Samuel D. Bond

Generating Objectives: Can Decision Makers Articulate What They Want?

Objectives have long been considered a basis for sound decision making. This research examines the ability of decision makers to generate self-relevant objectives for consequential decisions. In three empirical studies, participants consistently omitted nearly half of the objectives that they later identified as personally relevant. More surprisingly, omitted objectives were perceived to be almost as important as those generated by participants on their own. These empirical results were replicated in a real-world case study of strategic decision making at a high-tech firm. Overall, our research suggests that decision makers are considerably deficient in utilizing personal knowledge and values to form objectives for the decisions they face.

Improving the Generation of Decision Objectives

Real decision makers exhibit significant shortcomings in the generation of objectives for decisions that they face. Prior research has illustrated the magnitude of this shortcoming but not its causes. In this paper, we identify two distinct impediments to the generation of decision objectives: not thinking broadly enough about the range of relevant objectives, and not thinking deeply enough to articulate every objective within the range that is considered. To test these explanations and explore ways of stimulating a more comprehensive set of objectives, we present three experiments involving a variety of interventions: the provision of sample objectives, organization of objectives by category, and direct challenges to do better, with or without a warning that important objectives are missing. The use of category names and direct challenges with a warning both led to improvements in the quantity of objectives generated without impacting their quality; other interventions yielded less improvement. We conclude by discussing the relevance of our findings to decision analysis and offering prescriptive implications for the elicitation of decision objectives. In this version of the paper, “Improving the Generation of Decision Objectives” by Samuel D. Bond, Kurt A. Carlson, and Ralph L. Keeney, originally published online ahead of print March 10, 2010, the first panel heading of Figure 2 was corrected to read “Study 1 (Choice context = Dissertation),” as shown on page 243.

Improving Preference Assessment: Limiting the Effect of Context Through Pre-exposure to Attribute Levels

This paper introduces a technique for improving preference assessment by reducing the influence of context on preferential choices. We propose that a decision maker who is exposed to relevant attribute levels will form spontaneous valuations, which will then insulate the decision maker from the effects of context during subsequent preference assessment. Results from three studies supported this hypothesis. Pre-exposure to product attribute levels undermined the impact of attribute priming, decision framing, and asymmetric dominance on preferential choices. A fourth study demonstrated that similar results can be obtained by allowing decision makers to pregenerate lists of attribute levels on their own.

Why Is the Crowd Divided? Attribution for Dispersion in Online Word of Mouth

The widespread availability of online word of mouth (WOM) enables modern consumers to assess not only the opinions of others about products and services, but also the extent to which those opinions are consistent or dispersive. Despite longstanding calls for greater understanding of mixed opinions, existing evidence is inconclusive regarding effects of WOM dispersion, and theoretical accounts have relied primarily on the notion of reference dependence. Extending prior work, this research proposes an attribution-based account, in which consumer interpretation of WOM dispersion depends on the extent to which tastes in a product domain are perceived to be dissimilar, so that dispersion can be attributed to inconsistency in reviewer preferences rather than the product itself. Across four experimental studies, participants presented with online rating distributions were more tolerant of dispersion in taste-dissimilar product domains than taste-similar product domains, and the difference was driven by underlying attributions. Together, these findings expand current understanding of WOM, social distributions, and risk perception, by revealing distinct pathways through which consumers respond to differences of opinion. In addition, they suggest the opportunity to proactively influence the manner in which dispersion is perceived, highlighting its positive connotations while diminishing its association with risk.

Keep Your Cool or Let It Out: Nonlinear Effects of Expressed Arousal on Perceptions of Consumer Reviews

This research explores how expressed emotional arousal in a consumer review affects reader perceptions of its helpfulness. Drawing from research on written communication and lay theories of emotion, the authors propose a pattern of diminishing returns, in which the marginal effect of arousal on perceived helpfulness is positive at low levels of arousal but diminishes at higher levels. Results of a field study using Apples App Store, a follow-up survey, and two laboratory experiments provide consistent evidence for the predicted pattern. In addition, the results suggest that the nonlinear effect is explained in part by perceptions of reviewer effort and that the effect is stronger for products that are utilitarian in nature. By revealing a nuanced relationship between emotional expression and perceived helpfulness, these findings offer valuable implications for effective word-of-mouth communication.