Abstract
In two studies, we show that features shared by products (common features) do not cancel out during the decision-making process but in fact are consequential as they decrease desire for delay in decision making. In study 1, we show that as the amount of available information about product features increases, decision delay decreases in spite of the additional information being identical across the products. Further, we also find that this effect is partially mediated by information adequacy. In study 2, we show that despite the overall difficulty of making decisions under avoidance–avoidance versus approach–approach conflict, an increase in common features decreases decision delay under both conflict conditions.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
We use the terms “identical” and “common” interchangeably in the manuscript.
Information can describe both common and unique features. We define a common feature as an attribute on which all alternatives within a consideration set have the same value. For example, if two computers have the same screen size, then screen size is a common feature. Alternatively, a feature that has competitively different values in a consideration set is defined as a unique feature. For example, if one of the two computers has voice-recognition technology and the other does not, or if the two computers have a different price, then those aspects are unique features.
Information adequacy refers to the information’s ability to help diagnose which alternative is the better option. Alternatively, it may also refer to whether the information is enough to make an informed choice. We feel that both these processes might be at play simultaneously. We thank the editor for the suggestion.
We would like to thank an anonymous reviewer for identifying the alternative possibility.
We would like to thank an anonymous reviewer for identifying the possibility of this confound and also suggesting it as an interesting research idea for the future.
References
Agarwal, M. K., & Chatterjee, S. (2003). Complexity, uniqueness, and similarity in between-bundle choice. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 12(6), 358–376.
Anderson, C. J. (2003). The psychology of doing nothing: Forms of decision avoidance result from reason and emotion. Psychological Bulletin, 129(1), 139–166.
Ariely, D. (2000). Controlling the information flow: Effects on consumers’ decision making and preferences. Journal of Consumer Research, 27 (September), 233–47.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.
Bettman, J., Johnson, E. J., & Payne, J. W. (1991). In T. S. Robertson & H. H. Kassarjian (Eds.), Consumer decision making. Handbook of Consumer Behaviour (pp. 50–84). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Bruine De Bruin, W., & Keren, G. (2003). Order effects in sequentially judged options due to the direction of comparison. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 92(1/2), 91–101.
Brunner, T. A., & Wanke, M. (2006). The reduced and enhanced impact of shared features on individual brand evaluations. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(2), 101–111.
Carpenter, G. S., Glazer, R., & Nakamoto, K. (1994). Meaningful brands from meaningless differentiation: The dependence on irrelevant attributes. Journal of Marketing Research (JMR), 31(3), 339–350.
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.
Chernev, A. (1997). The effect of common features on brand choice: Moderating role of attribute importance. Journal of Consumer Research, 23(4), 304–310.
Chernev, A. (2001). The impact of common features on consumer preferences: A case of confirmatory reasoning. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(4), 475–488.
Coupey, E. (1994). Restructuring: Constructive processing of information displays in consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 83–99.
De Dreu, C. K. W., Yzerbyt, V. Y., and Leyens, J.-P. (1995). Dilution of stereotype-based cooperation in mixed-motive interdependence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31(November), 575–593.
DeMaris, A. (2004). Regression with social data: Modelling continuous and limited response variables. Hoboken: Wiley.
Dhar, R., & Nowlis, S. M. (1999). The effect of time pressure on consumer choice deferral. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(4), 369–384.
Fein, S., and Hilton, J. L. (1992). Attitudes towards groups and behavioral intentions toward individual group members: The impact of nondiagnostic information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28 (March), 101–124.
Gaeth, G. J., Levin, I. P., Chakraborty, G., and Levin, A. M. (1991). Consumer evaluation of multi-product bundles: An information integration analysis. Marketing Letters, 2 (January), 47–57.
Greenleaf, E. A., & Lehman, D. R. (1995). Reasons for substantial delay in consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(2), 186–199.
Hilton, J. L., & Fein, S. (1989). The role of typical diagnosticity in stereotype-based judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(2), 201–211.
Houston, D. A., & Sherman, S. J. (1995). Cancellation and focus: The role of shared and unique features in the choice process. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31(4), 357–378.
