國立虎尾科技大學 |

The Role of Response Modes in Consumer Judgment and Choice.

Record Type:	Language materials, manuscript : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	The Role of Response Modes in Consumer Judgment and Choice./
Author:	Park, Jen Heewon.
Description:	1 online resource (119 pages)
Notes:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 84-04, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International84-04A.
Subject:	Design. -
Online resource:	click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798352603857

The Role of Response Modes in Consumer Judgment and Choice.
Park, Jen Heewon.

The Role of Response Modes in Consumer Judgment and Choice. - 1 online resource (119 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 84-04, Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Stanford University, 2022.

Includes bibliographical references

Marketing research has predominantly focused on how and what consumers choose. However, most options considered by consumers are rejected (i.e., not chosen); yet, the study of how consumers make rejections has not received much attention. While choosing a good option and rejecting a bad option had long been regarded as nominally the same decision, a growing body of research has uncovered that these two response modes differ in their psychological processes and behavioral consequences. Recognizing this discrepancy between choice and rejection, my dissertation explores the impact of response modes on product evaluations and decisions, with a focus on contexts in which consumers make rejections.In Chapter 1, I explore how the salience of option rejection affects consumer experience and purchase. The paper addresses the following questions: Are all rejections created equal? How does explicitly (versus implicitly) rejecting options influence the ultimate purchase decision? Can the interface design elements of choice architecture influence consumers' evaluation experience and, more importantly, their likelihood of purchasing any option at all? Building on the surge of online decision interfaces, I examine the impact of interface designs-whether the interface enables explicit rejection of products during the evaluation phase-on the likelihood that consumers make a purchase instead of deferral. The findings indicate that the interfaces that strengthen (versus weaken) consumers' psychological rejection of their product options can increase purchase likelihood. Beyond broadly demonstrating the importance of decision context in consumer search, this research sheds light on the psychological implications of the alternative ways consumers reject (i.e., not choose) their options. The findings also have substantive implications for marketers and policy makers as I identify a previously unrecognized source of purchase after evaluation: decision interface design. For example, as demonstrated in my field experiment that involves high-stake decisions in the context of animal adoption, consumers who could explicitly reject animal options through the decision interface were more likely to adopt an animal after their evaluation compared to those who could not.Chapter 2 examines how the rejection mindset can lead consumers to prioritize certain attributes over others, which in turn affects their preference. In today's marketplace, objective attributes that convey the extrinsic quality of the product (e.g., customer reviews and ratings) have become more salient than ever. As a result, consumers face a dilemma when the quality information conflicts with their idiosyncratic preferences (e.g., a product with a low rating fits their taste). This paper tests the proposition that the way consumers resolve this quality-taste conflict depends on whether they respond to a choice or rejection. I posit that rejecting one's own taste is more painful and objectionable-or associated with greater loss aversion-than rejecting the criteria related to quality essentially constructed by others. As multiple online tools aim to not only highlight quality cues (e.g., number of reviews, recommendations based on algorithms) but also accommodate individual consumer taste better (e.g., customization, personalized recommendations), this line of research on "survival of taste" has important implications for practitioners in the current consumer environment.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2024

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798352603857Subjects--Topical Terms:

595500
Design.
Index Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

The Role of Response Modes in Consumer Judgment and Choice.
LDR:04693ntm a22003257 4500 001 1141686
005 20240414211445.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 250605s2022 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798352603857
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI29342295
035 $a (MiAaPQ)STANFORDpk878xs5144
035 $a AAI29342295
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Park, Jen Heewon. $3 1465623
245 1 4 $a The Role of Response Modes in Consumer Judgment and Choice.
264 0 $c 2022
300 $a 1 online resource (119 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 84-04, Section: A.
500 $a Advisor: Huang, Szu-chi;Levav, Jonathan;Simonson, Itamar.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Stanford University, 2022.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a Marketing research has predominantly focused on how and what consumers choose. However, most options considered by consumers are rejected (i.e., not chosen); yet, the study of how consumers make rejections has not received much attention. While choosing a good option and rejecting a bad option had long been regarded as nominally the same decision, a growing body of research has uncovered that these two response modes differ in their psychological processes and behavioral consequences. Recognizing this discrepancy between choice and rejection, my dissertation explores the impact of response modes on product evaluations and decisions, with a focus on contexts in which consumers make rejections.In Chapter 1, I explore how the salience of option rejection affects consumer experience and purchase. The paper addresses the following questions: Are all rejections created equal? How does explicitly (versus implicitly) rejecting options influence the ultimate purchase decision? Can the interface design elements of choice architecture influence consumers' evaluation experience and, more importantly, their likelihood of purchasing any option at all? Building on the surge of online decision interfaces, I examine the impact of interface designs-whether the interface enables explicit rejection of products during the evaluation phase-on the likelihood that consumers make a purchase instead of deferral. The findings indicate that the interfaces that strengthen (versus weaken) consumers' psychological rejection of their product options can increase purchase likelihood. Beyond broadly demonstrating the importance of decision context in consumer search, this research sheds light on the psychological implications of the alternative ways consumers reject (i.e., not choose) their options. The findings also have substantive implications for marketers and policy makers as I identify a previously unrecognized source of purchase after evaluation: decision interface design. For example, as demonstrated in my field experiment that involves high-stake decisions in the context of animal adoption, consumers who could explicitly reject animal options through the decision interface were more likely to adopt an animal after their evaluation compared to those who could not.Chapter 2 examines how the rejection mindset can lead consumers to prioritize certain attributes over others, which in turn affects their preference. In today's marketplace, objective attributes that convey the extrinsic quality of the product (e.g., customer reviews and ratings) have become more salient than ever. As a result, consumers face a dilemma when the quality information conflicts with their idiosyncratic preferences (e.g., a product with a low rating fits their taste). This paper tests the proposition that the way consumers resolve this quality-taste conflict depends on whether they respond to a choice or rejection. I posit that rejecting one's own taste is more painful and objectionable-or associated with greater loss aversion-than rejecting the criteria related to quality essentially constructed by others. As multiple online tools aim to not only highlight quality cues (e.g., number of reviews, recommendations based on algorithms) but also accommodate individual consumer taste better (e.g., customization, personalized recommendations), this line of research on "survival of taste" has important implications for practitioners in the current consumer environment.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2024
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Design. $3 595500
650 4 $a Shopping carts. $3 1465624
650 4 $a Decision making. $3 528319
650 4 $a Interfaces. $3 1372540
650 4 $a Painting. $3 1131865
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0389
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a Stanford University. $3 1184533
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 84-04A.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=29342295 $z click for full text (PQDT)