We come to place more value on the options we chose and less value on the ones we rejected be it choosing between presidential candidates or household objects, researcher say.
One way of explaining this effect is through the idea of cognitive dissonance. Making a selection between two options that we feel pretty much the same about creates a sense of dissonance.
Re-evaluating the options after we've made our choice may be a way of resolving this dissonance.
In a new article researcher Tali Sharot of University College London and her colleagues examine whether choice-induced changes in preference are fleeting or long-lasting.
The researchers asked 39 undergraduate participants to rate the desirability of 80 different vacation destinations, rating how happy they think they would be if they were to vacation at that location.
They were then presented with pairs of similar vacation destinations and asked to choose which destination they would prefer. The participants rated the destinations again immediately after making their choices and once more three years later.
To test whether a sense of agency over the decision makes a difference for choice-induced changes in preference, the researchers looked at participants' preferences when the participants made the choices themselves and when a computer instructed the participants' choices.
The results suggest that the act of choosing between two similar options can lead to enduring changes in preference.
Participants rated vacation destinations as more desirable both immediately after choosing them and again three years later.
This change only occurred, however, if they had made the original choice themselves. The researchers observed no change in participants' preferences when the computer instructed their choices.
Sharot and her colleagues argue the fact that this effect is robust and has implications for a diverse array of fields, including economics, marketing and even interpersonal relationships.
The study has been published in Psychological Science.