The Impact of Goal Framing on the Choose–Reject Discrepancy

Parthasarathy Krishnamurthy, University of Houston
Anish Nagpal, University of Melbourne, Australia
Removing options from a fully loaded model (rejecting) typically leads to a larger final option set than adding options to a base model (choosing), resulting in a choose-reject discrepancy. In two studies, we find that it is possible to take advantage of information processing differences in choosing versus rejecting to modify the finding that rejecting options from a fully-loaded model leads to more options in the final option set compared to adding options to a base model.
[ to cite ]:
Parthasarathy Krishnamurthy and Anish Nagpal (2008) ,"The Impact of Goal Framing on the Choose–Reject Discrepancy", in NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 35, eds. Angela Y. Lee and Dilip Soman, Duluth, MN : Association for Consumer Research, Pages: 784-785.