Maximizers’ Reactance to Algorithm-Recommended Options: The Moderating Role of Autotelic vs. Instrumental Choices

Citations

WEB OF SCIENCE

0
Citations

SCOPUS

0

초록

The previous literature has provided mixed findings regarding whether consumers appreciate or are opposed to algorithms. The primary goal of this paper is to address these inconsistencies by identifying the maximizing tendency as a critical moderating variable. In Study 1, it was found that maximizers, individuals who strive for the best possible outcomes, exhibit greater reactance toward algorithm-recommended choices than satisficers, those who are satisfied with a good-enough option. This increased reactance also resulted in decreased algorithm adoption intention. Study 2 replicated and extended the findings from Study 1 by identifying the moderating role of choice goals. Maximizers are more likely to experience reactance to algorithm-recommended options when the act of choosing itself is intrinsically motivating and meaningful (i.e., autotelic choices) compared to when the decision is merely a means to an end (i.e., instrumental choices). The results of this research contribute to a nuanced understanding of how consumers with different decision-making styles navigate the landscape of choice in the digital age. Furthermore, it offers practical insights for firms that utilize algorithmic recommendations in their businesses.

키워드

maximizingsatisficingalgorithmic decision-makingautotelic choicesinstrumental choices
제목
Maximizers’ Reactance to Algorithm-Recommended Options: The Moderating Role of Autotelic vs. Instrumental Choices
저자
김가은
DOI
10.3390/bs13110938
발행일
2023-11
유형
정기학술지(Article(Perspective Article포함))
저널명
Behavioral Sciences
13
11
페이지
1 ~ 11