Using Multiple (Imperfect) Methods to Test an Idea: a Different Kind of Meta-Analysis

New concepts that go against conventional assumptions are typically hard to “prove” using a single method. In such cases, it is more effective to rely on evidence that employs sufficiently different methods/data. This approach will be illustrated in the context of a basic assumption underlying consumer decision making whereby attribute values are the carriers of utility whereas relative option positions in any given set are irrelevant. An alternative view being proposed is that consumers have a stable tendency to prefer options in certain relative positions. In support of this view, I will present evidence from (a) twins data, (b) choice problems embedded in a videogame, and (c) individual difference measures.

Citation:

Itamar Simonson (2013) ,"Using Multiple (Imperfect) Methods to Test an Idea: a Different Kind of Meta-Analysis", in NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 41, eds. Simona Botti and Aparna Labroo, Duluth, MN : Association for Consumer Research, Pages: .