Abstract

Prior academic research and common sense assume that differences in attribute importance weights should determine choice. All else equal, consumers are presumed to prefer products that in their view are superior along the products’ most important—or so-called “prominent”—dimensions. This dissertation examines to what extent people use prominence (i.e., relative attribute importance) when constructing their preference and shows that the decision process exerts an influence on choice that is not captured by the classic theories.

First, we argue that the use of prominence in choice depends on the perceived reliability of the prominent attribute. When values associated with the prominent attribute are not perceived to be as reliable as values associated with the non-prominent attribute, decision-makers are more likely to make choices that are inconsistent with their attribute preferences. Second, we argue that the use of prominence in choice depends on the presence of relational properties between the alternatives under consideration. We found that decision-makers are less likely to employ prominence when expressing their preference about alternatives from a choice set in which dominance or compromise relationships are present. This dissertation holds implications for product line management and choice architecture.

Additional Metadata
Keywords Prominence, Attribute, Number of Alternatives, Dominance, Compromise, Context Effects, Preference Construction, Disaster Donation, Heuristics, Policy-making
Promotor S.M.J. van Osselaer (Stijn)
Publisher Erasmus Research Institute of Management
Sponsor S. Puntoni (Stefano) , B.G.C. Dellaert (Benedict) , Erasmus Research Institute of Management , Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR)
ISBN 978-90-5892-396-7
Persistent URL hdl.handle.net/1765/78202
Series ERIM Ph.D. Series Research in Management
Citation
Evangelidis, I. (2015, June 12). Preference Construction under Prominence (No. EPS-2015-340-MKT). ERIM Ph.D. Series Research in Management. Erasmus Research Institute of Management. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1765/78202