最优化决策倾向对延迟选择的影响:加工深度与选择难度的链式中介*

doi:10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240324

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 延迟选择的个体差异研究已成为关注的热点。本研究运用信息板技术追踪了最优化决策倾向不同个体（最优化者vs.满意型者）的延迟选择过程,探讨最优化决策倾向对延迟选择的影响及信息加工方式与选择难度的中介作用。结果发现：（1）最优化决策倾向分别与选择难度及延迟选择呈显著正相关,即最优化者在决策中更容易体验到选择困难而倾向于延迟选择;（2）最优化决策倾向与信息加工方式呈显著正相关,最优化者在决策中的信息加工时间更长、深度更深,并更偏好使用基于选项的加工方式;（3）最优化决策倾向不仅能直接正向预测延迟选择,而且还能通过加工深度的单独中介、选择难度的单独中介及加工深度→选择难度的链式中介作用间接影响延迟选择。研究结果对进一步理解最优化决策倾向不同个体的延迟选择偏好差异及其机制及如何根据最优化与满意型消费者特征的差异制定有效的营销策略均有一定的启示意义。

关键词: 最优化决策倾向, 延迟选择, 加工深度, 选择难度

Abstract: People often do not decide right away. Instead, they defer their decision to return to it at later time, and it be defined as choice deferral. This phenomenon refers to a situation in which an individual chooses not to choose for the time being. Previous research mainly focused on the cognitive and emotional factors that affect choice deferral, however, with the rising of research on individual differences in decision making, recently more and more scholars begin to explore whether different people have different preferences on choice deferral. For instance, some studies demonstrated that older adults were more likely than young adults to choose the deferral option, and compared to promotion-focus individuals, prevention-focus individuals were more likely to delay their choices and so on. As one of the important individual difference variables, decision-making styles have become a hot research topic. Schwartz et al. (2002) suggested that people vary in the extent to which they seek the best during choice—some people were more likely to try to maximize, while others were content to satisfy. As far as we know, there is no research to explore the effect of maximizing tendency on choice deferral. Therefore, the purpose of the present research uses the information board technique to reveal the effect of maximizing tendency on choice deferral and the underlying information processing mechanism.
The current research employed one factor (decision-making style: maximizing/satisficing) between-subject design, used the revision of the Maximization Scale to measure decision-making style, and took choice deferral, information processing mode (processing time, depth and pattern) and choice difficulty as dependent variables. The experiment was conducted on computer. Firstly, the participants were required to complete multi-attribute decision task, and made their deferral choice. Secondly, subjects’ subjective rating of the difficulty experienced in the process of decision-making was record. Lastly, subjects reported the revision of the Maximization Scale and personal information, and the experiment was finished. The results from the experiment indicated that: (1) Maximizing tendency was significantly positively correlated with choice difficulty and choice deferral, specifically, compared to satisficers, maximizers were more likely to experience choice difficulty, and delay their choice; (2) Maximizing tendency was significantly positively correlated with information processing mode, specifically, maximizers were inclined to spend more time, search more depth on processing, and show more preference for alternative-based search pattern. (3) Processing depth and choice difficulty respectively mediated the effect of maximizing tendency on choice deferral. (4) Maximizing tendency affected choice deferral through the serial mediating effect of processing depth→choice difficulty.
In sum, these results suggested that maximizing tendency had different preferences on choice deferral, moreover, processing depth and choice difficulty could explain the effect of maximizing and satisficing style on choice deferral to some extent. Our findings could not only enrich the literature of decision-making style and choice deferral, but also contribute to understanding of how to provide the appropriate marketing strategy for individuals with different decision-making styles.

Key words: maximizing tendency, choice deferral, processing depth, choice difficulty

王怀勇, 吴君, 王鑫慧. 最优化决策倾向对延迟选择的影响:加工深度与选择难度的链式中介^*[J]. 心理科学, 2024, 47(3): 703-710.

Wang Huaiyong, Wu Jun, Wang Xinhui. Effect of Maximizing Tendency on Choice Deferral:The Serial Mediating Role of Processing Depth and Choice Difficulty[J]. Journal of Psychological Science, 2024, 47(3): 703-710.

