IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/doi10.1086-677315.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Defaults: Observed Choices Become Choice Defaults

Author

Listed:
  • Young Eun Huh
  • Joachim Vosgerau
  • Carey K. Morewedge

Abstract

Defaults effects can be created by social contexts. The observed choices of others can become social defaults, increasing their choice share. Social default effects are a novel form of social influence not due to normative or informational influence: participants were more likely to mimic observed choices when choosing in private than in public (experiment 1) and when stakes were low rather than high (experiment 2). Like other default effects, social default effects were greater for uncertain rather than certain choices (experiment 3) and were weaker when choices required justification (experiment 4). Social default effects appear to occur automatically as they become stronger when cognitive resources are constrained by time pressure or load, and they can be sufficiently strong to induce preference reversals (experiments 5 and 6).

Suggested Citation

  • Young Eun Huh & Joachim Vosgerau & Carey K. Morewedge, 2014. "Social Defaults: Observed Choices Become Choice Defaults," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 41(3), pages 746-760.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:doi:10.1086/677315
    DOI: 10.1086/677315
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/677315
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/677315
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/677315?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. Ping Dong & Chen-Bo Zhong & Darren DahlEditor & Jennifer ArgoAssociate Editor, 2017. "Retracted: Witnessing Moral Violations Increases Conformity in Consumption," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 44(4), pages 778-793.
    2. Colby, Helen & Li, Meng & Chapman, Gretchen, 2020. "Dodging dietary defaults: Choosing away from healthy nudges," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 161(S), pages 50-60.
    3. (Chloe) Ki, Chung-Wha & Park, Sangsoo & Kim, Youn-Kyung, 2022. "Investigating the mechanism through which consumers are “inspired by” social media influencers and “inspired to” adopt influencers’ exemplars as social defaults," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 264-277.
    4. Lasarov, Wassili & Mai, Robert & Hoffmann, Stefan, 2022. "The backfire effect of sustainable social cues. New evidence on social moral licensing," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    5. Carminati, Lara, 2020. "Behavioural Economics and Human Decision Making: Instances from the Health Care System," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(6), pages 659-664.
    6. Altmann, Steffen & Grunewald, Andreas & Radbruch, Jonas, 2019. "Passive Choices and Cognitive Spillovers," IZA Discussion Papers 12337, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Nikil Mukerji & Adriano Mannino, 2023. "Nudge Me If You Can! Why Order Ethicists Should Embrace the Nudge Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 186(2), pages 309-324, August.
    8. Thieme, Lutz & Winkelhake, Olaf, 2018. "Zur Wirkung moralischer Appelle als Nudging? Ergebnisse aus verhaltensökonomischen Experimenten," Working Papers of the European Institute for Socioeconomics 22, European Institute for Socioeconomics (EIS), Saarbrücken.
    9. Merle, Aurélie & St-Onge, Anik & Sénécal, Sylvain, 2022. "Does it pay to be honest? The effect of retailer-provided negative feedback on consumers’ product choice and shopping experience," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 532-543.
    10. Scott A. Wright & Guang-Xin Xie, 2019. "Perceived Privacy Violation: Exploring the Malleability of Privacy Expectations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 123-140, April.
    11. Lee, Jacob C. & Kim, Jungkeun & Kwak, Kyuseop, 2018. "A multi-attribute examination of consumer conformity in group-level ordering," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 41-48.
    12. Wen, Na & Lurie, Nicholas H., 2019. "More Than Aesthetic: Visual Boundaries and Perceived Variety," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 86-98.
    13. Yoon, Haewon & Scopelliti, Irene & Morewedge, Carey K., 2021. "Decision making can be improved through observational learning," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 155-188.
    14. Kartik K. Ganju & Hilal Atasoy & Paul A. Pavlou, 2022. "Do Electronic Health Record Systems Increase Medicare Reimbursements? The Moderating Effect of the Recovery Audit Program," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 2889-2913, April.
    15. Schulz, Jonathan F. & Thiemann, Petra & Thöni, Christian, 2018. "Nudging generosity: Choice architecture and cognitive factors in charitable giving," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 139-145.
    16. Kim, Jungkeun & Kim, Jae-Eun & Marshall, Roger, 2020. "Choose Quickly! The Influence of Cognitive Resource Availability on the Preference between the Intuitive and Externally Recommended Options," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 263-272.
    17. Jia, Yanli & Wyer, Robert S., 2022. "The effect of control deprivation on consumers’ adoption of no-pain, no-gain principle," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 678-698.
    18. Piras, Simone & Righi, Simone & Setti, Marco & Koseoglu, Nazli & Grainger, Matthew & stewart, Gavin & Vittuari, Matteo, 2021. "From social interactions to private environmental behaviours: The case of consumer food waste," SocArXiv 7k4vy, Center for Open Science.

    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:10.1086/677315. 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.