Oct 21, 2021
- Dikla Perez 1,
- Yael Steinhart 2,
- Amir Grinstein 3,
- Meike Morren 4
- 1Bar-Ilan University;
- 2Tel Aviv University;
- 3Northeastern University, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam;
- 4Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Protocol Citation: Dikla Perez , Yael Steinhart , Amir Grinstein , Meike Morren 2021. Experiment 1. protocols.io https://protocols.io/view/experiment-1-bzbpp2mn
License: This is an open access protocol distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited
Protocol status: Working
We use this protocol and it’s working
Created: October 21, 2021
Last Modified: October 21, 2021
Protocol Integer ID: 54351
Keywords: Sequential decisions, Consistent behavior, Visibility, Social identity, Personal identity.
Abstract
In this experiment, we aimed to provide evidence regarding the effect of expected product visibility on consumers’ likelihood of engaging in consistent behavior when they are faced with two sequential choices in the lab.
We expect that in cases in which the expected visibility of the product’s usage environment can be manipulated (to convey either high or low expected visibility of the product) the effect of expected visibility on consistency is likely to occur. To examine this notion, we manipulated the visibility level of a service and presented participants with two identity-related decisions in a sequence.
Furthermore, in this experiment we sought to rule out cognitive dissonance as underlying mechanisms for the effect of expected product visibility on decision consistency. We explicitly aimed to show that the effect occurs even when the decision itself is not public (in an online experiment). We executed the study in a low-publicity setting, thereby minimizing the likelihood that participants would experience cognitive dissonance due to the publicity of the decision.
Materials
Experiment 1.sav Experimental design:
We have employed two expected-visibility conditions (high vs. low) in a between-subjects design.
Sample
n = 179 residents of major cities (64.8% women, Mage = 29.22, SDage = 4.45) were paid to take part in an online experiment. Participants were each randomly assigned to one of two expected-visibility conditions (high vs. low) in a between-subjects design
Measurements:
Questionnaire
(Instructions)
Please assume that you have been given the opportunity to participate in a new municipal service that is only relevant to city residents. This service includes meetings with professional tour guides that will share with you notes about the history of the city and its uniqueness. The main purpose of these meetings is to increase the identification of the residents with the city.
(Low-expected-visibility condition)
These meetings are going to take place in a one-on-one setting and will be free of charge. All you have to do is to pre-register and choose the location of the meetings.
Your own living room.
A private office in one of the city community centers.
(High-expected-visibility condition)
These meetings are going to take place in a group setting and will be free of charge. All you have to do is to pre-register and choose the location of the meetings.
In one of the group members’ living rooms.
In one of the city community centers.
(Decision)
Now we would like to share with you a dilemma that the organizers of the “Summer Nights” events (festivals that includes artists’ performances and fairs) are having in your city. The organizers are planning to give out free t-shirts and cannot decide which type of message should be printed on these t-shirts. As a potential visitor in such events, which one of two t-shirts would you prefer?
1. T-shirt with the city logo printed on it.
2. T-shirt with a variety of colors, and each visitor will be able to choose his favorite one.
(Cognitive dissonance scale)
Please indicate the extent to which you felt the following emotions after making your decision with regard to the location of the city history meetings (1 - not at all to 7- very much):
-To what extent do you wonder whether you have made the right decision?
-To what extent do you feel uncomfortable about your decision?
-To what extent do you feel regret about your decision?
-To what extent do you feel disappointment from your decision?
-To what extent do you feel hostile about your decision?
-To what extent do you feel anger about your decision?
-To what extent do you wonder whether the decision you have made is the right step for you?
-To what extent do you feel disturbed by your decision?
-To what extent do you feel frustrated by your decision?
These items were highly correlated (α = .919), and we averaged these ratings into a single measure of cognitive dissonance.
(Product visibility manipulation check)
Please rate your level of agreement with the following sentences (1- strongly disagree to 7- strongly agree):
-Many people are expected to know that I took part in the city history meetings.
-Friends are expected to know that I took part in the city history meetings.
-Other people are expected to know that took part in the city history meetings.
These items were highly correlated (α = .881) and were averaged into a single measure of expected visibility.
(Background questions)
Age, Gender, Income,Years of residency in the city.
Hypotheses
H1: In a set of sequential identity-related product decisions, an individual is more likely to engage in consistent behavior—i.e., to make a second decision that emphasizes the same (personal or social) identity as the first decision—when the product involved in the first decision is expected to be consumed in high-visibility rather than low-visibility circumstances.