Abstract
Product configuration systems are an important instrument to implement mass customization, a production paradigm that supports the manufacturing of highly-variant products under pricing conditions similar to mass production. A side-effect of the high diversity of products offered by a configurator is that the complexity of the alternatives may outstrip a user’s capability to explore them and make a buying decision. A personalization of such systems through the calculation of feature recommendations (defaults) can support customers (users) in the specification of their requirements and thus can lead to a higher customer satisfaction. A major risk of defaults is that they can cause a status quo bias and therefore make users choose options that are, for example, not really needed to fulfill their requirements. In this paper we present the results of an empirical study that aimed to explore whether there exist status quo effects in product configuration scenarios.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Barker, V., O’Connor, D., Bachant, J., Soloway, E.: Expert systems for configuration at Digital: XCON and beyond. Communications of the ACM 32(3), 298–318 (1989)
Fleischanderl, G., Friedrich, G., Haselboeck, A., Schreiner, H., Stumptner, M.: Configuring Large Systems Using Generative Constraint Satisfaction. IEEE Intelligent Systems 13(4), 59–68 (1998)
Mittal, S., Frayman, F.: Towards a Generic Model of Configuration Tasks. In: 11th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Detroit, MI, pp. 1395–1401 (1990)
Sabin, D., Weigel, R.: Product Configuration Frameworks - A Survey. IEEE Intelligent Systems 13(4), 42–49 (1998)
Stumptner, M.: An overview of knowledge-based configuration. AI Communications (AICOM) 10(2), 111–126 (1997)
Cöster, R., Gustavsson, A., Olsson, T., Rudström, A.: Enhancing web-based configuration with recommendations and cluster-based help. In: De Bra, P., Brusilovsky, P., Conejo, R. (eds.) AH 2002. LNCS, vol. 2347, Springer, Heidelberg (2002)
Felfernig, A., Mandl, M., Tiihonen, J., Schubert, M., Leitner, G.: Personalized User Interfaces for Product Configuration. In: International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI 2010), pp. 317–320 (2010)
Mandl, M., Felfernig, A., Teppan, E., Schubert, M.: Consumer Decision Making in Knowledge-based Recommendation. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems (2010) (to appear)
Huffman, C., Kahn, B.: Variety for Sale: Mass Customization or Mass Confusion. Journal of Retailing 74, 491–513 (1998)
Bostrom, N., Ord, T.: The Reversal Test: Eliminating Status Quo Bias in Applied Ethics. Ethics (University of Chicago Press) 116(4), 656–679 (2006)
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J., Thaler, R.: Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias. The Journal of Economic Perspectives 5(1), 193–206 (1991)
Kahneman, D., Tversky, A.: Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2), 263–291 (1979)
Ritov, I., Baron, J.: Status-quo and omission biases. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5, 49–61 (1992)
Samuelson, W., Zeckhauser, R.: Status quo bias in decision making. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1(1), 7–59 (1988)
Mandl, M., Felfernig, A., Teppan, E., Schubert, M.: Consumer Decision Making in Knowledge-based Recommendation. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems (to appear)
Kurniawan, S.H., So, R., Tseng, M.: Consumer Decision Quality in Mass Customization. International Journal of Mass Customisation 1(2-3), 176–194 (2006)
Kamali, N., Loker, S.: Mass customization: On-line consumer involvement in product design. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 7(4) (2002)
Huber, J., Payne, W., Puto, C.: Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis. Journal of Consumer Research 9(1), 90–98 (1982)
Simonson, I., Tversky, A.: Choice in context: Tradeoff contrast and extremeness aversion. Journal of Marketing Research 29(3), 281–295 (1992)
Yoon, S., Simonson, I.: Choice set configuration as a determinant of preference attribution and strength. Journal of Consumer Research 35(2), 324–336 (2008)
Teppan, E.C., Felfernig, A.: Calculating Decoy Items in Utility-Based Recommendation. In: Chien, B.-C., Hong, T.-P., Chen, S.-M., Ali, M. (eds.) IEA/AIE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5579, pp. 183–192. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Teppan, E., Felfernig, A.: Impacts of Decoy Elements on Result Set Evaluation in Knowledge-Based Recommendation. International Journal of Advanced Intelligence Paradigms 1(3), 358–373 (2009)
Felfernig, A., Gula, B., Leitner, G., Maier, M., Melcher, R., Schippel, S., Teppan, E.: A Dominance Model for the Calculation of Decoy Products in Recommendation Environments. In: AISB 2008 Symposium on Persuasive Technology, pp. 43–50 (2008)
Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice. Science, New Series 211, 453–458 (1981)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Mandl, M., Felfernig, A., Tiihonen, J., Isak, K. (2011). Status Quo Bias in Configuration Systems. In: Mehrotra, K.G., Mohan, C.K., Oh, J.C., Varshney, P.K., Ali, M. (eds) Modern Approaches in Applied Intelligence. IEA/AIE 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 6703. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21822-4_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21822-4_12
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-21821-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-21822-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)