A map of decoy influence in human multialternative choice

Tsvetomira Dumbalska, Vickie Li, Konstantinos Tsetsos and Christopher Summerfield ()
Additional contact information
Tsvetomira Dumbalska: Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6GG, United Kingdom
Vickie Li: Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6GG, United Kingdom
Konstantinos Tsetsos: Medical School, Hamburg University, 20457 Hamburg, Germany
Christopher Summerfield: Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6GG, United Kingdom

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2020, vol. 117, issue 40, 25169-25178

Abstract: Human decisions can be biased by irrelevant information. For example, choices between two preferred alternatives can be swayed by a third option that is inferior or unavailable. Previous work has identified three classic biases, known as the attraction, similarity, and compromise effects, which arise during choices between economic alternatives defined by two attributes. However, the reliability, interrelationship, and computational origin of these three biases have been controversial. Here, a large cohort of human participants made incentive-compatible choices among assets that varied in price and quality. Instead of focusing on the three classic effects, we sampled decoy stimuli exhaustively across bidimensional multiattribute space and constructed a full map of decoy influence on choices between two otherwise preferred target items. Our analysis reveals that the decoy influence map is highly structured even beyond the three classic biases. We identify a very simple model that can fully reproduce the decoy influence map and capture its variability in individual participants. This model reveals that the three decoy effects are not distinct phenomena but are all special cases of a more general principle, by which attribute values are repulsed away from the context provided by rival options. The model helps us understand why the biases are typically correlated across participants and allows us to validate a prediction about their interrelationship. This work helps to clarify the origin of three of the most widely studied biases in human decision-making.

Keywords: decision-making; cognition; human behavior; consumer choice (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.pnas.org/content/117/40/25169.full (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nas:journl:v:117:y:2020:p:25169-25178

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Bibliographic data for series maintained by PNAS Product Team ().