THEEFFECTSOFACCOUNTABILITYANDHEURISTICCUESONCHOICE BY MANUELC.PONTES ADISSERTATIONPRESENTEDTOTHEGRADUATESCHOOL OFTHEUNIVERSITYOFFLORIDAINPARTIALFULFILLMENT OFTHEREQUIREMENTSFORTHEDEGREEOF DOCTOROFPHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITYOFFLORIDA 1993 Dedicatedtomywife,Nancy,whopatientlyencouragedandsupportedme throughoutthisendeavor,andtomyparents,whoalwaysencouragedmeinmy pursuitofknowledge. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Iwouldliketothankthemembersofmysupervisorycommittee. Iam gratefultoDr.JosephW.Alba,chairman,forhisguidancethroughoutthe researchstudy. MyappreciationalsogoestoDr.JohnG.Lynch,Jr.,Dr.J. WesleyHutchinson,andDr.BarryR.Schlenkerfortheirassistancewiththis research. Inaddition,IwouldliketothankalltheprofessorsintheMarketing DepartmentattheUniversityofFloridaforteachingmemuchthatIhavelearned aboutmarketing. Iwouldalsoliketothankmywife,Nancy,forcodingverbalprotocolsand mycolleaguesintheMarketingDepartmentattheUniversityofFloridafortheir stimulatingdiscussions. Finally,Iwouldliketothankmyfamilyforencouraging meinthisendeavor. TABLEOFCONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii ABSTRACT ..VI CHAPTERS 1 INTRODUCTION 2 REVIEWANDDISCUSSIONOFLITERATURE EffectsofAccountability:PriorResearch EffectsofInvolvement:PriorResearch IsAccountabilityMerelyAnotherFormofDecision Importance? TheInfluenceofHeuristicCuesonAccountableDecision Makers 3 EXPERIMENT 1 Overview Method .12 PIrnoddeupcetndSetnimtulViariables ...." ..111422 Subjects .14 Procedure 15 Results 16 ManipulationCheck:Accountability 16 ManipulationCheck:AssociationsBetweenBrandName andProductGuality 17 ManipulationCheck:InvolvementwiththeDecisionTask 17 CUhsoeicofeHoefurtihsetiAcltCeruneastiaveswRietahstohnesBefosrtPFreoadtuucrtesChoices 2119 OSowcnialChIonifclueesncVeerMseuassuLirkeelyChoicesofOthers:Market 21 ShareCondition 22 Conclusions 24 4 EXPERIMENT2 26 Overview 26 Method 27 IndependentVariables 27 IV Subjects .27 ResuMlattserialsandProcedure .28 OBICMnrhawfaonnlniiudcpeCenuhNclooeaafitmocitfeoehnsesBrCAVaahlesnteredcRsrkuenNsasaatsimPovreenesdswiiofctonthreCtdPhhreCoohidBocueiecscstteCsFheoaoftiuOcrteehsse.r..s ......333322552099 MarketingProfessors’InfluenceonChoice............' .36 Conclusions 38 5 DISCUSSIONANDIMPLICATIONS 39 GeneralDiscussion 39 Implications 43 FutureResearch 44 APPENDICES A PRODUCTSTIMULIFOREXPERIMENT 1 .45 B INSTRUCTIONSFOREXPERIMENT 1 .52 C INSTRUCTIONSFOREXPERIMENT2 .55 REFERENCES 60 BIOGRAPHICALSKETCH 64 v AbstractofDissertationPresentedtotheGraduateSchool oftheUniversityofFloridainPartialFulfillmentofthe RequirementsfortheDegreeofDoctorofPhilosophy THEEFFECTSOFACCOUNTABILITYANDHEURISTICCUESONCHOICE By MANUELC.PONTES December,1993 Chairman: JosephW.Alba MajorDepartment: Marketing Previousresearchhasshownthataccountabilityleadstogreaterdecision involvementandmoresystematicinformationprocessing. Researchhasalso shownthatdecisionmakerswhoprocessinformationmoresystematicallymake betterdecisionsbecausetheyarenotaseasilyinfluencedbyheuristiccues. Takentogether,theseresultssuggestthataccountabledecisionmakersshould makebetterdecisionsandshouldnotbeaseasilyinfluencedbyheuristiccues. Incontrast,thisdissertationhypothesizesthataccountabledecisionmakersmay makeworsechoicesandbemoreinfluencedbyheuristiccues,suchasbrand namesormarketshares,becausetheyseektheapprovaloftheiraudience. The firstexperimentsupportedthishypothesisandshowedthataccountabledecision makersmadeworsechoices;thatis,subjectswerelesslikelytochoosean unknownbrandnameorabrandwithalowmarketshareevenwhenit possessedthemostcompellingattributes. Thesecondexperimentexaminedthe VI effectsofaccountabilityontheuseofbrandnameswhendecisionmakerswere informedthatmembersoftheiraudiencehadconflictingpreferences. Others havesuggestedthataccountabilitytoanaudiencecharacterizedbyconflicting viewsmayleadtobetterdecisionmaking. Incontrast,thepatternofchoices madebysubjectsinthisexperimentwassimilartothatinthefirstexperiment;in bothexperiments,accountabledecisionmakerswerelesslikelytochoosethe bestalternative. Also,subjectsintheseexperimentsbelievedthatheuristiccues (brandnamesormarketshares)werepredictiveofthechoicesofotherpeople. Itappearsthataccountablesubjectsoptedforalternativesthateitherprovideda justifiablerationaleorthatmatchedthepresumedpreferencesoftheiraudience. VII CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Despitetheenormousamountofattentiondevotedtothestudyofhow individualsmakedecisions,mostresearchhasignoredthebasicfactthatmany ofthesedecisionsaremadeinsocialandorganizationalsettings. Insuch settings,individualsareoftenaccountablefortheirdecisions. Socialsystems andorganizationsdevelopsharedrules,norms,andsocialpractices(Tetlock, 1985a)andoftenregulatethebehavioroftheirmemberswithenforcement mechanisms,suchasaccountability,thataredependentontheneedforsocial approval(Schlenker,1980,1982). Thus,accountabilityprovidesalinkbetween individualdecisionmakersandtheorganizationstowhichtheybelong(Tetlock, 1985a). Whenpeopleareaccountable,theyseekapprovalfromaudiencesfor theirdecisions. Asaresult,theirbehaviorisconstrainedbytherationalesthat theiraudiencesarewillingtoaccept. Failuretobehaveinwaysforwhichone canprovideacceptablerationalesmayleadtoblameandpunishment. Conversely,behaviorforwhichonecanconstructacceptableaccountsmaylead toapprovalandreward(Schlenker,1980,1982;ScottandLyman,1968;Tetlock, 1985a). Asaresult,accountabledecisionmakersarepronetobehavelike politicians;thatis,theycarefullyconsiderthewishesandpreferencesoftheir audienceandmakechoicesthattheaudienceislikelytosupportandendorse (Tetlock,1985a). Accountabilityiswidelyprevalentinmarketingsituations. Forexample, consumersareimplicitlyaccountablefordecisionsthataffectotherindividuals. Asaresult,accountabilityexistsinfamilyandhouseholddecisionmakingaswell 1 2 asingift-givingsituations. Nevertheless,itisinorganizational,managerial,and politicalsituationsthataccountabilityisespeciallypervasivebecausedecision makersmustjustifytheirdecisionspriortoimplementation. Thisdissertation examinestheeffectsofaccountabilityonchoicewhenheuristiccuessuchas brandnamesandmarketsharesarepresent. Thecentralpremiseofthis researchisthatalthoughaccountabilitymotivatespeopletobemorethoughtful,it paradoxicallymayleadtoworsedecisionoutcomeswhensuchcuesarepresent. Chapter2ofthisdissertationpresentsareviewoftheliteraturepertaining totheeffectsofaccountabilityandinvolvementondecisionmaking. Itprovidesa discussionofwhyaccountabilitymaydifferfromotherincentivesandculminates inahypothesisaboutthedifferentialeffectsofaccountabilityandinvolvementon decisionmaking. Chapter3describesanexperimentthatisusedtotestthe hypothesis. Chapter4describesafollow-upexperimentthatservestoclarifyand extendtheresultsofthefirstexperiment. Finally,Chapter5providesageneral discussionoftheresultsandtheirimplications. CHAPTER2 REVIEWANDDISCUSSIONOFLITERATURE EffectsofAccountability:PriorResearch Theeffectsofaccountabilityoninformationprocessingarecontingenton whethertheviewsoftheaccountableaudienceareknown(Tetlock,1985a). Whentheaccountabledecisionmakerknowsthepreferencesoftheaudience, thesimplestwaytocopeistofollowtheaudience’swishes(KlimoskiandInks, 1990;Tetlock,1985a). Forexample,managersarelikelytodowhattheirbosses wantthemtodo;consumersarelikelytobuywhattheirspouseswantthemto buy. Theuseofthisheuristic,labeledtheAcceptabilityheuristic(Tetlock, 1985a),isadvantageousbecausetheheuristiciseasytouseandtheaudienceis likelytoprovideapprovalandrewardsfordecisionsthatitfavors. Ontheotherhand,whenanaccountabledecisionmakerdoesnotknow thepredispositionsoftheaudience,theAcceptabilityheuristiccannotbeused, msuchcases,accountabilitymotivatesdecisionmakerstoengageinmore integrativeinformationprocessingandmakemoredata-drivendecisions. Asa result,thesedecisionmakerstypicallyexaminemoreinformation,process informationmoredeeply,andconsiderailaspectsofadecisionsothatitcanbe defendedregardlessoftheaudience’sdesires. Indeed,Tetlock(1985a,pg.310) claimsthataccountabilitytoanaudienceofunknownviewsmotivatespeopleto become“morevigilant,complex,andself-criticalinformationprocessors”who engageingreater“preemptiveself-criticism”andultimatelymakebetter decisions. 3