UnivTrevesV1, Istex, Corpus, bibRecord, 001506

Asymmetric Comparison in Choice Processes

Identifieur interne : 001506 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 001505; suivant : 001507

Asymmetric Comparison in Choice Processes

Auteurs : Johannes O. Ritter ; Alexandra M. Freund

Source :

Social and Personality Psychology Compass [ 1751-9004 ] ; 2009-07.

RBID : ISTEX:2E79FDD0618AFD799ADE0F6074B8A08F4412477D

Abstract

Since Tversky's (1977) seminal paper on asymmetric comparisons was published, comparisons of different options are generally believed to be directional. Interestingly, the asymmetry involved in comparisons has not been considered systematically for choices between different options. This paper argues that, in decision situations, one of the options serves as a dominant standard against which the others are evaluated, which results in asymmetric comparisons and, in turn, has important and systematic consequences for the choice process. This paper outlines which conditions should result in asymmetric comparisons. Taking existing models of asymmetric comparisons into account, a process model will be presented using the loss of a previously available choice option as an example.

Url:

https://api.istex.fr/document/2E79FDD0618AFD799ADE0F6074B8A08F4412477D/fulltext/pdf

DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2009.00189.x

Links to Exploration step

ISTEX:2E79FDD0618AFD799ADE0F6074B8A08F4412477D

Le document en format XML

<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Asymmetric Comparison in Choice Processes</title>
<author><name sortKey="Ritter, Johannes O" sort="Ritter, Johannes O" uniqKey="Ritter J" first="Johannes O." last="Ritter">Johannes O. Ritter</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Zurich</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Freund, Alexandra M" sort="Freund, Alexandra M" uniqKey="Freund A" first="Alexandra M." last="Freund">Alexandra M. Freund</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Zurich</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno>
<idno type="RBID">ISTEX:2E79FDD0618AFD799ADE0F6074B8A08F4412477D</idno>
<date when="2009" year="2009">2009</date>
<idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1751-9004.2009.00189.x</idno>
<idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/2E79FDD0618AFD799ADE0F6074B8A08F4412477D/fulltext/pdf</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001506</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001506</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Asymmetric Comparison in Choice Processes</title>
<author><name sortKey="Ritter, Johannes O" sort="Ritter, Johannes O" uniqKey="Ritter J" first="Johannes O." last="Ritter">Johannes O. Ritter</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Zurich</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Freund, Alexandra M" sort="Freund, Alexandra M" uniqKey="Freund A" first="Alexandra M." last="Freund">Alexandra M. Freund</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Zurich</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
</analytic>
<monogr></monogr>
<series><title level="j">Social and Personality Psychology Compass</title>
<idno type="ISSN">1751-9004</idno>
<idno type="eISSN">1751-9004</idno>
<imprint><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher>
<pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace>
<date type="published" when="2009-07">2009-07</date>
<biblScope unit="volume">3</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" from="582">582</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" to="600">600</biblScope>
</imprint>
<idno type="ISSN">1751-9004</idno>
</series>
<idno type="istex">2E79FDD0618AFD799ADE0F6074B8A08F4412477D</idno>
<idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1751-9004.2009.00189.x</idno>
<idno type="ArticleID">SPC3189</idno>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
<seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">1751-9004</idno>
</seriesStmt>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass></textClass>
<langUsage><language ident="en">en</language>
</langUsage>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Since Tversky's (1977) seminal paper on asymmetric comparisons was published, comparisons of different options are generally believed to be directional. Interestingly, the asymmetry involved in comparisons has not been considered systematically for choices between different options. This paper argues that, in decision situations, one of the options serves as a dominant standard against which the others are evaluated, which results in asymmetric comparisons and, in turn, has important and systematic consequences for the choice process. This paper outlines which conditions should result in asymmetric comparisons. Taking existing models of asymmetric comparisons into account, a process model will be presented using the loss of a previously available choice option as an example.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
<istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName>
<author><json:item><name>Johannes O. Ritter</name>
<affiliations><json:string>University of Zurich</json:string>
</affiliations>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>Alexandra M. Freund</name>
<affiliations><json:string>University of Zurich</json:string>
</affiliations>
</json:item>
</author>
<articleId><json:string>SPC3189</json:string>
</articleId>
<language><json:string>eng</json:string>
</language>
<originalGenre><json:string>article</json:string>
</originalGenre>
