Advertisement

Multi-attribute Decision Making Process in Economic Behavior: Process Tracking of Decision Making and Computer Simulation

  • Kazuhisa TakemuraEmail author
Chapter
  • 346 Downloads

Abstract

Most consumers make purchase decisions on the basis of various considerations such as price, design, and brand performance. Thus, the behavior of consumers can be considered as multi-attribute decision making.

Keywords

Multi-attribute decision making process Process-tracing technique 

References

  1. Abelson, R. P., & Levi, A. (1985). Decision making and decision theory. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 231–309). New York, NY: Random House.Google Scholar
  2. Aoki, Y. (1989). Tentō kenkyū no tenkai hōkō to tenponai shōhisha kōdō bunseki [Direction of in-store research and in-store consumer behavior]. In Y. Tajima & Y. Aoki (Eds.), Tentō kenkyū to shōhisha kōdō bunseki: Tenpo nai kōbai kōdō bunseki to sono shūhen [In-store research and consumer behavior analysis: Analysis of buying behavior and related issues] (pp. 49–81). Tokyo, JP: Seibundō shinkōsha.Google Scholar
  3. Aoki, Y. (1992). Shōhisha jōhō shori no riron [Theory of consumer information processing]. In Y. Osawa (Ed.), Māketingu to shōhisha kōdō: Māketingu saiensu no shin tenkai [Marketing and consumer behavior: New development in marketing science] (pp. 129–154). Tokyo, JP: Yuhikaku Publishing.Google Scholar
  4. Arrow, K. J. (1951). Social choice and individual values. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
  5. Beach, L. R., & Mitchell, T. R. (1978). A contingency model for the selection of decision strategies. Academy of Management Review, 3, 439–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bettman, J. (1979). An information processing theory of consumer choice. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  7. Bettman, J., Johnson, E. J., & Payne, J. W. (1991). Consumer decision making. In T. S. Robertson & H. H. Kassarjian (Eds.), Handbook of consumer behavior (pp. 50–79). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  8. Biehal, G. J. (1983). Consumers’ prior experiences and perceptions in auto repair choice. Journal of Marketing, 47, 87–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carmone, F. J., Green, P. E., & Jain, A. K. (1978). Robustness of conjoint analysis: Some Monte Carlo results. Journal of Marketing Research, 15, 300–303.Google Scholar
  10. Cattin, P., & Wittink, D. R. (1989). Commercial use of conjoint analysis: An update. Journal of Marketing, 53, 91–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cohen, J. B., & Areni, C. S. (1991). Affect and consumer behavior. In T. S. Robertson & H. H. Kassarjian (Eds.), Handbook of consumer behavior (pp. 188–240). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  12. Dickson, P., & Sawyer, A. (1990). The price knowledge and search of supermarket shoppers. Journal of Marketing, 54(3), 42–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Donovan, R. J., & Rossiter, J. R. (1982). Store atmosphere: An environmental psychology approach. Journal of Retailing, 58, 34–57.Google Scholar
  14. Ehrlich, D., Guttman, I., Schönbach, P., & Mills, J. (1957). Postdecision exposure to relevant information. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 54(1), 98–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Engel, J. F., Blackwell, R. D., & Miniard, P. W. (1993). Consumer behavior (7th ed.). New York, NY: Dryden.Google Scholar
  16. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Festinger, L., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 203–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fujii, S., & Takemura, K. (2001). Risuku taido to chūi: Jōkyō izonteki shōten moderu ni yoru furēmingu kōka no keiryō bunseki [Risk attitude and attention: A psychometric analysis of framing effect by contingent focus model]. Kodo keiryogaku [The Japanese Journal of Behaviormetrics], 28, 9–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gigerenzer, G., & Selten, R. (Eds.). (2001). Bounded rationality: The adaptive toolbox. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
  20. Harmon-Jones, E., & Mills, J. (Eds.). (1999). Cognitive dissonance: Progress on a pivotal theory in social psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  21. Howard, J. A. (1989). Consumer behavior in marketing strategy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  22. Huber, J., Payne, J. W., & Puto, C. (1982). Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis. Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 90–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Huber, J., & Puto, C. (1983). Market boundaries and product choice: Illustrating attraction and substitution effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(1), 31–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ichikawa, A. (Ed.). (1980). Tamokuteki kettei no riron to hōhō [Theory and method of multi-objective decision]. Tokyo, JP: Keisoku jidō seigyo gakkai.Google Scholar
