open access
메뉴.png){kind=logo}
open access
메뉴
ISSN : 1229-8778
The objective of this study is to investigate the effect of mood, decision mode, and decision strategy on the preference consistency in the process of judgment of decision of the consumer. The experimental design was 2(mood: pleasant vs. sad) x 2(decision mode: intuitive vs. deliberate type) x 2(decision strategy: intuitive vs. deliberate) 3-way randomized design. The dependent variable is the number of inconsistent choices. The main findings of this study were as follows: consumer’s preference consistency was changed by mood and decision mode, and their interaction showed. The fitting decision between mood and decision mode existed. Intuitive person(type-I) showed a similar preference consistency regardless of the kinds of mood, however, deliberate person(type-D) showed a more consistent preference on sad mood than pleasant mood. Also there was an interaction effect between decision mode and decision strategy, that is, the fitting decision between decision mode and decision strategy existed. Intuitive person showed a more consistent preference on intuitive strategy, deliberate person showed a more consistent preference on deliberate strategy. The finding of this study shows that there are fitting decisions in preference consistency.
양윤, 한남영. (2013). 제품속성소구, 구매충동성, 기분이 광고 및 상표태도에 미치는 영향. 광고학연구, 24(7), 129148.
Amir, O., & Levav, J. (2008). Choice construction versus preference construction: The instability of preferences learned in context. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(2), 145-158.
Andrews, P. W., & Thomson, J. A. (2009). The bright side of being blue: Depression as an adaptation for analyzing complex problems. Psychological Review, 116(3), 620-654.
Ariely, D., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2003). Coherent arbitrariness: Stable demand curves without stable preferences. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118, 73-105.
Betsch, C. (2004). Preference for intuition and deliberation (PID): An inventory for assessing affect- and cognition-based decision-making. Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 25(4), 179-197.
Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(5), 752-766.
Chaiken, S., & Trope, Y. (1999). Dual-process theories in social psychology. Social psychology. (p. 676). Guilford Press.
De Vries, M., Holland, R. W., & Witteman, C. L. M. (2008). Fitting decisions: Mood and intuitive versus deliberative decision strategies. Cognition & Emotion, 22(5), 931-943.
DeCarlo, T. E., & Barone, M. J. (2009). With suspicious (but happy) minds: Mood's ability to neutralize the effects of suspicion on persuasion. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19, 326-333.
Epstein, S. (1994). Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. The American Psychologist, 49, 709-724.
Evans, J. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255-278.
Evans, J., & Over, D. E. (1997). Rationality in reasoning: The problem of deductive competence. Cahiers De Psychologie Cognitive- Current Psychology of Cognition, 16, 3-38.
Fodor, J. (2001). The mind doesn't work that way. AI Magazine, 22, p. 125. doi:10.1007/BF00484631.
Groenland, E. A. G., & Schoormans, J. P. L. (1994). Comparing mood-induction and affective conditioning as mechanisms influencing product evaluation and product choice. Psychology & Marketing, 11, 183-197.
Higgins, E. T., Chen Idson, L., Freitas, A. L., Spiegel, S., & Molden, D. C. (2003). Transfer of value from fit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1140-1153.
Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Ed.). Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment. Cambridge University Press. pp. 49-81.
Lee, L., Amir, O., & Ariely, D. (2009). In search of homo economicus: Cognitive noise and the role of emotion in preference consistency. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(2), 173-187.
Loewenstein, G., & Donoghue, T. O. (2004). Animal spirits?: Affective and deliberative processes in economic behavior. Social Science Research Network, 2006, 1-54. doi:10.2139/ssrn.539843.
Metcalfe, J., & Mischel, W. (1999). A hot/cool-system analysis of delay of gratification: Dynamics of willpower. Psychological Review, 106(1), 3-19.
Nisbett, R. E., Peng, K., Choi, I., & Norenzayan, A. (2001). Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review, 108, 291-310.
Nordgren, L. F., & Dijksterhuis, A. (2009). The devil is in the deliberation: Thinking too much reduces preference consistency. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(1), 39-46.
Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford Psychology Series No 9, 9, p. 336. doi:10.1093/acprof.
Reber, A. S. (1989). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118(3), 219-235.
Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84(2), 127-190.
Schunk, D., & Betsch, C. (2006). Explaining heterogeneity in utility functions by individual differences in decision modes. Journal of Economic Psychology, 27(3), 386-401.
Sloman, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119(1), 3-22.
Strack, F., & Deutsch, R. (2004). Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 220-247.
Yoon, S., & Simonson, I. (2008). Choice set configuration as a determinant of preference attribution and strength. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(2), 324-336.