2017- Reprints: Marketing
Causal models drive preference between drugs that treat a focal versus multiple symptoms, Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 30(4), 794-806, 2017
K. Saporta-Sorozon, S. Danziger and S. Sloman
(Reprint No. 325)
This research examines the effects of causal beliefs on drug preference. In three studies, 374 undergraduate participants imagined that they suffered from a focal symptom and then indicated their preference between a drug claiming to treat only the focal symptom (single treatment) and a drug claiming to treat the focal symptom and a nonfocal symptom (dual treatment) they thought resulted from a common-cause or from a different cause. Participants who thought that the symptoms resulted from different causes significantly preferred the single treatment drug more and the dual treatment drug less than participants who thought the symptoms resulted from a common-cause. Process analysis yielded a significant mediation effect. Specifically, an individual’s causal model determines preference by affecting the estimates of the potential gain and loss associated with using each drug. Participants who held a common cause model concerning the source of the symptoms thought they would be more likely to need the nonfocal treatment provided by the dual treatment drug and less likely to suffer from side effects when taking this drug, than those with a different-cause model. The results demonstrate the influence of causal structure on judgment and choice.
Remembering friends as not so friendly in competitive and bargaining social interactions, Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 30(4), 987-998, 2017
S. Danziger, D. Disatnik and Y. Shani
(Reprint No. 326)
Shani: Research no.: 00370100
Disatnik: Research no.: 08270100
From children’s schoolyard play to executives’ boardroom negotiations, competitive and bargaining interactions are common to everyday life. Sometimes, the interacting parties are socially close and sometimes not. In this research, we examine how friendship influences memory for actions in such interactions. Dyads consisting of either friends or strangers played a competitive card game (Study 1) or the ultimatum game (Studies 2 and 4) and then recalled the interaction. We find that participants remembered friends’ play as more competitive (Study 1) and less generous (Studies 2 and 4) than strangers’ play, even when friends’ actual play was more generous than that of strangers (Studies 2 and 4). Friendship did not affect recall for one’s own play. In a workplace setting, Study 3 reveals people expect more of work colleagues who are friends than of work colleagues who are acquaintances. Study 4 tests our complete model and shows that people expect more of friends than of strangers and that this difference in expectations explains the less favorable memory for friend’s actions. Our findings are consistent with a negative disconfirmation account whereby people expect their friends to be less competitive and more generous, and when these expectations are violated, people remember friends’ actions more negatively than they actually were. Much research shows positive effects of friendship norms on actual behavior. We demonstrate a negative effect on people’s memory of friends’ behavior in competitive and bargaining social interactions.
When sharing is not caring: Does (un)certainty about bill payment method lead diners to consume more and spend more money? Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 30(2), 453-461, 2017
Y. Shani
(Reprint No. 336)
Research no. : 00360100
Previous work has demonstrated that unacquainted participants in an experimental, restaurant-like setting consume more when they know in advance that the bill will be split evenly rather than paid according to individual consumption. Real life, however, often differs from these experimental settings in two important ways. First, unlike random groups of participants, diners who eat together are frequently friends or colleagues. Second, payment method (even vs. individual payment) is usually unknown (i.e.uncertain) at the time people place their orders, and is determined when the check arrives. The current research tests the ecological validity of the association between consumption amount and payment method. Study 1 was conducted in a natural setting with organic groups of diners. Some were asked to state their desired payment method before ordering (Certain condition); others did so only after asking for the check (Uncertain condition). In both conditions, even payment (as opposed to individual payment) was associated with greater consumption amount. However, overall, consumption amount was lower among diners in the Uncertain condition than among those in the Certain condition. Study 2 presents a controlled follow-up experiment showing that eliminating diners’ prior expectations regarding the payment method—by informing them that the payment method will be randomly determined after the consumption decision—eliminates the relationship between payment method and consumption amount. This study further indicates that when diners are uncertain what the payment method will be, even bill-splitting has negative implications for their subsequent social interactions, expressed in retribution tendencies.
