Context (archaeology)

Linguistics

Cognitive psychology

Philosophy

Biology

Microeconomics

Social psychology

Variety (cybernetics)

Economics

Biochemistry

Computer science

Cognitive science

Empirical research

Paleontology

CLARITY

Context effect

Psychology

Preference

Compromise

Politics

Political science

Epistemology

Deliberation

Sociology

Artificial intelligence

Representation (politics)

Chemistry

Concreteness

Word (group theory)

Social science

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

The study of how the composition of choice sets affects choices has been a thriving research topic for many years now. Among the many different context effects, the three main ones, attraction, compromise, and similarity effects, have been demonstrated across a wide variety of settings and species. Research in recent years has shown that a variety of simple, seemingly irrelevant changes in the experimental setting can make each of the three main context effects disappear or even reverse. None of these effects seems to be compatible with existing theoretical approaches, or with each other, for that matter. Empirical research has far outpaced theoretical development. The current approach to context-effect research has reached a hard boundary. The field needs a coherent synthesis of the existing literature and a research agenda that overcomes the past shortcomings. Contextual features influence human and non-human decision making, giving rise to preference reversals. Decades of research have documented the species and situations in which these effects are observed. More recently, however, researchers have focused on boundary conditions, that is, settings in which established effects disappear or reverse. This work is scattered across academic disciplines and some results appear to contradict each other. We synthesize recent findings and resolve apparent contradictions by considering them in terms of three core categories of decision context: spatial arrangement, attribute concreteness, and deliberation time. We suggest that these categories could be understood using theories of choice representation, which specify how context shapes the information over which deliberation processes operate. Contextual features influence human and non-human decision making, giving rise to preference reversals. Decades of research have documented the species and situations in which these effects are observed. More recently, however, researchers have focused on boundary conditions, that is, settings in which established effects disappear or reverse. This work is scattered across academic disciplines and some results appear to contradict each other. We synthesize recent findings and resolve apparent contradictions by considering them in terms of three core categories of decision context: spatial arrangement, attribute concreteness, and deliberation time. We suggest that these categories could be understood using theories of choice representation, which specify how context shapes the information over which deliberation processes operate. a context effect according to which a choice option that is clearly inferior to one other option increases the choice share of this superior option at the expense of other options. a context effect according to which an extreme option that makes one other option appearing as a compromise increases the choice share of this compromise option at the expense of other options. systematic changes in choice behavior depending on the composition of the choice set. the option that is specifically arranged within a choice set in order to increase the choice share of the target option. tasks in which an objectively correct state of the world both exists and has to be inferred from the provided input. a context effect in which the decoy is not available for choice (i.e., a phantom) but nevertheless has an effect on individuals' choices. The exact effect exerted by the phantom decoy depends on various factors such as when the unavailability of the decoy is communicated to the decision maker. tasks in which individuals choose according to their latent (i.e., for the experimenter unobservable) preferences. Adherence to normative principles is typically assessed using consistency across trials. a set of techniques such as eye tracking or mouse tracking that allow quantifying decisions as they emerge rather than just measuring their outputs in the form of choice proportions or response times. a context effect according to which an option that is similar (but not clearly inferior or superior) to one other option draws away choices from this similar option at the advantage of other options. the option within a choice set whose choice share is expected to increase within a given context.

The elusiveness of context effects in decision making