IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jacres/doi10.1086-701966.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Being “Rational” Is Not Always Rational: Encouraging People to Be Rational Leads to Hedonically Suboptimal Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Xilin Li
  • Christopher K. Hsee

Abstract

Often, laypeople motivate themselves or others to make good decisions by encouraging the decision maker to be “rational.” However, this practice could be counterproductive. Laypeople typically think that rational decisions are anti-emotional, based only on “cold” factors such as economic value, and not influenced by “hot” factors such as hedonic experience. Paradoxically, this lay notion of rationality is in stark contrast with the utilitarian notion of rationality, which maximizes overall utility, in which feelings are essential. Demonstrating this paradox, three studies found that participants who were encouraged to be rational were more likely to choose options that yielded less happiness without other benefits and therefore were less rational in the utility-maximizing sense. The research also examines boundary conditions and discusses practical implications.

Suggested Citation

  • Xilin Li & Christopher K. Hsee, 2019. "Being “Rational” Is Not Always Rational: Encouraging People to Be Rational Leads to Hedonically Suboptimal Decisions," Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 115-124.
  • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jacres:doi:10.1086/701966
    DOI: 10.1086/701966
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/701966
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/701966
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/701966?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:4:p:561-571 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Mariela E. Jaffé & Maria Douneva & Rainer Greifeneder, 2020. "Solve the dilemma by spinning a penny? On using random decision-making aids," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(4), pages 561-571, July.

    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:ucp:jacres:doi:10.1086/701966. 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JACR .

    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.