Coping with Ambivalence: The Effect of Removing a Neutral Option on Consumer Attitude and Preference Judgments

Stephen M Nowlis, Barbara E Kahn and Ravi Dhar

Journal of Consumer Research, 2002, vol. 29, issue 3, 319-34

Abstract: This article examines how the exclusion of a neutral or fence-sitting option changes an expressed attitude or preference judgment. Over a series of six studies, we find that the exclusion of a neutral response option (1) affects the judgment of extreme options (strong positive and negative features) more significantly than the judgment of options that are average on all features, (2) results in respondents favoring the option superior on the more important attribute, and (3) results in more risk aversion. We also provide evidence for the underlying process and show that our findings are moderated by individual differences on need for cognition and tolerance for ambiguity. Copyright 2002 by the University of Chicago.

Date: 2002
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (22)

Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/344431 (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:oup:jconrs:v:29:y:2002:i:3:p:319-34

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Consumer Research is currently edited by Bernd Schmitt, June Cotte, Markus Giesler, Andrew Stephen and Stacy Wood

More articles in Journal of Consumer Research from Journal of Consumer Research Inc.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by ().