参考文献

[1] 何清华, 薛贵, 陈春辉, 董奇, 陈传升. (2014). 遗传因素在风险决策加工中的作用. 心理科学进展, 22(2), 191-204.
[2] 黄仁辉, 曾晓青, 李文虎. (2014). 不确定性容忍度、损益概率及延迟风险对延迟选择的影响. 心理学探新, 24(3), 230-235.
[3] 李晓明, 蒋松源. (2019). 权力对延迟选择的影响. 心理科学进展, 27(3), 71-76.
[4] 李晓明, 谢佳. (2012). 偶然情绪对延迟选择的影响机制. 心理学报, 44(12), 83-92.
[5] 梁竹苑, 许燕, 蒋奖. (2007). 决策中个体差异研究现状述评. 心理科学进展, 15(4), 689-694.
[6] 王怀勇, 刘永芳. (2013). 调节定向与延迟风险对决策偏好的影响. 心理研究, 6(2), 56-63.
[7] 王怀勇, 刘永芳. (2014). 决策过程中的调节匹配效应及其机制. 心理科学, 37(1), 182-189.
[8] 周蕾, 李纾, 许燕, 梁竹苑. (2014). 决策风格的理论发展及建构:基于信息加工视角. 心理科学进展, 22(1), 112-121.
[9] 朱冬青, 谢晓非. (2013). 最优化与满意型决策风格孰优孰劣? 心理科学进展, 21(2), 309-316.
[10] Anderson, C. J. (2003). The psychology of doing nothing: Forms of decision avoidance result from reason and emotion. Psychological Bulletin, 129(1), 139-167.
[11] Appelt K. C., Milch K. F., Handgraaf M., & Weber E. U. (2011). The decision making individual differences inventory and guidelines for the study of individual differences in judgment and decision-making research. Judgment and Decision Making, 6(3), 252-262.
[12] Bahník, Š. (2019). Disfluent, but fast: inverted-u shaped effect of fluency on decision times. Experimental Psychology, 66(1), 1-9.
[13] Berens, S., & Funke, J. (2020). A vignette study of option refusal and decision deferral as two forms of decision avoidance: Situational and personal predictors. PLoS ONE, 15(10), e0241182.
[14] Chatterjee, S., & Heath, T. B. (1996). Conflict and loss aversion in multiattribute choice: The effects of trade-off size and reference dependence on decision difficulty. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67(2), 144-155.
[15] Cheek, N. N., & Goebel, J. (2020). What does it mean to maximize? "Decision difficulty", indecisiveness, and the jingle-jangle fallacies in the measurement of maximizing. Judgment and Decision Making, 15(1), 7-24.
[16] Chen Y., Ma X., & Pethtel O. (2011). Age differences in trade-off decisions: Older adults prefer choice deferral. Psychology and Aging, 26(2), 269-273.
[17] Chernev A., Böckenholt U., & Goodman J. (2010). Commentary on Scheibehenne, Greifeneder, and Todd choice overload: Is there anything to it? Journal of Consumer Research, 37(3), 426-428.
[18] Chernev A., Böckenholt U., & Goodman J. (2015). Choice overload: A conceptual review and meta-analysis. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25(2), 333-358.
[19] Chowdhury T. G., Ratneshwar S., & Mohanty P. (2009). The time-harried shopper: Exploring the differences between maximizers and satisficers. Marketing Letters, 20(2), 155-167.
[20] Dalal D. K., Diab D. L., Zhu X. Y., & Hwang T. (2015). Understanding the construct of maximizing tendency: A theoretical and empirical evaluation. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 28, 437-450.
[21] Dar-Nimrod I., Rawn C. D., Lehman D. R., & Schwartz B. (2009). The maximization paradox: The costs of seeking alternatives. Personality and Individual Differences, 46(5), 631-635.
[22] Deck, C., & Jahedi, S. (2015). The effect of cognitive load on economic decision making: A survey and new experiments. European Economic Review, 78, 97-119.
[23] Dhar, R. (1996). The effect of decision strategy on deciding to defer choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 9(4), 265-281.
[24] Dhar, R. (1997). Consumer preference for a no-choice option. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(2), 215-231.
[25] Dhar, R., & Nowlis, S. M. (1999). The effect of time pressure on consumer choice deferral. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(4), 369-384.
[26] Diab D. L., Gillespie M. A., & Highhouse S. (2008). Are maximizers really unhappy? The measurement of maximizing tendency. Judgment and Decision Making, 3(5), 364-370.
