Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis

Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis

John Huber, John W Payne, Christopher Puto. 1982. (View Paper → )

An asymmetrically dominated alternative is dominated by one item in the set but not by another. Adding such an alternative to a choice set can increase the probability of choosing the item that dominates it. This result points to the inadequacy of many current choice models and suggests product line strategies that might not otherwise be intuitively plausible.

This is where the things you have to say about the paper actually go. They go here.

The decoy effect is when you slip in an asymmetrically dominated option into a set and you reliably shift choice toward the nearby “target,” violating both regularity and the similarity hypothesis. In lab markets spanning six categories, adding such a decoy lifted the target’s share by 9% on average.

For digital products, that makes plan pages, spec comparators, and recommendation carousels powerful levers… an intentionally “worse-but-close” tier can steer adoption to your intended option. Use it ethically: keep trade-offs truthful, test positioning, and watch post-choice satisfaction too.