Attribute Conflict and Preference Uncertainty: Effects on Judgment Time and Error
AbstractThis research investigates preference uncertainty generated as a function of specific alternative characteristics during multiattribute evaluative judgments. We propose that preference uncertainty has at least two behavioral manifestations: longer judgment times and greater response error in expressed preferences. We investigate two hypotheses regarding stimulus-based causes of preference uncertainty. As predicted by our attribute conflict hypothesis, greater within-alternative conflict (discrepancy among the attributes of an evaluative alternative) led to longer judgment times and greater response error. As predicted by our attribute extremity hypothesis, greater attribute extremity (very high or low attribute values) resulted in shorter judgment times and less response error. We also found that judgment times and response errors were strongly positively correlated at the item level, consistent with our assumption that preference uncertainty generated by stimulus characteristics is manifested in judgment time and error. Finally, we found that the item-level preference uncertainty effects proposed here operate in parallel with strategy-level, effort-accuracy tradeoffs observable across participants. These findings are consistent with the RandMAU random multiattribute utility model developed in a companion article by Fischer et al. (2000).
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by INFORMS in its journal Management Science.
Volume (Year): 46 (2000)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Palmeira, Mauricio M. & Krishnan, H. Shanker, 2008. "Criteria instability and the isolated option effect," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 153-167, July.
- Roman Kraeussl & Andre Lucas & Arjen Siegmann, 2010.
"Risk Aversion under Preference Uncertainty,"
Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers
10-117/2/DSF 4, Tinbergen Institute.
- Scholten, Marc, 2002. "Conflict-mediated choice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 683-718, July.
- Haiyan Xu & Keith Hipel & D. Kilgour & Ye Chen, 2010. "Combining strength and uncertainty for preferences in the graph model for conflict resolution with multiple decision makers," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 69(4), pages 497-521, October.
- Conlon, B.J. & Dellaert, B.G.C. & Soest, A.H.O. van, 2001. "Complexity and Accuracy in Consumer Choice: The Double Benefits of Being the Consistently Better Brand," Discussion Paper 2001-54, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Simsek, Zeki & Lubatkin, Michael H. & Veiga, John F. & Dino, Richard N., 2009. "The role of an entrepreneurially alert information system in promoting corporate entrepreneurship," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(8), pages 810-817, August.
- Deparis, Stéphane & Mousseau, Vincent & Öztürk, Meltem & Pallier, Christophe & Huron, Caroline, 2012. "When conflict induces the expression of incomplete preferences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 221(3), pages 593-602.
- Conlon, B.J. & Dellaert, B.G.C. & Soest, A.H.O. van, 2001. "Optimal Effort in Consumer Choice: Theory and Experimental Evidence for Binary Choice," Discussion Paper 2001-51, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Mirko Janc).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.