[27] Drolet, A., & Luce, M. F. (2004). The rationalizing effects of cognitive load on emotion-based trade-off avoidance. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(1), 63-77.
[28] Etkin J., Ghosh A. P., Dahl D., & Laboo A. (2018). When being in a positive mood increases choice deferral. Journal of Consumer Research, 45(1), 208-225.
[29] Faul F., Erdfelder E., Lang A. G., & Buchner A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavioral Research Methods, 39(2), 175-191.
[30] Garg N., Inman J. J., & Mittal V. (2017). Emotion effects on choice deferral: The moderating role of outcome and process accountability European Journal of Marketing, 51(9), 1631-1649.
[31] Gourville, J. T., & Soman, D. (2005). Overchoice and assortment type: When and why variety backfires. Marketing Science, 24(3), 382-395.
[32] Inbar Y., Botti S., & Hanko K. (2011). Decision speed and choice regret: When haste feels like waste. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(3), 533-540.
[33] Iyengar S. S., Wells R. E., & Schwartz B. (2006). Doing better but feeling worse: Looking for the “best” job undermines satisfaction. Psychological Science, 17(2), 143-150.
[34] Kim, K. & Miller, E. G. (2017). Vulnerable maximizers: The role of decision difficulty. Judgment and Decision Making, 12(5), 516-526.
[35] Krijnen J. M. T., Zeelenberg M., & Breugelmans S. M. (2015). Decision importance as a cue for deferral. Judgment and Decision Making, 10(5), 407-415.
[36] Larasati, A., & Yeh, M. Y. (2016). Does more attractive choice always decrease choice deferral? The moderating effect of ideal point. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 54, 43-51.
[37] Leach, J. K., & Patall, E. A. (2013). Maximizing and counterfactual thinking in academic major decision making. Journal of Career Assessment, 21(3), 414-429.
[38] Lohse, G. L., & Johnson, E. J. (1996). A comparison of two process tracing methods for choice tasks. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 68(1), 28-43.
[39] Luce, M. F. (1998). Choosing to avoid: Coping with negatively emotion-laden consumer decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 409-433.
[40] Luce M. F., Payne J. W., & Bettman J. R. (1999). Emotional trade-off difficulty and choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(2), 143-159.
[41] Magnusson, D., & Stattin, H. (1998). Person-context interaction theories. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (pp. 685-759). John Wiley & Sons Inc.
[42] Mao, W. (2016). When one desires too much of a good thing: The compromise effect under maximizing tendencies. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 26(1), 66-80.
[43] Misuraca R., Faraci P., Gangemi A., Carmeci F. A., & Miceli S. (2015). The decision making tendency inventory: A new measure to assess maximizing, satisficing, and minimizing. Personality and Individual Differences, 85, 111-116.
[44] Misuraca, R., & Teuscher, U. (2013). Time flies when you maximize — maximizers and satisficers perceive time differently when making decisions. Acta Psychologica, 143(2), 176-180.
[45] Noguchi, T., & Hills, T. T. (2016). Description-experience gap in choice deferral. Decision, 3(1), 54-61.
[46] Novemsky N., Dhar R., Schwarz N., & Simonson, I.(20007). Preference fluency in choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(3), 347-356.
[47] Owen H. E., Halberstadt J., Carr E. W., & Winkielman P. (2016). Johnny depp, reconsidered: How category-relative processing fluency determines the appeal of gender ambiguity. PLoS ONE, 11(2), e0146328.
[48] Parker A. M., Bruin W., & Fischhoff B. (2007). Maximizers versus satisficers: Decision-making styles, competence, and outcomes. Judgment and Decision Making, 2(6), 342-350.
