Choosing Among Options Presented Sequentially or Simultaneously

When choosing among multiple options, people can view the options either one at a time or all together. In this article, we review an emerging stream of research that examines the ways in which viewing options sequentially as opposed to simultaneously influences people’s decisions. Multiple studies support the idea that viewing options simultaneously encourages people to compare the options and to focus on the ways in which the options differ from each other. In contrast, viewing options sequentially encourages people to process each option holistically by comparing the option with previously encountered options or a subjective reference point. Integrating research from judgment and decision making, consumer behavior, experimental economics, and eyewitness identification, we identify ways in which the different processing styles elicited by sequential- and simultaneous-presentation formats influence people’s judgment and decision making. This issue is particularly important because presenting options either sequentially or simultaneously is a key element of choice architecture.

Download Full-text

Minimal Frames and Transparent Frames for Risk, Time, and Uncertainty

Management Science ◽

10.1287/mnsc.2018.3167 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 65 (9) ◽

pp. 4318-4335 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Jonathan W. Leland ◽

Mark Schneider ◽

Nathaniel T. Wilcox

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Rational Choice Theory ◽

Choice Theory ◽

Ambiguity Aversion ◽

Judgment And Decision Making ◽

Choice Under Uncertainty ◽

Presentation Formats ◽

Frame Dependence ◽

Standard Presentation ◽

Over Time

Behavior differs between transparent and nontransparent presentations of decisions, but “transparent presentation” has not been precisely defined. We formally define “transparent frames” for risk and time, establish their uniqueness, provide algorithms for constructing them, and compare them with “standard” presentation formats. A logic emerges for predicting systematic shifts in choice under risk and over time, and how violations of rational choice theory will depend on frames. An experiment verifies most of those predictions in choice under risk. We extend results to choice under uncertainty and also predict frame dependence of ambiguity aversion, a result supported by recent experimental evidence. This paper was accepted by Elke Weber, judgment and decision making.

Download Full-text

Culture and Judgment and Decision Making

Perspectives on Psychological Science ◽

10.1177/1745691610375556 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 5 (4) ◽

pp. 410-419 ◽

Cited By ~ 51

Author(s):

Elke U. Weber ◽

Michael W. Morris

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Cultural Influences ◽

Judgment And Decision Making ◽

Interpersonal Interaction ◽

Social Environments ◽

Decision Strategies ◽

Typical Size ◽

Processing Styles ◽

Individual Judgment ◽

Cultural Research

Cultural influences on individual judgment and decision making are increasingly understood in terms of dynamic constructive processing and the structures in social environments that shape distinct processing styles, directing initial attentional foci, activating particular judgment schemas and decision strategies, and ultimately reinforcing some judgment and decision making (JDM) patterns over others. These structures include the society’s observable patterns of normative actions and responses, its prevalent forms of interpersonal interaction, the typical size and density of social networks, the ideational frames represented publically in texts and institutions, and so forth. We review this emerging perspective on culture and JDM in both economic and social domains, noting the distinctive insights it yields. We suggest new ways that cultural research is becoming relevant to mainstream JDM researchers, while also recognizing issues in need of further research.

Download Full-text

Judgment and Decision-Making Processes

10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.867 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Richard P. Larrick ◽

M. Asher Lawson

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Goal Setting ◽

Judgment And Decision Making ◽

Choice Architecture ◽

Retirement Savings ◽

Wisdom Of Crowds ◽

Rational Models ◽

Emotional Processes ◽

Decision Making Processes ◽

Professional Fields

The field of judgment and decision making (JDM) arose in psychology to test the rational assumptions posed in other fields such as economics and statistics. This has led to three major contributions of the field. First, to the extent that people systematically deviate from rational models, their decisions are less than optimal. This has consequences for both business practice and for assumptions in many professional fields, such as finance, medicine, and law. Second, the deviation from rational models has led JDM researchers to identify categories of psychological processes that do guide decision making. These include associationistic memory processes, psychophysical processes, emotional processes, and learning. Third, building on the first two contributions, the field of JDM has merged rational and psychological perspectives to explore ways to improve decision making. These methods include a variety of interventions known as nudges, choice architecture, debiasing, and the use of external aids such as algorithms and the wisdom of crowds. The three contributions of JDM help researchers in a number of fields analyze problems and design helpful solutions. Workplace examples include designing better processes for hiring and evaluation, goal setting, and employee retirement savings planning.

Download Full-text