Process Utility and the Effect of Inaction Frames

References

• Anderson NH (1971) Integration theory and attitude change. Psych. Rev. 78(3):171–206.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baron J, Ritov I (1994) Reference points and omission bias. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 59(3):475–498.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bettman JR, Luce MF, Payne JW (1998) Constructive consumer choice processes. J. Consumer Res. 25(3):187–217.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brown CL, Krishna A (2004) The skeptical shopper: A metacognitive account for the effects of default options on choice. J. Consumer Res. 31(3):529–539.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cross SE, Madson L (1997) Models of the self: Self-construals and gender. Psych. Bull. 122(1):5–37.Crossref, Google Scholar
• deCharms R (1968) Personal Causation: The Internal Affective Determinants of Behavior (Academic Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Deci EL (1975) Intrinsic Motivation (Plenum, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dinner IM, Johnson EJ, Goldstein DG, Liu K (2011) Partitioning default effects: Why people choose not to choose. J. Experiment. Psych. Appl. 17(4):332–341.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Duttwiller M (2006) Liability for omission in international criminal law. Internat. Criminal Law Rev. 6(1):1–61.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Evangelidis I, Levav J (2013) Prominence versus dominance: How relationships between alternatives drive decision strategy and choice. J. Marketing Res. 50(6):753–766.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fischer GW, Hawkins SA (1993) Strategy compatibility, scale compatibility, and the prominence effect. J. Experiment. Psych. Human Perception Performance 19(3):580–597.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goldstein DG, Dinner IM (2013) A fairly mechanical method for policy innovation. van Trijp HCM, ed. Encouraging Sustainable Behavior (Psychology Press, New York), 55–68.Google Scholar
• Goldstein DG, Johnson EJ, Herrmann A, Heitmann M (2008) Nudge your customers toward better choices. Harvard Bus. Rev. 86(12):99–105.Google Scholar
• Goswami I, Urminsky O (2016) When should the ask be a nudge? The effect of default amounts on charitable donations. J. Marketing Res. 53(5):829–846.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hayes AF (2013) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis (Guilford Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Hilton DJ, Slugoski BR (1986) Knowledge-based causal attribution: The abnormal conditions focus model. Psych. Rev. 93(1):75–88.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johnson EJ, Goldstein DG (2003) Do defaults save lives? Science 302(5649):1338–1339.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2):263–91.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Tversky A (1982) The psychology of preferences. Sci. Amer. 246(1):160–173.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Knetsch JL, Thaler RH (1991) Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. J. Econom. Perspect. 5(1):193–206.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lakens D (2013) Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers Psych. 4(article 863):1–12.Google Scholar
• Landman J (1987) Regret and elation following action and inaction: Affective responses to positive versus negative outcomes. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 13(4):524–536.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Markus HR, Kitayama S (1991) Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psych. Rev. 98(2):224–253.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McKenzie CRM, Liersch MJ, Finkelstein SR (2006) Recommendations implicit in policy defaults. Psych. Sci. 17(5):414–420.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ritov I, Baron J (1995) Outcome knowledge, regret, and omission bias. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 64(2):119–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Samuelson W, Zeckhauser R (1988) Status quo bias in decision making. J. Risk Uncertainty 1(1):7–59.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Savage LJ (1954) The Foundations of Statistics (Wiley, New York).Google Scholar
• Shafir E, Diamond P, Tversky A (1997) Money illusion. Quart. J. Econom. 112(2):341–374.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shafir E, Simonson I, Tversky A (1993) Reason-based choice. Cognition 49(1–2):11–36.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shen L, Urminsky O (2013) Making sense of nonsense: The visual salience of units determines sensitivity to magnitude. Psych. Sci. 24(3):297–304.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shweder RA, Bourne EJ (1984) Does the concept of the person vary cross-culturally? Shweder RA, Levine RA, eds. Cultural Theory: Essays on Mind, Self, and Emotion (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA), 158–199.Google Scholar
• Simonson I (1989) Choice based on reasons: The case of attraction and compromise effects. J. Consumer Res. 16(2):158–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simonson I, Tversky A (1992) Choice in context: Tradeoff contrast and extremeness aversion. J. Marketing Res. 29(3):281–295.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Slovic P (1995) The construction of preference. Amer. Psychologist 50(5):364–371.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thaler RH (1980) Towards a positive theory of consumer choice. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 1(1):39–60.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thaler RH (1981) Some empirical evidence on dynamic inconsistency. Econom. Lett. 8(3):201–207.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thaler RH (1985) Mental accounting and consumer choice. Marketing Sci. 4(3):199–214.Link, Google Scholar
• Thaler RH, Sunstein CR (2008) Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happiness (Penguin Books, New York).Google Scholar
• Troutman CM, Shanteau J (1976) Do consumers evaluate products by adding or averaging attribute information? J. Consumer Res. 3(2):101–106.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211(4481):453–458.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1991) Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model. Quart. J. Econom. 106(4):1039–1061.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Shafir E (1992) The disjunction effect in choice under uncertainty. Psych. Sci. 3(5):305–309.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Sattath S, Slovic P (1988) Contingent weighting in judgment and choice. Psych. Rev. 95(3):371–384.Crossref, Google Scholar
• von Neumann J, Morgenstern O (1947) Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Wu S, Keysar B (2007) The effect of culture on perspective taking. Psych. Sci. 18(7):600–606.Crossref, Google Scholar