<abstract>Since Tversky's (1977) seminal paper on asymmetric comparisons was published, comparisons of different options are generally believed to be directional. Interestingly, the asymmetry involved in comparisons has not been considered systematically for choices between different options. This paper argues that, in decision situations, one of the options serves as a dominant standard against which the others are evaluated, which results in asymmetric comparisons and, in turn, has important and systematic consequences for the choice process. This paper outlines which conditions should result in asymmetric comparisons. Taking existing models of asymmetric comparisons into account, a process model will be presented using the loss of a previously available choice option as an example.</abstract>
<qualityIndicators><score>6.832</score>
<pdfVersion>1.4</pdfVersion>
<pdfPageSize>422 x 649 pts</pdfPageSize>
<refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative>
<abstractCharCount>785</abstractCharCount>
<pdfWordCount>7851</pdfWordCount>
<pdfCharCount>48972</pdfCharCount>
<pdfPageCount>19</pdfPageCount>
<abstractWordCount>111</abstractWordCount>
</qualityIndicators>
<title>Asymmetric Comparison in Choice Processes</title>
<refBibs><json:item><author><json:item><name>C. M. Aguilar</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>D. L. Medin</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>6</volume>
<pages><last>337</last>
<first>328</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Psychonomic Bulletin & Review</title>
</host>
<title>Asymmetries of comparison</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>C. J. Anderson</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>129</volume>
<pages><last>167</last>
<first>139</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Psychological Bulletin</title>
</host>
<title>The psychology of doing nothing: forms of decision avoidance result from reason and emotion</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>J. R. Bettman</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>M. F. Luce</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>J. W. Payne</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>25</volume>
<pages><last>217</last>
<first>187</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Consumer Research</title>
</host>
<title>Constructive consumer choice processes</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>M. Bhargava</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>J. Kim</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>R. K. Srivastava</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>9</volume>
<pages><last>177</last>
<first>167</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Consumer Psychology</title>
</host>
<title>Explaining context effects on choice using a model of comparative judgment</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>B. F. Bowdle</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>D. Gentner</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>34</volume>
<pages><last>286</last>
<first>244</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Cognitive Psychology</title>
</host>
<title>Informativity and asymmetry in comparisons</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><host><author></author>
<title>Brehm, J. W. (1966). A Theory of Psychological Rea Ctance. New York, NY: Academic Press.</title>
</host>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>J. W. Brehm</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>16</volume>
<pages><last>75</last>
<first>72</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Advances in Consumer Research</title>
</host>
<title>Psychological reactance – Theory and applications</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>H. H. Clark</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>S. E. Haviland</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><pages><last>40</last>
<first>1</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Discourse production and comprehension</title>
</host>
<title>Comprehension and the given‐new contract</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><host><author></author>
<title>Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self‐Determination in Human Behavior. New York, NY: Plenum.</title>
</host>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>R. Dhar</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>24</volume>
<pages><last>231</last>
<first>215</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Consumer Research</title>
</host>
<title>Consumer preference for a no‐choice option</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>R. Dhar</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>I. Simonson</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>29</volume>
<pages><last>440</last>
<first>430</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Marketing Research</title>
</host>
<title>The effect of the focus of comparison on consumer preferences</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>R. Dhar</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>S. M. Nowlis</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>S. J. Sherman</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>26</volume>
<pages><last>306</last>
<first>293</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Consumer Research</title>
</host>
<title>Comparison effects on preference construction</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>J. R. Doyle</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>D. J. O’Connor</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>G. M. Reynolds</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>P. A. Bottomley</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>16</volume>
<pages><last>243</last>
