An Interaction Framework of Consumer Decision Making

Author(s): Girish N. Punj and David W. Stewart

Source: Journal of Consumer Research , Sep., 1983, Vol. 10, No. 2 (Sep., 1983), pp. 181-
196
Published by: Oxford University Press

Stable URL: [Link]

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
[Link]
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@[Link].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
[Link]

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Journal of Consumer Research

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Sun, 11 Feb 2024 [Link] +00:00
All use subject to [Link]
 An Interaction Framework
of Consumer Decision Making

GIRISH N. PUNJ
DAVID W. STEWART*

Three streams of research on consumer decision processes-task characteristics,

individual differences, and elemental behavioral response analysis-are inte-
grated within the conceptual framework of an interactionist model of consumer
decision making. Taxonomies of task and individual difference characteristics are
presented. It is suggested that a complete model of the consumer choice process
must explicitly consider three components: task, individual difference, and task
x individual difference interactions.

vidual.
A,review of the information processing literature sug- Because of the importance attached to the
gests that at least three approaches to the application interaction component, we have chosen to call it "an in-
of the framework are in use. One approach has sought to teraction framework of consumer decision making." The
identify elements of the consumer choice task which deter- three components of the framework provide a mechanism
mine decision outcomes (Bettman and Kakkar 1977; Capon for integrating a large body of existing research on con-
and Burke 1980; Olshavsky and Smith 1980; van Raaij sumer decision making and suggest directions for fruitful
1977). A second stream of work has been concerned with future research.
the identification of individual differences that influence
decision outcomes (Capon and Burke 1980; Henry 1980). THE INTERACTION FRAMEWORK
The third approach is "constructive processing" (Bettman
and Park 1980a; Bettman and Zins 1977), which attempts The underlying premise of the interaction framework is
to break the consumer choice process into its elementary that behavior occurring under one set of variable types and
behavioral components. The way in which these compo- levels (e.g., task variables) is not independent of the type

nents are put together within the choice process becomes and level of other variables (e.g., individual differences).

the focus of this approach. Although a single researcher Behavior is posited to be a function of task-related vari-

may pursue all three of these streams of research, there has ables, individual differences, and their interaction. The ab-

been a tendency for work in each stream to proceed inde- sence of any one component results in an incomplete ex-
pendently of the other two. planation of behavior. Further, the relative importance of

While it is undoubtedly true that task characteristics and each of the determinants varies across occasions, depending
individual differences affect decision outcomes and that on the relative importance of task characteristics, individual
consumers construct decision strategies from more elemen- differences, or the task-individual interactions. Thus in

tary behavioral responses, what is needed is a model of some instances, the main effect due to task might be the
consumer decision making which ties these three ap- primary determinant of behavior, while in other cases the

proaches together within a network of interrelationships. individual might be the primary influence. In most cases,
This paper proposes such a framework a framework built the task-by-individual effect is likely to be the dominant
around the notion that three types of variables affect con- one.

sumer decisions: task characteristics, individual differ- The interactionist perspective is not new. Indeed, its
ences, and the interaction between the task and the indi- origins can be traced to Kantor (1926) and Lewin (1939),
as well as to a number of other psychological theorists.
Ekehammar (1974) has provided a historical perspective on
*Girish N. Punj is Assistant Professor of Marketing, University of Con-
necticut, Storrs, CT 06268. David W. Stewart is Associate Professor of
interactionism, and Endler and Magnusson have summa-
Management, Owen Graduate School of Management, Vanderbilt Uni- rized the main features of interactions (1976, p. 968):
versity, Nashville, TN 37203. The authors wish to acknowledge the sup-
port received from the 1981 and 1982 Dean's Research Fund of the Owen
1. Actual behavior is a function of a continuous process of
Graduate School of Management, Vanderbilt University, which greatly multidirectional interaction (feedback) between the indi-
facilitated the completion of this paper. The authors also wish to express vidual and the situation s/he encounters.
their gratitude to several anonymous reviewers, whose comments helped
improve and strengthen the paper.
2. The individual is an intentional active agent in this inter-
action process.
181
? JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH 0 Vol. 10 S September 1983

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Sun, 11 Feb 2024 [Link] +00:00
All use subject to [Link]
 182 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH

3. On the person side of the interaction, cognitive factors sions. Using a hypothetical illustration, he demonstrates the
are the essential determinants of behavior, although emo- potential use of person, situation, and person-situation vari-
tional factors do play a role. ables in designing market segments for suntan lotion.
4. On the situation side, the psychological meaning of the No model of consumer decision processes can be com-
situation for the individual is the important determining plete without an explicit recognition of interaction effects.
factor. Earlier work on task dimensions and individual differences
is essential, however. It is only by determining important
Bowers (1973) has argued that the two prevalent para-
dimensions of the task and the individual that interaction
digms of behavior-trait theory and situationism have
effects may be identified. Bem and Funder (1978) and Bem
proved inadequate for explaining behavior. Trait theory
and Allen (1974) have argued that taxonomies both of the
(Adinolfi 1971; Bem 1972) focuses on an individual's
task structure and of individual differences are indispens-
"traits" or mental states and attempts to explain behavior
able to an understanding of interaction effects. A common
solely in terms of them; situationism (Mischel 1973; Skin-
language of description for both persons and situations is
ner 1953) holds that behavior is largely dependent on the
required before an adequate specification of interaction ef-
situation. Both paradigms have failed to account for ob-
fects can be attempted. Such a common language has begun
served deviations from expected results. For example, trait
to appear in the consumer behavior literature.
theory predicts that an individual's behavior should not vary
An examination of the rather substantial literature on task
from situation to situation and that even if there are differ-
determinants of consumer decision making suggests the
ences across situations, they should be minimal. The situ-
outline of a taxonomy of task characteristics. Literature on
ationist model, on the other hand, predicts that no differ-
individual differences also exists, although it appears to be
ences should be observed within a situation, since task
less definitive. The remainder of this paper develops these
influences are the sole determinant of behavior. Bowers
two taxonomies and attempts to show how an interaction
(1973) presents evidence that both trait theory and situa-
framework can help integrate findings on consumer decision
tionism are inadequate. He summarizes the results of 11
making.
studies that examined the effects of the situation, the per-
son, and their interaction. He found that the mean amount
of variance explained by the individual was 12.71 percent,
Toward Developing a Task Taxonomy
as compared to 10.17 percent for the situation. The situa- Much of what we know about human information pro-
tion-by-person interaction accounted for 20.77 percent of cessing has been learned in the laboratory. Typically, lab-
the variance. In 14 of 18 possible comparisons, the inter- oratory research has provided powerful, well-structured
action term accounted for a higher percentage of variance tasks for subjects. Since this is the very state in which task
than either main effect, and in 8 of the 18 comparisons the effects should be dominant, it is not surprising that the task
interaction term accounted for more variance than the sum situation has been found to be so important in determining
of the main effects. behavior. Dawes (1975) and Brehmer (1969) have sug-
An analysis of variance framework is a useful model for gested that models of behavior are primarily models of the
illustrating the interaction framework. Theorists who em- task. Such models represent behavior only because subjects
phasize the task as a determinant of behavior would posit have acquired simple abilities that allow them to behave
a model as follows: appropriately. Simon (1981) has argued that information
processing is a means by which an organism develops an
Behavior= Task + Error
internal representation of its environment. And Payne
Theorists who emphasize individual differences as a deter- (1982) suggests that there are at least two determinants of
minant of behavior would use the following model: the environmental representation: task effects and context
effects. Task effects are the factors associated with general
Behavior = Individual + Error structural characteristics of a decision. These effects include
factors such as the number of outcomes and alternatives,
The interaction framework would suggest the following
time pressures, mode of problem and information presen-
model:
tation, and so on. Context effects are more dependent on
the individual than are task effects and include factors such
Behavior = Task + Individual + (Task x Individual) + Error
as the attractiveness of alternatives. The present discussion
The interaction model not only provides for the identifi- will be restricted to task effects.
cation of both task and individual main effects, but explic- Models of laboratory behavior are very likely models of
itly recognizes the presence of an interaction effect between the laboratory task. Task characteristics would be expected
the two. Clearly, few researchers in the area of consumer to be the most important determinants of behavior when the
behavior would categorize themselves as pure "situation- task is well-defined and unambiguous. Mischel (1973) has
ists" or pure "trait theorists," and much research has ex- argued that situations are the dominant determiner of human
amined both influences on consumer behavior. Dickson behavior when they induce uniform expectancies about ap-
(1982) is among the first to have explicitly proposed adop- propriate response patterns, instill the skills necessary for
tion of the interactionist perspective for marketing deci- task completion, and provide adequate incentives for the

