Choice under restrictions

Abstract

Nearly every decision a person makes is restricted in some way. While we are painfully aware of some of these restrictions, others go largely undetected. This paper presents a conceptual framework for understanding how restrictions interact with situational and individual characteristics, as well as goals to influence behavior. Implications for overlooked research opportunities in choice modeling are presented and discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Adams, J. G. U. (1985). Risk and freedom—The record of road safety regulations. Nottingham: Bottesford.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anderson, J. C., Narus, J. A., & van Rossum, W. (2006). Customer value propositions in business market. Harvard Business Review, 84(3), 90–99.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Andreasen, A. R. (1975). The disadvantaged consumer. New York: Free.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Andrews, R. L., & Srinivasan, T. C. (1995). Studying consideration effects in empirical choice models using scanner panel data. Journal of Marketing Research, 32, 30–41 (February).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Baker, S. M., & Kaufman-Scarborough, C. (2001). Marketing and public accomodation: A retrospective on title III of the Americans with disabilities act. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 20(2), 297–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Baker, S. M., Gentry, J. W., & Rittenburg, T. I. (2005). Building understanding of the domain of consumer vulnerability. Journal of Macromarketing, 25, 128–139 (December).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bem, D. J. (1967). Self-perception: An alternative interpretation of cognitive dissonance phenomena. Psychological Review, 74(3), 183–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Boatwright, P., & Nunes, J. C. (2001). Reducing assortment: An attribute-based approach. Journal of Marketing, 65, 50–63 (July).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Boatwright, P., & Nunes, J. C. (2004). Correction note for ‘Reducing Assortment: An Attribute-Based Approach’. Journal of Marketing, 68, 50–63 (July).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Botti, S., & Iyengar, S. S. (2004). The psychological pleasure and pain of choosing: When people prefer choosing at the cost of subsequent satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(3), 312–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Botti, S., & McGill, A. L. (2006). When choosing is not deciding: The effect of perceived responsibility on satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Research, 33, 211–219 (September).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bower, J. L., & Gilbert, C. G. (2007). How managers’ everyday decisions create or destroy your company’s strategy. Harvard Business Review, 85(2), 72–79.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Brehm, J. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Brock, T. C. (1968). Implications of commodity theory for value change. In A. Greenwald, T. C. Brock, & T. Ostrom (Eds.), Psychological foundations of attitudes (pp. 243–275). New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Broniarczyk, S. M. (2008). Product assortment. In C. Haugtvedt, P. Herr, & F. Kardes (Eds.), Handbook of consumer psychology (pp. 755–779). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Chapter 30.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Broniarczyk, S. M., Hoyer, W. D., & McAlister, L. M. (1998). Consumers’ perceptions of the assortment offered in a grocery category: The impact of item reduction. Journal of Marketing Research, 35, 166–177 (May).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Brown, C., & Feinberg, F. (2002). How does choice affect evaluations? Advances in Consumer Research, 29, 331–332.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Carmon, Z., Wertenbroch, K., & Zeelenberg, M. (2003). Option attachment: When deliberating makes choosing feel like losing. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 15–29 (June).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Chandon, P., & Wansink, B. (2007). Obesity and the calorie underestimation bias: A psychophysical model of fast-food meal size estimation. Journal of Marketing Research, 44, 84–99 (February).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Chernev, A. (2003). When more is less and less is more: The role of ideal point availability and assortment in consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 170–183 (September).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Chernev, A. (2005). Feature complementarity choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 348–359 (March).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19(2), 109–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Dréze, X., Hoch, S. J., & Purk, M. E. (1994). Shelf management and space elasticity. Journal of Retailing, 70(4), 301–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Farquhar, P. H., & Pratkanis, A. R. (1987). Phantom choices: The effects of unavailable alternatives on decision making, technical Report 87–2. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon University.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Fitzsimons, G. (2000). Consumer response to stockouts. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(2), 249–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Fitzsimons, G., & Lehmann, D. R. (2004). Reactance to recommendations: When unsolicited advice yields contrary responses. Marketing Science, 23(1), 82–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Gourville, J. T., & Soman, D. (2005). Overchoice and assortment type: When and why variety backfires. Marketing Science, 24(3), 382–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Harris, A.-M., Henderson, G. R., & Williams, J. D. (2005). Courting customers: Assessing consumer racial profiling and other marketplace discrimination. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 24(1), 163–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Häubl, G., Dellaert, B., & Usta, M. (2007). Ironic effects of personalized product recommendations on subjective consumer decision outcomes. Working Paper.