<first>225</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Psychology & Marketing</title>
</host>
<title>The robustness of the asymmetrically dominated effect: Buying frames, phantom alternatives, and in‐store purchases</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>A. H. Eagly</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>S. Chaiken</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>25</volume>
<pages><last>602</last>
<first>582</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Social Cognition</title>
</host>
<title>The advantages of an inclusive definition of attitude</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>B. Englich</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>T. Mussweiler</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>F. Strack</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>32</volume>
<pages><last>200</last>
<first>188</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin</title>
</host>
<title>Playing dice with criminal sentences: The influence of irrelevant anchors on experts’ judicial decision making</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>D. Gentner</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>7</volume>
<pages><last>170</last>
<first>155</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Cognitive Science</title>
</host>
<title>Structure‐mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>D. Gentner</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><pages><last>241</last>
<first>199</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Similarity and Analogical Reasoning</title>
</host>
<title>The mechanisms of analogical learning</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>D. Gentner</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>B. F. Bowdle</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>16</volume>
<pages><last>356</last>
<first>351</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society</title>
</host>
<title>The coherence imbalance hypothesis: A functional approach to asymmetry in comparison</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>D. Gentner</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>A. B. Markman</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>5</volume>
<pages><last>158</last>
<first>152</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Psychological Science</title>
</host>
<title>Structural alignment in comparison: No difference without similarity</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>D. Gentner</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>A. B. Markman</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>52</volume>
<pages><last>56</last>
<first>45</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>American Psychologist</title>
</host>
<title>Structure mapping in analogy and similarity</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>H. P. Grice</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><pages><last>133</last>
<first>121</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Syntax and Semantics</title>
</host>
<title>Logic and conversation</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><host><author></author>
<title>Testing the reference‐dependent model: An experiment on asymmetrically dominated reference pointsJournal of Behavioral Decision</title>
</host>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>E. T. Higgins</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><pages><last>168</last>
<first>133</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles</title>
</host>
<title>Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>S. Highhouse</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>65</volume>
<pages><last>76</last>
<first>68</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes</title>
</host>
<title>Context‐dependent selection: The effects of decoy and phantom job candidates</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><host><author></author>
<title>Hodges, S. D. (2005). A Feature‐Based Model of Self‐Other Comparisons. New York, NY: Psychology Press.</title>
</host>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>S. D. Hodges</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>P. Bruininks</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>L. Ivy</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>28</volume>
<pages><last>53</last>
<first>40</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin</title>
</host>
<title>It's different when I do it: Feature matching in self‐other comparisons</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>D. A. Houston</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>S. J. Sherman</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>31</volume>
<pages><last>378</last>
<first>357</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Experimental Social Psychology</title>
</host>
<title>Cancellation and focus: The role of shared and unique features in the choice process</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>D. A. Houston</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>S. J. Sherman</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>S. M. Baker</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>25</volume>
<pages><last>141</last>
<first>121</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Experimental Social Psychology</title>
</host>
<title>The influence of unique features and direction of comparison on preferences</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>D. A. Houston</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>S. J. Sherman</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>S. M. Baker</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>27</volume>
