TY - JOUR
T1 - Interattribute evaluation theory
AU - Evangelidis, Ioannis
AU - van Osselaer, Stijn M.J.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 American Psychological Association.
PY - 2019/10
Y1 - 2019/10
N2 - In this article we advance a theory that describes how people evaluate attribute values. We propose that evaluations involve a target and a reference value. Evaluators first seek a reference value on the target attribute (e.g., an average value or another stimulus's value on that same attribute). However, in the absence of same-attribute information, evaluators may instead rely on the target stimulus's own value on another attribute and make an evaluation about the target in one of two ways. First, the individual may compare the target attribute value to the stimulus's value on a reference attribute. The evaluator is more likely to engage in an interattribute comparison when the target attribute value is relatively evaluable and compatible with the reference value. Second, the individual may infer the magnitude of the target value based on his or her judgment about the extremity (e.g., the goodness or badness) of the stimulus's value on a reference attribute and the perceived correlation between the target attribute and the reference attribute. The evaluator is more likely to make an inference about the target value based on the reference when the target is low in evaluability and is less compatible with the reference value. Two attribute values are considered to be more compatible when their scale format is more similar. We provide support for our framework in 14 studies.
AB - In this article we advance a theory that describes how people evaluate attribute values. We propose that evaluations involve a target and a reference value. Evaluators first seek a reference value on the target attribute (e.g., an average value or another stimulus's value on that same attribute). However, in the absence of same-attribute information, evaluators may instead rely on the target stimulus's own value on another attribute and make an evaluation about the target in one of two ways. First, the individual may compare the target attribute value to the stimulus's value on a reference attribute. The evaluator is more likely to engage in an interattribute comparison when the target attribute value is relatively evaluable and compatible with the reference value. Second, the individual may infer the magnitude of the target value based on his or her judgment about the extremity (e.g., the goodness or badness) of the stimulus's value on a reference attribute and the perceived correlation between the target attribute and the reference attribute. The evaluator is more likely to make an inference about the target value based on the reference when the target is low in evaluability and is less compatible with the reference value. Two attribute values are considered to be more compatible when their scale format is more similar. We provide support for our framework in 14 studies.
KW - Attribute evaluations
KW - Attribute value judgments
KW - Evaluability theory
KW - Interattribute evaluation theory
KW - Magnitude judgments
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85061097843&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1037/xge0000552
DO - 10.1037/xge0000552
M3 - Article
C2 - 30714784
AN - SCOPUS:85061097843
SN - 0096-3445
VL - 148
SP - 1733
EP - 1746
JO - Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
JF - Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
IS - 10
ER -