  31. Häubl, G., & Murray, K. B. (2003). Preference construction and persistence in digital marketplaces: The role of electronic recommendation agents. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(1&2), 75–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Häubl, G., & Murray, K. B. (2006). Double agents: Assessing the role of electronic product-recommendation systems. Sloan Management Review, 47(3), 8–12.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Häubl, G., & Trifts, V. (2000). Consumer decision making in online shopping environments: The effects of interactive decision aids. Marketing Science, 19(1), 4–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Healy, M., & Iles, J. (2002). The establishment and enforcement of codes. Journal of Business Ethics, 39, 117–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 1–46). New York: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Hill, R. P., & Stamey, M. (1990). The homeless in America: An examination of possessions and consumption behaviors. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 303–321 (December).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Hirschman, E. C., & Hill, R. P. (2000). On human commoditization and resistance: A model based upon Buchenwald Concentration Camp. Psychology & Marketing, 17(6), 469–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (2000). When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 995–1006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Iyengar, S., & Lepper, M. R. (2002). Choices and its consequences: On the costs and benefits of self-determination. In A. Tesser (Ed.), Self and motivation: Emerging psychological perspectives (pp. 71–96). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  40. Kahn, B. E., & Baron, J. (1995). An exploratory study of choice rules favored for high-stakes decisions. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 4(4), 305–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Kahn, B. E., & Lehmann, D. R. (1991). Modeling choice among assortment. Journal of Retailing, 67, 274–299.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Kahn, B. E., & Wansink, B. (2004). The influence of assortment structure on perceived variety and consumption quantities. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 519–533 (March).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (vol. 15, pp. 192–240). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Kivetz, R., & Simonson, I. (2002). Earning the right to indulge: Effort as a determinant of customer preferences towards frequency program rewards. Journal of Marketing Research, 39, 155–170 (May).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Kivetz, R., Urminsky, O., & Zheng, Y. (2006). The goal-gradient hypothesis resurrected: Purchase acceleration, illusionary goal progress, and customer retention. Journal of Marketing Research, 43, 39–58 (February).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Klemperer, P. (1987). Markets with consumer switching costs. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 102(2), 375–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Klemperer, P. (1995). Competition when consumers have switching costs: An overview with applications to industrial organization, macroeconomics, and international trade. Review of Economic Studies, 62(4), 515–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Langer, E. J. (1975). The illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(2), 311–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Langer, E. J., & Rodin, J. (1976). The effects of choice and enhanced personal responsibility for the aged: A field experiment in an institutional setting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 191–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (1998). The role of feasibility and desirability considerations in near and distant future decisions: A test of temporal construal theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(1), 5–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Lynn, M. (1991). Scarcity effects on value: A quantitative review of the commodity theory literature. Psychology and Marketing, 8, 43–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Lynn, M. (1992). Scarcity’s enhancement of desirability: The role of naïve economic theories. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13, 67–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Malhotra, N. K. (1982). Information load and consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 8, 419–430 (March).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Morales, A. C., Kahn, B. E., McAlister, L., & Broniarczyk, S. M. (2005). Perception of assortment variety: The effects of congruency between consumers’ internal and retailers’ external organization. Journal of Retailing, 81(2), 159–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Murray, K., & Häubl, G. (2007). Explaining cognitive lock-in: The role of skill-based habits of use in consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 77–88 (June).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Nunes, J. C., & Drèze, X. (2006). The endowed progress effect: How artificial advancement increases effort. Journal of Consumer Research, 32, 504–512 (March).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Ozanne, J., Hill, R. P., & Wright, N. (1998). Juvenile delinquents’ use of consumption as cultural resistance: Implications for juvenile reform programs and public policy. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 17, 185–196 (Fall).

    Google Scholar 

  58. Pham, M., & Avnet, T. (2004). Ideals and oughts and the reliance on affect versus substance in persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 503–518 (March).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Peppers, D., & Rogers, M. (1997). Enterprise one-to-one: Tools for competing in the interactive age. New York, NY: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Pratkanis, A. R., & Farquhar, P. H. (1992). A brief history of research on phantom alternatives: Evidence for seven empirical generalizations about phantoms. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13(0), 103–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Ratner, R. K., Kahn, B. E., & Kahneman, D. (1999). Choosing less preferred experiences for the sake of variety. Journal of Consumer Research, 26, 1–15 (June).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Roberts, J. H., & Lattin, J. M. (1991). Development and testing of a model of consideration set composition. Journal of Marketing Research, 28, 429–440 (November).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Schwartz, B. (2004). The paradox of choice: Why more is less. New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Seligman, M. E. P. (1975). Helplessness: On depression, development, and death. San Francisco, CA: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Shugan, S. M. (1980). The cost of thinking. Journal of Consumer Research, 7, 99–111 (September).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Siddarth, S., Bucklin, R. E., & Morrison, D. G. (1995). Making the cut: Modeling and analyzing choice set restriction in scanner panel date. Journal of Marketing Research, 32, 255–266 (August).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Simon, H. A. (1957). Models of man: Social and rational. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Strahilevitz, M., & Myers, J. G. (1998). Donations to charity as purchase incentives: How well they work may depend on what you are trying to sell. Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 434–446 (March).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Szrek, H., & Baron, J. (2007). The value of choice in insurance purchasing. Journal of Economic Psychology, 28(5) 529–544.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Taylor, S. E. (1979). Hospital patient behavior: Reactance, helplessness, or control? Journal of Social Issues, 35, 156–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Thaler, R. (1985). Mental accounting and consumer choice. Marketing Science, 4, 199–214 (Summer).

    Google Scholar 

  72. Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2003). Libertarian paternalism. American Economic Review, 93(2), 175–179 May 2003 (Papers and Proceedings).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Thomas, G. P., & Soldow, G. F. (1988). A rules-based approach to competitive interaction. Journal of Marketing, 52, 63–74 (April).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263–292 (March).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. (2006). Can businesses effectively regulate employee conduct? The antecedents of rule following in work settings. American Management Journal, 48, 1143–1158.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Urbany, J. E. (2005). Inspiration and cynicism in values statements. Journal of Business Ethics, 62, 169–182 (December).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Verhallen, T. M. M. (1982). Scarcity and consumer choice behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 2, 299–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Verhallen, T. M. M., & Robben, H. S. J. (1995). Unavailability and the evaluation of goods. Kyklos: International Review for Social Sciences, 48(3), 369–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Wansink, B. (2006a). Mindless eating: Why we eat more than we think. New York: Bantam-Dell.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Wansink, B. (2006b). Nutritional gatekeepers and the 72% solution. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 106(9), 1324–1326 (September).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Wansink, B., & Chandon, P. (2006). Can low-fat nutrition labels lead to obesity? Journal of Marketing Research, 43(3), 605–617 (November).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Wertenbroch, K. (1998). Consumption self-control by rationing purchase quantities of virtue and vice. Marketing Science, 17(4), 317–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Wong, P. T., Welner, B. (1981). When people ask ‘why’ questions, and the heuristics of attributional search. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40(4), 650–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Donald Lehmann.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Botti, S., Broniarczyk, S., Häubl, G. et al. Choice under restrictions. Mark Lett 19, 183–199 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-008-9035-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Choice
  • Restrictions
  • Constraints