The Impact of Goal Framing on the Choose–Reject Discrepancy

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.



Citation:

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.

Authors

Parthasarathy Krishnamurthy, University of Houston
Anish Nagpal, University of Melbourne, Australia



Volume

NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 35 | 2008



Share Proceeding

Featured papers

See More

Featured

In Pursuit of Imperfection: How Flawed Products Can Reveal Valuable Process Information

Erin P Carter, University of Maine
Peter McGraw, University of Colorado, USA

Read More

Featured

Augmented Reality, Augmented Trust: How Augmented Reality Enhances Consumer Trust In Online Shopping

Alberto Lopez, Tecnológico de Monterrey, MEXICO
Rachel Rodriguez, Tecnológico de Monterrey, MEXICO
Claudia Quintanilla, Tecnológico de Monterrey, MEXICO
Raquel Castaño, Tecnológico de Monterrey, MEXICO

Read More

Featured

J10. Transnational Consumer Lifestyle

zahra Sharifonnasabi, Queen Mary University of London
Fleura Bardhi, City University of London, UK

Read More

Engage with Us

Becoming an Association for Consumer Research member is simple. Membership in ACR is relatively inexpensive, but brings significant benefits to its members.