<pages><last>430</last>
<first>411</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Experimental Social Psychology</title>
</host>
<title>Feature matching, unique features, and the dynamics of the choice process: Predecision conflict and postdecision satisfaction</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>J. Huber</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>J. W. Payne</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>C. Puto</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>9</volume>
<pages><last>98</last>
<first>90</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Consumer Research</title>
</host>
<title>Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>K. E. Jacowitz</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>D. Kahneman</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>21</volume>
<pages><last>1166</last>
<first>1161</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin</title>
</host>
<title>Measures of anchoring in estimation tasks</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>D. Kahneman</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>D. T. Miller</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>93</volume>
<pages><last>153</last>
<first>136</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Psychological Review</title>
</host>
<title>Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>F. R. Kardes</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>G. Kalyanaram</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>29</volume>
<pages><last>357</last>
<first>343</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Marketing Research</title>
</host>
<title>Order‐of‐entry effects on consumer memory and judgment: An information integration perspective</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>F. R. Kardes</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>D. M. Sanbonmatsu</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>2</volume>
<pages><last>54</last>
<first>39</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Consumer Psychology</title>
</host>
<title>Direction of comparison, expected feature correlation, and the set‐size effect in preference judgment</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>J. J. Karylowski</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>4</volume>
<pages><last>586</last>
<first>581</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Social Behavior & Personality</title>
</host>
<title>Trait prototypicality and the asymmetry effect in self‐other similarity judgments</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>J. J. Karylowski</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>K. Skarzynska</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>10</volume>
<pages><last>254</last>
<first>235</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Social Cognition</title>
</host>
<title>Asymmetric self‐other similarity judgments depend on priming of self‐knowledge</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>T. Kramer</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>R. Carroll</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>20</volume>
<pages><last>208</last>
<first>197</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Marketing Letters</title>
</host>
<title>The effect of incidental out‐of‐stock options on preferences</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><host><author></author>
<title>Lichtenstein, S., & Slovic, P. (Eds.). (2006). The Construction of Preference. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.</title>
</host>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>A. B. Markman</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>D. Gentner</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>25</volume>
<pages><last>467</last>
<first>431</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Cognitive Psychology</title>
</host>
<title>Structural alignment during similarity comparisons</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>D. L. Medin</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>R. L. Goldstone</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>D. Gentner</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>100</volume>
<pages><last>278</last>
<first>254</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Psychological Review</title>
</host>
<title>Respects for similarity</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>D. L. Medin</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>R. L. Goldstone</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>A. B. Markman</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>2</volume>
<pages><last>19</last>
<first>1</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Psychonomic Bulletin & Review</title>
</host>
<title>Comparison and choice: Relations between similarity processes and decision processes</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>A. M. Miron</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>J. W. Brehm</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>37</volume>
<pages><last>18</last>
<first>9</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie</title>
</host>
<title>Reactance theory – 40 years later</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>T. Mussweiler</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>27</volume>
<pages><last>47</last>
<first>38</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin</title>
</host>
<title>Focus of comparison as a determinant of assimilation versus contrast in social comparison</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>T. Mussweiler</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>33</volume>