  25. Isen, A. M., & Means, B. (1983). The influence of positive affect on decision making strategy. Social Cognition, 2, 18–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Klayman, J. (1983). Analysis of predecisional information search patterns. In P. Humphreys, O. Svenson, & A. Vari (Eds.), Analyzing and aiding decision processes (pp. 401–414). Amsterdam, NL: North-Holland.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Knox, R. E., & Inkster, J. A. (1968). Postdecision dissonance at post time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 319–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Krantz, D. H., Luce, R. D., Suppes, P., & Tversky, A. (1971). Foundations of measurement Vol. 1: Additive and polynomial representations. New York, NY: Academic.Google Scholar
  29. Kühberger, A., Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., & Ranyard, R. (2011). Introduction: Windows for understanding the min. In M. Schulte-Mecklenbeck, A. Kühberger, & R. Ranyard (Eds.), A handbook of process tracing methods for decision research (pp. 3–17). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  30. Louviere, J. J. (1988). Analyzing decision making: Metric conjoint analysis. Journal of Marketing Research, 26.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3172612.Google Scholar
  31. Luce, M. F., Bettman, J. R., & Payne, J. W. (2001). Emotional decisions: Tradeoff difficulty and coping in consumer choice. Monographs of Journal of Consumer Research, Conflict and Tradeoffs in Decision Making, 1, 86–109.Google Scholar
  32. Luce, R. D., & Tukey, J. W. (1964). Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new type of fundamental measurement. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mandel, N., & Johnson, E. J. (2002). When web pages influence choice: Effects of visual primes on experts and novice. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(2), 235–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Matz, D., & Wood, W. (2005). Cognitive dissonance in groups: The consequences of disagreement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 22–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Milliman, R. E. (1986). The influence of background music on the behavior of restaurant patrons. Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 286–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Montgomery, H. (1983). Decision rules and the search for a dominance structure: Towards a process model of decision making. In P. C. Humphreys, O. Svenson, & A. Vari (Eds.), Analyzing and aiding decision processes (pp. 343–369). Amsterdam, NL: North-Holland.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Montgomery, H. (1993). The search for a dominance structure in decision making: Examining the evidence. In G. A. Klein, J. Orasanu, R. Calderwood, & C. E. Zsambok (Eds.), Decision making in action: Models and methods (pp. 182–187). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  38. Mowen, J. C. (1990). Consumer behavior (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Macmillian.Google Scholar
  39. Nagano, M. (1997). Shōhisha kōdō ni okeru jōkyō yōin [Situational factors in consumer behavior]. In T. Sugimoto (Ed.), Shōhisha rikai no tame no shinrigaku [Psychology for understanding consumer] (pp. 192–205). Tokyo, JP: Fukumura Shuppan.Google Scholar
  40. Okubo, S., Morogami, S., Takemura, K., & Fujii, S. (2006). Kanjō ga jōhō kensaku ni ataeru eikyō no jikken kenkyū: Aikamera ni yoru katei tsuiseki o mochīte [An experimental study of the effects of emotions on information search: Using eye camera-based process tracking]. In Collection of Lecture Papers for 2004 Entaateimento Kansei Waakushoppu [Entertainment Sensitivity Workshop] (pp. 14–19).Google Scholar
  41. Okubo, S., & Takemura, K. (2011). Shirīzu shōhisha kōdō to māketingu 2 gankyū undō sokutei to shōhisha kōdō [Consumer behavior and marketing (2) measurement of the eye movement and consumer behavior]. Seni seihin shohi kagaku [Journal of the Japan Research Association for Textile End-uses], 52(12), 744–750.Google Scholar
  42. Okuda, H. (2003). Ishikettei ni okeru bunmyaku kōka: Miryoku kōka, maboroshi kōka, oyobi tasū kōka [Context effects in decision making: Attraction, phantom, and plurality effects]. Shakai shinrigaku kenkyū [Japanese Journal of Social Psychology], 18(3), 147–155.Google Scholar
  43. Otsuki, H. (1991). Tentō māketingu no jissai [In-store marketing practice]. Tokyo, JP: Nihonkeizaishinbunsha.Google Scholar
