Understanding High-Stakes Consumer Decisions: Mammography Adherence Following False-Alarm Test Results
Consumers often have to decide whether to acquire information in high-stakes decision domains. We study women in mammography waiting rooms to test how a “false-alarm” result (i.e., an indication that a malady is present when a “more accurate” follow-up test reveals it is not) affects willingness to get retested. In Study 1 we show that, given a false-alarm result, life-threatening test consequences are associated with more disutility for future testing than when test consequences are less significant; this does not hold for normal test results. In Study 2 in the mammography context, we show that patients receiving a false-alarm result experienced more stress, were less likely to believe that a positive mammography result indicated cancer, and more likely to delay mammography than patients receiving normal results unless they were also told that they may be vulnerable to breast cancer in the future. We show that delays in planned adherence following a false-alarm result can be mitigated by an information intervention. Finally, we have preliminary evidence that a previous history of false-positive results can cause a consumer to both react more negatively to emotional stress and respond more positively to coping information.
Volume (Year): 22 (2003)
Issue (Month): 3 (April)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 7240 Parkway Drive, Suite 300, Hanover, MD 21076 USA|
Web page: http://www.informs.org/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Luce, Mary Frances & Kahn, Barbara E, 1999. " Avoidance or Vigilance? The Psychology of False-Positive Test Results," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(3), pages 242-59, December.
- Robert Meyer & Eric J. Johnson, 1995. "Empirical Generalizations in the Modeling of Consumer Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3_supplem), pages G180-G189.
- Bazerman, Max H, 2001. " Consumer Research for Consumers," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(4), pages 499-504, March.
- Moorman, Christine & Matulich, Erika, 1993. " A Model of Consumers' Preventive Health Behaviors: The Role of Health Motivation and Health Ability," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(2), pages 208-28, September.
- Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 1996. "Decision-Making Under Uncertainty: Capturing Dynamic Brand Choice Processes in Turbulent Consumer Goods Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20.
- J. Jeffrey Inman & James S. Dyer & Jianmin Jia, 1997. "A Generalized Utility Model of Disappointment and Regret Effects on Post-Choice Valuation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 97-111.
- John W. Walsh, 1995. "Flexibility in Consumer Purchasing for Uncertain Future Tastes," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(2), pages 148-165.
- Oliver, Richard L & Berger, Philip K, 1979. " A Path Analysis of Preventive Health Care Decision Models," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 113-22, Se.
- Ofir, Chezy & Lynch, John G, Jr, 1984. " Context Effects on Judgment under Uncertainty," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 668-79, September.
- Brian T. Ratchford & Narasimhan Srinivasan, 1993. "An Empirical Investigation of Returns to Search," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 73-87.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:22:y:2003:i:3:p:393-410. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
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.