<pages><last>733</last>
<first>719</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>European Journal of Social Psychology</title>
</host>
<title>‘Everything is relative’: Comparison processes in social judgment: The 2002 Jaspars Lecture</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>T. Mussweiler</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>B. Englich</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>98</volume>
<pages><last>143</last>
<first>133</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes</title>
</host>
<title>Subliminal anchoring: Judgmental consequences and underlying mechanisms</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>A. Ortony</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>86</volume>
<pages><last>180</last>
<first>161</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Psychological Review</title>
</host>
<title>Beyond literal similarity</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>A. Ortony</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>R. J. Von Druska</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>M. A. Foss</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>L. E. Jones</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>24</volume>
<pages><last>594</last>
<first>569</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Memory and Language</title>
</host>
<title>Salience, similes, and the asymmetry of similarity</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>J. Park</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>J. K. Kim</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>15</volume>
<pages><last>107</last>
<first>94</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Consumer Psychology</title>
</host>
<title>The effects of decoys on preference shifts: The role of attractiveness and providing justification</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>J. C. Pettibone</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>D. H. Wedell</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>20</volume>
<pages><last>341</last>
<first>323</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Behavioral Decision Making</title>
</host>
<title>Testing alternative explanations of phantom decoy effects</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>S. Ratneshwar</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>A. D. Shocker</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>D. W. Stewart</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>13</volume>
<pages><first>520</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Consumer Research</title>
</host>
<title>Toward understanding the attraction effect: The implications of product stimulus meaningfulness and familiarity</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>J. Rieskamp</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>J. R. Busemeyer</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>B. A. Mellers</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>44</volume>
<pages><last>661</last>
<first>631</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Economic Literature</title>
</host>
<title>Extending the bounds of rationality: Evidence and theories of preferential choice</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>N. Schwarz</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>25</volume>
<pages><last>656</last>
<first>638</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Social Cognition</title>
</host>
<title>Attitude construction: Evaluation in context</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>H. A. Simon</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>69</volume>
<pages><last>118</last>
<first>99</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>The Quarterly Journal of Economics</title>
</host>
<title>A behavioral model of rational choice</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>I. Simonson</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>18</volume>
<pages><last>169</last>
<first>155</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Consumer Psychology</title>
</host>
<title>Will I like a ‘medium’ pillow? Another look at constructed and inherent preferences</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>P. Slovic</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>S. Lichtenstein</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>73</volume>
<pages><last>605</last>
<first>596</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>The American Economic Review</title>
</host>
<title>Preference reversals: A broader perspective</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>T. K. Srull</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>L. Gaelick</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>2</volume>
<pages><last>121</last>
<first>108</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Social Cognition</title>
</host>
<title>General principles and individual differences in the self as a habitual reference point: An examination of self‐other judgments of similarity</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>Y. Trope</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>A. Liberman</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><pages><last>270</last>
<first>239</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles</title>
</host>
<title>Social hypothesis testing: Cognitive and motivational mechanisms</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>A. Tversky</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>79</volume>
<pages><last>299</last>
<first>281</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Psychological Review</title>
</host>