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Sun, 11 Feb 2024 [Link] +00:00
All use subject to [Link]
 INTERACTION FRAMEWORK OF DECISION MAKING 183

performance of the response pattern. To the degree that A Taxonomy of Task Characteristics
individuals are exposed to powerful treatments (well-struc-
tured tasks), individual differences will be minimized. A considerable amount of research has focused on iden-
Before a model of the task can be constructed, however, tifying dimensions of the task environment. Newell and
the components of that model must be identified. These Simon (1972) suggest task complexity, time pressure, in-
components are the dimensions along which tasks may dif- formation format, and information load as potential dimen-
fer. Researchers and theorists in consumer decision making sions of a task typology. Using Newell and Simon's work
have been calling for the identification of such components as a starting point, Olshavsky and Smith (1980) define three
for some time. To date, there has been no systematic effort dimensions of the consumer choice environment: (1) size
to develop a taxonomy of the consumer task environment. of the choice environment (total number of alternative
The elements of such a taxonomy should include not only brands), (2) information within the choice environment
a listing of elements, but also a demonstration of the effect (amount, quality, and format), and (3) complexity of the
each element has on the choice process. Such a demon- product (number and type of attributes which characterize
stration provides evidence of the construct validity of the the products). Wright (1974c) has examined the effects of
set of task dimensions. time pressure, time horizon, and distraction on consumer
It is useful to distinguish between two general procedures choice behavior. Like Wright, Bettman (1979) has sug-
for task analysis that have been suggested in the literature. gested time pressure, perceived time horizon for the choice,
The first approach has its origins in the human factors lit- and distraction in addition to noncomparable scale for-
erature and may be called "task response" analysis. Here mats, extraneous data, incomplete data, type of response
a behavioral understanding of the task requirements is required, number of alternatives, format of information dis-
sought. The focus is on the human performance require- play, degree of knowledge about the alternatives, and ease
ments, skills, and knowledge needed for successful com- of computing dimensional differences. Jacoby el al. (1976)
pletion of the task. have also suggested some dimensions of the task that deal
Several researchers have suggested "task response" tax- with specific information characteristics.
onomies. Cohen (1968) has distinguished among sensor- Research in social psychology, particularly group dy-
type tasks, which require intake of information, and effec- namics, has produced several task classification systems.
tor-type tasks, which require the application of rules. Miller Of these, the system of classification attributable to Shaw
(1962) has suggested six responses that might be elicited (1976) has the greatest empirical grounding. Shaw analyzed
by task: identification, short-term/long-term memory, de- 104 different tasks on a variety of attributes. These task
cision making, multiple discriminations, applying concepts, attributes were intercorrelated, and a factor analysis resulted
and applying principles and values. Gagne (1965) has pro- in six task dimensions: (1) difficulty, (2) solution multi-
posed the following taxonomy of task activities: plicity, (3) intrinsic interest, (4) cooperation requirements,
stimulus-response connections, chain of relationships (mo- (5) intellectual/manipulative requirements, and (6) popu-
tor or verbal), multiple discriminations, concepts, simple lation familiarity. Task difficulty refers to the amount of
principles or rules, and complex principles or rules. These effort required to complete the task. Attributes such as re-
behaviors, although outlined by researchers outside of the quiring few or many skills and knowledge and/or having
consumer behavior field, appear to have much in common a clear goal were related to this dimension. Solution mul-
with the behavioral characteristics that consumer informa- tiplicity refers to the degree to which a task has many ac-
tion processing theorists have developed. Chestnut and Ja- ceptable solutions, many alternatives for attaining those so-
coby (1977) have suggested encoding processes, decision lutions, and no solutions that could be easily verified as
making processes, and long-term mnemonic processes. best. Intrinsic interest refers to the degree to which a task
Bettman (1979) has suggested attention and perceptual en- is, in and of itself, interesting, motivating, or attractive.
coding, information acquisition and evaluation, and deci- Tasks may vary from dull to extremely interesting. Coop-
sion processes as important behavioral elements in con- eration requirements define the degree to which a task can
sumer choice tasks. be completed by one individual or requires the participation
The second approach, "task description" analysis, seeks of several individuals for completion. The intellectual/ma-
an objective description of the task. This approach focuses nipulative requirement is the ratio of mental requirements
on the external characteristics of the task. In one sense, of the task (reasoning, thinking) to motor requirements
task description may be viewed as an independent variable. (movement from place to place, manipulating articles, and
"Task description" provides information about the content so on). Population familiarity refers to the degree to which
of the task, while "task response" analysis addresses the members of the larger society have had experience with the
issues of the method by which the task is completed. In task. Tasks may vary from very familiar (if they are en-
practice, many researchers have tended to confuse the two. countered by nearly everyone in the population) to very
Generally, consumer behavior researchers who have called unfamiliar (if they have not been encountered by anyone
for a taxonomy of tasks or task dimensions have had "task in the population).
description" analysis in mind (see Bettman 1979; Brucks Beach and Mitchell (1978) have discussed characteristics
and Mitchell 1981; Olshavsky and Smith 1980; Wright of the decision task in the literature of organizational be-
1974b, 1974c; Wright and Weitz 1977). havior. These authors identify two broad dimensions of the

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Sun, 11 Feb 2024 [Link] +00:00
All use subject to [Link]
 184 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH

task-the decision problem and the decision environment. tion)-the spatial and temporal pattern of information
The decision problem consists of a variety of elements: (1) presentation

unfamiliarity; (2) ambiguity with respect to goals, decision D. Information source-the medium by which information
is obtained
alternatives, and constraints, as well as the unavailability,
E. Information form-the degree to which information is
unreliability, and impression of relevant information; (3)
presented in verbal or numerical form, in abstract or con-
complexity, which refers to the number of alternatives to
crete terms, absolute or relative terms, and summary
be considered, the amount of relevant information to be (brand names) or detailed form
considered, number of criteria on which the decision will F. Noise level (distraction)-the amount of information
be judged, and the degree to which the problem will influ- available to the consumer during the decision process that
ence future decisions; and (4) instability, the degree to is not related to the choice amnong alternatives
which criteria, goals, alternatives, and so on change during III. Temporal Characteristics
and after the decision. The decision environment also con- A. Time pressure-the extent to which a decision must be
sists of several dimensions: (1) irreversibility-the ability made within a time period less than that period required
of the decision maker to monitor the effects of a decision for optimal decision making
and reverse it if necessary; (2) significance-the magni-
IV. Cooperation Characteristics
tudes and breadth of decision outcomes; (3) accountability;
A. Cooperation characteristics-the degree to which a de-
and (4) time and/or money constraints. Finally, Payne cision requires the involvement of more than one indi-
(1982) has identified three dimensions of task complexity: vidual
number of alternatives, number of dimensions, and time
pressure. Each of these dimensions has been identified in the lit-
Each of these several taxonomies focuses on somewhat erature; definitions vary somewhat. For example, the antic-
different dimensions of the decision task. Each was de- ipated frequency of a task is probably related to the fre-

signed for a particular purpose and with particular objec- quency with which an individual has encountered it in the
tives in mind. Some of the taxonomies are more relevant past. To some extent, then, this dimension is an expecta-
to the consumer choice situation than others. Nevertheless, tion, and might be considered an individual difference vari-
there are significant commonalities among them all. A care- able. It is also likely that frequency has some relationship
ful reading of the literature suggests that a taxonomy of to population familiarity. However, since researchers have
task characteristics is already developing, albeit in piece- actively manipulated frequency in the laboratory, it may
meal fashion and with few attempts at integration. Our tax- also be considered a task dimension. Moreover, Bettman
onomy thus represents a compilation of dimensions of the (1979) has suggested that task experience is an individual
task that have been researched or otherwise identified in the difference, not a task characteristic. A distinction may be
literature. These characteristics of the task may be grouped
made between population familiarity and individual famil-
into four broad categories: iarity. Individuals will, of course, differ in their experience
with a task, but some tasks or problems are also likely to
be so pervasive as to be encountered with considerable fre-
I. Solution Characteristics
A. Number of alternatives available (solution multiplicity)- quency by large numbers of persons. This pervasiveness is
the number of product or service alternatives available to a task characteristic.
the consumer for consideration at any point in the deci- Certain characteristics of the task that have been dis-
sion making process cussed in the consumer information processing literature
B. Decisioni uncertainty (solution verifiability)-the degree have not been included in the present taxonomy because
to which choice of alternative solutions can be determined they may be considered the outcome of more basic task
to be correct or optimal by the consumer prior to alter- dimensions. The purchase planning horizon and risk are
native selection
among these. Bettman (1979) and Wright and Weitz (1977)
C. Frequency of decisioni-the number of times the con-
have drawn a distinction between time pressure and pur-
sumer anticipates choosing among alternatives during the
decision making process
chase planning horizon. The effects of changes in the plan-
D. Decision importtance-the degree to which an incorrect ning horizon may be attributable to changes in one or more
decision is costly (in time, money) to the decision maker of three more basic task components: time pressure, deci-
E. Populationi familiarity (task experience)-the frequency sion uncertainty, and decision importance. Risk is a func-
with which the general population has encountered the tion of decision uncertainty and decision importance. It is
task in the past possible that the conflicting literature on the effects of risk
on consumer decision making (Capon and Burke 1980; Ja-
II. Information Characteristics
coby, Chestnut, and Fisher 1978; Swan 1972) is the result
A. Number of attributes per alternative-the number of
of inadequate or incomparable definitions of risk. Consid-
characteristics describing an alternative and available to
ering risk as an interaction of decision uncertainty and de-
the consumer at some point in the decision making pro-
cess
cision importance may provide a more useful insight into
B. Attribute commonality-the extent to which attribute in- the effects of risk on consumer decision processes. For
formation is available, and available in similar form, for example, Roselius (1971) found that strategies for risk re-
all alternatives duction varied as a function of the interaction of perceived
C. Iniformnationi format (sequential presentation of informa- uncertainty and perceived loss. Bauer (1960, p. 389) argued

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Sun, 11 Feb 2024 [Link] +00:00
All use subject to [Link]
 INTERACTION FRAMEWORK OF DECISION MAKING 185

