Abstract
Insurance companies often use defaults in the online presentation of their offers. A default is a preselected product option that a customer accepts unless he explicitly rejects that option. In this experimental study, we analyze the effect of defaults when insurance companies offer a different number of product options. In addition, we examine how customers’ choice behavior is influenced by their perception of the default. The study shows that defaults have a greater influence when fewer rather than more product options are presented. Moreover, customers’ acceptance of the default depends on their level of skepticism toward the default and on their perception of other customers’ behavior.
Zusammenfassung
Versicherungsunternehmen verwenden im Rahmen ihrer Produktpräsentation im Internet häufig Defaults. Ein Default ist die Voreinstellung einer Produktoption, die der Kunde erhält, sofern er sich nicht aktiv gegen diese Voreinstellung entscheidet. Mit Hilfe einer experimentellen Studie wird untersucht, wie Defaults bei einem unterschiedlich großen Produktangebot von Versicherungsunternehmen wirken. Zudem wird analysiert, wie sich die kundenseitige Wahrnehmung des Defaults auf das Wahlverhalten der Kunden auswirkt. Es wird gezeigt, dass Defaults einen größeren Einfluss bei einem kleineren im Vergleich zu einem größeren Produktangebot haben. Des Weiteren wird deutlich, dass die Akzeptanz des Defaults von dem Misstrauen gegenüber dem Default und der Einschätzung des Verhaltens anderer Kunden abhängt.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, C.J.: The psychology of doing nothing: forms of decision avoidance result from reason and emotion. Psychol Bull 129(1), 139–167 (2003)
Asch, S.E.: Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychol. Monogr. 70(9), 1–70 (1956)
Babin, B.J., Darden, W.R., Griffin, M.: Work and/or fun: measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. J Consum Res 20(4), 644–656 (1994)
Baron, J., Ritov, I.: Reference points and omission bias. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 59(3), 475–498 (1994)
Baumol, W.J., Ide, E.A.: Variety in retailing. Manage. Sci. 3(1), 93–101 (1956)
Berger, J., Draganska, M., Simonson, I.: The influence of product variety on brand perception and choice. Mark Sci 26(4), 460–472 (2007)
Boyd, D.E., Bahn, K.D.: When do large product assortments benefit consumers? An information-processing perspective. J Retail 85(3), 288–297 (2009)
Brown, C.L., Krishna, A.: The skeptical shopper: a metacognitive account for the effects of default options on choice. J Consum Res 31(3), 529–539 (2004)
Chen, Y.F.: Herd behavior in purchasing books online. Comput. Hum. Behav. 24(5), 1977–1992 (2008)
Chernev, A.: When more is less and less is more: the role of ideal point availability and assortment in consumer choice. J Consum Res 30(2), 170–183 (2003a)
Chernev, A.: Product assortment and individual decision processes. J Pers Soc Psychol 85(1), 151–162 (2003b)
Chernev, A.: The role of purchase quantity in assortment choice: the quantity-matching heuristic. J Mark Res 45(2), 171–181 (2008)
Chernev, A.: Product assortment and consumer choice: an interdisciplinary review. Found Trends Mark 6(1), 1–61 (2011)
Dhar, R.: Consumer preference for a no-choice option. J Consum Res 24(2), 215–231 (1997)
Diehl, K., Poynor, C.: Great expectations?! Assortment size, expectations, and satisfaction. J Mark Res 47(2), 312–322 (2010)
Fitzsimons, G.J., Hutchinson, J.W., Williams, P., Alba, J.W., Chartrand, T.L., Huber, J., Kardes, F.R., Menon, G., Raghubir, J., Russo, E., Shiv, B., Tavassoli, N.T.: Non-conscious influences on consumer choice. Mark Lett 13(3), 269–279 (2002)
Gfk: Global trust report 2017 (2017). http://www.gfkverein.org/forschung/studien/studienuebersicht/2017-global-trust-report, Accessed 23 Jan 2018
Grösch, M., Steul-Fischer, M.: Defaults and advice in self-customization procedures of insurance. Z. Ges. Versicherungswiss. 106(3), 325–341 (2017)
Haynes, G.A.: Testing the boundaries of the choice overload phenomenon: the effect of number of options and time pressure on decision difficulty and satisfaction. Psychol Mark 26(3), 204–212 (2009)
