• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.17 no.6
• /
• pp.490-503
• /
• 2017

The purpose of this study was to identify the effect of choice theory focus group work on improving housewives' mental health. To achieve this goal. the book 'Warning: Psychiatry can be hazardous to your mental health' was utilized as a media to educate and debate. The subjects for the study were 24 housewives divided by 2 group. The instrument utilized were the Korean versions of Trait Anger Scale, Trait Anxiety Scale, Beck Depression Inventory, and Psychological Well-Being Scale. The participants were asked to complete the instruments before, after and in 5 weeks after the program. The results were as follows: First, Choice Theory Focus Group Work decreased trait anger, trait anxiety and depression compared to control group. Second, Choice Theory Focus Group Work increased Psychological Well-Being Scale compared to control group. The effect of the program was significant in improving mental health of the housewives and the effect was maintained up to 5 weeks after the program. The results of this study implied that Choice Theory Focus Group Work could be effective in improving mental health.

• Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association
• /
• v.28 no.3
• /
• pp.147-160
• /
• 1990

Family researchers had devoted little attention to Choice, Exchange theory by the time 1960. Being anchored by Thibaut & kelley(1959), this theory becomes one of the most widely used theoretical frameworks for family research. Waller's(1938) famous rating-dating hypothesis was intrinsically an exchange formulation. Blood and Wolfe(1960) employed the concept of rewards in their theory of family power. Farber(1964) also used the reward concept in his theory of permanent availability. Heer's(1964) specific application of its concepts to spousal power was among its earliest uses in the family. The general principle or most general proposition of the theory is that humans avoid costly behavior and seek rewarding statuses, to the end maxmize profits. This review will attempt to show that Choice, Exchange theory is applicable to the several arenas of family interaction and that it can provide an explanation for family behavior. Subjects such as mate selection, marital unstability, family cohesion, spousal power, the problems of aged, family co-unseling, and so on are included. By discussing research findings from a perspective of rewrds and costs this review will show that the application of the theory is not limited to one or two substative specialities with in the family domain. After all Choice, Exchange theory is truly general and can be productively applied to any domain of human behavior.

• Journal of Distribution Science
• /
• v.11 no.5
• /
• pp.63-76
• /
• 2013

Purpose - For the past several decades, behavioral economics or behavioral decision theory has undergone rapid development. This study provides a critical review of the development of behavioral economics with a focus on what are deemed to be core theories in the field. Starting from the utility function proposed by Daniel Bernoulli in the 18th century, the development history of utility functions until the emergence of the prospect theory is thoroughly reviewed. Some of the experimental results violating the traditionally assumed utility function and supporting the prospect theory value function are summarized. The most representative principles of rational choice are transitivity, independence from irrelevant alternatives (IIA), and regularity. The development of behavioral economics has been triggered by finding counter-examples to these principles. Some of the choice behaviors discussed in this study as counter-examples to the traditional theories of rational choice are the St. Petersburg paradox; the Allais paradox; gambling behavior; and the various context effects including the similarity effect, attraction effect, and the compromise effect. The Elimination-by-Aspects (EBA) model, which was proposed as an explanation for the similarity effect, is discussed in detail as well. Based on the literature review and further analysis, this study summarizes the relationship between the context effects, prospect theory, and EBA model. Research design, data, and methodology - This study provides an extensive literature review on several important theories in the field of behavioral decision theory and adds some critical comments to the theories and the relationships among them. This study first reviews the development of utility functions. Daniel Bernoulli introduced the concept of utility function to solve the St. Petersburg paradox. In the mid-20th century, Herbert Simon proposed the "satisficing" heuristic and presented a value function with a shape different from traditional utility functions. This study highlights the strengths and weaknesses of several utility functions proposed until the emergence of the prospect theory value function. Results - This study posits that prospect theory and EBA model are the two most important theories in the field of behavioral decision theory. They can explain various choice behaviors that traditional utility maximization analysis has been unable to. The application of these models to various fields is further increasing nowadays. This study explains how prospect theory and the EBA model can be used to explain the context effects. Conclusions - The traditional economic theory relies on a single variable called "utility" in explaining consumer choice. However, this study argues that, in investigating consumer choice, several other variables should also be considered. These are the similarity among alternatives, an alternative's prototypicality within the category, the dominance relationship between alternatives, and the reference point in evaluating alternatives. Due to the development of behavioral economics, we are now closer to a more complete understanding of consumer choice behavior than in the past when we had only a single tool called utility.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.23 no.3
• /
• pp.59-68
• /
• 1995

This paper intends to identify recreation destination choice process, in particular, considering need/motive theory, recreation opportunity spectrum, information integration theory, and to review critically the status of development of the various modeling approaches. Two attempts are then made to explain consumers' choice begavior of theme park and national park, respectively, applying conjoint model and discrete choice experiment model. Three theme parks and three national parks were selected as study areas, resolution Ⅲ designs were constructed, and data was collected by in-personal interviews on the study areas. The results illustrated the part-worth utilities and the relative importance of the attributes of theme park and national park. In addition, further research directions were discussed.