that "consumer behavior involves risk in the sense that any choice than is known about the effects of task structure.
action of a consumer will produce consequences which he Kassarjian (1971) and Wells (1975) have concluded that
cannot anticipate . . . some of which at least are likely to findings concerning personality and consumer behavior are
be unpleasant." To date, little empirical work has examined equivocal at best. Demographic characterizations offer little
risk as an interaction of certainty and importance. insight into the consumer choice process, and psycho-
A considerable literature already exists on the effects of graphic studies fail to provide an integrated and theoreti-
the task dimensions on consumer decision processes. Table cally relevant taxonomy of individual differences within the
1 provides a summary of the findings regarding each di- context of consumer decision processes. Newman (1977)
mension (i.e., task characteristic). The summary is re- has concluded that little is known about the relationship of
stricted to a discussion of main effects. The interactions of personality and information search behavior, largely be-
many of these dimensions have not generally been system- cause the topic has received little attention.
atically explored. Indeed, some of the conflicting findings It should not be surprising that little is known about the
on task effects in the literature may be attributable to a influence of individual differences on consumer behavior.
failure to consider the interactions among task elements. Much of consumer choice research has been carried out
For example, processing by brand is not the same as pro- within the context of well-structured tasks. As suggested
cessing by alternative. Alternatives may be presented with earlier, this is just the type of research design that mini-
or without a brand name. Further, the effect of the brand mizes the influence of individual differences. Mischel
name will be determined in part by the consumer's famil- (1973) has argued that individual difference variables are
iarity with the brand. most likely to appear in ambiguous situations. To the degree
Our set of task dimensions may provide a basis for iden- that the situation is unstructured, variability due to differ-
tifying the important elements of a model of the task. It is ences among individuals will be large.
likely that additional elements may need to be added or that At least two methodological problems and one concep-
some elements will need to be combined. For example, the tual problem may account for the paucity of knowledge
behavioral responses to increases in time pressure, number about the influence of individual differences on consumer
of alternatives, and number of attributes per alternative ap- decision making. First, many individual difference char-
pear very similar. This may suggest that all three elements acteristics pose serious, unresolved measurement problems.
are manifestations of a more fundamental dimension of the The reliability of many measures of personality is not high,
task. What is clear is that a great deal is already known and the correlation between different measures of the same
about the effects of the task environment on consumer de- characteristic or trait is frequently quite low. In addition,
cision making. Future research will need to further refine only infrequently have there been attempts to separate in-
the understanding of these effects and more fully examine dividual differences from one another and from task char-
the interactions of task elements. In addition, future re- acteristics. Thus any taxonomic framework should include
search should seek the development of scales of measure- only dimensions that can be assessed with considerable re-
ment for evaluating tasks along these dimensions. It is also liability and that can be operationally separated from other
of interest to note that one of the task dimensions-coop- individual and task characteristics.
eration-has not yet been directly researched to determine Reliability and construct validity must be established for
its impact on consumer decision processes. This is so de- individual difference variables before such constructs can
spite the large number of purchase decisions in households be used as components of a larger explanatory model. The
and organizations that involve multiple participants. While conceptual problem with the study of individual differences
research has been carried out on organizational decision concerns the level or unit of analysis. Bettman and Park
making, little work has empirically examined the differ- (1980a, 1980b) have argued for an examination of the mi-
ences in consumer choice processes due to multiple decision cro-elements of the decision process. Wells and Beard
makers, particularly as this relates to information acquisi- (1973) have suggested that contemporary personality mea-
tion, integration, and choice criteria. Davis (1976) and sures are too global for the kinds of decisions that marketers
Kourilsky and Murray (1981) suggest that the process of are interested in studying. On the one hand, very global
decision making within households has yet to be system- individual characteristics may be important, but in such
atically explored. indirect and subtle ways as to render them inappropriate.
On the other hand, studying individual differences at a level
A Taxonomy of Individual Differences of conceptualization that is insufficiently aggregated and
generalized may result in every behavior being considered
Despite the large amount of work on demographic and
unique or an individual difference characteristic in its own
psychographic consumer characteristics and efforts to relate
right. Models of individual differences and their influence
personality traits to consumer behavior, far less is known
on choice behavior would be very difficult to build at this
about the effects of individual differences' on consumer
micro-level of analysis. Indeed, at such a level it becomes
impossible to separate the effects of the behavioral depen-
'Individual differences are manifest on a variety of dimensions-per-
dent variable from the independent variable i.e., individ-
sonality, demographic characteristics, socio-economic data, and so on.
The present discussion is largely restricted to personality differences, since
ual difference characteristics. Eysenck (1961) has suggested
these differences have most frequently been examined by researchers in that individual differences may be characterized in terms
consumer behavior. of a hierarchy of responses. At the lowest level of analy-

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Sun, 11 Feb 2024 [Link] +00:00
All use subject to [Link]
186 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH

TABLE 1

EFFECTS OF TASK CHARACTERISTICS ON CONSUMER DECISION MAKING

I. Solution Characteristics
A. Number of alternatives available (solution multiplicity) As the number of alternatives increases, consumers tend to shift
Bettman & Park 1980a, 1980b; Crow, Olshavsky, & from one-stage compensatory strategies to multistage strategies
Summers 1980; Einhorn 1971; Green, Mitchell, & Staelin involving a noncompensatory screening-by-attribute stage,
1977; Jacoby, Szybillo, and Busato-Schach 1977; followed by a compensatory evaluation of remaining
Olshavsky 1979; Park 1978; Payne 1976; Staelin & Payne alternatives. Amount of information selected increases.
1976; Wright & Barbour 1977
B. Decision uncertainty (solution verifiability) Uncertainty increases the amount of information search.
Hawkins & Lanzetta 1965; Sieber & Lanzetta 1965
C. Frequency of decision Processing by attribute is most likely for one-time decisions.
Chestnut & Jacoby 1977; Green, Mitchell, & Staelin 1977; Processing by alternative (brand) is preferred when multiple
Lehmann & Moore 1980 decisions are involved. Amount of information sought in latter
decisions is determined by the degree to which an acceptable
set of alternatives is identified in the first decision and some
members of that set are better than the chosen brand on an
attribute for which feedback was received. Information
acquisition decreases with number of decisions made.
D. Decision importance
1. Importance Information acquisition increases with product importance. Greater
Jacoby, Chestnut, & Fisher 1978; Swan 1972; Wright risk is associated with greater information search.
1975
2. Involvement High involvement tasks produce faster evaluation and better
Gardner, Mitchell, & Russo 1978; Swan 1972; Wright accuracy at brand evaluation than low involvement tasks. Risk is
1975 associated with greater information search.
E. Population familiarity (task experience) More knowledgeable consumers tend to process by brand
Bettman & Park 1980a, 1980b; Dover & Olson 1977; (alternative). Consumers with moderate knowledge and
Jacoby, Chestnut, & Fisher 1978; Jacoby, Szybillo, & experience do more processing of available information than
Busato-Schach 1977; Staelin & Payne 1976 either high or low knowledge/experience consumers; consumers
with favorable product experiences tend to examine a restricted
set of alternatives.

II. Information Characteristics

A. Number of attributes per alternative As the average number of attributes per alternative increases,
Green, Mitchell, & Staelin 1977; Lussier & Olshavsky 1979; consumers differentially weight available information; attributes
Olshavsky 1979; Staelin & Payne 1976 may be given zero weights and ignored so that a smaller
percentage of available information is used although more total
information is acquired. Decision accuracy increases in a
discontinuous fashion. Consumers may be switching decision
rules (which may account for the discontinuity).
B. Attribute commonality Common dimensions are given greater weight. Large attribute
van Raaij 1977; Slovic & Lichtenstein 1971; Slovic & variability results in more choice by alternative; small attribute
MacPhillamy 1974 variability results in more choice by attribute.
C. Information format (sequential presentation of When information is not accessible simultaneously for all
information) alternatives and costs (money, time, effort) are involved in
Olander 1975 obtaining further information, a satisficing approach is used.
D. Information source Fewer sources and types of sources of information are used if
Staelin & Payne 1976 information is from friends and local retailers rather than from
advertising, books, pamphlets, and articles.
E. Information form
1. Absolute vs. relative Relative formats reduce time required for choice and increase
Gatewood & Perloff 1973; van Raaij 1977; Russo, accuracy of choices.
Krieser, & Miyashita 1975; Slovic 1975
2. Numerical vs. verbal information Numerical information requires less extended information
Chestnut 1976 processing than verbal information. Verbal information
remembered better over the long term.
3. With or without brand name Brand name increases accuracy of choice and decreases amount
Jacoby, Szybillo, & Busato-Schach 1977; van Raaij of information acquired for each alternative. Without brand
1977 name, more processing by attribute rather than by alternative
takes place.
G. Noise level (distraction) Fewer attributes used as distraction increases.
Wright 1974a, 1974c, 1975

III. Temporal Characteristics

A. Time pressure As time pressure increases, a smaller number of attributes are
Wright 1973, 1974c, 1975; Wright & Weitz 1977 used and negative information is more strongly weighted.

IV. Cooperation Characteristics

A. Cooperation requirements Not directly examined.

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Sun, 11 Feb 2024 [Link] +00:00
All use subject to [Link]
 INTERACTION FRAMEWORK OF DECISION MAKING 187