Herrmann, A., Goldstein, D.G., Stadler, R., Landwehr, J.R., Heitmann, M., Hofstetter, R., Huber, F.: The effect of default options on choice – evidence from online product configurators. J Retail Consum Serv 18(6), 483–491 (2011)
Huffman, C., Kahn, B.E.: Variety for sale: mass customization or mass confusion? J Retail 74(4), 491–513 (1998)
Iyengar, S.S., Lepper, M.R.: When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? J Pers Soc Psychol 79(6), 995 (2000)
Johnson, E.J., Hershey, J., Meszaros, J., Kunreuther, H.: Framing, probability distortions, and insurance decisions. J. Risk Uncertain. 7(1), 35–51 (1993)
Johnson, E.J., Bellman, S., Lohse, G.L.: Defaults, framing and privacy: why opting in – opting out. Mark Lett 13(1), 5–15 (2002)
Kahn, B.E., Lehman, D.R.: Modeling choice among assortments. J Retail 67(3), 274–299 (1991)
Kahn, B.E., Weingarten, E., Townsend, C.: Assortment variety: too much of a good thing? Rev Mark Res 10, 1–23 (2013)
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J.L., Thaler, R.H.: Anomalies: the endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. J Econ Perspect 5(1), 193–206 (1991)
Levin, I.P., Schreiber, J., Lauriola, M., Gaeth, G.J.: A tale of two pizzas: building up from a basic product versus scaling down from a fully-loaded product. Mark Lett 13(4), 335–344 (2002)
Loewenstein, G.: Is more choice always better. Soc Secur Brief 7(1), 1–8 (1999)
Madrian, B.C., Shea, D.F.: The power of suggestion: Inertia in 401 (k) participation and savings behavior. Q J Econ 116(4), 1149–1187 (2001)
Malhotra, N.K.: Information load and consumer decision making. J Consum Res 8(4), 419–430 (1982)
Mogilner, C., Rudnick, T., Iyengar, S.S.: The mere categorization effect: how the presence of categories increases choosers’ perceptions of assortment variety and outcome satisfaction. J Consum Res 35(2), 202–215 (2008)
Polak, B., Herrmann, A., Heitmann, M., Einhorn, M.: Die Macht des Defaults – Wirkung von Empfehlungen und Vorgaben auf das individuelle Entscheidungsverhalten. Z Betriebswirtsch 78(10), 1033–1060 (2008)
Redelmeier, D.A., Shafir, E.: Medical decision making in situations that offer multiple alternatives. J Am Med Assoc 273(4), 302–305 (1995)
Ritov, I., Baron, J.: Reluctance to vaccinate: omission bias and ambiguity. J Behav Decis Mak 3(4), 263–277 (1990)
Ritov, I., Baron, J.: Outcome knowledge, regret, and omission bias. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 64(2), 119–127 (1995)
Sagi, A., Friedland, N.: The cost of richness: the effect of the size and diversity of decision sets on post-decision regret. J Pers Soc Psychol 93(4), 515–524 (2007)
Samuelson, W., Zeckhauser, R.: Status quo bias in decision making. J Risk Uncertain 1(1), 7–59 (1988)
Scheibehenne, B., Greifeneder, R., Todd, P.M.: What moderates the too-much-choice effect? Psychol Mark 26(3), 229–253 (2009)
Sela, A., Berger, J., Liu, W.: Variety, vice, and virtue: how assortment size influences option choice. J Consum Res 35(6), 941–951 (2009)
Shafir, E., Simonson, I., Tversky, A.: Reason-based choice. Cognition 49(1–2), 11–36 (1993)
Simonson, I., Tversky, A.: Choice in context: tradeoff contrast and extremeness aversion. J Mark Res 29(3), 281–295 (1992)
Smith, N.C., Goldstein, D.G., Johnson, E.J.: Smart defaults: from hidden persuaders to adaptive helpers. INSEAD business school research paper 3. (2009)
Tversky, A., Shafir, E.: Choice under conflict: the dynamics of deferred decision. Psychol Sci 3(6), 358–361 (1992)
Wright, P.: Consumer choice strategies: simplifying vs. optimizing. J Mark Res 12(1), 60–67 (1975)
Wright, P.: Marketplace metacognition and social intelligence. J Consum Res 28(4), 677–682 (2002)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Grösch, M., Steul-Fischer, M. Less is more: How the number of insurance options influences customers’ default acceptance. ZVersWiss 107, 517–529 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12297-018-0415-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12297-018-0415-4