IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0196246.html

Inducing preference reversals in aesthetic choices for paintings: Introducing the contrast paradigm

Author

Listed:
  • Zorry Belchev
  • Glen E Bodner
  • Jonathan M Fawcett

Abstract

Understanding what leads people to reverse their choices is important in many domains. We introduce a contrast paradigm for studying reversals in choices—here between pairs of abstract paintings—implemented in both within-subject (Experiment 1; N = 320) and between-subject (Experiment 2; N = 384) designs. On each trial, participants chose between a pair of paintings. A critical pair of average-beauty paintings was presented before and after either a reversal or control block. In the reversal block, we made efforts to bias preference away from the chosen average-beauty painting (by pairing it with more-beautiful paintings) and toward the non-chosen average-beauty painting (by pairing it with less-beautiful paintings). Meta-analysis revealed more reversals after reversal blocks than after control blocks, though only when the biasing manipulations succeeded. A second meta-analysis revealed that reversals were generally more likely for participants who later misidentified their initial choice, demonstrating that memory for initial choices influences later choices. Thus, the contrast paradigm has utility both for inducing choice reversals and identifying their causes.

Suggested Citation

  • Zorry Belchev & Glen E Bodner & Jonathan M Fawcett, 2018. "Inducing preference reversals in aesthetic choices for paintings: Introducing the contrast paradigm," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-15, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0196246
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0196246
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0196246
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0196246&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0196246?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simonson, Itamar, 1989. "Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(2), pages 158-174, September.
    2. Bostic, Raphael & Herrnstein, R. J. & Luce, R. Duncan, 1990. "The effect on the preference-reversal phenomenon of using choice indifferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 193-212, March.
    3. Svenson, Ola & Benthorn, Lars J., 1992. "Consolidation processes in decision making: Post-decision changes in attractiveness of alternatives," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 315-327, June.
    4. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1986. "Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages 251-278, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kuhberger, Anton & Komunska, Dagmara & Perner, Josef, 2001. "The Disjunction Effect: Does It Exist for Two-Step Gambles?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 250-264, July.
    2. Gregory W. Fischer & Ziv Carmon & Dan Ariely & Gal Zauberman, 1999. "Goal-Based Construction of Preferences: Task Goals and the Prominence Effect," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(8), pages 1057-1075, August.
    3. Cathleen Johnson & Aurélien Baillon & Han Bleichrodt & Zhihua Li & Dennie Dolder & Peter P. Wakker, 2021. "Prince: An improved method for measuring incentivized preferences," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 62(1), pages 1-28, February.
    4. Selart, Marcus, 2024. "Preference reversals in judgment and choice," SocArXiv kyvtq, Center for Open Science.
    5. Jang, Sunghoon & Hong, Doosun & Kim, Youngho & Lee, Chungwon, 2025. "Investigation of preferences for ride-sourcing taxis: Compromise effect and regret-based latent class modeling," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    6. Attema, Arthur E. & Brouwer, Werner B.F. & l’Haridon, Olivier, 2013. "Prospect theory in the health domain: A quantitative assessment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1057-1065.
    7. Urbany, Joel E. & Montgomery, David B. & Moore, Marian, 2001. "Competitive Reactions and Modes of Competitive Reasoning: Down-Playing the Unpredictable?," Research Papers 1707, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    8. Tarnanidis, Theodore & Owusu-Frimpong, Nana & Nwankwo, Sonny & Omar, Maktoba, 2015. "Why we buy? Modeling consumer selection of referents," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 24-36.
    9. Nathalie Etchart-Vincent, 2007. "Expérimentation de laboratoire et économie : contre quelques idées reçues et faux problèmes," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 83(1), pages 91-116.
    10. Katherine Burson & David Faro & Yuval Rottenstreich, 2013. "Multiple-Unit Holdings Yield Attenuated Endowment Effects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(3), pages 545-555, November.
    11. Desmarchelier, Benoit & Qian, Lixian & Fang, Eddy S., 2018. "Preference reversals in decisions that matter: Education choices in China," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 122-128.
    12. Kaisa Herne, 1999. "The Effects of Decoy Gambles on Individual Choice," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 2(1), pages 31-40, August.
    13. Kurt A. Carlson & Samuel D. Bond, 2006. "Improving Preference Assessment: Limiting the Effect of Context Through Pre-exposure to Attribute Levels," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(3), pages 410-421, March.
    14. Ricardo Arlegi & Dinko Dimitrov, 2006. "On Freedom of Choice, Ambiguity, and the Preference for Easy Choices," Documentos de Trabajo - Lan Gaiak Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra 0607, Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra.
    15. Lanzi, Diego, 2011. "Frames as choice superstructures," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 115-123, April.
    16. Freeman, Steven F., 1997. "Good decisions : reconciling human rationality, evolution, and ethics," Working papers WP 3962-97., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    17. Ellen Garbarino & Robert Slonim, 2007. "Preferences and decision errors in the winner’s curse," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 241-257, June.
    18. de Meza, David & Pathania, Vikram, 2021. "Is the Second-Cheapest Wine a Rip-Off? Economics vs. Psychology in Product-Line Pricing," Working Papers 321852, American Association of Wine Economists.
    19. Jonathan C. Pettibone, 2012. "Testing the effect of time pressure on asymmetric dominance and compromise decoys in choice," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 7(4), pages 513-523, July.
    20. Chorus, Caspar & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Daniel, Aemiro Melkamu & Sandorf, Erlend Dancke & Sobhani, Anae & Szép, Teodóra, 2021. "Obfuscation maximization-based decision-making: Theory, methodology and first empirical evidence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 28-44.

    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:plo:pone00:0196246. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.