sis-the level of specific behavioral responses-no gener- a surrogate for construction competencies) on decision
alization about the individual is possible. Only by exam- competency, but the relationships identified are far from
ining the pattern of these individual responses over time perfect. In addition, task dimensions frequently differ
and in relation to one another is it possible to develop gen- across studies. Thus, while a number of researchers have
eralizations. What is needed is a taxonomy of individual found education to be monotonically related to amount of
differences that is appropriate to the conceptual unit of in- search activity (Claxton, Fry, and Portis 1974; Katona and
terest. In the present case, this conceptual unit is consumer Mueller 1955; Miller and Zikmund 1975; Thorelli, Becker,
decision making. and Engeldow 1975), other researchers have reached dif-
Despite the numerous problems associated with the iden- ferent conclusions (Newman and Staelin 1972). It is im-
tification of individual differences that affect consumer de- portant to note that this competency dimension describes
cision making, some evidence is available which clearly what the person can do rather than what the person usually
demonstrates the impact of the individual on decision mak- does.
ing. Beach and Mitchell (1978) identify three such char- Research on encoding strategies and personal constructs
acteristics knowledge, ability, and motivation but pro- is well established in the literature of both psychology
vide no empirical support. One recent taxonomy of (Kelly 1955; Mischel, Ebbesen, and Zeiss 1973) and con-
individual differences that has received attention from both sumer behavior (Bettman 1979; Kanwar, Olson, and Sims
psychologists and consumer behavior researchers is that 1981). There is considerable evidence that people catego-
proposed by Mischel (1973). Mischel's list of rize their experiences in terms of relatively stable personal
cognitive-social-learning variables has been discussed as constructs. These constructs are unique to the individual,
a potential individual differences taxonomy by Bettman but enough similarity may exist among individuals to permit
(1979) and several proponents of the interactionist approach some degree of aggregation. Some recent research has
(Endler and Magnusson 1976). As identified by Mischel sought to examine the properties of encoding strategies and
(1973), these individual difference variables are: personal constructs and their impact on consumer decision
making. Kanwar et al. (1981) have used Kelly's Repertory
* Construction conipetencies-the ability to construct (gen- Grid to examine consumers' cognitive structures regarding
erate) cognitions and behaviors; related to measures of nutrition. Marks and Olson (1981) have examined the ef-
IQ, social and cognitive (mental) maturity and compe- fects of direct and indirect product familiarity on personal
tence, ego development, social-intellectual achievements constructs. Kanwar et al. (1981) present evidence for the
and skills reliability of four dimensions of personal constructs: di-
* Enicoding strategies and personal conistructs-the units mensionality, abstraction, concreteness, and articulation.
for categorizing events and for self-descriptions These dimensions appear to be related to the way in which
* Behavior-outcome and stimulus-outcome expectanicies in personal constructs are organized. Brucks and Mitchell
particular situations-events anticipated when certain (1981) have presented a typology of the content of con-
stimuli are present or certain behavioral responses are sumer knowledge about a particular product category. One
made of these dimensions, terminology, appears similar to the
* Subjective stimulus values-motivating and arousing notion of a personal construct.
stimuli, incentives, and aversions A substantial literature also supports the importance of
F Self-regulatory systems and plans-rules and self-reac- expectations in determining consumer satisfaction (Ander-
tions for performance and for the organization of complex son 1973; Oliver 1977; Olshavsky and Miller 1972), but
behavior sequences little has been done in the way of relating expectations to
the consumer choice process (Bettman 1979). Brucks and
Bettman (1979) has suggested degree of prior experience Mitchell (1981) have suggested that consumers possess no-
with a choice task as an additional individual difference tions of causal relationships and specific facts that appear
dimension. Task experience is certainly an important di- to be similar to the concept of expectations used here. Olson
mension along which persons may differ. However, as and Dover (1979) have criticized much of the research on
noted in the discussion of task dimensions, it is important consumer expectations for failing to provide an adequate
to distinguish between task familiarity that grows out of the conceptual and operational definition of the expectation
pervasiveness of the task and task familiarity that is more construct. These authors argue that expectations should be
idiosyncratic. It is also an open question whether task fa- considered beliefs, a point of view with much merit.
miliarity should be considered among individual difference That people differ in the values they assign to stimuli
characteristics or whether other characteristics-such as and the characteristics of stimuli in their environment seems
outcome expectancies, or personal constructs and self-reg- beyond dispute. Psychologists have long recognized this
ulatory systems capture such familiarity (Mischel 1973). (see Becker and McClintock 1967 and Edwards 1954 for
Research on these five individual difference dimensions early reviews of the topic), and utility theory in economics
is not difficult to find; conclusions about what that research is explicitly concerned with the evaluation of subjective
has to say about individual differences are more difficult to stimulus values. However, it is likely that values have a
discern. One reason is that these dimensions have not often more profound impact than is frequently recognized. Values
been studied directly. For example, there is a considerable not only affect the choice heuristic of the consumer; they
literature on the effects of education (which is presumably also enter the consumer decision process very early. Many

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Sun, 11 Feb 2024 [Link] +00:00
All use subject to [Link]
 188 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH

stimuli probably acquire strong emotion-eliciting powers propriate targets for research. Rather, individual differences
and influence the direction of attentional processes. Wright may only be identified within the context of the task or
(1975), Fishbein and Ajzen (1975), and others have argued situation. This may be particularly true of plans and self-
that attitudes are primarily affective in nature and are es- regulatory systems that specifically mediate interactions
sentially indicators of the value of an object. The work of between the individual and the environment. Indeed, work
Green and colleagues (e.g., Green and Wind 1973) on the applying control theory to human behavior suggests that
measurement of consumer preference provides both a meth- this is the case (Carver and Scheier 1982; Powers 1973).
odology and a theoretical framework for the study of sub- Thus the study of individual differences in consumer de-
jective stimulus values. cision making may make more progress as emphasis shifts
Self-regulatory systems have been the object of a number from a study of individual differences to a study of
of studies in psychology (Bandura 1978; Miller, Galanter, task-person interactions.
and Pribram 1960; Mischel and Patterson 1976). To date,
little consumer research has examined self-regulatory sys-
tems, although Bettman (1979) has suggested such a mech- Task-Individual Difference
anism within the context of carrying out actions implied by Interaction Effects
goal hierarchies. These regulatory systems track progress
Task-person interaction effects can readily be found in
toward a goal and determine what additional actions are
research on consumer information processing and decision
required to obtain stated goals. Anderson (1975) has also
making. Numerous researchers in the area have called at-
suggested a cognitive executive system that is responsible
tention to the need to consider interactions of the situation
for planning activities, allocating resources, and directing
and the individual. Most of the classical models of con-
progress toward goals. Thaler and Shiffrin (1981) and
sumer behavior (e.g., Bettman 1979; Howard and Sheth
Schelling (1978) have provided examples of self-regulatory
1969) recognize the presence of such interactions. In de-
mechanisms. Park and Lutz (1982) report that decision
veloping a general framework of psychological models of
plans formulated by consumers prior to the search process
choice, Hansen (1976) has argued that interactions between
serve as guidelines for information search and decision
predispositions inherent in the individual and situational
making. These decision plans appear to remain relatively
influences on the individual are of critical importance. Sev-
stable throughout the purchase process.
eral types of such interactions may be identified:
While relatively little work has directly examined how
these individual characteristics influence decision pro- 1. The exposure situatiotn, where predispositions together
cesses, some research has appeared. Table 2 summarizes with environmental stimulation form new dispositions,
a number of these studies and shows that several of the such as knowledge, beliefs, and so on

dimensions under discussion have been examined, includ- 2. Prior commitment, where a particular situation or behav-
ing ability, knowledge, expectations, beliefs, plans, values, ior is elicited as a consequence of a predisposition
self-confidence, and a variety of personality patterns. It is
3. Impulse purchases, where the situation elicits a behavior
useful to note that where personality variables have been
employed, patterns of these variables have been found to 4. Joint effects of predispositions and the environment
be related to information search and decision making rather
5. A deliberation situation, where the environment and sit-
than to individual personality variables. For example, Ker-
uational stimulation act only as background
nan (1968) and Horton (1979) found characteristic person-
ality patterns related to decision strategies. While it would Belk (1975a, 1975b) has examined the effects of person,
be premature to suggest any causal relation, the habitual situation, and product variables on consumer preference and
modes of relating to one's environment and of self-control found that interaction terms account for substantially more
may be reflected both in how one makes decisions and in variance than the three main effects. Although he did not
global patterns of personality variables. attempt to define specific individual differences or task vari-
Clearly, less is known about the influence of individual ables that might provide insight into the consumer choice
differences on consumer decision making than about the process, Belk's work is nevertheless indicative of the im-
influence of the task. This is not surprising because indi- portance of interaction effects. Other theorists have also
vidual differences are not easily manipulated in the labo- suggested that interactions should be explicitly examined.
ratory. Also contributing to the paucity of data on individual Ray (1973) and DeBruicker (1979) have suggested that per-
difference variables is the problem of separating situations sonal involvement in a purchase decision be conceptualized
from traits. Wells and Beard (1973, p. 178) suggest that as a person-by-situation interaction. Mitchell (1979) and
"the same personality trait can be made manifest in very Ray (1979) have shown that the concept of involvement is
different ways, depending on local and temporary condi- poorly understood and conceptualized. Conceptualizing in-
tions and circumstances." Nakanishi (1972) has noted that volvement as an interaction of more fundamental dimen-
it may be useful to conceive of personality as a moderator sions of the task and person, as Kassarjian (1981) has re-
variable that functions to moderate the effects of environ- cently done, may help illuminate findings in this area.
mental change on the individual's behavior. This would Bettman (1979, p. 124) has reinterpreted the findings of a
suggest that individual differences per se may not be ap- study by Newman and Staelin (1972), which suggested that

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Sun, 11 Feb 2024 [Link] +00:00
All use subject to [Link]
INTERACTION FRAMEWORK OF DECISION MAKING 189

TABLE 2

PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCE CHARACTERISTICS RELATED TO DECISION MAKING

Personality or individual difference variable(s) Effect on information search and decision making

Personal values as measured by the Rokeach Value Survey Personal values were shown to influence attitudes towards price
(Becker and Connor 1982) as a store attribute, which, in turn, influences store choice.
Self-confidence-specific to buying a car (Bell 1967) Consumers low in self-confidence use "purchase pal" while
making the decision.
Prior knowledge and experience with product (Bettman and Park Such consumers did more processing of available information than
1980a) high or low groups. More knowledgeable consumers tended to
process by brand.
Need for cognitive clarity (Cox 1967) Positively related to acceptance of new information and likelihood
of changing prior product evaluations.
Need for self-esteem (Cox 1967) Positively related to confidence in ability to evaluate alternatives.
27 consumers beliefs about ability to judge products and product Accounted for 50% of total observed variation in external product
attributes, risk associated with product, benefits of search search behavior.
activity, differences among available alternatives, and
differences among vendors (Duncan and Olshavsky 1982)
Pattern of traits measured by Gordon Personal Profile (Greeno, Related to patterns of purchase behavior.
Sommers, and Kernan 1973)
Value importance and perceived instrumentality of product Value importance of attributes related to prediction of choice
attributes for 6 different products (Hansen 1969) across all products/situations. Perceived instrumentality
appeared to depend on situation.
Ability to process information, as measured by an integrative No interaction of ability and complexity observed. Ability accounted
complexity scale (Henry 1980) for substantially greater variation in judgments than did
complexity.
6 factorially derived personality dimensions: general anxiety, task General anxiety and task orientation appeared to influence choice
orientation, social anxiety, family structure, impulsiveness, and strategies in all 6 classes. Consumers with high general anxiety
age (Horton 1979) and low task orientation tended to prefer a decision strategy that
consistently resulted in selection of products manufactured by
well-known producers. Intelligence found to be negatively
related to preference for brands produced by well-known
manufacturers. Social anxiety and family structure related to
choice strategies in some, but not all, product classes.
Beliefs-i.e., inferences (Huber and McCann 1982) In the absence of information about a particular product attribute,
consumers appeared to fill in such information by inference from
their belief systems. Such inferences produced strong effects on
choice.
Need for abasement, need for affiliation, need for compliance, Number of shopping trips to purchase coffee negatively related to
need for intraception (Massy, Frank, and Lodahl 1968) need for abasement, need for affiliation, and need for
compliance, but positively related to need for intraception.
Tolerance for ambiguity (Mazis and Sweeney 1973) Tolerance for ambiguity positively related to trial of low-cost
convenience items and negatively related to trial of durable
goods.
Rigidity (Rokeach 1960) Rigidity negatively related to the acceptance of new or discrepant
information in problem solving.
Tolerance for ambiguity, trait anxiety, cognitive style, self-esteem, Tolerance for ambiguity and self-esteem positively related to
rigidity, and need for cognitive clarity (Schaninger and number of information pieces examined in an Information
Sciglimpaglia 1981) Display Board (IDB) task.

