Studying choice-induced preference change within the implicit-choice paradigm: the role of real incentives and data collection methods.

Cognitive dissonance theory implies that individuals tend to change their preferences as a result of a decision. This implication is widely tested and confirmed within the free-choice paradigm, where a large amount of studies find significant spreading of rating or ranking alternatives subsequent to a choice task. However, recent criticism on the free-choice paradigm has questioned the methodological validity of this specific paradigm. The present study uses and slightly modifies the implicit-choice paradigm as first introduced as a solution for the methodological flaws by Alós-Ferrer et al. (2012). The biggest modification of the paradigm is the introduction of real incentives with incentive compatibility mechanisms. Instead of making hypothetical choices, as prevailing in the literature on this subject, the participants actually faced the consequences of the stated preferences and choices made during the experiment. Contrasting to the general finding in the literature, the present study does not find significant evidence for choice-induced preference change. The present study neither finds significant differences between the observed spread for data collected on pen and paper and that on laptop. In addition, two introduced treatments neither significantly influenced the observed spread. Gender is the only variable found to significantly influence the distribution of spread.