Skip to main content
Search
Search
    Quick Search anywhere
    Quick search in Citations
Advanced Search
Skip main navigationClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Previous article
Next article
Original Article

Justifying Decisions

Making Choices for Others Enhances Preferences for Impoverished Options

Published Online:April 28, 2017https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000302

Abstract

Abstract. Prior research has found that people prefer impoverished over enriched options. However, individuals make decisions either for themselves or for others every day. The present research investigates how and why the decision target (self or other) influences preferences for impoverished and enriched options. We hypothesized and found that participants who made choices for others preferred impoverished over enriched options more than those who made choices for themselves (Studies 1 and 2) because the former group believed that they should justify their decisions to others more than the latter group (Study 2). Overall, the current research sheds light on self–other differences in the trade-off between impoverished and enriched options, as well as the role of justification in this effect.

References

  • Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C. & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5, 323–370. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.323 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Beattie, J., Baron, J., Hershey, J. C. & Spranca, M. (1994). Psychological determinants of decision attitude. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 7, 129–144. doi: 10.1002/bdm.3960070206 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Briley, D. A., Morris, M. W. & Simonson, I. (2000). Reasons as carriers of culture: Dynamic versus dispositional models of cultural influence on decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 27, 157–178. doi: 10.1086/314318 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Chang, C.-C., Chuang, S.-C., Cheng, Y.-H. & Huang, T.-Y. (2011). The compromise effect in choosing for others. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 25, 109–122. doi: 10.1002/bdm.720 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Custódio, C., Ferreira, M. A. & Matos, P. (2013). Generalists versus specialists: Lifetime work experience and chief executive officer pay. Journal of Financial Economic, 108, 471–492. doi: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2013.01.001 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Danziger, S., Montal, R. & Barkan, R. (2012). Idealistic advice and pragmatic choice: A psychological distance account. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 1105–1117. doi: 10.1037/a0027013 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Dore, R. A., Stone, E. R. & Buchanan, C. M. (2014). A social values analysis of parental decision making. The Journal of Psychology, 148, 477–504. doi: 10.1080/00223980.2013.808603 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Drolet, A., Luce, M. F. & Simonson, I. (2009). When does choice reveal preference? Moderators of heuristic versus goal-based choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 36, 137–147. doi: 10.1086/596305 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Ganzach, Y. (1995). Attribute scatter and decision outcome: Judgment versus choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62, 113–122. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1995.1036 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Hong, J. & Chang, H. H. (2015). “I” follow my heart and “we” rely on reasons: The impact of self-construal on reliance on feelings versus reasons in decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 41, 1392–1411. doi: 10.1086/680082 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Hsee, C. K. (1996). The evaluability hypothesis: An explanation for preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 247–257. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1996.0077 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 47, 263–291. doi: 10.2307/1914185 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Laran, J. (2010). Goal management in sequential choices: Consumer choices for others are more indulgent than personal choices. Journal of Consumer Research, 37, 304–314. doi: 10.1086/652193 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Lerner, J. S. & Tetlock, P. E. (1999). Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 255–257. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.255 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Lu, J., Jia, H., Xie, X. & Wang, Q. (2016). Missing the best opportunity; who can seize the next one? Agents show less inaction inertia than personal decision makers. Journal of Economic Psychology, 54, 100–112. doi: 10.1016/j.joep.2016.03.004 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Lu, J. & Xie, X. (2014). To change or not to change: A matter of decision maker’s role. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 124, 47–55. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.12.001 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Lu, J., Xie, X. & Xu, J. (2013). Desirability or feasibility: Self–other decision-making differences. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 144–155. doi: 10.1177/0146167212470146 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Maimaran, M. & Simonson, I. (2011). Multiple routes to self-versus other-expression in consumer choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 48, 755–766. doi: 10.1509/jmkr.48.4.755 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Markus, H. R. & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Mishra, S. (2014). Decision-making under risk: Integrating perspectives from biology, economics, and psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18, 280–307. doi: 10.1177/1088868314530517 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Mishra, S., Barclay, P. & Lalumière, M. L. (2014). Competitive disadvantage facilitates risk taking. Evolution and Human Behavior, 35, 126–132. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2013.11.006 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Neumann, N., Böckenholt, U. & Sinha, A. (2016). A meta-analysis of extremeness aversion. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 26, 193–212. doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2015.05.005 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • O’Brien, E. & Kardas, M. (2016). The implicit meaning of (my) change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111, 882–894. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000073 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Polman, E. (2012a). Effects of self–other decision making on regulatory focus and choice overload. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 980–993. doi: 10.1037/a0026966 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Polman, E. (2012b). Self–other decision making and loss aversion. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 119, 141–150. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.06.005 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Polman, E. & Vohs, K. D. (2016). Decision fatigue, choosing for others, and self-construal. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7, 471–478. doi: 10.1177/1948550616639648 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Pugh, D., Hickson, D. J., Hinings, C. R. & Turner, C. (1968). Dimensions of organization structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 13, 65–105. doi: 10.2307/2391262 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Rozin, P. & Royzman, E. B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 296–320. doi: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0504_2 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Shafir, E. (1993). Choosing versus rejecting: Why some options are both better and worse than others. Memory and Cognition, 21, 546–556. doi: 10.3758/BF03197186 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Shafir, E., Simonson, I. & Tversky, A. (1993). Reason-based choice. Cognition, 49, 11–36. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(93)90034-S First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Simon, H. A. (1990). Invariants of human behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 1–19. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ps.41.020190.000245 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Simonson, I. (1989). Choice based on reasons: The case of attraction and compromise effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 158–174. doi: 10.1086/209205 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Simonson, I. & Nowlis, S. M. (2000). The role of explanations and need for uniqueness in consumer decision making: Unconventional choices based on reasons. Journal of Consumer Research, 27, 49–68. doi: 10.1086/314308 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Singelis, T. M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 580–591. doi: 10.1177/0146167294205014 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Steffel, M., Williams, E. F. & Perrmann-Graham, J. (2016). Passing the buck: Delegating choices to others to avoid responsibility and blame. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 135, 32–44. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.04.006 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Stone, E. R., Choi, Y., de Bruin, W. B. & Mandel, D. R. (2013). I can take the risk, but you should be safe: Self-other differences in situations involving physical safety. Judgment and Decision Making, 8, 250–267. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Tetlock, P. E. & Boettger, R. (1994). Accountability amplifies the status quo effect when change creates victims. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 7, 1–23. doi: 10.1002/bdm.3960070102 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1986). Rational choice and the framing of decisions. Journal of Business, 59, 251–278. doi: 10.1086/296365 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Wagenmakers, E.-J., Krypotps, A.-M., Criss, A. H. & Iverson, G. (2012). On the interpretation of removable interations: A survey of the field 33 years after Loftus. Memory and Cognition, 40, 145–160. doi: 10.3758/s13421-011-0158-0 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Wang, L. & Murnighan, J. K. (2013). The generalist bias. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 120, 47–61. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.09.001 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Zhang, Y. & Mittal, V. (2007). The attractiveness of enriched and impoverished options: Culture, self-construal, and regulatory focus. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 588–598. doi: 10.1177/0146167206296954 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar