When More Time to Choose is Not Good

Abstract

This paper investigates how time availability affects the relationship between Need for Cognitive Closure (NCC) and Choice-Process Satisfaction (CPS).  We argue that the “time as resource” concept does not apply when prevention-focused consumers process non-alignable information. In this challenging decision situation, having more time to decide is unfavorable to CPS. A 2x2x2 between-subject experiment was conducted with 1,061 respondents to investigate the effect of NCC on CPS.  The eight different scenarios (Table 2 refers) vary in consumer regulatory focus, information alignability, and time availability.  The focus is on the role of time availability affecting the relationship between NCC and CPS.  Regression analysis was conducted on each of the eight scenarios.  The results show that the relationship between NCC and CPS is only significant when prevention-focused consumers process non-alignable information.  The findings support the argument that the “time as resource” concept does not always apply.  In these situations, NCC positively (negatively) affects CPS when time is limited (abundant).  This paper challenges the long-held “time as resource” belief, and argues that having time abundance in challenging decision situations is unfavorable to CPS.  Managers, especially retailers, can apply the findings to design decision-making environments such as providing time limits for complex choice decisions. This research is without limitation.  The current research was conducted in an experimental environment.  Future research should explore the real retail environment.

Keywords: Time as Resource, Need for Cognitive Closure, Choice-Process Satisfaction, Decision Situation, Prevention Focus