Preference, projection, and packing: Support theory models of judgments of others' preferences
People frequently need to predict the preferences of others. Such intuitive predictions often show social projection, in which one's own preference for an option increases its perceived popularity among others. We use support theory to model social projection in the prediction of preferences, and in particular interactions between social projection and description-dependence. Preferred options are predicted to have consistently high salience, and therefore should be less susceptible to description variations, such as unpacking, which normally affect option salience. This preference salience premise implies an interaction between social projection and option description, with reduced unpacking effects for hypotheses including preferred options, or equivalently, with reduced social projection when less-liked alternatives are unpacked. Support theory models accommodating different preference-dependent unpacking effects are tested. These models distinguish two substantial contributors to social projection effects: (a) greater evidence recruited for preferred options and (b) greater discounting of packed less-preferred options.
Volume (Year): 115 (2011)
Issue (Month): 1 (May)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp|
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Andrew D. Gershoff & Ashesh Mukherjee & Anirban Mukhopadhyay, 2008. "What's Not to Like? Preference Asymmetry in the False Consensus Effect," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(1), pages 119-125, November.
- Koehler, Derek J., 1996. "A Strength Model of Probability Judgments for Tournaments," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 16-21, April.
- West, Patricia M, 1996. " Predicting Preferences: An Examination of Agent Learning," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(1), pages 68-80, June.
- David Faro & Yuval Rottenstreich, 2006. "Affect, Empathy, and Regressive Mispredictions of Others' Preferences Under Risk," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(4), pages 529-541, April.
- Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1986. "Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages S251-78, October.
- Bearden, William O & Etzel, Michael J, 1982. " Reference Group Influence on Product and Brand Purchase Decisions," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 9(2), pages 183-94, September.
- Hoch, Stephen J, 1988. " Who Do We Know: Predicting the Interests and Opinions of the American Consumer," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(3), pages 315-24, December.
- Dawes, Robyn M. & Mulford, Matthew, 1996. "The False Consensus Effect and Overconfidence: Flaws in Judgment or Flaws in How We Study Judgment?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 201-211, March.
- Childers, Terry L & Rao, Akshay R, 1992. " The Influence of Familial and Peer-Based Reference Groups on Consumer Decisions," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 19(2), pages 198-211, September.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:115:y:2011:i:1:p:121-132. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.