education is not monotonically related to external search uncertainty, and decision importance are all task variables
activity. This reinterpretation suggests an interaction be- that are likely to influence task difficulty. Definition of am-
tween task and individual factors. Taylor (1974) has con- biguous terms-such as involvement, perceived risk, and
ceived of risk as a function of (1) uncertainty concerning task difficulty-on the basis of the more fundamental com-
outcomes and consequences, and (2) certain individual ponents and the interactions that make them up may facil-
characteristics such as self-esteem, value functions, and itate research on these topics.
self-regulatory strategies. Bettman and Kakkar (1977) found that even in a highly
Task difficulty (Bettman 1979) may also be considered structured task, 16 to 28 percent of the respondents did not
to be the outcome of an interaction between task and in- use the expected information search strategy. Such findings
dividual characteristics. Specifically, cognitive and behav- may be attributable either to stable individual differences
ior construction competencies and task familiarity should or to the interactions between individual differences and
affect task difficulty. The number of alternatives, number task characteristics. Capon and Burke (1980) demonstrated
of attributes per alternative, information format, decision that strong individual-characteristic manipulation will pro-

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Sun, 11 Feb 2024 [Link] +00:00
All use subject to [Link]
190 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH

TABLE 3

INTERACTION EFFECTS INFLUENCING CONSUMER INFORMATION PROCESSING AND DECISION MAKING

Dependent Individual Situational

Study variable(s) trait(s) or task variable(s) Summary of findings

Bither and Attitude change Self-confidence Level of distraction Differences in self-confidence

Wright (1973) influenced the effect of visual
distraction in adjusting receiver
attitude structure. Interaction of
distraction and self-confidence
accounted for 20% of total variance.
Main effect due to self-confidence
accounted for 28% of variance. Main
effect due to level of distraction was
nonsignificant.
Bozinoff and Rated importance of Personal values Usage situation Personal values accounted for 4-5% of
Cohen (1981) product features for measured by the variance of attribute importance,
automobiles, Rokeach Value usage situation accounted for 2-4%
libraries, and stereo Survey of variance of attribute importance,
speakers and interaction of values and usage
situation accounted for 7-9% of
variance of attribute importance
ratings.
Coney and Purchase intentions for Dogmatism, as Purchase situations: Situation by dogmatism interaction
Harmon 12 product measured by the buying for self and accounted for approximately 10% of
(1979) categories (watches, Rokeach Dogmatism "buying for another" total variation in purchase intention.
belts, cameras, etc.) Scale Main effects due to situation and
dogmatism each accounted for less
than 1 % of the variance and were
nonsignificant.
Petty and Attitude toward Product involvement Message quality Interaction between argument type and
Cacioppo shampoo product (importance of (strong vs. weak personal involvement. Strong
(1980) following exposure to product to the arguments), source arguments produced strong attitudes
advertising individual) when personal involvement was high;
less favorable attitudes were
produced by weak arguments in the
strong personal involvement situation.
Weaver and Satisfaction with Expectations (created Feedback Subjects more sensitive to the obtained
Brickman obtained outcome of by information outcome when expectancy was high
(1974) game presented prior to and a win predicted; wins were more
experiment) satisfying if expected and subjects
had high overall expectancies; losses
were made worse by being
unexpected.
Petty, Cacioppo Attitude change Personal relevance Expertise of source, Under conditions of high personal
and Goldman quality of arguments relevance, attitudes were primarily
(1982) influenced by quality of arguments;
under conditions of low personal
relevance, attitudes were primarily
influenced by expertise of source.
Sandell (1968) Reported choice Individual-level 7 situations relating to The person-situation interaction and
behavior for 10 analysis of 31 the behavior of the beverage-situation interaction
beverages (coffee, college students interest: "being really accounted for roughly 3% and 40% of
water, beer, etc.) thirsty," "feeling the total variance, respectively. The
sleepy in the main effects due to person and
afternoon," "reading situation contributed 0.5% and 2.7%
the papers in the to the total variance, respectively.
morning," etc.
Bishop and Witt Leisure behavior, as Individual-level 10 situations relating to The interaction component of the
(1970) measured by the analysis of 140 the behavior of design (person-situation,
leisure response college students interest: "waking up response-situation, and
inventory refreshed on a person-response) accounted for
Saturday morning," approximately 39% of the total
"finished going to variance. The amount of variance
class for the attributable to persons and situations
afternoon," was 4.5% and 2%, respectively.
"returning from the
library after working
on a term paper,"
etc.
Table continued on the opposite page

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Sun, 11 Feb 2024 [Link] +00:00
All use subject to [Link]
 INTERACTION FRAMEWORK OF DECISION MAKING 191

TABLE 3

INTERACTION EFFECTS INFLUENCING CONSUMER INFORMATION PROCESSING AND DECISION MAKING (Continued)

Dependent Individual Situational

Study variable(s) trait(s) or task variable(s) Summary of findings

Belk (1974b) Ratings of 12 Individual-level 9 situations related to The interaction component accounted
hypothetical motion analysis of 100 movie-going: "on a for approximately 43% of the total
pictures on a 5-point students week night with variance. The main effects due to
scale friends of the same person and situation explained 0.9%
sex," "just for and 0.5% of the variance,
something to do," respectively.
etc.
Belk (1975b) Purchase intentions Individual-level 10 fast food The interaction components accounted
relating to 10 fast- analysis of 98 consumption for about 38% of the total variance.
food outlets on a 6- housewives in a situations: "too tired The main effects due to person and
point likelihood scale community to cook dinner," situation explained 8% and 2% of the
"unexpected dinner variance, respectively.
guests," etc.
Belk (1974a) Usage intentions, as Individual-level 9 situations appropriate The interaction components of the
measured by a 5- analysis of 100 to the behavior of design accounted for approximately
point (extremely consumers in a interest: "party for 39% of the total variance. The main
likely-not at all community friends," "meal on a effects due to person and situation
likely) scale for 11 weekday evening," each explained approximately 5% of
meat products etc. the variance.
(hamburger, steak,
chicken, etc.)
Hornik (1982) Time expenditures on Demographic Environmental Interactions between person and
a variety of activities characteristics such variables such as situation variables accounted for
(work, necessities, as sex, age, family, temperature, statistically significant proportions of
homework, and income, etc. weather, presence of the total variance in reported time
leisure) others, and mood behavior. This was especially true for
leisure activities.

NOTE: The specific proportions of variance given in the summaries of the table may be varied by changing the number of treatment conditions and levels of conditions used. The relative
variability of interaction effects and main effects is the primary issue of concern in this table.

duce strong individual effects, and speculated on the nature Empirical demonstrations of the influence of interactions
of the boundary at which task factors become more impor- are not common, but do exist. Table 3 provides a summary
tant than individual differences in determining consumer of representative studies that have found important inter-
choice. If that boundary is conceptualized as a region rather actions between the individual and the task. In almost every
than a line-a region where both the task and individual case, the interaction component accounts for more variance
differences affect choice it would be consistent with the than do main effects components. The practical and theo-
interactionist position. retical implication is that an explicit examination of inter-
Work currently underway on behavioral decision pro- action terms increases the ability to account for variations
cesses has produced further evidence of the importance of in consumer behavior.
interaction effects. Recent work on the framing of outcomes Two recent papers, one by Beach and Mitchell (1978)
(Tversky and Kahneman 1981) clearly indicates that and one by Payne (1982), have reviewed research which
choices among alternatives are a function of the reference demonstrates that information processing in decision mak-
point of the individual and the objective task. This is so ing is highly contingent upon the task. Social psychologists
whether or not the outcome associated with an alternative have recently considered processes by which individuals
is viewed as a loss or as a gain which is, in turn, a func- choose situations (Snyder and Gangestad 1982). To the ex-
tion of both the individual and the way the alternatives are tent that individuals have control over the situations and
presented. Tversky and Kahneman (1981) have proposed tasks they are likely to encounter, they will control their
that the interaction of two sets of factors (1) variations in own behavior to some extent. To the extent that the situa-
the framing of acts, contingencies, and outcomes, and (2) tions (tasks) individuals encounter are of their own choos-
the characteristic nonlinearities of values and decision ing, the elements of the tasks faced by particular individuals
weights of individuals are important determinants of hu- may be so arranged as to facilitate certain responses and
man choice and account for much of the seemingly incon- inhibit others. Thus characteristic information processing
sistent choice behavior observed among decision makers. and decision strategies may develop as a means by which

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Sun, 11 Feb 2024 [Link] +00:00
All use subject to [Link]
 192 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH

consumers can exercise control over their own behavior. In objective task but also of the individual. This process seems
effect, consumers may bring their own behavior under stim- to be quite similar to what Bettman (1979) has called the
ulus control. It may be that characteristic patterns of shop- constructive approach to decision making.
ping such as those identified by Claxton et al. (1974), Individuals cannot respond to tasks without first encoun-
Kiel and Layton (1981), and Furse, Punj, and Stewart tering them. Understanding of consumer behavior may de-
(1982) are reflections of efforts by consumers to control pend not only upon considerations of behaviors that occur
their own behavior by designing a particular task environ- among consumers, but also upon the processes by which
ment. This self-selection of task environments would, pre- individuals find themselves in particular consumption sit-
sumably, grow from personal attributes, including charac- uations in the first place. The explicit examination of person
teristic dispositions, attitudes, and conceptions of self. Thus x task interactions represents a significant step in devel-
any effort to fully capture the interaction between the in- oping such an understanding.
dividual and the task environment must also deal with the The taxonomies of task and individual differences pre-
processes by which individuals choose situations. This is sented in this paper are meant to be neither definitive nor
an area of work that remains to be explored by consumer exhaustive. Rather, an attempt has been made to integrate
researchers. existing literature on task and individual-difference effects
and to demonstrate the validity of the numerous dimensions
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS that have been identified. These dimensions may form a
framework for further taxonomic work and suggest future
A model of consumer choice behavior that explicitly con- avenues of research. Thus the term "interaction" has been
siders not only the task and the individual, but also the used in two different ways: (1) in the statistical or mechan-
interaction between task and individual is more complete istic sense, which implies a distinction between independent
and more useful both in a descriptive and in a predictive and dependent variables, and (2) as a dynamic model of
sense than are models which fail to consider the interaction. behavior that stresses an interaction process by which per-
This does not mean that interactions will always emerge as sons and situations form an interwoven structure (Magnus-
statistically significant or will always account for apprecia- son and Endler 1977). Both uses apply to the interactionist
ble amounts of the variance in consumer behavior. In well- conceptualization proposed here. Mechanistic interactionist
defined, well-structured situations, task effects are likely to studies involving partitioning of variance tell us what the
be the dominant effect. In poorly structured, ill-defined sit- state of affairs is, but do not tell us why. Dynamic inter-
uations, individual differences are likely to be important actionist studies may indicate why.
predictors of behavior. These individual differences are Simon (1981) has suggested that the essence of describ-
most likely to appear in how the individual structures the ing a complex system is the decomposition of that system
situation and task, and in the choice of situations and tasks. into its simpler parts. He further suggests that an under-
To the extent that the consumer has control over the situ- standing of the relationship between the state characteristics
ations and tasks which s/he encounters which is true to of the individual and the characteristics of the process of
some extent in almost all naturally occurring consumer be- adaptation is critical to an understanding of purposeful be-
havior interactions between the individual and the task havior. We have sought to map that relationship, based on
will be significant and important sources of variance. the current literature in consumer behavior, and thus to
The interactionist viewpoint suggests that the behavior provide a foundation for future work. While much has been
of an individual is jointly determined by characteristics both learned, this relationship is far from complete, and we are
of the task and of the individual. It explictly recognizes that still some distance from developing the "taxonomy of rep-
the task influences the individual and that the individual resent, tion" called for by Simon (1981). That taxonomy
influences the task, i.e., "situations are as much a function will map the process by which organisms represent their
of the person as the person's behavior is a function of the externalities and thereby adapt to them. It is an ambitious
situation" (Bowers 1973, p. 327). Wiggins et al. (1971, goal for consumer researchers.
p. 40) suggest that "the effects of experience are always
modified by the organism to which they occur." Thus the [Received March 1982. Revised May 1983.]
situation must be specified in terms of the particular organ-
ism experiencing it (Escalona 1968). This viewpoint is also
REFERENCES
consistent with Piaget's genetic epistemology, which sug-
gests that "the cognizing organism . . . actually constructs Adinolfi, Allen A. (1971), "Relevance of Person Perception to

its world by assimilating it to schemas while accommodat- Clinical Psychology," Journal of Conslulting Psychology, 37
(October), 167-176.
ing these schemas to its constraints" (Flavell 1963, p. 71).
Anderson, Barry F. (1975), CognitiNe Psychology: The Study of
Newell and Simon (1972) make a similar argument that the
Knowing, Learning and Thinking, New York: Academic
objective task or situation is not the sole determiner of the
Press.
behavior of an individual. Rather, the way in which the Anderson, Ralph E. (1973), "Consumer Dissatisfaction: The Ef-
individual defines the task or problem that is, the notion fect of Disconfirmed Expectancy on Perceived Product Per-
of a problem space must be considered. This internal rep- formance," Journal of Marketing Research, 10 (February),
resentation of the task will be a function not only of the 38-44.

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Sun, 11 Feb 2024 [Link] +00:00
All use subject to [Link]
 INTERACTION FRAMEWORK OF DECISION MAKING 193

Bandura, Albert (1978), "The Self System in Reciprocal Deter- ioral Variance During Leisure Time," Journal of Personalitv
minism," American Psychologist, 33 (April), 344-358. and Social Psychology, 16 (October), 352-360.
Bauer, Raymond B. (1960), "Consumer Behavior as Risk Tak- Bither, Stewart W. and Peter L. Wright (1973), "The Self-Con-
ing," in Dynamic Marketing in a Changing World, ed. R. fidence-Advertising Response Relationship: A Function of
Hancock, Chicago: American Marketing Association, Situational Distraction," Journal of Marketing Research, 10
389-398. (May), 146-152.
Beach, Lee Roy and Terence R. Mitchell (1978), "A Contingency Bowers, Kenneth S. (1973), "Situationism in Psychology: An
Model for the Selection of Decision Strategies," Academy Analysis and a Critique," Psvchological Review, 80 (Sep-
of Management Review, 3 (July), 439-449. tember), 307-336.
Becker, Boris W. and Patrick E. Connor (1982), "The Influence Bozinoff, Lorne and Robert Cohen (1981), "An Interactionist
of Personal Values on Attitude and Store Choice Behavior," Approach to Consumer Behavior," Working paper No. 113,
An Assessment of Marketing Thought and Practice, 1982 College of Business Administration, Pennsylvania State
Educators' Conference Proceedings, Series No. 48, Chicago: University, University Park, PA.
American Marketing Association, 21-24. Brehmer, Berndt (1969), "Cognitive Dependence on Additive and
Becker, Gordon M. and Charles G. McClintock (1967), "Value: Configural Cue-Criterion Relations," American Journal of
Behavioral Decision Theory," Annual Review of Psychology, Psychology, 82 (December), 490-503.
18, 239-286. Brucks, Marie and Andrew Mitchell (1981), "Knowledge Struc-
Belk, Russell W. (1974a), "Application and Analysis of the Be- tures, Production Systems and Decision Strategies," in Ad-
havioral Differential Inventory for Assessing Situational Ef- vances in Consumer Research, Vol. 8, ed. Kent B. Monroe,
fects in Buyer Behavior," in Advances in Consumer Re- Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research,
search, Vol. 1, eds. Scott Ward and Peter Wright, Ann 750-757.
Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 158-161. Capon, Noel and Marion Burke (1980), "Individual Product
(1974b) "An Exploratory Assessment of Situational Ef- Class, and Task-Related Factors in Consumer Information
fects in Buyer Behavior," Journal of Marketing Research, Processing," Journal of Consumer Research, 7 (December),
11 (May), 156-163. 314-326.
(1975a), "Situational Variables and Consumer Behav- Carver, Charles S. and Michael F. Scheier (1982), "Control The-
ior," Journal of Consunmer Research, 2 (December), ory: A Useful Conceptual Framework for Personality-Social,
157-164. Clinical, and Health Psychology," Psychological Bulletin,
(1975b), "The Objective Situation as a Determinant of 92 (July), 111-135.
Consumer Behavior," in Advances in Consumer Research, Chestnut, Robert W. (1976), "The Impact of Energy-Efficiency
Vol. 2, ed. Mary Jane Schlinger, Ann Arbor, MI: Associa- Ratings: Selective vs. Elaborative Encoding," Purdue Pa-
tion for Consumer Research, 455-463. pers in Consumer Psychology, No. 154, West Lafayette, IN:
Bell, Gerald P. (1967), "Self-Confidence and Persuasion in Car Department of Psychology, Purdue University.
Buying," Journal of Marketing Research, 4 (February), and Jacob Jacoby (1977), "Consumer Information Pro-
46-52. cessing: Emerging Theory and Findings, in Consumer and
Bem, Daryl J. (1972), "Self-Perception Theory," in Advances in Industrial Buying Behavior, eds. A. G. Woodside, J. N.
Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 6, ed. Leonard Ber- Sheth, and P. D. Bennett, New York: Elsevier North-Hol-
kowitz, New York: Academic Press, 1-62. land.
and Andrea Allen (1974), "On Predicting Some of the Claxton, John D., Joseph N. Fry, and Bernard Portis (1974), "A
People Some of the Time: The Search for Cross-Situational Taxonomy of Prepurchase Information Gathering Patterns,"
Consistencies in Behavior," PsVchological Revieu, 81 (No- Journal of Consumer Resear-ch, 1 (December), 35-42.
vember), 506-520. Cohen, Guido B. (1968), The Task-Tuned Organization of
and David C. Funder (1978), "Predicting More of the Groups, Amsterdam: Swets en Zeitlinger.
People More of the Time: Assessing the Personality of Sit- Coney, Kenneth A. and Robert R. Harmon (1979), "Dogmatism
uations," Psychological Review, 85 (November), 485-501. and Innovation: A Situational Perspective," in Advances in
Bettman, James R. (1979), An Information Processing Theory of Consumer Behavior, Vol. 6, ed. William Wilkie, Ann Arbor,
Consumer Choice, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. MI: Association for Consumer Research, 118-121.
and Pradeer Kakkar (1977), "Effects of Information Pre- Cox, Donald F. (1967), "The Influence of Cognitive Needs and
sentation Format on Consumer Information Acquisition Strat- Styles on Information Handling in Making Product Evalua-
egies," Journal of Consumer Research, 3 (March), 233-240. tions," in Risk Takinig and Ihfor-mation Handlinig in Coni-
and C. Whan Park (1980a), "Effects of Prior Knowledge sumer Behavior, ed. Donald F. Cox, Boston: Harvard Uni-
and Experience and Phase of the Choice Process on Con- versity Press, 370-392.
sumer Decision Processes: A Protocol Analysis," Journal of Crow, Lowell E., Richard W. Olshavsky, and John 0. Summers
Consumer Research, 7 (December), 234-248. (1980), "Industrial Buyers' Choice Strategies: A Protocol
and C. Whan Park (1980b), "Implications of a Construc- Analysis," Journal of Marketing Research, 17 (February),
tive View of Choice for Analysis of Protocol Data: A Coding 34-44.
Scheme for Elements of Choice Processes," in Advances in Davis, Harry L. (1976), "Decision Making within the House-
Consumer Research, Vol. 7, ed. Jerry C. Olson, Ann Arbor, hold," Journal of Consumer Research, 2 (March), 241-260.
MI: Association for Consumer Research, 148-153. Dawes, Robyn M. (1975), "The Mind, The Model, and The
and Michael A. Zins (1977), "Constructive Processes in Task," in Cognitive Theory, Vol. 1, eds. Frank Restle et al.
Consumer Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, 3 (Sep- Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 119-139.
tember), 75-85. DeBruicker, F. Stewart (1979), "An Appraisal of Low-Involve-
Bishop, Doyle W. and Peter A. Witt (1970), "Sources of Behav- ment Consumer Information Processing," in Attitude Re-

