Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives¶
Huber, J., Payne, J. W., & Puto, C. (1982). Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(1), 90-98.
Cited by¶
3 citations across 3 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Context-Dependent Preference
- Absent that, there is nothing beyond arithmetic.
This sourceShows that adding an asymmetrically dominated alternative can increase the probability of choosing the option that dominates it, the regularity violation that separates reordering from mere redistribution.
- Absent that, there is nothing beyond arithmetic.
Domain-specific¶
- Decoy Effect
- Huber, Payne, and Puto (1982) documented it systematically across consumer-goods categories
This sourceThe original systematic demonstration in consumer choice: 'an asymmetrically dominated alternative is dominated by one item in the set but not by another. Adding such an alternative to a choice set can increase the probability of choosing the item that dominates it'. The seminal demonstration of the effect and the source of the term 'asymmetric dominance'.
SupportedVerified against the source
- Huber, Payne, and Puto (1982) documented it systematically across consumer-goods categories
Mechanisms¶
- Product or Option Comparison Matrix
- Padding the option list with a deliberately inferior "decoy" can shift the choice toward a target option even though nothing about the target changed.
This sourceShows that adding an asymmetrically dominated alternative can increase choice of the unchanged option that dominates it.
- Padding the option list with a deliberately inferior "decoy" can shift the choice toward a target option even though nothing about the target changed.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 3 citations: 1 supported. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:737d5893510b · see in the full table