• Journal of Korean Society of Transportation
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.77-90
• /
• 2003

This paper explores the way and the extent to which drivers' route choice was influenced by uncertain information. In particular, this paper investigates the effect of qualitative information on route choice when drivers face a choice with different degrees of uncertain information. The SP survey was conducted and route choice legit models were estimated. We also applied Prospect Theory to the analysis of drivers' decision making under uncertain information. The main findings are firstly, drivers tend to prefer a route with information than(to) one without information. This indicated that providing charge information encouraged drivers to choose the routes for which information is provided in preference to those for which it is not provided. Secondly, drivers also prefer a route with a certain and precise information over one with uncertain and imprecise information. Thirdly, when the information is given as a range, the size of the range of the information influenced route choice slightly and as the range of the charge increases, the route becomes slightly less unattractive. Fourthly, when the information is given as a range, drivers' route choices are influenced more by the median value of the ranges than by the size of the overall ranges of the information. Application of Prospect Theory to the results explains the way drivers may be interpreting the choice situation and how they make a route choice in response to uncertain information. The results of this paper implicate that drivers' decision making under uncertainty seem to be very complicated and flexible, depending on the way drivers interpret the choice situation. Therefore, it is recommended to apply wider related theories to the analysis of the drivers' behaviour.

• Korean Management Science Review
• /
• v.28 no.1
• /
• pp.159-167
• /
• 2011

The theory of random utility maximization (RUM) defines the probability of an alternative being chosen as the probability of its utility being perceived as higher than those of all the other competing alternatives in the choice set (Marschak 1960). According to this theory, consumers perceive the utility of an alternative not as a constant but as a probability distribution. Over the last two decades, there have been an increasing number of studies on the effect of utility variance on choice probability. The common result of the previous studies is that as the utility variance increases, the effect of the mean value of the utility (the deterministic component of the utility) on choice probability is reduced. This study provides a theoretical investigation on the effect of utility variance on choice probability without any assumptions on the specific forms of probability distributions. This study suggests that without assumptions of the probability distribution functions, firms cannot apply the marketing strategy of maximizing choice probability (or market share), but can only adopt the strategy of maximizing the minimum or maximum value of the expected choice probability. This study applies the Chebyshef inequality and shows how the changes in utility variances affect the maximum of minimum of choice probabilities and provides managerial implications.

• Asia Marketing Journal
• /
• v.18 no.3
• /
• pp.47-63
• /
• 2016

Rational choice theory holds that the alternative with largest expected utility in the choice set should always be chosen. However, it is often observed that an alternative with the largest expected utility is not always chosen while the choice task itself being avoided. Such a choice phenomenon cannot be explained by the traditional expected utility maximization principle. The current study posits shows that such a phenomenon can be attributed to the gap between the expected perceived gain (or loss) and the expected perceived value. This study mathematically analyses the relationship between the expectation of an alternative's gains or losses over the reference point and its expected value, when the perceived gains or losses follow continuous probability distributions. The proposed expected value (EV) function can explain the effects of loss aversion and uncertainty on the evaluation of an alternative based on the prospect theory value function. The proposed function reveals why the expected gain of an alternative should exceed some positive threshold in order for the alternative to be chosen. The model also explains why none of the two equally or similarly attractive options is chosen when they are presented together, but either of them is chosen when presented alone. The EV function and EG-EV curve can extract and visualize the core tenets of the prospect theory more clearly than the value function itself.

• Journal of the Korea Institute of Information Security & Cryptology
• /
• v.27 no.6
• /
• pp.1507-1517
• /
• 2017

Generally, information breach incidents are thought to be caused by external hackers. However, both direct and indirect information breach incidents by insiders are more frequent than by external hackers. It also accounts for more than half of the total information breach, so it should be prepared against insider breach. In this study, based on General Deterrence Theory(GDT) and Rational Choice Theory(RCT), we integrated the risk sensitivity and situational anxiety, which were studied in the field of traffic psychology to construct research model. Result of analysis shows that the impact of risk perceptions on the severity and certainty of perceived punishment was not statistically significant, but perceived benefits, situational anxiety, and severity and certainty of perceived punishment were found to influence the information breach intention.

• Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.89-97
• /
• 2010

This study researches the effects of common features on a no-choice option with respect to regulatory focus theory. The primary interest is in three factors and their interrelationship: common features, no-choice option, and regulatory focus. Prior studies have compiled vast body of research in these areas. First, the "common features effect" has been observed bymany noted marketing researchers. Tversky (1972) proposed the seminal theory, the EBA model: elimination by aspect. According to this theory, consumers are prone to focus only on unique features during comparison processing, thereby dismissing any common features as redundant information. Recently, however, more provocative ideas have attacked the EBA model by asserting that common features really do affect consumer judgment. Chernev (1997) first reported that adding common features mitigates the choice gap because of the increasing perception of similarity among alternatives. Later, however, Chernev (2001) published a critically developed study against his prior perspective with the proposition that common features may be a cognitive load to consumers, and thus consumers are possible that they are prone to prefer the heuristic processing to the systematic processing. This tends to bring one question to the forefront: Do "common features" affect consumer choice? If so, what are the concrete effects? This study tries to answer the question with respect to the "no-choice" option and regulatory focus. Second, some researchers hold that the no-choice option is another best alternative of consumers, who are likely to avoid having to choose in the context of knotty trade-off settings or mental conflicts. Hope for the future also may increase the no-choice option in the context of optimism or the expectancy of a more satisfactory alternative appearing later. Other issues reported in this domain are time pressure, consumer confidence, and alternative numbers (Dhar and Nowlis 1999; Lin and Wu 2005; Zakay and Tsal 1993). This study casts the no-choice option in yet another perspective: the interactive effects between common features and regulatory focus. Third, "regulatory focus theory" is a very popular theme in recent marketing research. It suggests that consumers have two focal goals facing each other: promotion vs. prevention. A promotion focus deals with the concepts of hope, inspiration, achievement, or gain, whereas prevention focus involves duty, responsibility, safety, or loss-aversion. Thus, while consumers with a promotion focus tend to take risks for gain, the same does not hold true for a prevention focus. Regulatory focus theory predicts consumers' emotions, creativity, attitudes, memory, performance, and judgment, as documented in a vast field of marketing and psychology articles. The perspective of the current study in exploring consumer choice and common features is a somewhat creative viewpoint in the area of regulatory focus. These reviews inspire this study of the interaction possibility between regulatory focus and common features with a no-choice option. Specifically, adding common features rather than omitting them may increase the no-choice option ratio in the choice setting only to prevention-focused consumers, but vice versa to promotion-focused consumers. The reasoning is that when prevention-focused consumers come in contact with common features, they may perceive higher similarity among the alternatives. This conflict among similar options would increase the no-choice ratio. Promotion-focused consumers, however, are possible that they perceive common features as a cue of confirmation bias. And thus their confirmation processing would make their prior preference more robust, then the no-choice ratio may shrink. This logic is verified in two experiments. The first is a $2{\times}2$ between-subject design (whether common features or not X regulatory focus) using a digital cameras as the relevant stimulus-a product very familiar to young subjects. Specifically, the regulatory focus variable is median split through a measure of eleven items. Common features included zoom, weight, memory, and battery, whereas the other two attributes (pixel and price) were unique features. Results supported our hypothesis that adding common features enhanced the no-choice ratio only to prevention-focus consumers, not to those with a promotion focus. These results confirm our hypothesis - the interactive effects between a regulatory focus and the common features. Prior research had suggested that including common features had a effect on consumer choice, but this study shows that common features affect choice by consumer segmentation. The second experiment was used to replicate the results of the first experiment. This experimental study is equal to the prior except only two - priming manipulation and another stimulus. For the promotion focus condition, subjects had to write an essay using words such as profit, inspiration, pleasure, achievement, development, hedonic, change, pursuit, etc. For prevention, however, they had to use the words persistence, safety, protection, aversion, loss, responsibility, stability etc. The room for rent had common features (sunshine, facility, ventilation) and unique features (distance time and building state). These attributes implied various levels and valence for replication of the prior experiment. Our hypothesis was supported repeatedly in the results, and the interaction effects were significant between regulatory focus and common features. Thus, these studies showed the dual effects of common features on consumer choice for a no-choice option. Adding common features may enhance or mitigate no-choice, contradictory as it may sound. Under a prevention focus, adding common features is likely to enhance the no-choice ratio because of increasing mental conflict; under the promotion focus, it is prone to shrink the ratio perhaps because of a "confirmation bias." The research has practical and theoretical implications for marketers, who may need to consider common features carefully in a practical display context according to consumer segmentation (i.e., promotion vs. prevention focus.) Theoretically, the results suggest some meaningful moderator variable between common features and no-choice in that the effect on no-choice option is partly dependent on a regulatory focus. This variable corresponds not only to a chronic perspective but also a situational perspective in our hypothesis domain. Finally, in light of some shortcomings in the research, such as overlooked attribute importance, low ratio of no-choice, or the external validity issue, we hope it influences future studies to explore the little-known world of the "no-choice option."

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.89-114
• /
• 2009

We have many causal beliefs, and they play an important role in our decision making. Unlike evidential decision theory, causal decision theory claims that an account of rational choice must use causal beliefs to identify the considerations that make a choice rational. I claim that evidential decision theory is refuted by the original Newcomb's problem but not by the medical Newcomb problem. The latter is taken to be the best example to point out the weakness of evidential decision theory. However, by the explicit statement about causal relations, I argue that the medical Newcomb problem loses its strength in refuting evidential decision theory. With this argument, this paper clarifies the difference between evidential decision theory and causal decision theory.