Houston, D. A., Sherman, S. J., & Baker, S. M. (1989). The influence of unique features and direction of comparison on preferences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25(2), 121–141.
Houston, D. A., Sherman, S. J., & Baker, S. M. (1991). Feature matching, unique features, and the dynamics of the choice process: Pre-decision conflict and post-decision satisfaction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27(5), 411–430.
Jacoby, J., Speller, D. E., & Berning, C. K. (1974). Brand choice behavior as a function of information load: Replication and extension. Journal of Consumer Research, 1(1), 33–42.
Jacoby, J., Speller, D. E., & Kohn, C. A. (1974). Brand choice behavior as a function of information load. Journal of Marketing Research (JMR), 11(1), 63–69.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263–291.
Kardes, F. R., & Sanbonmatsu, D. M. (1993). Direction of comparison, expected feature correlation, and the set-size effect in preference judgment. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2(1), 39–54.
Keller, K. L. (1998). Strategic brand management. NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Keller, K. L., & Staelin, R. (1987). Effects of quality and quantity of information on decision effectiveness. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(2), 200–213.
Klayman, J. (1995). Varieties of confirmation bias. In J. R. Busemeyer, R. Hastie, & D. S. Medin (Eds.), Decision making from the perspective of cognitive psychology (pp. 385–418). New York: Academic.
Lord, C. G., Lepper, M. R., and Ross, L. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37 (November), 2098–2110.
Lurie, N. H. (2004). Decision making in information-rich environments: The role of information structure, Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (March), 473–86.
Malhotra, N. K. (1982). Information load and consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 8 (March), 419–29.
Malhotra, N. K., Jain, A. K., & Lagakos, S. W. (1982). The information overload controversy: An alternative viewpoint. Journal of Marketing, 46(2), 27–37.
Mantel, S. P., & Kardes, F. R. (1999). The role of direction of comparison, attribute-based processing, and attitude-based processing in consumer preference. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(4), 335–352.
Moorthy, S., Ratchford, B. T., and Talukdar, D. (1997). Consumer information search revisited: Theory and empirical analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 23 (March), 263–77.
Muller, T. E. (1984). Buyer response to variations in product information load. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(2), 300–306.
Nagpal, A., & Krishnamurthy, P. (2008). Attribute conflict in consumer decision making: The role of task compatibility. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(5), 696–705.
Nisbett, R. E., Zukier, H., and Lemley, R. E. (1981). The dilution effect: Nondiagnostic information weakens the implications of diagnostic information. Cognitive Psychology, 13 (April), 248–277.
Russo, J. E., Medvec, V. H., & Meloy, M. G. (1996). The distortion of information during decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 66(1), 102–110.
Russo, J. E., Meloy, M. G., & Medvec, V. H. (1998). Predecisional distortion of product information. Journal of Marketing Research, 35(4), 438–452.
Scammon, D. L. (1977). “Information load” and consumers. Journal of Consumer Research, 4(3), 148–155.
Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp. 290–312). Washington, DC: American Sociological Association.
Troutman, M. C. and Shanteau, J. (1976). Do consumers evaluate products by adding or averaging attribute information? Journal of Consumer Research, 3 (September), 101–106.
Tversky, A. (1972). Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice. Psychological Review, 79 (July), 281–299.
Tversky, A. (1977). Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 84 (July), 327–352.
Tversky, A., & Shafir, E. (1992). Choice under conflict: The dynamics of deferred decision. Psychological Science, 3 (November), 358–361.
Wang, T., Venkatesh, R., and Chatterjee, R., (2007). Reservation price as a range: An incentive-compatible measurement approach. Journal of Marketing Research, 44 (May), 200–213.
Wang, J., & Wyer, R. S. (2002). Comparative judgment process: The effects of task objectives and time delay on product evaluations. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12(4), 327–340.
Wanke, M. (1996). Comparative judgments as a function of the direction of comparison versus word order. Public Opinion Quarterly, 60(3), 400–409.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix A
Appendix A
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nagpal, A., Khare, A., Chowdhury, T. et al. The impact of the amount of available information on decision delay: The role of common features. Mark Lett 22, 405–421 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-010-9132-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-010-9132-z