Show simple item record

[journal article]

dc.contributor.authorSelart, Marcusde
dc.contributor.authorGärling, Tommyde
dc.contributor.authorMontgomery, Henryde
dc.date.accessioned2014-09-25T12:50:59Z
dc.date.available2014-09-25T12:50:59Z
dc.date.issued1998de
dc.identifier.issn0894-3257de
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/39966
dc.description.abstractWhen a prominent attribute looms larger in one response procedure than in another, a violation of procedure invariance occurs. A hypothesis based on com-patibility between the structure of the input information and the required output was tested as an explanation of this phenomenon. It was also compared with other existing hypotheses in the field. The study had two aims: (1) to illustrate the prominence effect in a selection of preference tasks (choice, acceptance decisions, and preference ratings); (2) to demonstrate the processing differences in a matching procedure versus the selected preference tasks. Hence, verbal protocols were collected in both a matching task and in subsequent preference tasks. Silent control conditions were also employed. The structure compatibility hypothesis was confirmed in that a prominence effect obtained in the preference tasks was accompanied by a lower degree of attention to the attribute levels in these tasks. Furthermore, as predicted from the structure compatibility hypothesis, it was found that fewer comparisons between attribute levels were performed in the preference tasks than in the matching task. It was therefore concluded that both these processing differences may explain the occurrence of the prominence effects.en
dc.languageende
dc.subject.ddcPsychologiede
dc.subject.ddcPsychologyen
dc.titleCompatibility and the use of information processing strategiesde
dc.description.reviewbegutachtet (peer reviewed)de
dc.description.reviewpeer revieweden
dc.source.journalJournal of Behavioral Decision Making
dc.source.volume11de
dc.publisher.countryGBR
dc.subject.classozAllgemeine Psychologiede
dc.subject.classozGeneral Psychologyen
dc.subject.thesozInformationsprozessde
dc.subject.thesozinformation processen
dc.subject.thesozKognitionde
dc.subject.thesozcognitionen
dc.subject.thesozEntscheidungsfindungde
dc.subject.thesozdecision makingen
dc.subject.thesozEntscheidungsprozessde
dc.subject.thesozdecision making processen
dc.subject.thesozUrteilsbildungde
dc.subject.thesozjudgment formationen
dc.subject.thesozEntscheidungskriteriumde
dc.subject.thesozdecision making criterionen
dc.subject.thesozPräferenzde
dc.subject.thesozpreferenceen
dc.subject.thesozWirkungde
dc.subject.thesozeffecten
dc.identifier.urnurn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-399660
dc.rights.licenceCreative Commons - Namensnennung, Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungende
dc.rights.licenceCreative Commons - Attribution-ShareAlikeen
internal.statusformal und inhaltlich fertig erschlossende
internal.identifier.thesoz10047394
internal.identifier.thesoz10040718
internal.identifier.thesoz10042187
internal.identifier.thesoz10042188
internal.identifier.thesoz10041759
internal.identifier.thesoz10042200
internal.identifier.thesoz10054152
internal.identifier.thesoz10037483
dc.type.stockarticlede
dc.type.documentZeitschriftenartikelde
dc.type.documentjournal articleen
dc.source.pageinfo59-72de
internal.identifier.classoz10703
internal.identifier.journal627
internal.identifier.document32
internal.identifier.ddc150
dc.description.pubstatusVeröffentlichungsversionde
dc.description.pubstatusPublished Versionen
internal.identifier.licence8
internal.identifier.pubstatus1
internal.identifier.review1
internal.pdf.version1.4
internal.pdf.validtrue
internal.pdf.wellformedtrue
internal.pdf.ocrnull Page_15
internal.check.abstractlanguageharmonizerCERTAIN
internal.check.languageharmonizerCERTAIN_RETAINED


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record