Notes on Ratner et al (1999) – Choosing Less-Preferred Experiences for the Sake of Variety
Main Topic or Phenomenon
This paper examines the counterintuitive behavior where individuals deliberately choose less-preferred experiences when seeking variety, even though they derive less enjoyment from these choices than they would from repeating their favorites. The research challenges the traditional assumption that variety-seeking behavior maximizes real-time experienced utility.
Theoretical Construct
Variety-Seeking Behavior: The tendency for individuals to switch away from the item consumed on the last occasion, traditionally explained by satiation, need for stimulation, or uncertainty about future preferences.
Experienced Utility: The actual pleasure or satisfaction an individual derives while consuming a chosen product, measured in real-time rather than inferred from choice patterns.
Retrospective Evaluation: Global judgments of past consumption episodes that may differ systematically from real-time experienced utility due to memory biases and the peak/end rule of evaluation.
The paper introduces a distinction between decision utility (what drives choices) and experienced utility (what is actually felt during consumption), suggesting these can diverge in variety-seeking contexts.
Key Findings
-
Primary Finding: Participants systematically choose less-preferred options for variety even when they know and experience less enjoyment from these choices compared to repeating favorites.
-
No Contrast Effects: Less-preferred experiences do not enhance enjoyment of subsequent favorites through hedonic contrast.
-
Memory Bias for Variety: Retrospective evaluations favor high-variety sequences (containing both preferred and less-preferred items) over low-variety sequences (containing only preferred items), even though real-time enjoyment was lower during high-variety sequences.
-
Premature Switching: Participants switch to less-preferred options before becoming satiated with their favorites, contradicting traditional satiation-based explanations.
-
Real-time vs. Retrospective Divergence: A systematic crossover effect where low-variety sequences are enjoyed more in real-time but high-variety sequences are remembered more favorably.
Boundary Conditions or Moderators
Sequence Length: The memory advantage for variety becomes more pronounced in longer sequences (8 trials) compared to shorter ones (4 trials), suggesting that brief consumption episodes may not show the retrospective variety bias.
Choice vs. Assignment: The retrospective preference for variety holds both when sequences are experimenter-assigned and when participants make their own choices, indicating robustness across decision contexts.
Ending Effects: High-variety sequences that end on a positive note (improving sequences) are remembered particularly favorably, consistent with peak/end evaluation rules.
Building on Previous Work
The paper extends Kahneman’s work on experienced vs. remembered utility to the variety-seeking domain. It challenges traditional variety-seeking models (McAlister 1982; Givon 1984) that assume utility maximization drives switching behavior.
The research builds on findings that consumers don’t always choose to maximize real-time enjoyment (Read & Loewenstein 1995; Simonson 1990) and extends this to sequential choice among familiar options.
Unlike previous studies that inferred utility from choice patterns, this research directly measures experienced utility through real-time ratings, providing more definitive evidence about the pleasure derived from variety-seeking.
Major Theoretical Contribution
The paper fundamentally challenges the utility-maximization assumption underlying variety-seeking models. It introduces the concept that variety-seeking may be a learned strategy reinforced by favorable retrospective evaluations rather than real-time enjoyment maximization.
The research establishes that retrospective evaluations can systematically favor varied experiences over objectively more enjoyable uniform experiences, suggesting that memory biases drive future variety-seeking behavior in a self-reinforcing cycle.
Major Managerial Implication
Marketers should recognize that consumers may choose product assortments that don’t maximize their immediate satisfaction. Companies could leverage consumers’ retrospective preference for variety by:
- Designing experiences that feel varied in memory even if individual moments are less enjoyable
- Creating product sequences that end positively to enhance overall memory
- Understanding that consumer satisfaction surveys may favor varied experiences over consistently high-quality uniform experiences
Unexplored Theoretical Factors
Individual Differences: The paper doesn’t explore personality factors like need for variety, tolerance for ambiguity, or cognitive style that might moderate the willingness to sacrifice immediate enjoyment for variety.
Cultural Factors: Cross-cultural differences in variety-seeking tendencies and memory biases remain unexplored.
Temporal Factors: The role of time pressure, decision urgency, or consumption occasion context in moderating the variety-memory relationship.
Social Influences: Whether the presence of others or social sharing expectations affects the trade-off between immediate enjoyment and variety.
Category Effects: How product category characteristics (hedonic vs. utilitarian, frequency of consumption, involvement level) might influence the variety-memory bias.
Cognitive Load: Whether mental resources available during choice or consumption moderate the retrospective variety bias.
Expertise Effects: How domain knowledge or consumption expertise might affect both real-time enjoyment and retrospective evaluations of varied sequences.
Reference
Ratner, Rebecca K., Barbara E. Kahn, and Daniel Kahneman (1999), “Choosing Less-Preferred Experiences for the Sake of Variety,” Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (1), 1–15.