<title>Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>A. Tversky</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>84</volume>
<pages><last>352</last>
<first>327</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Psychological Review</title>
</host>
<title>Features of similarity</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>A. Tversky</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>D. Kahneman</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>106</volume>
<pages><last>1061</last>
<first>1039</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>The Quarterly Journal of Economics</title>
</host>
<title>Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference‐dependent model</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>A. Tversky</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>E. Shafir</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>3</volume>
<pages><last>361</last>
<first>358</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Psychological Science</title>
</host>
<title>Choice under conflict: The dynamics of deferred decision</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>D. H. Wedell</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>J. C. Pettibone</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>67</volume>
<pages><last>344</last>
<first>326</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes</title>
</host>
<title>Using judgments to understand decoy effects in choice</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>J. B. White</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>44</volume>
<pages><last>131</last>
<first>127</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Experimental Social Psychology</title>
</host>
<title>Self–other similarity judgment asymmetries reverse for people to whom you want to be similar</title>
</json:item>
<json:item><author><json:item><name>T. D. Wilson</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>C. E. Houston</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>K. M. Etling</name>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>N. Brekke</name>
</json:item>
</author>
<host><volume>125</volume>
<pages><last>402</last>
<first>387</first>
</pages>
<author></author>
<title>Journal of Experimental Psychology: General</title>
</host>
<title>A new look at anchoring effects: Basic anchoring and its antecedents</title>
</json:item>
</refBibs>
<genre><json:string>article</json:string>
</genre>
<host><volume>3</volume>
<publisherId><json:string>SPC3</json:string>
</publisherId>
<pages><total>19</total>
<last>600</last>
<first>582</first>
</pages>
<issn><json:string>1751-9004</json:string>
</issn>
<issue>4</issue>
<genre><json:string>journal</json:string>
</genre>
<language><json:string>unknown</json:string>
</language>
<eissn><json:string>1751-9004</json:string>
</eissn>
<title>Social and Personality Psychology Compass</title>
<doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1751-9004</json:string>
</doi>
</host>
<publicationDate>2009</publicationDate>
<copyrightDate>2009</copyrightDate>
<doi><json:string>10.1111/j.1751-9004.2009.00189.x</json:string>
</doi>
<id>2E79FDD0618AFD799ADE0F6074B8A08F4412477D</id>
<score>0.019897927</score>
<fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension>
<original>true</original>
<mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype>
<uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/2E79FDD0618AFD799ADE0F6074B8A08F4412477D/fulltext/pdf</uri>
</json:item>
<json:item><extension>zip</extension>
<original>false</original>
<mimetype>application/zip</mimetype>
<uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/2E79FDD0618AFD799ADE0F6074B8A08F4412477D/fulltext/zip</uri>
</json:item>
<istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/2E79FDD0618AFD799ADE0F6074B8A08F4412477D/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Asymmetric Comparison in Choice Processes</title>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority>
<publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher>
<pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace>
<availability><p>© 2009 The Authors. Journal Compilation © 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd</p>
</availability>
<date>2009</date>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Asymmetric Comparison in Choice Processes</title>
<author xml:id="author-1"><persName><forename type="first">Johannes O.</forename>
<surname>Ritter</surname>
</persName>
<note type="correspondence"><p>Correspondence address: Applied Psychology: Life‐Management, Department of Psychology, University of Zurich, Binzmuehlestrasse 14/11, CH‐8050 Zurich, Switzerland. Email: j.ritter@psychologie.uzh.ch; freund@psychologie.uzh.ch</p>
</note>
<affiliation>University of Zurich</affiliation>
</author>
<author xml:id="author-2"><persName><forename type="first">Alexandra M.</forename>
<surname>Freund</surname>
</persName>
<note type="correspondence"><p>Correspondence address: Applied Psychology: Life‐Management, Department of Psychology, University of Zurich, Binzmuehlestrasse 14/11, CH‐8050 Zurich, Switzerland. Email: j.ritter@psychologie.uzh.ch; freund@psychologie.uzh.ch</p>
</note>
<affiliation>University of Zurich</affiliation>
</author>
</analytic>
<monogr><title level="j">Social and Personality Psychology Compass</title>
<idno type="pISSN">1751-9004</idno>
<idno type="eISSN">1751-9004</idno>
<idno type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1751-9004</idno>
<imprint><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher>
<pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace>
<date type="published" when="2009-07"></date>