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Sun, 11 Feb 2024 [Link] +00:00
All use subject to [Link]
 194 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH

search Plays for High Stakes, eds. J. C. Malone and B. Some Results from a Preliminary Experiment," in Contem-
Silberman, Chicago: American Marketing Association, porary Marketing Thought, eds. Barnett A. Greenberg and
112-130. Danny N. Bellenger, Chicago: American Marketing Asso-
Dickson, Peter R. (1982), "Person-Situation: Segmentations's ciation, 461-466.
Missing Link," Journal of Marketing, 46 (Fall), 56-64. Greeno, Daniel W., Montrose S. Sommers, and Jerome B. Kernan
Dillon, William R., Donald G. Frederick, and Vanchai Tangpan- (1973), "Personality and Implicit Behavior Patterns," Jour-
ichdee (1982), "A Note on Accounting for Sources of Var- nal of Marketing Research, 10 (February), 63-69.
iation in Perceptual Maps," Journal of Marketing Research, Hansen, Flemming (1969), "Consumer Choice Behavior: An Ex-
19 (August), 302-311. perimental Approach," Journal of Marketing Research, 6
Dover, Phillip A. and Jerry C. Olson (1977), "Dynamic Changes (November), 436-443.
in an Expectancy-Value Attitude Model as a Function of (1976), "Psychological Theories of Consumer Choice,"
Multiple Exposures to Product Information," in Contenmpo- Journal of Consumer Research, 3 (September), 117-142.
rary Marketing Tholught, eds. Barnett A. Greenberg and Hawkins, C. K. and John T. Lanzetta (1965), "Uncertainty, Im-
Danny N. Bellenger, Chicago: American Marketing Asso- portance and Arousal as Determinants of Predecisional In-
ciation, 455-460. formation Search," Psychological Reports, 17 (December),
Duncan, Calvin P. and Richard W. Olshavsky (1982), "External 791-800.
Search: The Role of Consumer Beliefs," Journal of Mar- Henry, Walter A. (1980). "The Effect of Information Processing
keting Research, 19 (February), 32-43. Ability on Processing Accuracy," Journal of Consumer Re-
Edwards, Ward (1954), "The Theory of Decision Making," Psy- search, 7 (June), 42-48.
chological Bulletin, 51 (April), 380-417. Hornik, Jacob (1982), "Situational Effects on the Consumption
Einhorn, Hilliel J. (1971), "Uses of Nonlinear, Noncompensatory of Time," Journal of Marketing, 46 (Fall), 44-55.
Models as a Function of Task and Amount of Information," Horton, Raymond L. (1979), "Some Relationships Between Per-
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 6 (Jan- sonality and Decision Making," Journal of Marketing Re-
uary), 1-27. search, 16 (May), 233-246.
Ekehammar, Bo (1974), "Interactionism in Personality from a Howard, John A. and Jagdish N. Sheth (1969), The Theory of
Historical Perspective," Psychological Bulletin, 81 (Decem- Buyer Behavior, New York: John Wiley.
ber), 1026-1048. Huber, Joel and Joel McCann (1982), "The Impact of Inferential
Endler, Norman S. and David Magnusson (1976), "Personality Beliefs on Product Evaluations," Journal of Marketinig Re-
and Person by Situation Interactions," in Interactional Psv- search, 19 (August), 324-333.
chology and Personality, eds. Norman S. Endler and David Jacoby, Jacob, George J. Szybillo, and Jacqueline Basato-Schach
Magnusson, Washington, D.C.: Hemisphere. (1977), "Information Acquisition Behavior in Brand Choice
Escalona, Sybille K. (1968), The Roots of Individuality, Chicago: Situations," Journal of Consumer Research, 3 (March),
Aldine. 209-216.
Eysenck, Hans J. (1961), "Classification and the Problem of Di- , Robert W. Chestnut, and William A. Fisher (1978), "A
agnosis," in Handbook of Abnormal Psychology, ed. Hans Behavioral Process Approach to Information Acquisition in
J. Eysenck, New York: Basic Books. Nondurable Purchasing," Journal of Marketing Research,
Fishbein, Martin and Icek Ajzen (1975), Belief, Attitude, Inten- 15 (November), 532-544.
tion, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory anid Research, , Robert W. Chestnut, Karl T. Weigel, and William Fisher
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. (1976), "Pre-Purchase Information Acquisition: Description
Flavell, John H. (1963), The Developmental Psychology of Jean of a Process Methodology, Research Paradigm, and Pilot
Piaget: With a Foreword by Jean Piaget, Princeton, NJ: Van Investigation," in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 3,
Nostrand. ed. Beverlee B. Anderson, Chicago: Association for Con-
Furse, David H., Girish N. Punj, and David W. Stewart (1982), sumer Research, 306-314.
"Individual Search Strategies in New Automobile Pur- Kantor, J. Robert (1926), Principles of Psychology, Vol. 2,
chases," in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 9, ed. Bloomington, IL: Principia Press.
Andrew Mitchell, Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Kanwar, Rajesh, Jerry C. Olson, and Laura S. Sims (1981),
Research, 379-384. "Toward Conceptualizing and Measuring Cognitive Struc-
Gagne, Robert M. (1965). The Conditions of Learning, New tures," in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 8, ed. Kent
York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. B. Monroe, Chicago: Association for Consumer Research,
Gardner, Meryl P., Andrew A. Mitchell, and J. Edward Russo 122-127.
(1978), "Chronometric Analysis: An Introduction and an Kassarjian, Harold H. (1981), "Low Involvement: A Second
Application to Low Involvement Perception of Advertise- Look, " in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 8, ed. Kent
ments, " in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 5, ed. H. B. Monroe, Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Re-
Keith Hunt, Chicago: Association for Consumer Research, search, 31-34.
581-589. (1971), "Personality and Consumer Behavior: A Re-
Gatewood, Robert D. and Robert Perloff (1973), "An Experi- view," Journal of Marketing Research, 8 (November),
mental Investigation of Three Methods of Providing Weight 409-418.
and Price Information to Consumer," Journal of Applied Katona, George and Eva Mueller (1955), "A Study of Purchase
Psychology, 57 (February), 81-85. Decisions," in Consumer Behavior: The Dynamics of Con-
Green, Paul E. and Yoram Wind (1973), Multiattribute Decisions sumer Reaction, ed. Lincoln H. Clark, New York: New York
in Marketing, Hinsdale, IL: Dryden. University Press, 30-87.
Green, R., Andrew A. Mitchell, and Richard Staelin (1977), Kelly, George (1955), The Psychology of Personal Constructs,
"Longitudinal Decision Studies Using a Process Approach: New York: Basic Books.

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Sun, 11 Feb 2024 [Link] +00:00
All use subject to [Link]
 INTERACTION FRAMEWORK OF DECISION MAKING 195

