Measuring Information Preferences

References

• Ajzen I, Fishbein M (1977) Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psych. Bull. 84(5):888–918.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Antonovsky A (1993) The structure and properties of the sense of coherence scale. Soc. Sci. Medicine 36(6):725–733.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Asparouhov T, Muthén B (2009) Exploratory structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Model. 16(3):397–438.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Azen R, Budescu DV (2003) The dominance analysis approach for comparing predictors in multiple regression. Psych. Methods 8(2):129–148.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Azen R, Traxel N (2009) Using dominance analysis to determine predictor importance in logistic regression. J. Ed. Behav. Statist. 34(3):319–347.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bazerman MH, Sezer O (2016) Bounded awareness: Implications for ethical decision making. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 136:95–105.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cacioppo JT, Petty RE, Kao CF (1984) The efficient assessment of need for cognition. J. Personality Assessment 48:306–307.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Caplin A, Eliaz K (2003) AIDS policy and psychology: A mechanism-design approach. RAND J. Econom. 34(4):631–646.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cassidy S (2004) Learning Styles: An overview of theories, models, and measures. Ed. Psych. 24(4):419–444.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cheung GW, Rensvold RB (2002) Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Model. 9(2):233–255.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cialdini RB, Trost MR, Newsom JT (1995) Preference for consistency: The development of a valid measure and the discovery of surprising behavioral implications. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 69(2):318–328.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Druckman JN, Peterson E, Slothuus R (2013) How elite partisan polarization affects public opinion formation. Amer. Political Sci. Rev. 107(01):57–79.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eil D, Rao JM (2011) The good news-bad news effect: Asymmetric processing of objective information about yourself. Amer. Econom. J. Microeconom. 3(2):114–138.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elbel B, Kersh R, Brescoll VL, Dixon LB (2009) Calorie labeling and food choices: A first look at the effects on low-income people in New York City. Health Affairs 28(6):w1110–w1121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eliaz K, Schotter A (2007) Experimental testing of intrinsic preferences for non-instrumental information. Amer. Econom. Rev. 97(2):166–169.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Falk A, Zimmermann F (2017) Beliefs and utility: Experimental evidence on preferences for information. Working paper, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.Google Scholar
• Fernandes D, Lynch JG, Netemeyer RG (2014) Financial literacy, financial education, and downstream financial behaviors. Management Sci. 60(8):1861–1883.Link, Google Scholar
• Flora DB, Curran PJ (2004) An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psych. Methods 9(4):466–491.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ganguly A, Tasoff J (2017) Fantasy and dread: The demand for information and the consumption utility of the future. Management Sci. 63(12):3999–4446.Google Scholar
• Gino F, Bazerman MH (2009) When misconduct goes unnoticed: The acceptability of gradual erosion in others’ unethical behavior. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 45(4):708–719.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ginsburg GS, McCarthy JJ (2001) Personalized medicine: Revolutionizing drug discovery and patient care. Trends Biotechnology 19(12):491–496.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gneezy U, Potters J (1997) An experiment on risk taking and evaluation periods. Quart. J. Econom. 112(2):631–645.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Golman R, Hagmann D, Loewenstein G (2017) Information avoidance. J. Econom. Literature 55(1):96–135.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ho E, Budescu D, Por HH (2017) Psychological Challenges in Communicating About Climate Change and Its Uncertainties, Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Change (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Hooper D, Coughlan J, Mullen M (2008) Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic J. Bus. Res. 6(1):53–60.Google Scholar
• Howell JL, Shepperd JA (2016) Establishing an information avoidance scale. Psych. Assessment 28(12):1695–1708.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hu L, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria vs. new alternatives. Structural Equation Model. 6(1):1–55.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jethwani K, Kvedar J, Kvedar J (2010) Behavioral phenotyping: A tool for personalized medicine. Personalized Medicine 7(6):689–693.Crossref, Google Scholar
• John OP, Srivastava S (1999) The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. Pervin LA, John OP, eds. Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research (Guilford Publications, New York), 102–138.Google Scholar
• Kahan DM, Landrum A, Carpenter K, Helft L, Hall Jamieson K (2017) Science curiosity and political information processing: Curiosity and information processing. Political Psych. 38(S1):179–199.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaiser HF (1960) The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Ed. Psych. Measurement 20(1):141–151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kashdan TB, Gallagher MW, Silvia PJ, Winterstein BP, Breen WE, Terhar D, Steger MF (2009) The Curiosity and Exploration Inventory-II: Development, factor structure, and psychometrics. J. Res. Personality 43(6):987–998.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kirby KN, Petry NM, Bickel WK (1999) Heroin addicts have higher discount rates for delayed rewards than non-drug-using controls. J. Experiment. Psych. General 128(1):78–87.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kline RB (2011) Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 3rd ed. (Guilford Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Kőszegi B, Rabin M (2006) A model of reference-dependent preferences. Quart. J. Econom. 121(4):1133–1165.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kőszegi B, Rabin M (2009) Reference-dependent consumption plans. Amer. Econom. Rev. 99(3):909–936.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kruglanski AW (2013) Lay Epistemics and Human Knowledge: Cognitive and Motivational Bases (Springer-Verlag, New York).Google Scholar
• Loewenstein G (1994) The psychology of curiosity: A review and reinterpretation. Psych. Bull. 116(1):75–98.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Loewenstein G (2006) The pleasures and pains of information. Science 312(5774):704–706.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Loewenstein G, O’Donoghue T (2006) “We can do this the easy way or the hard way”: Negative emotions, self-regulation, and the law. Univ. Chicago Law Rev. 73(1):183–206.Google Scholar
• Mardia KV (1970) Measures of multivariate skewness and kurtosis with applications. Biometrika 57(3):519–530.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marsh HW, Guo J, Parker PD, Nagengast B, Asparouhov T, Muthén B, Dicke T (2018) What to do when scalar invariance fails: The extended alignment method for multi-group factor analysis comparison of latent means across many groups. Psych. Methods 23(3):524–545.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marshall G (2014) Don’t Even Think About It: Why Our Brains Are Wired to Ignore Climate Change, 1st ed. (Bloomsbury USA, New York).Google Scholar
• Minson JA, Chen FS, Tinsley CH (2019) Why won’t you listen to me? Measuring receptiveness to opposing views. Management Sci., ePub ahead of print November 5, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3362.Link, Google Scholar
• Mischel W, Shoda Y (1995) A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics. Psych. Rev. 102(2):246–268.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oster E, Shoulson I, Dorsey ER (2013) Optimal expectations and limited medical testing: Evidence from Huntington disease. Amer. Econom. Rev. 103(2):804–830.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rasmussen A, Verkuilen J, Ho E, Fan Y (2015) Posttraumatic stress disorder among refugees: Measurement invariance of Harvard Trauma Questionnaire scores across global regions and response patterns. Psych. Assessment 27(4):1160–1170.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rutkowski L, Svetina D (2014) Assessing the hypothesis of measurement invariance in the context of large-scale international surveys. Ed. Psych. Measurement 74(1):31–57.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schork NJ (2015) Personalized medicine: Time for one-person trials. Nature 520(7549):609–611.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schwarzer R, Jerusalem M (1995) Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale. Johnston M, Wright SC, Weinman J, eds. Measures in Health Psychology: A User’s Portfolio. Causal and Control Beliefs (NFER Nelson, Windsor, UK), 35–37.Google Scholar
• Segerstrom SC, Evans DR, Eisenlohr-Moul TA (2011) Optimism and pessimism dimensions in the Life Orientation Test-Revised: Method and meaning. J. Res. Personality 45(1):126–129.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sicherman N, Loewenstein G, Seppi DJ, Utkus SP (2016) Financial attention. Rev. Financial Stud. 29(4):863–897.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Steiger JH, Lind JC (1980) Statistically-based tests for the number of common factors. Paper presentation, Annual Spring Meeting of the Psychometric Society, May 30, Iowa City, IA.Google Scholar
• Stigler G (1961) The economics of information. J. Political Econom. 69(3):213–225.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sullivan PS, Lansky A, Drake A, HITS-2000 Investigators (2004) Failure to return for HIV test results among persons at high risk for HIV infection: Results from a multistate interview project. J. Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes 35(5):511–518.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sunstein CR (2017) Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sunstein CR (2019a) Ruining popcorn? The welfare effects of information. J. Risk Uncertainty 58(2):121–142.Google Scholar
• Sunstein CR (2019b) Sludge and ordeals. Duke Law J. 1843–1883.Google Scholar
• Swan M (2009) Emerging patient-driven healthcare models: An examination of health social networks, consumer personalized medicine and quantified self-tracking. Internat. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 6(2):492–525.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sweeny K, Melnyk D, Miller W, Shepperd JA (2010) Information avoidance: Who, what, when, and why. Rev. General Psych. 14(4):340–353.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tucker J, Guess A, Barbera P, Vaccari C, Siegel A, Sanovich S, Stukal D, Nyhan B (2018) Social media, political polarization, and political disinformation: A review of the scientific literature. Report, William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, Menlo Park, CA.Google Scholar
• Tucker LR, Lewis C (1973) A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika 38(1):1–10.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vandenberg RJ, Lance CE (2000) A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organ. Res. Methods 3(1):4–70.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Webster DM, Kruglanski AW (1994) Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 67(6):1049–1062.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Woolley K, Risen JL (2018) Closing your eyes to follow your heart: Avoiding information to protect a strong intuitive preference. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 114(2):230–245.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zeelenberg M (1999) Anticipated regret, expected feedback and behavioral decision making. J. Behav. Decision Making 12(2):93–106.Crossref, Google Scholar