IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpex/0109001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

From utilities to mental models: A critical survey on decision rules and cognition in consumer choice

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Giovanna Devetag

    (Università di Trento, Ceel)

Abstract

This work critically discusses a selected body of (mainly experimental) studies on consumer behavior in the light of two general questions. First, can one identify within the vast literature from psychology, marketing, etc., a few stylized facts which might be the grounds of a behavioral theory of consumption parsimonious enough to be useful to economic theorizing, and, at the same time, not in open violation of the evidence on how consumers actually behave? Second, to what extent should such theories be nested into an explicit account of the cognitive processes leading to particular consumption acts? Copyright 1999 by Oxford University Press.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Giovanna Devetag, 2001. "From utilities to mental models: A critical survey on decision rules and cognition in consumer choice," Experimental 0109001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpex:0109001
    Note: Type of Document - Word/pdf; prepared on none; to print on none; pages: 78; figures: included
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/exp/papers/0109/0109001.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of 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, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 158-174, September.
    2. Peracchio, Laura A & Tybout, Alice M, 1996. "The Moderating Role of Prior Knowledge in Schema-Based Product Evaluation," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(3), pages 177-192, December.
    3. Timothy B. Heath & Subimal Chatterjee & Karen R. France, 1995. "Mental Accounting and Changes in Price: The Frame Dependence of Reference Dependence," Post-Print hal-00670476, HAL.
    4. Heath, Timothy B & Chatterjee, Subimal & France, Karen Russo, 1995. "Mental Accounting and Changes in Price: The Frame Dependence of Reference Dependence," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 90-97, June.
    5. Wernerfelt, Birger, 1995. "A Rational Reconstruction of the Compromise Effect: Using Market Data to Infer Utilities," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(4), pages 627-633, March.
    6. Cripps, John D & Meyer, Robert J, 1994. "Heuristics and Biases in Timing the Replacement of Durable Products," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 304-318, September.
    7. Cohen, Joel B & Basu, Kunal, 1987. "Alternative Models of Categorization: Toward a Contingent Processing Framework," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 455-472, March.
    8. Urbany, Joel E & Bearden, William O & Weilbaker, Dan C, 1988. "The Effect of Plausible and Exaggerated Reference Prices on Consumer Perceptions and Price Search," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(1), pages 95-110, June.
    9. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    10. Johnson, Michael D, 1989. "The Differential Processing of Product Category and Noncomparable Choice Alternatives," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 300-309, December.
    11. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    12. Meyers-Levy, Joan & Tybout, Alice M, 1989. "Schema Congruity as a Basis for Product Evaluation," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 39-54, June.
    13. Klein, Noreen M & Yadav, Manjit S, 1989. "Context Effects on Effort and Accuracy in Choice: An Enquiry into Adaptive Decision Making," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(4), pages 411-421, March.
    14. Ratneshwar, Srinivasan & Shocker, Allan D & Stewart, David W, 1987. "Toward Understanding the Attraction Effect: The Implications of Product Stimulus Meaningfulness and Familiarity," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 520-533, March.
    15. Timothy B. Heath & Subimal Chatterjee, 1995. "Asymmetric Decoy Effects on Lower-Quality Versus Higher-Quality Brands: Meta-Analytic and Experimental Evidence," Post-Print hal-00670480, HAL.
    16. Levine, Michael E. & Plott, Charles R., "undated". "Agenda Influence and Its Implications," Working Papers 151, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    17. Hoyer, Wayne D, 1984. "An Examination of Consumer Decision Making for a Common Repeat Purchase Product," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 822-829, December.
    18. Sujan, Mita, 1985. "Consumer Knowledge: Effects on Evaluation Strategies Mediating Consumer Judgments," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 31-46, June.
    19. Levin, Irwin P & Gaeth, Gary J, 1988. "How Consumers Are Affected by the Framing of Attribute Information before and after Consuming the Product," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(3), pages 374-378, December.
    20. Kardes, Frank R, et al, 1993. "Brand Retrieval, Consideration Set Composition, Consumer Choice, and the Pioneering Advantage," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 62-75, June.
    21. Shira B. Lewin, 1996. "Economics and Psychology: Lessons for Our Own Day from the Early Twentieth Century," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(3), pages 1293-1323, September.
    22. Marengo, Luigi & Tordjman, Helene, 1996. "Speculation, Heterogeneity and Learning: A Simulation Model of Exchange Rates Dynamics," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3), pages 407-438.
    23. Heath, Timothy B & Chatterjee, Subimal, 1995. "Asymmetric Decoy Effects on Lower-Quality versus Higher-Quality Brands: Meta-analytic and Experimental Evidence," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(3), pages 268-284, December.
    24. Park, C Whan & Smith, Daniel C, 1989. "Product-Level Choice: A Top-Down or Bottom-Up Process?," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 289-299, December.
    25. Pan, Yigang & Lehmann, Donald R, 1993. "The Influence of New Brand Entry on Subjective Brand Judgments," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 76-86, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jessica Birkholz & Jarina Kühn, 2021. "Entrepreneurship Perception during the first COVID-19 Shock: Mental Representations of Entrepreneurship and Preferences of Business Models during the Pandemic," Bremen Papers on Economics & Innovation 2105, University of Bremen, Faculty of Business Studies and Economics.
    2. Olga C. Damman & Peter Spreeuwenberg & Jany Rademakers & Michelle Hendriks, 2012. "Creating Compact Comparative Health Care Information," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(2), pages 287-300, March.
    3. Marco Valente, 2009. "Markets fo Heterogeneous Products: a Boundedly Rational Consumer Model," LEM Papers Series 2009/11, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    4. Franco Malerba, 2006. "Innovation, Industrial Dynamics and Industry Evolution: Progress and the Research Agendas," Revue de l'OFCE, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 97(5), pages 21-46.
    5. Bonsall, Peter & Shires, Jeremy & Maule, John & Matthews, Bryan & Beale, Jo, 2007. "Responses to complex pricing signals: Theory, evidence and implications for road pricing," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 672-683, August.
    6. Ljubica Nedelkoska, 2010. "Occupations at risk: The task content and job stability," Jena Economics Research Papers 2010-024, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    7. Zhang, Tao & Zhang, David, 2007. "Agent-based simulation of consumer purchase decision-making and the decoy effect," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(8), pages 912-922, August.
    8. Frank J. van Rijnsoever & Laurens K. Hessels & Rens L.J. Vandeberg, 2008. "A resource-based view on the interactions of university researchers," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-14, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Apr 2008.
    9. Marco Valente, 2012. "Evolutionary demand: a model for boundedly rational consumers," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 1029-1080, November.
    10. Tarnanidis, Theodore & Owusu-Frimpong, Nana & Nwankwo, Sonny & Omar, Maktoba, 2015. "A confirmatory factor analysis of consumer styles inventory: Evidence from Greece," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 164-177.
    11. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & van Mossel, Allard & Broecks, Kevin P.F., 2015. "Public acceptance of energy technologies: The effects of labeling, time, and heterogeneity in a discrete choice experiment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 817-829.
    12. 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.
    13. S. Bhaduri & H. Worch, 2008. "Past Experience, Cognitive Frames, and Entrepreneurship: Some Econometric Evidence from the Indian Pharmaceutical Industry," Papers on Economics and Evolution 2008-04, Philipps University Marburg, Department of Geography.
    14. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Hessels, Laurens K. & Vandeberg, Rens L.J., 2008. "A resource-based view on the interactions of university researchers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1255-1266, September.
    15. Ruslan Rakhmatullin & Louis Brennan, 2014. "Motivation Behind Researchers’ Participation in Formal Networking Research Projects Funded by the European Union," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 5(2), pages 305-329, June.
    16. Malerba, Franco, 2002. "Sectoral systems of innovation and production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 247-264, February.
    17. Frank J. van Rijnsoever & Carolina Castaldi, 2008. "Knowledge base, information search and intention to adopt innovation," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-02, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Feb 2008.

