本研究嘗試探討消費者的矛盾心理對於選擇困難的影響，加入了考慮集大小和時間距離一起探討消費者在做決策時的行為。本研究結果顯示：（1）當產品的考慮集大小較大時，不論消費者具有高矛盾心理或是低矛盾心理，他們對於選擇困難無顯著差異，但是當考慮集大小較小時，與低矛盾心理的消費者相比，高矛盾心理的消費者會有較大的選擇困難；此外，（2）當時間距離較近時，與低矛盾心理的消費者相比，高矛盾心理的消費者會有較大的選擇困難；相反地，當時間距離較遠時，與高矛盾心理的消費者相比，低矛盾心理的消費者會有較大的選擇困難；（3）另外，當面對考慮集大小較大的情況之下，無論時間距離是較近還是較遠，高矛盾心理的消費者和低矛盾心理的消費者對於選擇困難無顯著的差異；相對地，當面對考慮集大小較小的情況，在時間距離較近的情況之下，與低矛盾心理的消費者相比，高矛盾心理的消費者會有較大的選擇困難，但是在時間距離較遠的情況下，與高矛盾心理的消費者相比，低矛盾心理的消費者會有較大的選擇困難。

This research attempts to examine the effects of the consideration set size and temporal distance on consumer ambivalence and choice behavior. The findings of this research demonstrate that (1) When the consideration set size of products is large, the consumers have no differential decision difficulty, regardless of consumers’ ambivalence. On the contrary, as compared to consumers with low ambivalence, those with high ambivalence tend to engender stronger decision difficulty when dealing with products characterized by a small consideration set size. In addition, (2) When the temporal distance is near, as compared to consumers with low ambivalence, consumers with high ambivalence engender stronger decision difficulty; on the contrary, as compared to consumers with high ambivalence, those with low ambivalence engender stronger decision difficulty for products characterized by far temporal distance. (3) In addition, for large consideration set size of products, consumers engender no differential decision difficulty, regardless of temporal distance and consumers' ambivalence. In contrast, for small consideration set size of products, when the temporal distance is near, consumers with high ambivalence engender stronger decision difficulty than consumers with low ambivalence; however, for small consideration set size of products, when the temporal distance is far, consumers with low ambivalence engender stronger decision difficulty than consumers with high ambivalence.

Abaluck, J, and J Gruber (2011). Choice inconsistencies among the elderly: Evidence from plan choice in the Medicare Part D program, American Economic Review 101(4), 1180-1210. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.101.4.1180

Ainslie, G., & Haslam, N. (1992). Hyperbolic discounting. In G. Loewenstein & J. Elster (Eds.), Choice over time (pp. 57-92). Russell Sage Foundation.

Aurier, P., Jean, S., & Zaichkowsky, J. L. (2000). Consideration set size and familiarity with usage context. Advances in Consumer Research, 27, 307-313.

Bartholomew, K., & Thompson, J. M. (1995). The application of attachment theory to counseling psychology. The Counseling Psychologist, 23(3), 484-490. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000095233006

Bassili, J. N. (1996). Meta-judgmental versus operative indexes of psychological attributes: The case of measures of attitude strength. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(4), 637-653. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.4.637

Belonax, J. J., & Rajshekhar, J. G. (1989). The Influence of Involvement and Product Class Quality on Consumer Choice Sets. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 17(3), 209-216.

Benjamin, C. L., Harrison, J. P., Settipani, C. A., Brodman, D. M., & Kendall, P. C. (2013). Anxiety and related outcomes in young adults 7 to 19 years after receiving treatment for child anxiety. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 81, 865-876. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033048

Berry, C. M., Sackett, P. R., & Tobares, V. (2010). A meta-analysis of conditional reasoning tests of aggression. Personnel Psychology, 63(2), 361-384. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01173.x

Bettman, J. R., & Zins, M. A. (1979). Information format and choice task effects in decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 6(2), 141-153. https://doi.org/10.1086/208757
Botti, S., & lyengar, S. S. (2004). The psychological pleasure and pain of choosing: When people prefer choosing at the cost of subsequent outcome satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(3), 312-326. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.3.312

Briers, B., Pandelaere, M., Dewitte, S., & Warlop, L. (2006). Hungry for money: The desire for caloric resources increases the desire for financial resources and vice versa. Psychological Science, 17, 939-943. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01808.x

Brisoux, J. E., & Chéron, E. J. (1990). Brand categorization and product involvement. In M. Goldberg, G. Gorn, & R. Pollay (Eds.), Advances in Consumer Research, 17, 101-109. Association for Consumer Research.

Broekel, T., & Boschma, R. (2012). Knowledge networks in the Dutch aviation industry: The proximity paradox. Journal of Economic Geography, 12, 409-433. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbr010

Broniarczyk, S. M., & Griffin, J. G. (2014). Decision difficulty in the age of consumer empowerment. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24(4), 608-625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2014.05.003

Buehler, R., Griffin, D., & Ross, M. (1994). Exploring the "planning fallacy": Why people underestimate their task completion times. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(3), 366-381. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.3.366

Campbell, D. T. (1969). Reforms as experiments. American Psychologist, 24(4), 409-429. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0027982

Cheek, N. N., & Goebel, J. (2020). What does it mean to maximize? “Decision difficulty,” indecisiveness, and the jingle-jangle fallacies in the measurement of maximizing. Judgment and Decision Making, 15(1), 7-24. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500006884

Cheek, N. N., & Ward, A. (2019). When choice is a double-edged sword: Understanding maximizers' paradoxical experiences with choice. Personality and Individual Differences, 143, 55-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.02.004

Conner, M., & Flesh, D. (1998). Attitudes, intentions and ambivalence about having casual sex. Unpublished raw data. School of Psychology, University of Leeds, UK.

Conner, M., Norman, P., & Bell, R. (2002). The theory of planned behavior and healthy eating. Health Psychology, 21(2), 194-201. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.21.2.194

Cziko, G. (2000). The things we do: Using the lessons of Bernard and Darwin to understand the what, why and how of our behavior. Journal of Mammalogy, 82(3), 882–883. https://doi.org/10.1644/1545-1542(2001)082<0883:>2.0.CO;2

Dane E., Rockman K. W., Pratt M. G. (2012). When should I trust my gut? Linking domain expertise to intuitive decision-making effectiveness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 119, 187-194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.07.009

De Neys, W. (2006). Dual processing in reasoning: Two systems but one reasoner. Psychological Science, 17(5), 428-433. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01723.x

Dhar, R., & Nowlis, S. M. (1999). The effect of time pressure on consumer choice deferral. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(4), 369-384. https://doi.org/10.1086/209545

Divine, R. L. (1995). The influence of price on the relationship between involvement and consideration size. Marketing Letters, 6(4), 309-319. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00996194

Drolet, R. E., Cannon, J. R., Montero, L., & Greenamyre, J. T. (2009). Chronic rotenone exposure reproduces Parkinson’s disease gastrointestinal neuropathology. Neurobiology of Disease, 36, 96-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbd.2009.06.017

Effron, D. A., Niedenthal, P. M., Gil, S., & Droit-Volet, S. (2006). Embodied temporal perception of emotion. Emotion, 6(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.6.1.1

Elliott, M. T., & Warfield, A. E. (1993). Do market mavens categorize brands differently? Advances in Consumer Research, 202-208.

Elster, J., & Loewenstein, G. (1992). Utility from memory and anticipation. In G. Loewenstein & J. Elster (Eds.), Choice over time, 213-234. Russell Sage Foundation.

Eyal, T., Liberman, N., Trope, Y., & Walther, E. (2004). The pros and cons of temporally near and distant action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(6), 781-795. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.781

Fazio, R. H. (1995). Attitudes as object-evaluation associations: Determinants, consequences, and correlates of attitude accessibility. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and Consequences (pp. 247-282). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Fisher, M., & Keil, F. C. (2014). The illusion of argument justification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(1), 425-433. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032234

Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Freud, S. (1930). Civilization and its discontents. Hogarth.

Friedman, R. S., & Förster, J. (2010). Implicit affective cues and attentional tuning: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 136(5), 875-893. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020495

Gronhaug, Kjell (1973-1974), Some factors influencing the size of the buyer’s evoked set, European Journal of Marketing, 7, 232-241. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005116

Haenze, M. (2001). Ambivalence, conflict and decision making: Attitudes and feelings in Germany towards NATO’s military intervention in the Kosovo war. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 693-706. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.57

Hinson, J. M., Jameson, T. L., & Whitney, P. (2003). Impulsive decision making and working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29(2), 298-306. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.29.2.298

Homans, G. C. (1974). Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms (Revised ed.). San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Howard, J. A., & Sheth, J. N. (1969). The theory of buyer behavior. John Wiley & Sons.

Howard, T. C. (1963). Effects of hunger on the rat's escape from cold. Psychological Reports, 12(2), 299-304. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1963.12.2.299

Hu, H. F., & Krishen, A. S. (2019). When is enough, enough? Investigating product reviews and information overload from a consumer empowerment perspective. Journal of Business Research, 100(C), 27-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.03.011

Huber, O., & Kunz, U. (2007). Time pressure in risky decision-making: Effect on risk defusing. Psychology Science, 49(4), 415-426.

Huskinson, T. L.H., & Haddock, G. (2004). Individual differences in attitude structure: Variance in the chronic reliance on affective and cognitive information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(1), 82-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00060-X

Jarvis, Lance P. and James B. Wilcox (1973), Evoked set size, some theoretical foundations and empirical evidence, American Marketing Association, 236-240.

