Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Präferenzen bei Ergebnisambiguität

Preferences in the case of outcome ambiguity

  • Published:
Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

In diesem Beitrag wird die Frage behandelt, wie Personen auf Wahlmöglichkeiten reagieren, die durch Ergebnisambiguität gekennzeichnet sind. Ergebnisambiguität bezeichnet den Sachverhalt, dass ein Merkmal oder mehrere Merkmale einer Option nicht durch fixe Ausprägungen, sondern nur durch Bereiche beschrieben sind, in denen die Ausprägungen angesiedelt sein können. In der deskriptiven Entscheidungstheorie hat diese Situation erst geringe Aufmerksamkeit gefunden, obwohl in der Marketingpraxis den Nachfragern zuweilen ungenaue Informationen über Attribute gegeben werden. Die Studie zeigt, dass sich die Präferenz für ein Zielprodukt erhöhen lässt, wenn die Attribute, die bei Formulierung durch fixe Werte Nachteile offenbaren, ambigue formuliert werden.

Summary

In this article we deal with the problem how consumers cope with decision situations in which one alternative is described being outcome ambiguous. Outcome ambiguity exists if consumers do not see an option’s attributes as fix values but as intervals or minimum values. Although people experience outcome ambiguity in many cases little is known about how it affects preferences or decision outcomes. In this study we show that the attractiveness of the target product can be increased if an obvious disadvantage of that option is expressed ambiguously.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Literatur

  • Bamberg, G./ Coenenberg, A.G. (2002): Betriebswirtschaftliche Entscheidungslehre, 11. Aufl., München.

  • Bochner, S. (1965): Defining Intolerance of Ambiguity, in: Psychological Record, Vol. 15, S. 393–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Budner, S. (1962): Intolerance of Ambiguity as a Personality Variable, in: Journal of Personality, Vol. 30, S. 29–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camerer, C./ Weber, M. (1992): Recent Developments in Modeling Preferences: Uncertainty and Ambiguity, in: Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Vol. 5, S. 325–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chernev, A. (2001): The Impact of Common Features on Consumer Preferences: A Case of Confirming Reasoning, in: Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20, S. 170–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curley, S.P./ Yates, J.F. (1985): The Centre and Range of the Probability Interval as Factors Affecting Ambiguity Preferences, in: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 36, S. 273–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curley, S.P./ Yates, J.F./ Abrams, R.A. (1986): Psychological Sources of Ambiguity Avoidance, in: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 37, S. 230–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einhorn, H.J./ Hogarth, R.M. (1986): Decision Making under Ambiguity, in: Journal of Business, Vol. 59, S. 225–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenführ, F./ Weber, M. (2003): Rationales Entscheiden, 4. Aufl., Heidelberg.

  • Ellsberg, D. (1961): Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms, in: Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 75, S. 643–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, G.W. (1995): Range Sensitivity of Attribute Weights in Multiattribute Value Models, in: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 62, S. 252–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, C.R./ Tversky, A. (1995): Ambiguity Aversion and Comparative Ignorance, in: The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 110, S. 583–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, C.R./ Weber, M. (2002): Ambiguity Aversion, Comparative Ignorance, and Decision Context, in: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 88, S. 476–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frenkel-Brunswik, E. (1948): Intolerance of Ambiguity as an Emotional Perceptual Personality Variable, in: Journal of Personality, Vol. 18, S. 10–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frisch, D./ Baron, J. (1988): Ambiguity and Rationality, in: Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, Vol. 1, S. 149–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furnham, A./ Ribchester, T. (1995): Tolerance of Ambiguity: A Review of the Concept, its Measurement and Applications, in: Current Psychology, Vol. 14, No. 3, S. 179–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzáles-Vellejo, C./ Bonazzi, A./ Shapiro, A.J. (1996): Effects of Vague Probabilities and of Vague Payoffs on Preference: A Model Comparison Analysis, in: Journal of Mathematical Psychology, Vol. 40, S. 130–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ha, Y.-W./ Hoch, S.J. (1989): Ambiguity, Processing Strategy, and Advertising-Evidence Interactions, in: Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 16, S. 354–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, D.E./ Helgeson, J.G. (1996): Choice und Strict Uncertainty: Processes and Preferences, in: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 66, S. 153–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, C./ Tversky, A. (1991): Preference and Belief: Ambiguity and Competence in Choice under Uncertainty, in: Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, No. 4, S. 5–28.

  • Helson, H. (1959): Adaptation Level Theory, in: Koch, S. (Ed.): Psychology: A Study of Science, Vol. I, New York, S. 565–621.

  • Ho, J.L./ Keller, L.R./ Keltyka, P. (2001): Managers’ Variance Investigation Decisions: An Experimental Examination of Probabilistic and Outcome Ambiguity, in: Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, Vol. 14, S. 257–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, J.L./ Keller, L.R./ Keltyka, P. (2002): Effects of Outcome and Probabilistic Ambiguity on Managerial Choice, in: The Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Vol. 24, No. 1, S. 47–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoch, S.J./ Ha, Y.-W. (1986): Consumer Learning: Advertising and the Ambiguity of Product Experience, in: Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 13, S. 221–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogarth, R.M./ Kunreuther, H. (1995): Decision Making under Ignorance: Arguing with Yourself, in: Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Vol. 10, S. 15–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsee, C.K. (1995): Elastic Justification: How Tempting but Task-Irrelevant Factors Influence Decisions, in: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 62, S. 330–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurwicz, L. (1951): Optimally Criteria for Decision making under Ignorance, Crowles Commission Discussion Paper, Statistics 370.

  • Kahn, B.E./ Sarin, R.K. (1988): Modeling Ambiguity in Decision Under Uncertainty, in: Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15, S. 265–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, B.E./ Meyer, R.J. (1991): Consumer Multiattribute Judgments under Attribute-Weight-Uncertainty, in: Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 17, S. 508–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D./ Tversky, A. (1979): Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk, in: Econometria, Vol. 47, S. 263–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D./ Tversky, A. (1984): Choices, Values and Frames, in: American Psychologist, Vol. 39, S. 341–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keppe, H.-J./ Weber, M. (1995): Judged Knowledge and Ambiguity Aversion, in: Theory and Decision, Vol. 39, S. 51–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, K.M./ Budescu, D.V. (1996): The Relative Importance of Probabilities, Outcomes, and Vagueness in Hazard Risk Decisions, in: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 68, S. 301–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, A.P. (1970): Revised Scale for Ambiguity Tolerance: Reliability and Validity, in: Psychological Reports, Vol. 26, S. 791–798.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacInnis, D.J./ De Mello, G.E. (2005): The Concept of Hope and its Relevance to Product Evaluation and Choice, in: Journal of Marketing, Vol. 69 (January), S. 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, H. (1976): On Decision Rules and Information Processing Strategies for Choice among Multiattribute Alternatives, in: Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, Vol. 17, S. 283–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, H. (1983): Decision Rules and the Search for a Dominance Structure Towards a Process Model of Decision Making, in: Humphrys, P.C./ Svenson, O./ Vari, A. (Eds.): Analysing and Aiding Decision Processes, Amsterdam, S. 343–369.

  • Montgomery, H. (1987): Image Theory and Dominance Search Theory: How is Decision Making Actually Done? in: Acta Psychologica, Vol. 66, S. 221–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, H. (1989a): The Search for a Dominance Structure: Simplification versus Elaboration in Decision Making, in: Vickers, D./ Smith, P.I. (Eds.): Human Information Processing: Measures, Mechanisms, and Models, North Holland, S. 471–483.

  • Montgomery, H. (1989b): From Cognition to Action: The Search for Dominance in Decision Making, in: Montgomery, H./ Svenson, O. (Eds.): Process and Structure in Human Decision Making, Chicester, S. 23–49.

  • Niehans, J. (1948): Zur Preisbildung bei ungewissen Erwartungen, in: Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Volkswirtschaft und Statistik, 84. Jg., S. 433–446.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parducci, A. (1963): Range-Frequency-Compromise in Judgment, in: Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, Vol. 70, S. 1–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parducci, A. (1965): Category Judgment: A Range-Frequency-Model, in: Psychological Review, Vol. 72, S. 407–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parducci, A./ Perrett. L.F. (1971): Category Rating Scales: Effects of Relative Spacing and Frequency of Stimulus Values, in: Journal of Experimental Psychology Monograph, Vol. 89, S. 427–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parducci, A. (1974): Contextual Effects: A Range-Frequency-Analysis, in: Carterette, E.C./ Friedman, M.P. (Eds.): Handbook of Perception, New York, Vol. 2, S. 127–141.

  • Quattrone, G.A./ Tversky, A. (1988): Contrasting Rational and Psychological Analyses of Political Choice, in: American Political Science Review, Vol. 82, S. 719–736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarin, R.K./ Weber, M. (1993): Effects of Ambiguity in Market Experiments, in: Management Science, Vol. 39, S. 602–615.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savage, L.J. (1951): The Theory of Statistical Decision, in: Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 46, S. 55–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schweitzer, M.E./ Hsee, C.K. (2002): Stretching the Truth: Elastic Justification and Motivated Communication of Uncertain Information, in: The Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Vol. 25, S. 185–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P. (1975): Choice between Equally Valued Alternatives, in: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, Vol. 1, No. 3, S. 280–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R.H./ Diener, E.F./ Wedell, D.H. (1989): Intrapersonal and Social Comparison Determinants of Happiness: A Range-Frequency-Analysis, in: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 56, S. 317–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taha, H.A. (1987): Operations Research: An Introduction, 4th Ed., New York.

  • Taylor, K.A. (2000): Explaining Individual and Task Differences in Consumer Attitudes toward Ambiguität, in: Marketing Letters, Vol. 11, No. 2, S. 117–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tenbrunsel, A.E. (1999): Trust as an Obstacle in Environmental-Economic Disputes, in: The American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 42, S. 1350–1367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Dijk E./ Zeelenberg, M. (2003): The Discounting of Ambiguous Information in the Economic Decision Making, in: Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, Vol. 16, S. 341–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Neumann, J./ Morgenstern, O. (1947): The Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, 2nd Ed., Princeton.

  • von Nitzsch, R./ Weber, M. (1991): Bandbreiteneffekte bei der Bestimmung von Zielgewichten, in: Zeitschrift für betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung, 43. Jg., S. 971–986.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Nitzsch, R./ Weber, M. (1993): The Effect of Attribute Ranges on Weights in Multiattribute Utility Measurements, in: Management Science, Vol. 39, S. 937–943.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Nitzsch, R. (2002): Entscheidungslehre — Wie Menschen entscheiden und wie sie entscheiden sollten, Stuttgart.

  • Tversky, A./ Fox, C.G. (1995): Weighing Risk and Uncertainty, in: Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 102, S. 269–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volkmann, J. (1951): Scales of Judgment and their Implications for Social Psychology, in: Rohrer, J.H./ Sherif, M. (Eds.): Social Psychology at the Crossroads, New York, S. 273–296.

  • Wedell, D.H. (1991): Distinguishing among Models of Contextually Induced Preference Reversals, in: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, Vol. 17, S. 767–778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wedell, D.H./ Pettibone, J.C. (1996): Using Judgments to Understand Decoy Effects in Choice, in: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 67, S. 326–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willemsen, M.C./ Keren, G. (2003): The Meaning of Indifference in Choice Behaviour: Asymmetries in Adjustment Embodied in Matching, in: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 90, S. 342–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfradt, U./ Rademacher, J. (1999): Interpersonale Ambiguitätsintoleranz als klinisches Differentialkriterium: Skalenentwicklung und Validierung, in: Zeitschrift für Differenzielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 20. Jg., Nr. 1, S. 72–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yüce, P./ Highhouse, S. (1998): Effects of Attributes Set Size and Pay Ambiguity on Reactions to ‘Help Wanted’ Advertisements, in: Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 19, S. 337–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Lehrstuhl für Betriebswirtschaftslehre mit dem Schwerpunkt Marketing an der Universität Augsburg, Universitätsstr. 16, 86159, Augsburg, Germany

    Heribert Gierl

Authors
  1. Heribert Gierl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Arbeitsgebiete: Marketing, Innovationsforschung, Werteforschung, Präferenzforschung.

Der Autor dankt Herrn Dipl.-Kfm. Oliver Gansser für die wertvolle Mitarbeit an der theoretischen Analyse und den Experimenten sowie drei Gutachtern für viele konstruktive Hinweise.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gierl, H. Präferenzen bei Ergebnisambiguität. Z. Betriebswirtsch 76, 1187–1216 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-006-0057-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-006-0057-1

Keywords

JEL

Search

Navigation