision task type and construal level on the attraction effect," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 168-182.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:1:p:36-56 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Parthasarathy Krishnamurthy & Anish Nagpal, 2010. "Making choices under conflict: The impact of decision frames," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 37-51, March.
    7. Barrafrem, Kinga & Hausfeld, Jan, 2020. "Tracing risky decisions for oneself and others: The role of intuition and deliberation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    8. Huang, Guei-Hua & Korfiatis, Nikolaos & Chang, Chun-Tuan, 2018. "Mobile shopping cart abandonment: The roles of conflicts, ambivalence, and hesitation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 165-174.
    9. Liu, Yi & Polman, Evan & Liu, Yongfang & Jiao, Jiangli, 2018. "Choosing for others and its relation to information search," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 65-75.
    10. Karimi, Sahar & Holland, Christopher P. & Papamichail, K. Nadia, 2018. "The impact of consumer archetypes on online purchase decision-making processes and outcomes: A behavioural process perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 71-82.
    11. Meloy, Margaret G. & Russo, J. Edward, 2004. "Binary choice under instructions to select versus reject," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 93(2), pages 114-128, March.
    12. Gavan J. Fitzsimons & Donald R. Lehmann, 2004. "Reactance to Recommendations: When Unsolicited Advice Yields Contrary Responses," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 82-94, September.
    13. Trampe, Debra & Konuş, Umut & Verhoef, Peter C., 2014. "Customer Responses to Channel Migration Strategies Toward the E-channel," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 257-270.
    14. Tian, Jing & Chen, Rong & Xu, Xiaobing, 2022. "A good way to boost sales? Effects of the proportion of sold-out options on purchase behavior," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 156-169.
    15. Lee, Byung-Kwan & Lee, Wei-Na, 2016. "The effect of structural alignment on choice-process satisfaction and preference formation: The moderating role of self-construal," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 2747-2755.
    16. Yibei Pu & Norzaidahwati Zaidin & Yaodong Zhu, 2023. "How Do E-Brand Experience and In-Store Experience Influence the Brand Loyalty of Novel Coffee Brands in China? Exploring the Roles of Customer Satisfaction and Self–Brand Congruity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-17, January.
    17. Vishal Gaur & Young-Hoon Park, 2007. "Asymmetric Consumer Learning and Inventory Competition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(2), pages 227-240, February.
    18. Sandro Casal & Matteo Ploner & Alec N. Sproten, 2019. "Fostering The Best Execution Regime: An Experiment About Pecuniary Sanctions And Accountability In Fiduciary Money Management," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 57(1), pages 600-616, January.
    19. Falco, Paolo & Zaccagni, Sarah, 2020. "Promoting social distancing in a pandemic: Beyond the good intentions," OSF Preprints a2nys, Center for Open Science.
    20. Gauriot, Romain & Heger, Stephanie A. & Slonim, Robert, 2020. "Altruism or diminishing marginal utility?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 24-48.
    21. Jonathan Chapman & Erik Snowberg & Stephanie Wang & Colin Camerer, 2018. "Loss Attitudes in the U.S. Population: Evidence from Dynamically Optimized Sequential Experimentation (DOSE)," NBER Working Papers 25072, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:139:y:2022:i:c:p:1231-1239. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.