Choice Overload – Does it matter how often we are confronted with the different alternatives in a choice context?

Last registered on February 11, 2020

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Choice Overload – Does it matter how often we are confronted with the different alternatives in a choice context?
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0005447
Initial registration date
February 11, 2020

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
February 11, 2020, 1:43 PM EST

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2020-02-14
End date
2020-02-28
Secondary IDs
Abstract
The number of available alternatives in a choice context tends to influence the decision-making process of an individual. The question whether and in what way the size of the choice set influences decision makers has already been tested in numerous experiments. However, not only the number of alternatives has an influence on the decision-making process, but also how this process is structured in the respective context. This study aims to examine whether it makes a difference if individuals are confronted only once or twice with the set of alternatives during the decision-making process without varying the total size of the choice set.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Spinner, Larissa. 2020. "Choice Overload – Does it matter how often we are confronted with the different alternatives in a choice context?." AEA RCT Registry. February 11. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.5447-1.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2020-02-14
Intervention End Date
2020-02-28

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Proportion of participants clicking the add-to-cart-button
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
In this field experiment, the purchasing behaviour of customers of the brand KERBHOLZ (online shop for sustainable wooden accessories) is investigated. The two different treatments differ in the design of the product detail page a visitor of the online shop gets to see.
Experimental Design Details
At KERBHOLZ Onlineshop you can buy products from four different main categories: watches, sunglasses, jewellery and interior. By clicking on one of the four categories, a visitor is directed to the so-called category page, where all the products in the respective category are listed and can be compared with each other based on their design, price, model name and wood type. This category page remains identical for both treatments. If a user clicks on a certain product to take a closer look at it, she is forwarded to the product detail page, where she will find many details about the respective product (size, short description, more photos, etc.) and a button through which she can add her selected model to the shopping cart. The design of the product detail page now varies between the two treatments. For treatment group 1, differently coloured buttons are displayed directly above the add-to-cart button, showing the user in which variants her chosen model is also available (for example, in a different wood type, with a differently coloured watch strap or with a different plating). However, this is not new information, since these variants were also already displayed on the category page. Thus, group 1 sees some of the available options twice. By clicking on a variant button, the user is forwarded form the initially selected product to the detail page of the now selected model variant. To treatment group 2 these buttons are not shown. Otherwise the pages shown to the two groups do not differ. Since all available model variants are also displayed on the category page, the size of the choice set remains unchanged across the two groups. Hence, the only difference between the treatments is that group 2 is only once confronted with the available options, namely on the category page. Contrary to this, a user in group 1 will first see all existing choices on the category page and in addition to that she also sees the availability of other options very similar to the model originally selected, just above the add-to-cart button. This could distract her from her original decision (namely to add the selected model to the cart). It is examined whether the add-to-cart rate differs between the two treatments.
Randomization Method
Randomiziation done by A/B-testing tool (Google Optimize)
Randomization Unit
Individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
10.000 participants
Sample size: planned number of observations
10.000 participants
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
5.000 participants in each of the two treatments
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials