Do people disagree with themselves? On the consistency of everyday and complex decisions
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 V4
Name | File Type | Size | Last Modified |
---|---|---|---|
|
text/csv | 13.8 KB | 03/01/2017 06:58:AM |
|
text/csv | 1.9 MB | 03/01/2017 07:06:AM |
|
application/x-spss-sav | 1.4 MB | 01/04/2017 09:56:AM |
Project Citation:
Bessette, Douglas, Wilson, Robyn, and Arvai, Joseph. Do people disagree with themselves? On the consistency of everyday and complex decisions. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2017-03-01. https://doi.org/10.3886/E100392V4
Project Description
Summary:
View help for 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 consistency when
decisions are simple and straightforward.
However, 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:
View help for Funding Sources
University of Calgary
Scope of Project
Subject Terms:
View help for Subject Terms
internal consistency;
decision making;
preference;
tradeoffs
Geographic Coverage:
View help for Geographic Coverage
Canada
Related Publications
Published Versions
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.