Procedural and economic utilities in consequentialist choice: Trading freedom of choice to minimize financial losses
Work on procedural utility suggests that decision makers derive more value from outcomes earned with freedom of choice. We experimentally tested tradeoffs between procedural and outcome utility, examining financial losses as an important boundary condition. Participants completed a simulated consume...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Cambridge University Press
2020-07-01
|
| Series: | Judgment and Decision Making |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://journal.sjdm.org/12/12425/jdm12425.pdf |
| _version_ | 1797764876084445184 |
|---|---|
| author | Daniel A. DeCaro Marci S. DeCaro Jared M. Hotaling Joseph G. Johnson |
| author_facet | Daniel A. DeCaro Marci S. DeCaro Jared M. Hotaling Joseph G. Johnson |
| author_sort | Daniel A. DeCaro |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Work on procedural
utility suggests that decision makers derive more value from outcomes earned
with freedom of choice. We experimentally tested tradeoffs between procedural
and outcome utility, examining financial losses as an important boundary
condition. Participants completed a simulated consumer sales task (Exp. 1) or
card task (Exp. 2) with or without choice. Participants reported their
satisfaction with monetary outcomes. When given choice, participants reported
greater self-determination. Participants also reported higher outcome
satisfaction, but only for gains. Choice did not influence satisfaction for
losses. In Experiment 2, Participants also preferred choice when selecting
between financial gains. However, when choice was costly (large disparity in
pay) or posed losses, most participants sacrificed choice for better payoffs.
Results are consistent with a cognitive model in which participants shift their
attention from procedural utilities to financial outcomes when faced with
losses. Financial outcomes may take precedence over choice when financial
outcomes are threatened. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-12T20:02:04Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-9659b826eee447b982f512a82939ce8e |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1930-2975 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-12T20:02:04Z |
| publishDate | 2020-07-01 |
| publisher | Cambridge University Press |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Judgment and Decision Making |
| spelling | doaj.art-9659b826eee447b982f512a82939ce8e2023-08-02T02:19:57ZengCambridge University PressJudgment and Decision Making1930-29752020-07-01154517533Procedural and economic utilities in consequentialist choice: Trading freedom of choice to minimize financial lossesDaniel A. DeCaroMarci S. DeCaroJared M. HotalingJoseph G. JohnsonWork on procedural utility suggests that decision makers derive more value from outcomes earned with freedom of choice. We experimentally tested tradeoffs between procedural and outcome utility, examining financial losses as an important boundary condition. Participants completed a simulated consumer sales task (Exp. 1) or card task (Exp. 2) with or without choice. Participants reported their satisfaction with monetary outcomes. When given choice, participants reported greater self-determination. Participants also reported higher outcome satisfaction, but only for gains. Choice did not influence satisfaction for losses. In Experiment 2, Participants also preferred choice when selecting between financial gains. However, when choice was costly (large disparity in pay) or posed losses, most participants sacrificed choice for better payoffs. Results are consistent with a cognitive model in which participants shift their attention from procedural utilities to financial outcomes when faced with losses. Financial outcomes may take precedence over choice when financial outcomes are threatened.http://journal.sjdm.org/12/12425/jdm12425.pdfprocedural utility negativity bias loss aversion self-determination economic rational choice theorynakeywords |
| spellingShingle | Daniel A. DeCaro Marci S. DeCaro Jared M. Hotaling Joseph G. Johnson Procedural and economic utilities in consequentialist choice: Trading freedom of choice to minimize financial losses Judgment and Decision Making procedural utility negativity bias loss aversion self-determination economic rational choice theorynakeywords |
| title | Procedural and
economic utilities in consequentialist choice: Trading freedom of choice to
minimize financial losses |
| title_full | Procedural and
economic utilities in consequentialist choice: Trading freedom of choice to
minimize financial losses |
| title_fullStr | Procedural and
economic utilities in consequentialist choice: Trading freedom of choice to
minimize financial losses |
| title_full_unstemmed | Procedural and
economic utilities in consequentialist choice: Trading freedom of choice to
minimize financial losses |
| title_short | Procedural and
economic utilities in consequentialist choice: Trading freedom of choice to
minimize financial losses |
| title_sort | procedural and economic utilities in consequentialist choice trading freedom of choice to minimize financial losses |
| topic | procedural utility negativity bias loss aversion self-determination economic rational choice theorynakeywords |
| url | http://journal.sjdm.org/12/12425/jdm12425.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT danieladecaro proceduralandeconomicutilitiesinconsequentialistchoicetradingfreedomofchoicetominimizefinanciallosses AT marcisdecaro proceduralandeconomicutilitiesinconsequentialistchoicetradingfreedomofchoicetominimizefinanciallosses AT jaredmhotaling proceduralandeconomicutilitiesinconsequentialistchoicetradingfreedomofchoicetominimizefinanciallosses AT josephgjohnson proceduralandeconomicutilitiesinconsequentialistchoicetradingfreedomofchoicetominimizefinanciallosses |