Table Of ContentTHEEFFECTSOFACCOUNTABILITYANDHEURISTICCUESONCHOICE
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
