Rejecting options from large and small choice sets: the mediating role of confidence

Author:

Chan Eugene,Wang Yitong

Abstract

Purpose Literature on choice has predominantly focused on selection decisions rather than rejection decisions. Research on rejection decisions has also only studied rejecting one option from two alternatives. This research aims to study the differences in decision confidence and satisfaction in rejection decisions between choice sets of small and large sizes. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted three behavioral experiments in which they first tested the overall effect (Experiment 1) and then found out whether regulatory focus (Experiment 2) and the attractiveness of options (Experiment 3) moderated it. Findings The authors observed that decision satisfaction increased when rejecting larger (vs smaller) choice sets. Decision confidence mediated it (Experiment 1). The effect was strongest when participants had a prevention focus (Experiment 2) and when they were rejecting relatively unattractive options (Experiment 3). Research limitations/implications This research expands the understanding of how individuals make rejection-based decisions and in particular how individuals make choices for one option out of many as in the selection-based choice overload literature. Practical implications The authors show how choice sets of varying sizes affect rejection decisions commonly faced by managers and consumers. This research provides implications for improving confidence and satisfaction, both of which are important elements of everyday decision-making, by suggesting that choice outcomes may differ depending on whether one is making a selection or a rejection decision and whether the choice set size is small or large. Originality/value This is the first study to examine rejection decisions with more than two alternatives. The findings complement the large body of work on the choice overload effect that focuses on selection decisions.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Marketing

Cited by 5 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3