Jewell, D. E., Yu, S., & Joshi, D. K. (2002). Effects of serum vitamin E levels on skin vitamin E levels in dogs and cats. Veterinary Therapeutics, 3(3), 235-243.

Jewell, R. D., Coupey, E., & Jones, M. T. (2002). Catch a tiger by his toe: Ambivalence in decision making in the 2000 presidential election. In S. M. Broniarczyk & K. Nakamoto (Eds.), Advances in Consumer Research, 29, 333-338. Association for Consumer Research.

Johnson, T. E., & Rule, B. G. (1986). Mitigating circumstance information, censure, and aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(3), 537-542. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.50.3.537

Jonas, K., Diehl, M., & Brőmer, P. (1997). Effects of attitudinal ambivalence on information processing and attitude-intention consistency. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33(2), 190-210. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1996.1317

Kahneman, D., & Miller, D. T. (1986). Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives. Psychological Review, 93(2), 136-153. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.93.2.136

Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1982). The psychology of preferences. Scientific American, 246(1), 160-173. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0182-160

Kirby, K. N., & Herrnstein, R. J. (1995). Preference reversals due to myopic discounting of delayed reward. Psychological Science, 6(2), 83-89. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1995.tb00311.x

Lapersonne, E., Laurent, G., & Le Goff, J. J. (1995). Consideration sets of size one: An empirical investigation of automobile purchases. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 12, 55-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-8116(95)00005-M

Lavine, H., Borgida, E., & Sullivan, J. L. (2000). On the relationship between attitude involvement and attitude accessibility: Toward a cognitive-motivational model of political information processing. Political Psychology, 21(1), 81-106. https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00178

Liberman, N., Trope, Y., & Stephan, E. (2007). Psychological distance. In A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles (pp. 353-381). The Guilford Press.

Miller, D. T., & McFarland, C. (1986). Counterfactual thinking and victim compensation: A test of norm theory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 12(4), 513-519. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167286124014

Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81-97. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043158

Miller, P. H., & Aloise, P. A. (1989). Young children's understanding of the psychological causes of behavior: A review. Child Development, 60(2), 257-285. https://doi.org/10.2307/1130975

Murray, S. L., Holmes, J. G., & Griffin, D. W. (1996). The self-fulfilling nature of positive illusions in romantic relationships: Love is not blind, but prescient. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(6), 1155-1180. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.6.1155

Nenkov, G. Y., Morrin, M., Ward, A., Schwartz, B., & Hulland, J. (2008). A short form of the Maximization Scale: Factor structure, reliability and validity studies. Judgment and Decision Making, 3(5), 371-388. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500000395

Nooteboom, B., Vanhaverbeke, W., Duysters, G., Gilsing, V., & van den Oord, A. (2007). Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 36(7), 1016-1034.

Olson, J. M., & Stone, J. (2005). The Influence of Behavior on Attitudes. The Handbook of Attitudes (pp. 223-271). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Ostlund, L. E. (1973). Evoked set size: Some empirical results. Combined Proceedings. Conferences of the American Marketing Association, 226-230.

Otnes, C., Lowrey, T. M., & Shrum, L. J. (1997). Toward an understanding of consumer ambivalence. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(1), 80-93. https://doi.org/10.1086/209495

Ottati, V., Wilson, C., Price, E. (2015). Open-minded cognition: The flexible merit standard model. Unpublished manuscript. Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.

Parks, C. D., & Stone, A. B. (2010). The desire to expel unselfish members from the group. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(2), 303-310. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018403

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1990), Involvement and persuasion: Tradition versus integration, Psychological Bulletin, 107(3), 367-374. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.3.367

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1996). Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. Westview Press.

Petty, R. E., & Krosnick, J. A. (Eds.). (1995). Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Polman, E. (2010). Information distortion in self-other decision making. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(2), 432-435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.11.003

Povey, R., Wellens, B., & Conner, M. (2001). Attitudes towards following meat, vegetarian and vegan diets: An examination of the role of ambivalence. Appetite, 37(1), 15-26. https://doi.org/10.1006/appe.2001.0406

Priester, J. R., & Petty, R. E. (1996). The gradual threshold model of ambivalence: Relating the positive and negative bases of attitudes to subjective ambivalence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(3), 431-449. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.3.431

Rahinel, R., Otto, A. S., Grossman, D. M., & Clarkson, J. J. (2021). Exposure to brands makes preferential decisions easier. Journal of Consumer Research, 48(4), 541-561. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucab025

Ribeaux, P., & Poppleton, S. E. (1978). Psychology and Work: An Introduction. Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-15983-3_1

Roelofsma, P. H. M. P. (1996). Modelling intertemporal choices: An anomaly approach. Acta Psychologica, 93(1-3), 5-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(96)00023-6

Ross, M., & Wilson, A. E. (2002). It feels like yesterday: Self-esteem, valence of personal past experiences, and judgments of subjective distance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(5), 792-803. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.5.792

Rothschild, M. L., & Houston, M. J. (1977). The consumer involvement matrix: Some preliminary findings. In B. A. Greenberg & D. N. Bellinger (Eds.), Proceedings: AMA Educator's Conference (pp. 95-98).

Rydval, O. (2011). The causal effect of cognitive abilities on economic behavior: Evidence from a forecasting task with varying cognitive load (University of Jena, Working Paper).

Sagi, A., & Friedland, N. (2007). The cost of richness: The effect of the size and diversity of decision sets on post-decision regret. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(4), 515-524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.4.515

Schneider, I. K., Novin, S., & van Harreveld, F. (2022). The ambivalent individual: Validation studies for the trait ambivalence scale. OSF Preprints Web. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/4cbex

Schram, A., & Sonnemans, J. (2011). How individuals choose health insurance: An experimental analysis. European Economic Review, forthcoming.

Scott, W. E., Jr. (1966). Activation theory and task design. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 1(1), 3-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(66)90003-1

Sengupta, J., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2000). The effects of analyzing reasons for brand preferences: Disruption or reinforcement? Journal of Marketing Research, 37(3), 318-330. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.37.3.318.18776
Shapiro, S. L., & Schwartz, G. E. (2000). The role of intention in self-regulation: toward intentional systemic mindfulness. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of Self-regulation (pp. 253-273). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50037-8

Shernoff, E. S., Mehta, T. G., Atkins, M. S., Torf, R., & Spencer, J. (2011). A qualitative study of the sources and impact of stress among urban teachers. School Mental Health: A Multidisciplinary Research and Practice Journal, 3(2), 59-69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-011-9051-z

Shiv, B., & Fedorikhin, A. (1999). Heart and mind in conflict: The interplay of affect and cognition in consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(3), 278-292. https://doi.org/10.1086/209563

Silk, A. J., & Urban, G. L. (1978). Pre-test-market evaluation of new packaged goods: A odel and measurement methodology. Journal of Marketing Research, 15(2), 171-191. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224377801500201

Simon, H. A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review, 63(2), 129-138. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0042769

Sipilä, S. (2017). Leukocyte and skeletal muscle telomere length and body composition in monozygotic twin pairs discordant for long-term hormone replacement therapy. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 20, 119-131.

Snyder, A. I., & Tormala, Z. L. (2017). Valence asymmetries in attitude ambivalence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112(4), 555-576. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000075

Sprenger, A. M., Dougherty, M. R., Atkins, S. M., Franco-Watkins, A. M., Thomas, R. P., Lange, N., & Abbs, B. (2011). Implications of cognitive load for hypothesis generation and probability judgment. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, Article 129. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00129

Thompson, M. M., Zanna, M. P., & Griffin, D. W. (1995). Let's not be indifferent about (attitudinal) ambivalence. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude Strength: Antecedents and Consequences (pp. 361-386). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Thompson, V. A. (2009). Dual-process theories: A metacognitive perspective. In J. S. B. T. Evans & K. Frankish (Eds.), In two minds: Dual processes and beyond (pp. 171-195). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199230167.003.0008

Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2003). Temporal construal. Psychological Review, 110(3), 403-421. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403

Van Boven, L., White, K., & Huber, M. (2009). Immediacy bias in emotion perception: Current emotions seem more intense than previous emotions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138(3), 368-382. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016074

Van Harreveld, F., Rutjens, B. T., Rotteveel, M., Nordgren, L. F., & van der Pligt, J. (2009). Ambivalence and decisional conflict as a cause of psychological discomfort: Feeling tense before jumping off the fence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 167-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2008.08.015

Wallace H.M., Baumeister R.F. (2002). The effects of success versus failure feedback on further self-control. Self and Identity, 1, 35-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/152988602317232786

Ward Schofield, J., & Hausmann, L. R. M. (2004). School desegregation and social science research. American Psychologist, 59(6), 538-546. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.6.538

Whitney, P., Rinehart, C. A., & Hinson, J. M. (2008). Framing effects under cognitive load: The role of working memory in risky decisions. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(6), 1179-1184. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.6.1179

Wuyts, S., Colombo, M. G., Dutta, S. & Nooteboom, B. (2005). Empirical tests of optimal cognitive distance. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, forthcoming.

Yoo, J., Park, H., & Kim, W. (2018). Compromise effect and consideration set size in consumer decision-making. Applied Economics Letters, 25(8), 513-517. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2017.1340567

Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1985). Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(4), 341-352. https://doi.org/10.1086/208520