A newer version of this project is available. See below for other available versions.

Do people disagree with themselves? On the internal consistency of everyday and complex decisions

Name: Do people disagree with themselves? On the internal consistency of everyday and complex decisions
Published: 2017-01-04
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

Principal Investigator(s): View help for Principal Investigator(s) Douglas Bessette, Ohio State University; Robyn Wilson, Ohio State University; Joseph Arvai, University of Michigan

Version: View help for Version V1

Name	File Type	Size	Last Modified
The-internal-consistency-of-everyday-and-complex-decisions_PLOS-One.sav	application/x-spss-sav	1.7 MB	01/04/2017 08:47:AM

Project Citation:

Bessette, Douglas, Wilson, Robyn, and Arvai, Joseph. Do people disagree with themselves? On the internal consistency of everyday and complex decisions. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2017-01-04. https://doi.org/10.3886/E100392V1

Project Description

Summary: It is commonly accepted that across virtually every context people disagree with one another. In this data, we show that people might also disagree with themselves. Using seven decision-making contexts ranging in complexity and familiarity we show that a nationally representative sample (n = 1,874) of people made choices that were inconsistent across two complimentary methods of eliciting preferences. We show that on average, individuals demonstrate higher levels of internal consistency, which we define as the level of agreement between their choices and stated priorities, when decisions are simple and straightforward. However, internal consistency declines when people are confronted with unfamiliar or complex decision contexts. Our results support a theory of basic values over articulated values, which suggests that people have well-established preferences for only the most common decisions. Moreover, providing additional and salient contextual information about alternatives, such as brand names, model information or the specific processes behind alternative strategies, results in significantly lower levels of consistency when compared to situations where this information is withheld. This finding suggests that people may rely on simplifying heuristics when choosing between familiar alternatives; however, this kind of information is less influential when decision contexts, and the alternatives themselves, are complex or unfamiliar. Importantly, we show that higher levels of education also have a significant and positive association with the consistency of people’s choices.

Funding Sources: University of Calgary

Scope of Project

Subject Terms: internal consistency; decision making; preference; tradeoffs

Geographic Coverage: Canada

Related Publications

Download this project

Published Versions

Export Metadata

Dublin Core

DDI 2.5

Report a Problem

Found a serious problem with the data, such as disclosure risk or copyrighted content? Let us know.

This material is distributed exactly as it arrived from the data depositor. ICPSR has not checked or processed this material. Users should consult the investigator(s) if further information is desired.