Decision-Making and Interruptions: An Abstract

Abstract

We are interrupted constantly in everyday life. These interruptions are usually considered a nuisance. For example, being interrupted during work normally lowers performance (Katidioti et al. 2016). But when it comes to decision-making, interruptions sometimes have counter-intuitive effects. After an interruption, for example, consumers may make better decisions (Dijksterhuis 2004). While previous research on interruptions focuses on alternative selection, this paper looks at downstream variables and examines the effect of interruptions on consumers’ subjective perceptions. When making a purchase decision, in reality, there is often no right or wrong. Especially when it comes to complex decisions like buying a car or choosing a holiday, consumers are usually confronted with many alternatives and various characteristics. The quality of such decisions cannot be judged from a normative perspective. Consequently, we test whether unconscious thinking can increase the quality of a decision from a subjective point of view. Accordingly, we investigate whether an interruption in the decision-making process can increase decision satisfaction and also affect more behavioral outcomes like willingness to pay for the chosen alternative and purchase intention for an add-on that is related to the product.

In line with Dijksterhuis (2004), we assume that during an interruption, participants think unconsciously about their choice. We hypothesize that a more organized integration of information, which occurs when people engage in unconscious thinking, leads to a more correct weighting of the given information and thus enhances decision satisfaction. The specific type of information processing could reinforce this effect. We hypothesize that an instruction to form an overall impression increases the integration of information, compared to an instruction to focus on details. Accordingly, we expect an interaction between unconscious thinking that occurs during an interruption and an instruction to form an overall impression.

To test our hypotheses, we conducted a 2 (instruction: “form an overall impression” vs. “focus on details”) × 3 (interruption: interruption, thinking, immediate decision) experiment using a between-subject design. In an online experiment, participants had to choose between two package holidays. The alternatives differed slightly in various characteristics but were very similar overall, taking into account all information available. In this manner, we created a realistic situation without a preset correct choice.

We did not find the hypothesized effects in our data. Thus, our results are not consistent with the findings of Dijksterhuis (2004). Further research is underway to find potential moderators which may have influenced the findings.