Kernan, Jerome B. (1968), "Choice Criteria, Decision Behavior, Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 191-196.
and Personality," Journal of Marketing Research, 5 (May), Nakanishi, M. (1972). "Personality and Consumer Behavior: Ex-
155-164. tensions," Proceedings, Ann Arbor, MI: Association for
Kiel, Geoffrey C. and Roger S. Layton (1981), "Dimensions of Consumer Research, 61-65.
Consumer Information Seeking Behavior," Journal of Mar- Newell, Alan and Herbert A. Simon (1972), Human Problemn
keting Research, 18 (May), 233-239. Solving, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Kourilsky, Marilyn and Trudy Murray (1981), "The Use of Eco- Newman, Joseph W. (1977), "Consumer External Search:
nomic Reasoning to Increase Satisfaction with Family De- Amount and Determinants," in Consumer anid Industrial
cision Making," Journal of Conisumer Research, 8 (Septem- Buying Behavior, eds. Arch G. Woodside, Jagdish N. Sheth,
ber), 183-188. and Peter D. Bennett, New York: Elsevier North-Holland.
Lehmann, Donald R., and William L. Moore (1980), "Validity and Richard Staelin (1972), "Prepurchase Information
of Information Display Boards: An Assessment Using Lon- Seeking for New Cars and Major Household Appliances,"
gitudinal Data," Journal of Marketing Research, 17 (No- Journal of Marketing Research, 9 (August), 249-257.
vember), 450-459. Olander, Folke (1975), "Search Behavior in Non-Simultaneous
Lewin, Kurt (1939), "Field Theory and Experiment in Social Choice Situations: Satisficing or Maximizing," in Utility,
Psychology: Concepts and Methods," Americani Journal of Probability and Human Decision Making, eds. D. Wendt and
Sociology, 44 (May), 868-897. C. A. J. Ulek, Dordrect, Holland: D. Reidel.
Lussier, Denis A. and Richard W. Olshavsky (1979), "Task Oliver, Richard L. (1977), "Effect of Expectation and Disconfir-
Complexity and Contingent Processing in Brands Choice," mation on Post-Exposure Product Evaluations: An Alterna-
Journal of Consumer Research, 6 (September), 154-165. tive Interpretation," Journal of Applied Psychology, 62 (Au-
Magnusson, David and Norman S. Endler (1977), "Interactional gust), 480-486.
Psychology: Present Status and Future Prospects," in Per- Olshavsky, Richard W. (1979), "Task Complexity and Contin-
sonality at the Crossroads: Currenit Issues in Intertational gent Processing in Decision Making: A Replication anid Ex-
Psychology, eds. David Magnusson and Norman S. Endler, tension," Organzizational Behavior and Hutman Perfor-
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. mance, 24 (December), 300-316.
Marks, Lawrence J., and Jerry C. Olson (1981), "Toward a Cog- and John A. Miller (1972), "Consumer Expectations,
nitive Structure Conceptualization of Product Familiarity," Product Performance, and Perceived Product Quality," Jour-
in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 8, ed. Kent B. nal of Marketing Research, 9 (February), 19-21.
Monroe, Chicago: Association for Consumer Research, and M. Smith (1980), "A Taxonomy of Brand Choice
145-150. Environments," in Proceedings of the Division 23 Program
Massy, William F., Ronald E. Frank, and T. M. Lodahl (1968), of the 88th Annual Convention of the American Psychological
Purchasing Behavior and Personal Attributes, Philadelphia: Association, eds. Gerald J. Gorn and Marvin E. Goldberg,
University of Pennsylvania Press. Montreal: American Psychological Association, Division 23,
Mazis, Michael B., and Timothy W. Sweeney (1973), "Novelty 145-154.
and Personality with Risk as a Moderating Variable," in Olson, Jerry C. and Phillip A. Dover (1979), "Disconfirmation
1972 Combined Proceedings, eds. Boris W. Berkers and of Consumer Expectations Through Product Trial," Journal
Helmut Becker, Chicago: American Marketing Association, of Applied Psychology, 64 (April), 179-189.
401-411. Park, C. W. (1978), "A Seven-Point Scale and a Decision-
Miller, George A., Eugene Galanter, and Karl H. Pribram (1960), Maker's Simplifying Choice Strategy: An Operationalized
Plans and the Structure of Behavior, New York: Holt, Satisfying-Plus Model," Organizational Behavior and Hu-
Rinehart, & Winston. man Performance, 21 (April), 252-271.
Miller, R. B. (1962), "Task Description and Analysis," in Psy- and Richard J. Lutz (1982), "Decision Plans and Con-
chological Principles in System Development, ed. R. M. sumer Choice Dynamics," Journal of Marketing Research,
Gagne, New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston. 19 (February), 108-115.
Miller, Stephen J. and William G. Zikmund (1975), "A Multi- Payne, John W. (1976), "Task Complexity and Contingent Pro-
variate Analysis of Prepurchase Deliberation and External cessing in Decision Making: An Information Search and Pro-
Search Behavior," in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. tocol Analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Per-
2, ed. Mary Jane Schlinger, Chicago: Association for Con- formance, 16 (August), 366-387.
sumer Research, 187-196. (1982), "Contingent Decision Behavior," Psychological
Mischel, Walter (1973), "Toward a Cognitive Social Learning Bulletin, 92 (September), 382-402.
Reconceptualization of Personality," Psychological Review, Petty, Richard E. and John T. Cacioppo (1979), "Issue Involve-
80 (July), 252-285. ment Can Increase or Decrease Persuasion by Enhanc-
- Ebbe B. Ebbesen, and Antonette R. Zeiss (1973), "Se- ing Message-Relevant Cognitive Responses," Journal of
lective Attention to the Self: Situational and Dispositional Personality and Social Psychology, 37 (October), 1915-
Determinants," Journal of Personality and Social Psychol- 1926.
ogy, 27 (July), 129-142. and John T. Cacioppo (1980), "Effects of Issue Involve-
and Charlotte J. Patterson (1976), "Substantive and Struc- ment on Attitude in an Advertising Context," in Proceedings
tural Elements of Effective Plans for Self-Control," Journal of the Division 23 Program of the 88th Annual Convention
of Personality and Social Psychology, 34 (November), of the American Psychological Association, eds. Gerald L.
942-950. Gom and Marvin E. Goldberg, Montreal: American Psycho-
Mitchell, Andrew A. (1979), "Involvement: A Potentially Im- logical Association, Division 23, 75-79.
portant Mediator of Consumer Behavior," in Advances in - John T. Cacioppo, and Rachel Goldman (1982), "Per-
Consumer Research, Vol. 6, ed. William L. Wilkie, Ann sonal Involvement as a Determinant of Argument-Based Per-

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Sun, 11 Feb 2024 [Link] +00:00
All use subject to [Link]
 196 THE JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH

suasion," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40 ment," Organizational Behavior and Human Performance,
(November), 847-855. 11 (April), 172-194.
Powers, William T. (1973), Behavior: The Control of Perception, Snyder, Mark and Steve Gangestad (1982), "Choosing Social
Chicago: Aldine. Situations: Two Investigations of Self-Monitoring Pro-
van Raaij, W. Fred (1977), "Consumer Information Processing cesses," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40
for Different Information Structures and Formats," in Ad- (January), 123-135.
vances in Consumer Research, Vol. 4, ed. William D. Per- Staelin, Richard and John W. Payne (1976), "Studies of the In-
rault Jr., Chicago: Association for Consumer Research, formation Seeking Behavior of Consumers," in Cognition
176-184. and Social Behavior, eds. J. Carroll and J. W. Payne, New
Ray, Michael (1973), Marketing Communication and the Hier- York: Lawrence Erlbaum, 185-202.
archy of Effects," in Sage Annual Reviews in Communica- Swan, John E. (1972), "Search Behavior Related to Expectations
tion Research, eds. F. Gerald Kline and Peter Clark, Beverly Concerning Brand Performance," Journal of Applied Psy-
Hills, CA: Sage Publications. chology, 56 (August), 332-335.
(1979), "Involvement and Other Variables Mediating Taylor, James W. (1974), "The Role of Risk in Consumer Be-
Communication Effects as Opposed to Explaining All Con- havior," Journal of Marketing, 38 (April), 54-60.
sumer Behavior," in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. Thaler, Richard and H. M. Shiffrin (1981), "An Economic The-
6, ed. William L. Wilkie, Ann Arbor, MI: Association for ory of Self-Control," Journal of Political Economy, 89
Consumer Research, 191-196. (April), 392-406.
Rokeach, Milton (1960), The Open and Closed Mind, New York: Thorelli, Hans B., Helmut Becker, and Jack Engeldow (1975),
Basic Books. The Information Seekers, Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
Roselius, Ted (1971), "Consumer Rankings of Risk Reduction Tversky, Amos and Daniel Kahneman (1981), "The Framing of
Methods," Journal of Marketing, 35 (January), 56-61. Decisions and the Psychology of Choice," Science, 211,
Russo, J. Edward, Gene Krieser, and Sally Miyashita (1975), 453-458.
"An Effective Display of Unit Price Information," Journal Weaver, Donald W. and Philip Brickman (1974), "Expectancy,
of Marketing, 39 (April), 11-19. Feedback, and Disconfirmation as Independent Factors in
Sandell, Rolf G. (1968), "Effects of Attitudinal and Situational Outcome Satisfaction," Journal of Personality and Social
Factors on Reported Choice Behavior," Journal of Market- Psychology, 30 (October), 420-428.
ing Research, 5 (November), 405-408. Wells, William D. (1975), "Psychographics: A Critical Review,"
Schaninger, Charles M. and Donald Sciglimpaglia (1980), "The Journal of Marketing Research, 12 (May), 196-213.
Identification of Specific Information Acquisition Patterns in and Arthur D. Beard (1973), "Personality and Consumer
Information Display Board Tasks, and their Relation to De- Behavior," in Consumer Behavior. Theoretical Sources, eds.
mographics," in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 7, Scott Ward and Thomas S. Robertson, Englewood Cliffs,
ed. Jerry C. Olson, Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Con- NJ: Prentice-Hall.
sumer Research, 513-518. Wiggins, Jerry A., K. Edward Renner, Gerald L. Clore, and
and Donald Sciglimpaglia (1981), "The Influence of Cog- R. J. Rose (1971), The Psychology of Personality, Reading,
nitive Personality Traits and Demographics on Consumer In- MA: Addison-Wesley.
formation Acquisition," Journal of Consumer Research, 8 Wright, Peter L. (1973), "The Cognitive Processes Mediating
(September), 208-216. Acceptance of Advertising," Journal of Marketinig Research,
Schelling, Thomas C. (1978), "Economics, or the Art of Self- 10 (February), 53-62.
Management," The American Economic Review, 68(2), (1974a), "Analyzing Media Effects on Advertising Re-
290-294. sponses," Public Opinion Quarterly, 38 (Summer),
Shaw, Marvin E. (1976), Group Dynamics: The Psychology of 192-205.
Small Group Behavior, New York: McGraw-Hill. (1974b), "The Use of Phased, Noncompensatory Strate-
Sieber, J. E., and John T. Lanzetta (1964), "Conflict and Con- gies in Decisions Between Multi-Attribute Products," un-
ceptual Structure as Determinants of Decision-Making Be- published manuscript, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
havior," Journal of Personality, 32 (December), 622-641. (1974c), "The Harassed Decision Maker: Time Pressures,
Simon, Herbert A. (1981), The Sciences of the Artificial, Cam- Distractions, and the Use of Evidence," Journal of Applied
bridge, MA: MIT Press. Psychology, 59 (November), 555-561.
Skinner, B. F. (1953), Science and Human Behavior, New York: (1975), "Consumer Choice Strategies: Simplifying vs.
Free Press. Optimizing," Journal of Marketing Research, 11 (February),
Slovic, Paul (1975), "Choice Between Equally Valued Alterna- 60-67.
tives," Journal of Experimental Psychology: Hutman Per- and Frederic Barbour (1977), "Phased Decision Strate-
ception and Performance, 1 (August), 280-287. gies: Sequels to an Initial Screening," in North Holland!
and Sarah Lichtenstein (1971), "Comparison of Bayesian TIMS Studies in the Management Sciences: Multiple Criteria
and Regression Approaches to the Study of Information Pro- Decision Making, Vol. 6, eds. M. K. Starr and Milan Zeleny,
cessing in Judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Amsterdam: North-Holland, 91-109.
Performance, 6 (November), 649-744. and Barton Weitz (1977), "Time Horizon Effects on
and Douglas MacPhillamy (1974), "Dimensional Com- Product Evaluation Strategies," Journal of Marketing Re-
mensurability and Cue Utilization in Comparative Judg- search, 14 (November), 429-443.

This content downloaded from

[Link] on Sun, 11 Feb 2024 [Link] +00:00
All use subject to [Link]