[49] Pethtel, O. L., & Chen, Y. (2013). Age differences in choice deferrals as functions of interattribute conflict and decision domain. Educational Gerontology, 39(10), 772-782.
[50] Pilli, L. E., & Mazzon, J. A. (2016). Information overload, choice deferral, and moderating role of need for cognition: Empirical evidence. Revista de Administração, 51(1), 36-55.
[51] Polman, E. (2010). Why are maximizers less happy than satisficers? Because they maximize positive and negative outcomes. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 23(2), 179-190.
[52] Rassin, E., & Muris, P. (2005). Indecisiveness and the interpretation of ambiguous situations. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(7), 1285-1291.
[53] Reed D. D., Reed F. D. D., Chok J., & Brozyna G. A. (2011). The "tyranny of choice": Choice overload as a possible instance of effort discounting. The Psychological Record, 61(4), 547-560.
[54] Richardson C. M., Ye H. J., Ege E., Suh H., & Rice K. G. (2014). Refining the measurement of maximization: Gender invariance and relation to psychological well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 70, 229-234.
[55] Rieskamp J.,& Hoffrage, U. (1999). When do people use simple heuristics and how can we tell. In G. Gigerenzer, P. M. Todd, & the ABC Research Group (eds.), Simple heuristics that make us smart (pp. 141-167). Oxford University Press.
[56] Rim, H. B. (2012). Maximizing, satisficing and their impacts on decision-making behaviors. The Ohio State University.
[57] Rogge, N. (2017). Maximizing, choice freedom, and duration judgments in choice making. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 16(6), e125-e138.
[58] Saltsman T. L., Seery M. D., Ward D. E., Radsvick T. M., Panlilio Z. A., Lamarche V. M., & Kondrak C. L. (2020). Facing the facets: No association between dispositional mindfulness facets and positive momentary stress responses during active stressors. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1-14.
[59] Schwartz B., Ward A., Monterosso J., Lyubomirsky S., White K., & Lehman D. R. (2002). Maximizing versus satisficing: Happiness is a matter of choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(5), 1178-1197.
[60] Shiloh S., Koren S., & Dan Z. (2001). Individual differences in compensatory decision-making style and need for closure as correlates of subjective decision complexity and difficulty. Personality and Individual Differences, 30(4), 699-710.
[61] Spunt R. P., Rassin E., & Epstein L. M. (2009). Aversive and avoidant indecisiveness: Roles for regret proneness, maximization, and bias sensitivities. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(4), 256-261.
[62] Unkelbach, C., & Rom, S. C. (2017). A referential theory of the repetition-induced truth effect. Cognition, 160, 110-126.
[63] Weinhardt J. M., Morse B. J., Chimeli J., & Fisher J. (2012). An item response theory and factor analytic examination of two prominent maximizing tendency scales. Judgment and Decision Making, 7(5), 644-658.
[64] Yang, M. L., & Chiou, W. B. (2010). Looking online for the best romantic partner reduces decision quality: The moderating role of choice-making strategies. Cyberpsychology Behavior and Social Networking, 13(2), 207-210.

最优化决策倾向对延迟选择的影响:加工深度与选择难度的链式中介^*

Effect of Maximizing Tendency on Choice Deferral:The Serial Mediating Role of Processing Depth and Choice Difficulty

PDF

评审附件

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 4

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	戴佳彤, 盛光华. 公益广告信息框架对食物节约意愿的影响：基于焦虑感视角^*[J]. 心理科学, 2024, 47(2): 424-431.
[2]	王怀勇, 邢晓雪, 岳思怡. 调节模式与决策角色对延迟选择的影响及机制：过程追踪的视角^*[J]. 心理科学, 2023, 46(4): 913-920.
[3]	王怀勇陈翠萍. 调节模式对选择超载的影响及其机制：一个有中介的调节模型[J]. 心理科学, 2021, 44(5): 1057-1063.
[4]	段锦云卢志巍张涵碧. 权力感对风险决策框架效应的影响[J]. 心理科学, 2016, 39(2): 412-417.