Psychologists have long been intrigued by decision-induced changes in preferences where making a decision strengthens one's relative preference between more and less preferred options. This phenomenon has been explained through two prominent theories: a dissonance account, which suggests that it results from the decision maker's attempt to minimize an unpleasant emotional-motivational state of "dissonance," and an inference account, which posits that it reflects a process of inferring and updating one's "true" preferences. In the current research, we investigate whether, how, and why framing a decision as a choice or a rejection influences decision-induced preference modulation. Across 13 preregistered experiments, including seven (N = 6,248 participants from North America and Asia) reported in the main text, we find that reject-framed decisions between attractive options induce greater postdecision preference modulation (i.e., a larger preference gap between options) than choose-framed decisions, all else equal. Supporting the inference account, the effect is moderated by attribute similarity and choice set valence while being mediated consistently by perceived action diagnosticity. In contrast, purported moderators and process measures of the dissonance account received no support when tested. Additionally, we systematically address potential confounds associated with varying levels of "noise" in preference expression through decisions, an issue that had encumbered previous paradigms on preference modulation. Our findings suggest that changes in preference induced by ordinary day-to-day decisions primarily stem from an ongoing process of information inference and updating rather than dissonance reduction. This research also provides insights into the previously unforeseen consequences of framing interventions in policy and business. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

框架通过自我偏好推断（可能不是不和谐）影响决策后偏好。


长期以来，心理学家一直对决策引起的偏好变化很感兴趣，其中做出决定会加强一个人在更多和更少首选选项之间的相对偏好。这种现象可以通过两个突出的理论来解释：一种不和谐的解释，它表明它是决策者试图最小化令人不快的“不和谐”情绪动机状态的结果，另一种是推断解释，它假设它反映了推断和更新一个人的“真实”偏好的过程。在目前的研究中，我们研究了将决策构建为选择或拒绝是否、如何以及为什么会影响决策诱导的偏好调节。在 13 个预先注册的实验中，包括正文中报告的 7 个（N = 6,248 名来自北美和亚洲的参与者），我们发现，在其他条件相同的情况下，有吸引力的选项之间的拒绝框架决策比选择框架决策诱导更大的决策后偏好调节（即选项之间的偏好差距更大）。支持推理解释的是，这种效果受到属性相似性和选择集效价的调节，同时由感知的动作诊断一致地调节。相比之下，不和谐账户的所谓版主和过程措施在测试中没有得到任何支持。此外，我们系统地解决了通过决策解决与偏好表达中不同水平的 “噪声 ”相关的潜在混杂因素，这是一个阻碍了以前偏好调制范式的问题。我们的研究结果表明，普通日常决策引起的偏好变化主要源于持续的信息推理和更新过程，而不是减少不和谐。 这项研究还对在政策和商业中制定干预措施的先前不可预见的后果提供了见解。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 （c） 2024 APA，保留所有权利）。