  44. Payne, J. W. (1976). Task complexity and contingent processing in decision making: An information search and protocol analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 366–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Payne, J. W., & Bettman, J. R. (2004). Walking with the scarecrow: The information-processing approach to decision research. In D. J. Koehler & N. Harvey (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision (pp. 110–132). Malden, MA: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1993). The adaptive decision maker. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pratkanis, A. R., & Farquhar, P. H. (1992). A brief history of research on phantom alternatives: Evidences for seven empirical generalizations about phantoms. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13, 103–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Saido, M. (2000). Shōhisha no hikeikaku kōbai katei [Consumer’s non-planning buying decision]. In K. Takemura (Ed.), Shōhi kōdō no shakai shinrigaku: Shōhisuru ningen no kokoro to kōdō [Social psychology of consumer behavior: Mind and action in human consumption] (pp. 40–50). Tokyo, JP: Fukumura Shuppan.Google Scholar
  49. Schwartz, B. (2004). The paradox of choice: Why more is less. New York, NY: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  50. Schwartz, B., Ward, A., Monterosso, J., Lyubomirsky, S., White, K., & Lehman, D. R. (2002). Maximizing versus satisficing: Happiness is a matter of choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1178–1197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Shepard, R. N., Romney, A. K., & Nerlove, S. (1972). Multidimensional scaling (Vol. 1). New York, NY: Seminor Press.Google Scholar
  52. Simon, H. A. (1957). Administrative behavior: A study of decision making process in administrative organization. New York, NY: McMillan.Google Scholar
  53. Takahashi, H., Matsui, H., Camerer, C., Takano, H., Kodaka, F., Ideno, T., et al. (2010). Dopamine D1 receptors and nonlinear probability weighting in risky choice. Journal of Neuroscience, 30, 16567–16572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Takemura, K. (1985). Ishikettei sutoratejī jikkō ni okeru meta ninchi katei moderu [A metacognitive model for the implementation of decision strategies]. Doshisha shinri [Doshisha Psychological Review], 32, 16–22.Google Scholar
  55. Takemura, K. (1993). The effect of decision frame and decision justification on risky choice. Japanese Psychological Research, 35, 36–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Takemura, K. (1994). Furēmingu kōka no rironteki setsumei: Risukuka deno ishikettei no jōkyō izonteki shōten moderu [A theoretical explanation of the framing effect: The contingent focus model of decision making under risk]. Japanese Psychological Review, 37(3), 270–293.Google Scholar
  57. Takemura, K. (1996a). Ishikettei to Sono Shien [Decision-making and support for decision-making]. In S. Ichikawa (Ed.), Ninchi Shinrigaku 4kan Shiko [Cognitive psychology vol. 4 thoughts] (pp. 81–105). Tokyo, JP: University of Tokyo Press.Google Scholar
  58. Takemura, K. (1996b). Ishikettei no shinri: Sono katei no tankyū [Psychology of decision making: Its process and investigation]. Tokyo, JP: Fukumura Shuppan.Google Scholar
  59. Takemura, K. (1997). Shōhisha no jōhō tansaku to sentakushi hyōka [Alternative evaluation and consumer buying decision]. In T. Sugimoto (Ed.), Shohisha rikai no tame no shinrigaku [Psychology for understanding consumer] (pp. 56–72). Tokyo, JP: Fukumura Shuppan.Google Scholar
  60. Takemura, K. (2009a). Kōdō ishiketteiron: Keizai kōdō no shinrigaku [Behavioral decision theory: Psychology of economic behavior]. Tokyo, JP: Nippon hyoron sha Co. Ltd.Google Scholar
  61. Takemura, K. (2009b). Ishikettei to shinkei keizaigaku [Decision making and neuroeconomics]. Rinshō seishin igaku [Japanese Journal of Clinical Psychiatry], 38, 35–42.Google Scholar
  62. Takemura, K. (2011). Tazokusei ishikettei no shinri moderu to “yoi ishikettei” [Psychological model of multi-attribute decision making and good decision]. Operēshonzu risāchi [Journal of the Operations Research Society of Japan], 56, 583–590.Google Scholar
  63. Takemura, K. (2014). Behavioral decision theory: Psychological and mathematical representations of human choice behavior. Tokyo, JP: Springer.Google Scholar
  64. Takemura, K. (2018). Avoiding bad decisions: From the perspective of behavioral economics. Keynote Paper presented at the International Congress of Applied Psychology, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
  65. Takemura, K., & Fujii, S. (2015). Ishikettei no shohō [Prescription for decision making]. Tokyo, JP: Asakura Shoten.Google Scholar
  66. Takemura, K., Haraguchi, R., & Tamari, Y. (2015). Tazokusei ishikettei katei ni okeru kettei houryaku no ninchiteki doryoku to seikakukusa: Keisanki simyurēshon ni yoru kōdō ishiketteiron teki kentō [Effort and accuracy in multi-attribute decision making process: A behavioral decision theoretic approach using computer simulation technique]. Ninchi kagaku [Cognitive Studies], 22, 368–388.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyWaseda UniversityTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations