IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0213668.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing the decoy effect to increase interest in colorectal cancer screening

Author

Listed:
  • Sandro Tiziano Stoffel
  • Jiahong Yang
  • Ivo Vlaev
  • Christian von Wagner

Abstract

Literature on consumer choice has demonstrated that the inclusion of an inferior alternative choice (decoy) can increase interest in a target product or action. In two online studies, we tested the impact of decoys on the probability of previous non-intenders to have a screening test which could significantly lower their chances of dying of colorectal cancer. We find that the presence of a decoy increased the probability to choose screening at the target hospital (over no screening) from 39% to 54% and 37% to 59% depending on how many hospital attributes were communicated and how strongly the decoy was dominated by the target. We also show that the presence of the decoy was associated with lower levels of reported decisional complexity while not undermining information seeking and knowledge acquisition. These findings offer a ‘proof of principle’ that decoys have the potential to increase screening uptake without negatively influencing informed choice.

Suggested Citation

  • Sandro Tiziano Stoffel & Jiahong Yang & Ivo Vlaev & Christian von Wagner, 2019. "Testing the decoy effect to increase interest in colorectal cancer screening," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-16, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0213668
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0213668
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0213668
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0213668&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0213668?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
    ---><---

    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:pone00:0213668. 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: 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.