IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Feeling and Thinking in Memory-Based versus Stimulus-Based Choices

  • Yuval Rottenstreich
  • Sanjay Sood
  • Lyle Brenner
Registered author(s):

    We contrast memory-based and stimulus-based choices, using dual-process theories such as Kahneman and Frederick's system 1/system 2 dichotomy. Systems 1 and 2 are conceptualized as distinct modes of thought, the former automatic and affective, the latter controlled and deliberate. Cognitive load impedes system 2, yielding greater reliance on system 1. In memory-based choice, consumers must maintain relevant options in working memory. Thus, memory-based choices are associated with greater cognitive load than stimulus-based choices. Indeed, we find that memory-based choices favor immediately compelling, affect-rich system 1 options, whereas stimulus-based choices favor affect-poor options whose attractiveness emerges from deliberative system 2 thought. (c) 2007 by JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH, Inc..

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Oxford University Press in its journal Journal of Consumer Research.

    Volume (Year): 33 (2007)
    Issue (Month): 4 (December)
    Pages: 461-469

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:ucp:jconrs:v:33:y:2007:i:4:p:461-469
    Contact details of provider:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jconrs:v:33:y:2007:i:4:p:461-469. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.