    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. Davies, Antony & Cline, Thomas W., 2005. "A consumer behavior approach to modeling monopolistic competition," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 797-826, December.
    2. Marcel Lichters & Marko Sarstedt & Bodo Vogt, 2015. "On the practical relevance of the attraction effect: A cautionary note and guidelines for context effect experiments," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 5(1), pages 1-19, June.
    3. Marcel Lichters & Marko Sarstedt & Bodo Vogt, 2015. "On the practical relevance of the attraction effect: A cautionary note and guidelines for context effect experiments," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 5(1), pages 1-19, June.
    4. Mehran Spitmaan & Oihane Horno & Emily Chu & Alireza Soltani, 2019. "Combinations of low-level and high-level neural processes account for distinct patterns of context-dependent choice," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-31, October.
    5. Yuin Jeong & Sangheon Oh & Younah Kang & Sung-Hee Kim, 2021. "Impacts of Visualizations on Decoy Effects," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-19, December.
    6. Celedon, Paulina & Milberg, Sandra & Sinn, Francisca, 2013. "Attraction and superiority effects in the Chilean marketplace: Do they exist with real brands?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(10), pages 1780-1786.
    7. Scholten, Marc, 2002. "Conflict-mediated choice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 683-718, July.
    8. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2013. "Salience and Consumer Choice," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(5), pages 803-843.
    9. Slaughter, Jerel E. & Bagger, Jessica & Li, Andrew, 2006. "Context effects on group-based employee selection decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 47-59, May.
    10. Katharina Dowling & Daniel Guhl & Daniel Klapper & Martin Spann & Lucas Stich & Narine Yegoryan, 2020. "Behavioral biases in marketing," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 449-477, May.
    11. Chunhua Wu & Koray Cosguner, 2020. "Profiting from the Decoy Effect: A Case Study of an Online Diamond Retailer," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(5), pages 974-995, September.
    12. J-J Huang, 2009. "Revised behavioural models for riskless consumer choice," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(9), pages 1237-1243, September.
    13. Müller, Holger & Benjamin Kroll, Eike & Vogt, Bodo, 2010. "“Fact or artifact? Empirical evidence on the robustness of compromise effects in binding and non-binding choice contextsâ€," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 441-448.
    14. Linhai Wu & Pingping Liu & Xiujuan Chen & Wuyang Hu & Xuesen Fan, 2021. "Contents of product attributes and the decoy effect: A study on traceable pork from the perspective of consumer utility," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(4), pages 974-984, June.
    15. K. Sivakumar, 2016. "A unified conceptualization of the attraction effect," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 6(1), pages 39-58, June.
    16. Hamilton, R.W. & Puntoni, S. & Tavassoli, N.T., 2006. "Categorization by Groups," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2006-044-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    17. Bonaccio, Silvia & Reeve, Charlie L., 2006. "Consideration of preference shifts due to relative attribute variability," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 200-214, November.
    18. Kaisa Herne, 1999. "The Effects of Decoy Gambles on Individual Choice," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 2(1), pages 31-40, August.
    19. Lichters, Marcel & Müller, Holger & Sarstedt, Marko & Vogt, Bodo, 2016. "How durable are compromise effects?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 4056-4064.
    20. Holger Müller & Eike Kroll & Bodo Vogt, 2012. "Do real payments really matter? A re-examination of the compromise effect in hypothetical and binding choice settings," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 73-92, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    mental model decision rules conumer choice;

    JEL classification:

    • C9 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:wpa:wuwpex:0109001. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.