When Goods Were Odds: Do People Prefer Uncertain Goods After Uncertainty Is Resolved?

Abstract Much of the uncertainty people face is eventually resolved (e.g., a person entered in a raffle eventually learns what prize they have received). How do people evaluate goods (e.g., a prize of a $50 gift card) resulting from uncertain promotions (e.g., raffles)? Seven experiments (total N = 12,128) provide evidence for an uncertainty spillover effect: People prefer goods originating from uncertain prospects compared to those that were always known. This effect appeared both with naturalistic scenarios (study 1) and with incentive-compatible decisions (study 2). The authors propose that this effect arises because uncertainty induces a perception that the outcome is superior relative to salient downward counterfactuals (study 3). Supporting this idea, this effect: (a) weakened when downward counterfactuals were salient for certain goods (study 4), (b) weakened when the worst outcome from uncertainty was realized (study 5), and (c) reversed when uncertainty involved losses (study 6). Lastly, this effect carried over to products associated with previously uncertain goods (study 7). These findings demonstrate that the influence of uncertainty persists beyond its resolution, shaping the evaluation of goods derived from uncertain prospects.