Reinforcement versus balance response in sequential choice
- PDF / 173,631 Bytes
- 11 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 1 Downloads / 218 Views
Reinforcement versus balance response in sequential choice Joel Huber & Kelly Goldsmith & Cassie Mogilner
Published online: 3 June 2008 # Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2008
Abstract Psychologists often explore the impact of one act on a subsequent related act. With an eye to the marketing literature, this paper explores two properties of sequential choices that involve the resolution of competing goals. Reinforcement occurs when the goals driving the first choice are made stronger by that choice and result in a congruent subsequent choice. Balance occurs when the first choice satisfies or extinguishes the goals that led to the original decision, producing an incongruent subsequent choice. This review examines a number of psychological frameworks that account for reinforcement or balance responses in sequential choice and identifies theoretically relevant moderating variables that lead to either response. Keywords Sequential choice . Reinforcement . Balance This paper focuses on two divergent ways a choice can alter a subsequent choice. This divergence is illustrated in the following questions: & &
Does a shopper’s first purchase in a store increase or decrease the likelihood of making subsequent purchases in the store? Is a dieter who orders the low-fat entrée more or less likely to order the low-fat dessert?
This paper was drawn from the discussion in the “Preference Construction in Sequential Choice” session at the Invitational Choice Symposium in June 2007. Participants were James R. Bettman, Ravi Dhar, Ap Dijksterhuis, Ayelet Fishbach, Ran Kivetz, Nathan Novemsky, Daphna Oyserman, John Payne, Drazen Prelec, Norbert Schwarz, Itamar Simonson, Yaacov Trope, and the authors. J. Huber (*) Duke University, Durham, NC, USA e-mail: [email protected] K. Goldsmith Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA C. Mogilner Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
230
& &
Market Lett (2008) 19:229–239
Will turning down a large request from a charity alter the reaction to a more modest request made later? Are self-help systems that allow balanced deviations from a norm more effective than systems that proscribe all undesired behavior?
These four questions reflect sequential choice scenarios. Each begins with an initial decision that resolves conflicting goals and is followed by a related decision that shares the same conflict. For example, one might first choose a healthy but not particularly tasty appetizer and then later choose an artery-clogging but delicious dessert. We focus on whether having made an initial choice supports or extinguishes the cognitions and emotions that led to that decision. When the first choice bolsters a goal, leading to a similar later choice, we term that “reinforcement.” When the first choice satisfies the goal, allowing an alternative goal to drive the later choice, we term that “balance.”1 Since reinforcement and balance are descriptive rather than theoretical terms, we propose that their occurrence depends on the theoretical mechanism operating at the time. We will review a number of t
Data Loading...
