Abstract
A number of studies demonstrate that individual choice can be influenced by alternatives which should be irrelevant according to standard choice theory. In these studies it has been observed that introducing a decoy option, which is either asymmetrically dominated by a target option or which makes the target a compromise, increases the likelihood of choosing the target. A common feature of earlier research on decoy effects is the use of hypothetical choice tasks. The aim of this paper is to investigate decoy effects in a properly controlled experiment where subjects are given real incentives. Here, monetary gambles are used as alternatives. The results demonstrate that decoy effects persist despite the use of real incentives.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bohm, P. (1994). “Time Preference and Preference Reversal Among Experienced Subjects: The Effects of Real Payments.” Economic Journal. 104, 1370–1378.
Bohm, P. and Lind, H. (1993). “Preference Reversal, Real-World Lotteries, and Lottery-Interested Subjects.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization. 22, 327–348.
Camerer, C. (1995). “Individual Decision Making.” In J.H. Kagel and A.E. Roth (eds.), The Handbook of Experimental Economics. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 587–703.
Cox, J.C. and Grether, D.M. (1996). “The Preference Reversal Phenomenon: Response Mode, Markets and Incentives.” Economic Theory. 7, 381–405.
Grether, D.M. and Plott, C.R. (1979). “Economic Theory of Choice and the Preference Reversal Phenomenon.” American Economic Review. 69, 623–638.
Heath, T.B. and Chatterjee, S. (1995). “Asymmetric Decoy Effects on Lower-Quality Versus Higher-Quality Brands: Meta-Analytic and Experimental Evidence.” Journal of Consumer Research. 22, 268–284.
Herne, K. (1996). “The Role of Decoys in Choice: A Review of Research on Context Dependent Preferences.” Risk Decision and Policy. 1, 105–119.
Herne, K. (1997). “Decoy Alternatives in Policy Choices: Asymmetric Domination and Compromise Effects.” European Journal of Political Economy. 13, 575–589.
Highhouse, S. (1996). “Context-Dependent Selection: The Effects of Decoy and Phantom Job Candidates.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 65, 68–76.
Huber, J., Payne, J.W., and Puto, C. (1982). “Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis.” Journal of Consumer Research. 9, 90–98.
Huber, J. and Puto, C. (1983). “Market Boundaries and Product Choice: Illustrating Attraction and Substitution Effects.” Journal of Consumer Research. 10, 31–44.
Lehmann, D.R. and Pan, Y. (1994). “Context Effects, New Brand Entry, and Consideration Sets.” Journal of Marketing Research. 31, 364–374.
Lichtenstein, S. and Slovic, P. (1971). “Reversals of Preference Between Bids and Choices in Gambling Decisions.” Journal of Experimental Psychology. 89, 46–55.
Lichtenstein, S. and Slovic, P. (1973). “Response-Induced Reversals of Preference in Gambling: An Extended Replication in Las Vegas.” Journal of Experimental Psychology. 101, 16–20.
Pan, Y., O'Curry, S., and Pitts, R. (1995). “The Attraction Effect and Political Choice in Two Elections.” Journal of Consumer Psychology. 4, 85–101.
Pommerehne, W.W., Schneider, F., and Zweifel, P. (1982). “Economic Theory of Choice and the Preference Reversal Phenomenon: A Reexamination.” American Economic Review. 73, 569–584.
Ratneshwar, S., Shocker, A.D., and Stewart, D.W. (1987). “Toward Understanding the Attraction Effect: The Implications of Product Stimulus Meaningfulness and Familiarity.” Journal of Consumer Research. 13, 520–533.
Reilly, R.J. (1982). “Preference Reversal: Further Evidence and Some Suggested Modifications in Experimental Design.” American Economic Review 72, 576–584.
Simonson, I. (1989). “Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects.” Journal of Consumer Research. 16, 158–174.
Simonson, I. and Tversky, A. (1992). “Choice in Context: Tradeoff Contrast and Extremeness Aversion.” Journal of Marketing Research. 29, 281–295.
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1981). “The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice.” Science. 211, 453–458.
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1986). “Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions.” Journal of Business. 59, 251–277.
Tversky, A., Slovic, P., and Kahneman, D. (1990). “The Cause of Preference Reversal.” American Economic Review. 80, 204–217.
Tversky, A. and Simonson, I. (1993). “Context Dependant Preferences.” Management Science. 39, 1179–1189.
Wedell, D.H. (1991). “Distinguishing Among Models of Contextually Included Preference Reversals.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 17, 767–778.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Herne, K. The Effects of Decoy Gambles on Individual Choice. Experimental Economics 2, 31–40 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009925731240
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009925731240