Authors
Marcus Selart
Norwegian School of Economics
Abstract
The use of different response modes has been found to influence how subjects evaluate pairs of alternatives described by two attributes. It has been suggested that judgments and choices evoke different kinds of cognitive processes, leading to an overweighing of the prominent attribute in choice (Tversky, Sattath, & Slovic, 1988; Fischer & Hawkins, 1993). Four experiments were conducted to compare alternative cognitive explanations of this so-called prominence effect in judgment and choice. The explanations investigated were the structure compatibility hypothesis and the restructuring hypothesis. According to the structure compatibility hypothesis, it was assumed that the prominence effect is due to a lack of compatibility between the required output from subjects and the structure of information in input. The restructuring hypothesis stated that the decision maker uses mental restructuring operations on a representation of decision options to make the options more clearly differentiated. In Experiment 1, a matching procedure was used to provide pairs of equally attractive options (medical treatments) for the following experiments. In Experiments 2, 3, and 4, preferences were elicited with two different response modes, choice and preference rating. Value ranges on the prominent and nonprominent attributes were manipulated to test the structure compatibility hypothesis. Accountability was also subject to manipulation as it was assumed to stimulate restructuring. Since the prominence effect was not restricted to choices, and effects of value ranges were obtained but not of accountability, the results were interpreted in line with the structure compatibility hypothesis.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Features of Similarity.Amos Tversky - 1977 - Psychological Review 84 (4):327-352.
Choices, Values, and Frames.Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky (eds.) - 2000 - Cambridge University Press.
The Judgment-Choice Discrepancy.Henry Montgomery, Marcus Selart, Tommy Gärling & Erik Lindberg - 1994 - Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 7 (2):145-155.

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Choice Between Allocation Priciples.Daniel Eek & Marcus Selart - 2009 - International Journal of Psychology 44 (2):109-119.

View all 13 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Decision Theory and Cognitive Choice.John R. Welch - 2011 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 1 (2):147-172.
S-R Compatibility and Information Reduction.Paul M. Fitts & Irving Biederman - 1965 - Journal of Experimental Psychology 69 (4):408.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2016-03-22

Total views
409 ( #24,532 of 2,517,864 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
16 ( #50,307 of 2,517,864 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes