Abstract
Consumers sometimes recognize that irrelevant contextual factors may influence their judgments and decisions. When such factors are detected, consumers might engage in correction processes to counteract unwanted influences in their judgments and decisions. An experiment demonstrated that correction processes can reduce the magnitude of the compromise effect and the attraction effect.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arkes, Hal R. (1991). “Costs and Benefits of Judgment Errors: Implications for Debiasing,” Psychological Bulletin 110, 486–498.
Gilbert, Daniel T., Brian W. Pelham, and Douglas S. Krull. (1988). “On Cognitive Busyness: When Person Perceivers Meet Persons Perceived,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54, 733–740.
Huber, Joel, John W. Payne, and Christopher Puto. (1982). “Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis,” Journal of Consumer Research 9, 90–98.
Huber, Joel, and Christopher Puto. (1983). “Market Boundaries and Product Choice: Illustrating Attraction and Substitution Effects,” Journal of Consumer Research 10, 31–44.
Petty, Richard E., and Duane T. Wegener. (1993). “Flexible Correction Processes in Social Judgment: Correcting for Context-Induced Contrast,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 29, 137–165.
Simonson, Itamar. (1989). “Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects,” Journal of Consumer Research 16, 158–174.
Simonson, Itamar and Stephen M. Nowlis. (1998). “Constructive Decision Making in a Social Context: Unconventional Choices Based on Reasons,” working paper, Stanford University.
Simonson, Itamar, and Amos Tversky. (1992). “Choice in Context: Tradeoff Contrast and Extremeness Aversion,” Journal of Marketing Research 29, 281–295.
Stapel, Diederik A., Leonard L. Martin, and Norbert Schwarz. (1998). “The Smell of Bias: What Instigates Correction Processes in Social Judgments?” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 24, 797–806.
Strack, Fritz, Norbert Schwarz, Almut Kubler, and Michaela Wanke. (1993). “Awareness of the Influences as a Determinant of Assimilation Versus Contrast,” European Journal of Social Psychology 23, 53–62.
Wegener, Duane T., and Richard E. Petty. (1995). “Flexible Correction Processes in Social Judgment: The Role of Naïve Theories in Corrections for Perceived Bias,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 68, 36–51.
Wegener, Duane T., and Richard E. Petty. (1997). “The Flexible Correction Model: The Role of Naïve Theories of Bias in Bias Correction,” in Mark P. Zanna (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 29. San Diego: Academic Press.
Wilson, Timothy D., and Nancy Brekke. (1994). “Mental Contamination and Mental Correction: Unwanted Influences on Judgments and Evaluations,” Psychological Bulletin 116, 117–142.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Houghton, D.C., Kardes, F.R., Mathieu, A. et al. Correction Processes in Consumer Choice. Marketing Letters 10, 107–112 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008079228646
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008079228646