The Effect of Intuition and Reasoning on Choice Overload Felipe Gerenda*, Leandro M. Tonetto** * Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos (UNISINOS), [email protected] ** Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos (UNISINOS), Zooma Consumer Experience, [email protected] Abstract: Choice overload refers to the fact that, at a certain threshold, the increased amount of alternatives to which the individual may be exposed in a decision task compromises the resultant satisfaction, both with the choice process and product. Despite the ability shown by several empirical studies in replicating the occurrence of choice overload in distinct contexts, the variability in the results related to the threshold at which the number of alternatives undermines satisfaction is notable. A critical literature review suggests that the “effect” of choice overload is not placed only on the amount of alternatives presented to the individual, but yet, on the 2 forms through which the decision task is processed – one being rational, effortful and conscious, and the other being intuitive, automatic and unconscious. Thus, in this paper, the authors state a theoretical background, based on cognitive psychology and design, and a research agenda related to the fact that choosing different kinds of products demands different ways of processing information. Higher user involvement with the task of deciding which product to buy might be related to System 2 operations, while low user involvement might evoke System 1 operations. These two types of information processing can help understanding why many variations on the Choice Overload research have been reported. Key-Words: Choice overload, decision making, reasoning, intuition. 1. Choice Overload Effect The choice overload effect (18) consists in the fact that the abundance of product options may eventually lead to negative consequences among users, such as reduced motivation for choosing or decreased satisfaction with the choice made. Despite the fact that related literature shows consistent studies about the effect, many of the aspects that sustain it remain uncertain, e.g., the threshold from which the number of alternative begins to compromise one’s experience. Horovitz (15) mentions several examples that reaffirm the emergence of choice overload in contemporary society. In 1977, Dreyer's ice cream shop offered its customers 34 different flavors. In 2004, however, the brand offered over 250 options. Starbucks² has over 19 thousand ways to serve a simple cup of coffee. The author also reports that the juice brand Tropicana, which offered only 2 juice flavors in the 90’s, had come to offer 24 variations in 2004. It is important to note that the assumption that it is impossible to harm the consumer by broadening the set of alternatives offered is established as a basic premise by the classical theories of economics (3). Nevertheless, the benefits of this proliferation of variety of products is gaining prominence as a research topic for over a decade (27). Throughout this period, theorists in the field of psychology have been identifying that, when the number of alternatives exceeds a certain limit, it might have a negative impact on consumers, such as regret, dissatisfaction, disappointment, decreased motivation to make a choice, and reduced levels of consumption. There is not yet a consensus among researchers regarding which factor – when associated with the 1 number of alternatives presented – may cause a decrease in satisfaction. Some argue that it is the perceived complexity of the decision making process; others, that it is the difficulty of discerning between alternatives; or, yet, the difficulty of giving up other options (27). The various manifestations of the relationship between the high quantity of alternatives and the subsequent decrease in the individual’s satisfaction have been reported in the literature as the too-much-choice effect (16, 18), choice overload (4,5), or hyperchoice (24). Despite the different nomenclature, these terms are characterized by the same driving factors and consequences, to which this study refers to as "choice overload." Scheibehenne et al. (27) published a meta-analysis of the leading articles on the choice overload effect written between 2000 and 2010. The author categorized the analyzed studies in order to statistically assess the consistency of their results, identifying the subjects surveyed, and also their commonalities and dissociations. Thus, Scheibehenne’s paper represents a milestone on the academic discussion over the subject, considering that, through the compilation of the results found in 8 years’ worth of studies, it was able to point out some aspects of the choice overload effect whose explanation remained opened or inconsistent. The understanding of both the choice overload effect itself and the several variables already tested (satisfaction, regret, perceived complexity, etc.) allows the deepening of this study through the use of theories and knowledge within the field. For instance, understanding the brand’s offer through the concept of the Product-Service-System (which joins, in a systemic and symbiotic relationship, both products and services as a united offer) provides a higher range of values and features that can be studied (2). Thus, in order to understand the evolution that has been going on since Scheibehenne’s publication, the present authors performed a research on the academic articles related to the choice overload effect at Capes Database (a foundation of the Brazilian Ministry of Education, available at http://www.periodicos.capes.gov.br/)1, more specifically about studies published in the past 5 years (2009 – 2013). A few terms used when referring to the choice overload effect in the literature were raised (choice overload, too-much-choice effect, hyperchoice, paradox of choice, provision of choice), and then researched on the databases. The research has found 44 papers that contemplate the concept in the past five years. Thus, the reading of the texts presented 11 articles with experiments relevant to the discussion of the choice overload effect. In order to understand the topics and peculiarities recently discussed about this topic, a summary of the analyzed articles is presented below. This review states that, although choice overload has been studied for over a decade, several essential aspects for the complete understanding of the effect are still unsolved (i.e what originates choice overload). Different ways of approaching and investigating the effect have presented little consistency in regards to its replicability and generalizability. Thus, as indicated by Scheibehenne et al (27) and Messner and Wänke (23), experimental researches about the effect, when performed in laboratory, may influence the participants to overthinking about their decisions, using a reasoning system that is not as common in our daily life decisions. Kahneman (20) argue that “intuition” is the processing system that guides us throughout our daily activities, being effortless, automatic 1The database leads to SciVerseScienceDirect (Elsevier), OneFile (GALE), Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science), MEDLINE (NLM), Social Sciences Citation Index (Web of Science), SpringerLink, Emerald Management eJournals, American Psychological Association (APA), ERIC (U.S. Dept. of Education), Arts & Sciences (JSTOR), IEEE Periodicals, Cambridge Journals (Cambridge University Press), SAGE Journals, INFORMS Journals, Wiley Online Library, Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), SpringerLink Open Access, NEJM (New England Journal of Medicine) and IEEE (CrossRef). 2 and unconscious. This idea is sustained by easily identifiable situations, like buying a well-known brand’s new product, choosing low involvement products or choosing which route to take while walking home from work. The existence of this duality of the mind may be the reason why so much variance - and even inconsistency - has been presented over the last decade of choice overload studies. When using the rational system, individuals consciously evaluate alternatives and possible results, however, the conscious cognitive effort has its limits (10) – eventually leading to choice overload. On the other hand, the intuitive system is unconscious and runs based on automatic associations, processing route that may avoid the overload effect. Thus, to better understand the proposal of the processing system as a moderator of the choice overload effect, besides the review of the latest articles related to this theme, a posterior chapter presents an overview of the concept of “intuition” and “reasoning”, as well as the recent academic discussions regarding the behavior, functioning processes, and relation between these two ways of thinking. Such synthesis and understanding of the studies conducted in the last five years may serve as the basis for the presentation of a research agenda for the field of design itself (found in “Discussion and Conclusions”), adding the choice overload and cognitive processing to its scope – an opportunity to deepen and develop the theory, seeking to answer questions still unsolved regarding the effect. 2. Recent Literature Review Reed et al. (26) investigated the decision-making process involving the conscious choice for large or small sets of alternatives, exploring the boundaries of perceived advantages in large sets of alternatives, when there was the possibility of comparing these groups with other groups of less variety. The authors conducted an experiment in which participants were