<biblScope unit="volume">3</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" from="582">582</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" to="600">600</biblScope>
</imprint>
</monogr>
<idno type="istex">2E79FDD0618AFD799ADE0F6074B8A08F4412477D</idno>
<idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1751-9004.2009.00189.x</idno>
<idno type="ArticleID">SPC3189</idno>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><creation><date>2009</date>
</creation>
<langUsage><language ident="en">en</language>
</langUsage>
<abstract xml:lang="en"><p>Since Tversky's (1977) seminal paper on asymmetric comparisons was published, comparisons of different options are generally believed to be directional. Interestingly, the asymmetry involved in comparisons has not been considered systematically for choices between different options. This paper argues that, in decision situations, one of the options serves as a dominant standard against which the others are evaluated, which results in asymmetric comparisons and, in turn, has important and systematic consequences for the choice process. This paper outlines which conditions should result in asymmetric comparisons. Taking existing models of asymmetric comparisons into account, a process model will be presented using the loss of a previously available choice option as an example.</p>
</abstract>
</profileDesc>
<revisionDesc><change when="2009-07">Published</change>
</revisionDesc>
</teiHeader>
</istex:fulltextTEI>
<json:item><extension>txt</extension>
<original>false</original>
<mimetype>text/plain</mimetype>
<uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/2E79FDD0618AFD799ADE0F6074B8A08F4412477D/fulltext/txt</uri>
</json:item>
</fulltext>
<metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley, elements deleted: body"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration>
<istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisherName>
<publisherLoc>Oxford, UK</publisherLoc>
</publisherInfo>
<doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1111/(ISSN)1751-9004</doi>
<issn type="print">1751-9004</issn>
<issn type="electronic">1751-9004</issn>
<idGroup><id type="product" value="SPC3"></id>
<id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id>
</idGroup>
<titleGroup><title type="main" sort="SOCIAL PERSONALITY PSYCHOLOGY COMPASS">Social and Personality Psychology Compass</title>
</titleGroup>
</publicationMeta>
<publicationMeta level="part" position="07004"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/spco.2009.3.issue-4</doi>
<numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="3">3</numbering>
<numbering type="journalIssue" number="4">4</numbering>
</numberingGroup>
<coverDate startDate="2009-07">July 2009</coverDate>
</publicationMeta>
<publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="12" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/j.1751-9004.2009.00189.x</doi>
<idGroup><id type="unit" value="SPC3189"></id>
</idGroup>
<countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="19"></count>
</countGroup>
<titleGroup><title type="tocHeading1">Intrapersonal Processes</title>
</titleGroup>
<copyright>© 2009 The Authors. Journal Compilation © 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd</copyright>
<eventGroup><event type="firstOnline" date="2009-06-29"></event>
<event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2009-07-06"></event>
<event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.3.16 mode:FullText" date="2010-08-25"></event>
<event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-02-08"></event>
<event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-11-03"></event>
</eventGroup>
<numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst" number="582">582</numbering>
<numbering type="pageLast" number="600">600</numbering>
</numberingGroup>
<linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:SPC3.SPC3189.pdf"></link>
</linkGroup>
</publicationMeta>
<contentMeta><unparsedEditorialHistory><i>Social and Personality Psychology Compass</i>
 3/4 (2009): 582–600, 10.1111/j.1751‐9004.2009.00189.x</unparsedEditorialHistory>
<countGroup><count type="figureTotal" number="2"></count>
<count type="tableTotal" number="0"></count>
<count type="formulaTotal" number="0"></count>
<count type="referenceTotal" number="64"></count>
<count type="wordTotal" number="8109"></count>
</countGroup>
<titleGroup><title type="main">Asymmetric Comparison in Choice Processes</title>
<title type="shortAuthors">Asymmetric comparison in choice</title>
<title type="short">Asymmetric comparison in choice</title>
</titleGroup>
<creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1" affiliationRef="#a1" noteRef="#fn01"><personName><givenNames>Johannes O.</givenNames>
<familyName>Ritter</familyName>
</personName>
</creator>
<creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr2" affiliationRef="#a1" noteRef="#fn01"><personName><givenNames>Alexandra M.</givenNames>
<familyName>Freund</familyName>
</personName>
</creator>
</creators>
<affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="a1"><unparsedAffiliation>University of Zurich</unparsedAffiliation>
</affiliation>
</affiliationGroup>
<abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><title type="main">Abstract</title>
<p>Since <link href="#b59">Tversky's (1977)</link>
 seminal paper on asymmetric comparisons was published, comparisons of different options are generally believed to be directional. Interestingly, the asymmetry involved in comparisons has not been considered systematically for choices between different options. This paper argues that, in decision situations, one of the options serves as a dominant standard against which the others are evaluated, which results in asymmetric comparisons and, in turn, has important and systematic consequences for the choice process. This paper outlines which conditions should result in asymmetric comparisons. Taking existing models of asymmetric comparisons into account, a process model will be presented using the loss of a previously available choice option as an example.</p>
</abstract>
</abstractGroup>
</contentMeta>
</header>
</component>
</istex:document>
</istex:metadataXml>
<mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Asymmetric Comparison in Choice Processes</title>
</titleInfo>
<titleInfo type="abbreviated" lang="en"><title>Asymmetric comparison in choice</title>
</titleInfo>
<titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>Asymmetric Comparison in Choice Processes</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Johannes O.</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Ritter</namePart>
<affiliation>University of Zurich</affiliation>
<description>Correspondence address: Applied Psychology: Life‐Management, Department of Psychology, University of Zurich, Binzmuehlestrasse 14/11, CH‐8050 Zurich, Switzerland. Email: j.ritter@psychologie.uzh.ch; freund@psychologie.uzh.ch</description>
<role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Alexandra M.</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Freund</namePart>
<affiliation>University of Zurich</affiliation>
<description>Correspondence address: Applied Psychology: Life‐Management, Department of Psychology, University of Zurich, Binzmuehlestrasse 14/11, CH‐8050 Zurich, Switzerland. Email: j.ritter@psychologie.uzh.ch; freund@psychologie.uzh.ch</description>
<role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<genre type="article" displayLabel="article"></genre>
<originInfo><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher>
<place><placeTerm type="text">Oxford, UK</placeTerm>
</place>
<dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2009-07</dateIssued>
<edition>Social and Personality Psychology Compass 3/4 (2009): 582–600, 10.1111/j.1751‐9004.2009.00189.x</edition>
<copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2009</copyrightDate>
</originInfo>
<language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm>
<languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm>
</language>
<physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType>
<extent unit="figures">2</extent>
<extent unit="references">64</extent>
<extent unit="words">8109</extent>
</physicalDescription>
<abstract lang="en">Since Tversky's (1977) seminal paper on asymmetric comparisons was published, comparisons of different options are generally believed to be directional. Interestingly, the asymmetry involved in comparisons has not been considered systematically for choices between different options. This paper argues that, in decision situations, one of the options serves as a dominant standard against which the others are evaluated, which results in asymmetric comparisons and, in turn, has important and systematic consequences for the choice process. This paper outlines which conditions should result in asymmetric comparisons. Taking existing models of asymmetric comparisons into account, a process model will be presented using the loss of a previously available choice option as an example.</abstract>
<relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Social and Personality Psychology Compass</title>
</titleInfo>
<genre type="journal">journal</genre>
<identifier type="ISSN">1751-9004</identifier>
<identifier type="eISSN">1751-9004</identifier>
<identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1751-9004</identifier>
<identifier type="PublisherID">SPC3</identifier>
<part><date>2009</date>
<detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption>
<number>3</number>
</detail>
<detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption>
<number>4</number>
</detail>
<extent unit="pages"><start>582</start>
<end>600</end>
<total>19</total>
</extent>
</part>
</relatedItem>
<identifier type="istex">2E79FDD0618AFD799ADE0F6074B8A08F4412477D</identifier>
<identifier type="DOI">10.1111/j.1751-9004.2009.00189.x</identifier>
<identifier type="ArticleID">SPC3189</identifier>
<accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">© 2009 The Authors. Journal Compilation © 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd</accessCondition>
<recordInfo><recordContentSource>WILEY</recordContentSource>
<recordOrigin>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</recordOrigin>
</recordInfo>
</mods>
</metadata>
<serie></serie>
</istex>
</record>

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Rhénanie/explor/UnivTrevesV1/Data/Istex/Corpus

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001506 | SxmlIndent | more

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001506 | SxmlIndent | more

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri

{{Explor lien
   |wiki=    Wicri/Rhénanie
   |area=    UnivTrevesV1
   |flux=    Istex
   |étape=   Corpus
   |type=    RBID
   |clé=     ISTEX:2E79FDD0618AFD799ADE0F6074B8A08F4412477D
   |texte=   Asymmetric Comparison in Choice Processes
}}

This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.31.
Data generation: Sat Jul 22 16:29:01 2017. Site generation: Wed Feb 28 14:55:37 2024

	Serveur d'exploration sur l'Université de Trèves
	Attention, ce site est en cours de développement ! Attention, site généré par des moyens informatiques à partir de corpus bruts. Les informations ne sont donc pas validées.

Serveur d'exploration sur l'Université de Trèves

Asymmetric Comparison in Choice Processes

Asymmetric Comparison in Choice Processes

Source :

Abstract

Links to Exploration step

Le document en format XML

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri