IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/doi10.1086-669484.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Magnitude, Time, and Risk Differ Similarly between Joint and Single Evaluations

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher K. Hsee
  • Jiao Zhang
  • Liangyan Wang
  • Shirley Zhang

Abstract

Arguably, all choice options involve three basic attributes: magnitude (outcome size), time (of occurrence), and probability (of occurrence) and are evaluated in one of two basic evaluation modes: JE (joint evaluation, involving comparison of multiple options) and SE (single evaluation, without comparison). This research explores how reactions to the three basic attributes (and their associated functions--utility, time discounting, and probability weighting) vary between the two basic evaluation modes. Nine studies, tapping diverse contexts, yield two general results: first, for all these attributes, people are more sensitive to variations near endpoints (zero magnitude, no delay, and 0% or 100% probability) than in other regions, and this differential sensitivity is more pronounced in SE than in JE. Second, when faced with options involving a trade-off between magnitude and time (delay) or between magnitude and probability (risk), people are both more delay averse and more risk averse in SE than in JE.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher K. Hsee & Jiao Zhang & Liangyan Wang & Shirley Zhang, 2013. "Magnitude, Time, and Risk Differ Similarly between Joint and Single Evaluations," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 40(1), pages 172-184.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:doi:10.1086/669484
    DOI: 10.1086/669484
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/669484
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/669484
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/669484?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Min, Dong-Jun & Cunha, Marcus, 2019. "The influence of horizontal and vertical product attribute information on decision making under risk: The role of perceived competence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 174-183.
    2. Heard, Claire Louise & Rakow, Tim, 2022. "Examining insensitivity to probability in evidence‐based communication of relative risks: the role of affect and communication format," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113810, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Arvid Erlandsson, 2021. "Seven (weak and strong) helping effects systematically tested in separate evaluation, joint evaluation and forced choice," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(5), pages 1113-1154, September.
    4. Johanna Wiss & David Andersson & Paul Slovic & Daniel Västfjäll & Gustav Tinghög, 2015. "The influence of identifiability and singularity in moral decision making," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(5), pages 492-502, September.
    5. Li, Xilin & Hsee, Christopher K., 2019. "Beyond preference reversal: Distinguishing justifiability from evaluability in joint versus single evaluations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 63-74.
    6. Yu Hu & Yonggui Wang, 2020. "Marketing research in China during the 40-year reform and opening," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 1-29, December.
    7. repec:cup:judgdm:v:10:y:2015:i:5:p:492-502 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Anastasia Burkovskaya & Adam Teperski & Kadir Atalay, 2022. "Framing and insurance choices," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 89(2), pages 311-337, June.
    9. Alewine, Hank C. & Allport, Christopher D. & Shen, Wei-Cheng Milton, 2016. "How measurement framing and accounting information system evaluation mode influence environmental performance judgments," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 28-44.
    10. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:5:p:1113-1154 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Cass R. Sunstein, 2018. "On preferring A to B, while also preferring B to A," Rationality and Society, , vol. 30(3), pages 305-331, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:jconrs:doi:10.1086/669484. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcr .

    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.