This feels like the right choice: how decision aids may facilitate affect-based valuation

Area of Science:

• Behavioral Economics
• Decision Science
• Psychology

Background:

• Individuals sometimes use random aids (catalysts) to make decisions.
• These catalysts can elicit affective reactions, influencing choices.
• The hypothesis is that catalysts may increase reliance on affect-based decision making.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate if using a decision-making catalyst leads to more affect-based decisions.
• To examine the impact of catalysts on scope insensitivity and self-reported decision-making strategies.

Main Methods:

• Conducted multiple online studies employing hypothetical donation scenarios.
• Measured affect-driven decision making through scope insensitivity (behavioral measure).
• Assessed reliance on feelings versus reasons using self-report questionnaires.

Main Results:

• Study 1a suggested a catalyst increased scope insensitivity (affect-driven donations).
• Subsequent studies (1b, 2, 3) failed to replicate these findings.
• Participants descriptively reported more feeling-based decisions with a catalyst, but this was not statistically significant.

Conclusions:

• Contrary to popular belief, using a decision-making catalyst does not appear to increase affect-based hypothetical donation decisions.
• The initial finding of increased scope insensitivity in Study 1a was not robust across further investigations.
• Further research is needed to understand the nuanced relationship between decision aids, affect, and decision-making processes.