Interpersonal Effects of Using Selection or Elimination: People Are Less Willing to Interact With Elimination Strategy Users Than With Selection Strategy Users

Rao Fu & Jingyi LU

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making2026https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.70071article
AJG 3ABDC A
Weight
0.50

Abstract

Decision makers employ either a selection strategy to choose desirable options or an elimination strategy to remove undesirable options. While previous research has revealed how these two strategies influence decision processes and outcomes, the interpersonal influences remain understudied. This research fills this gap by documenting that people are less willing to interact with decision makers who use an elimination (vs. selection) strategy due to the belief that elimination (vs. selection) strategy users are more critical. However, the interpersonal cost of using an elimination strategy is mitigated when negative decisions are made to identify the worst option, when negative feedback is desired, and when decision makers are forced to use the strategy. Our research contributes to the literature on decision strategy by revealing the social effect of selection and elimination, and to the literature on choice perception by showing that decision strategy shapes the way people view decision makers.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.70071

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{rao2026,
  title        = {{Interpersonal Effects of Using Selection or Elimination: People Are Less Willing to Interact With Elimination Strategy Users Than With Selection Strategy Users}},
  author       = {Rao Fu & Jingyi LU},
  journal      = {Journal of Behavioral Decision Making},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.70071},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Interpersonal Effects of Using Selection or Elimination: People Are Less Willing to Interact With Elimination Strategy Users Than With Selection Strategy Users

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.