Bob M Fennis
email: b.m.fennis@rug.nl.

Marielle Stel
email: m.stel@uvt.nl.

Nonverbal Communication and Social Influence 1 Running head: NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION AND SOCIAL INFLUENCE The Pantomime of Persuasion: Fit Between Nonverbal Communication and Influence Strategies

Keywords: nonverbal communication, social influence, compliance-gaining, persuasion

How can we be more successful in persuading others and increase the odds of behavioral compliance? We argue that when a verbal influence strategy is embedded in a nonverbal style that fits its orientation, this boosts the strategy's effectiveness, whereas a misfit attenuates its impact. In field-experiment 1, agents tried to persuade participants in buying a candybox by using an approach-oriented strategy (Door-In-The-Face, DITF). An eager nonverbal style increased the impact of the DITF, whereas vigilant nonverbal cues rendered it ineffective.

Conversely, field-experiment 2 showed that an avoidance-oriented strategy (Disrupt-Then-Reframe) benefited from being presented in a vigilant, rather than an eager nonverbal style, which similarly attenuated its impact. Hence, eager nonverbal cues promote the effectiveness of approach-oriented influence strategies whereas vigilant cues do the opposite and increase the impact of avoidance-oriented influence strategies.

A C C E P T E D

M A N U S C R I P T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Nonverbal Communication and Social Influence 3

The Pantomime of Persuasion:

Fit Between Nonverbal Communication and Influence Strategies

We are all frequently approached and sometimes harassed by volunteers, fundraisers, and sales-representatives attempting to get us to say "yes" to their offer. These agents have at their disposal a wide variety of influence strategies aimed at increasing the odds of compliance.

Studies have focused on what agents have to say to foster persuasion, but have largely ignored the interplay with nonverbal communication in this process (e.g., [START_REF] Burger | The Foot-In-The-Door compliance procedure: A multiple-process analysis and review[END_REF][START_REF] Mcfarland | Influence tactics for effective adaptive selling[END_REF]. Furthermore, the influence of fit (and misfit) between nonverbal communication and influence strategies on the recipient's compliance has not yet received empirical investigation. The present research aims to fill this void by examining the impact of influence strategies when embedded in nonverbal behavior that either fits or misfits the key orientation of the strategy. We propose that nonverbal communication can "boost" the persuasive impact of influence strategies to the extent that it fits the strategy's orientation, and conversely, that a misfit between nonverbal behavior and type of strategy may render it ineffective in fostering compliance.

Previous research on social influence has focused primarily on identifying and testing verbalized scripts that agents may use to induce compliance and persuasion on the part of the recipient [START_REF] Cialdini | Social Influence: Compliance and conformity[END_REF]. For instance, research on personal selling has identified a host of persuasive techniques that sales representatives use to convince prospective buyers, such as information exchange, the use of recommendations, requests, promises, or ingratiation [START_REF] Mcfarland | Influence tactics for effective adaptive selling[END_REF]. In addition, studies have focused on several well-defined influence techniques employing heuristic decision making to induce compliance. Well-known examples include the "Door-In-The-Face" technique (DITF; [START_REF] Cialdini | Reciprocal concessions procedure for inducing compliance: The Door-In-The-Face technique[END_REF], in which the target request is presented as a concession to an unreasonably large initial request, and the "Disrupt-Then-Reframe" technique (DTR; [START_REF] Davis | A Disrupt-Then-Reframe Technique of Social Influence[END_REF][START_REF] Fennis | If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with nonsense: Extending the impact of the Disrupt-Then-Reframe technique of social influence[END_REF], 2006;

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Nonverbal Communication and Social Influence 4 [START_REF] Kardes | The role of the need for cognitive closure in the effectiveness of the Disrupt-Then-Reframe influence technique[END_REF], where an otherwise conventional sales script is interrupted by a subtle, odd element (i.e., the "disruption", for example stating the price of an offer in pennies before stating it in dollars) followed by a persuasive phrase that concludes the script (i.e., the "reframe", e.g., "it's a bargain!").

Interestingly, [START_REF] Knowles | Approach-avoidance model of persuasion: Alpha and omega strategies for change[END_REF] have recently argued that the DITF and DTR might operate differently because they rely on different orientations. More specifically, these authors have proposed that some influence strategies may work because they increase an approach orientation, while others are effective because they mobilize an avoidance orientation. More specifically, what they term "alpha strategies" persuade people by activating approach forces, increasing people's motivation toward a goal by making the offer or request more attractive. Hence, these strategies persuade by adding an extra incentive for compliance. For example, offering a discount to a product qualifies as an alpha strategy because it provides an extra reason to buy the product. Likewise, one can engage the norm of reciprocity (i.e., granting a small favor or concession that prompts recipients to reciprocate and return the favor) as an addition to the approach forces promoting compliance [START_REF] Knowles | Approach-avoidance model of persuasion: Alpha and omega strategies for change[END_REF]. As demonstrated by [START_REF] Cialdini | Reciprocal concessions procedure for inducing compliance: The Door-In-The-Face technique[END_REF], the DITF hinges on the principle of reciprocity (see also [START_REF] Fennis | Acts of benevolence: A limited-resource account of compliance with charitable requests[END_REF][START_REF] Gouldner | The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement[END_REF]: a large request by the agent is typically declined after which the agent presents the smaller request as a clear concession, thus provoking a counter-concession on the part of the recipient (i.e., compliance). Hence, the DITF works because of the addition of an interpersonal obligation to the reasons for compliance [START_REF] Knowles | Increasing compliance by reducing resistance[END_REF].

"Omega strategies", on the other hand, attempt to persuade people by minimizing avoidance forces, reducing people's motivation to move away from a goal. One way of minimizing avoidance forces is to reduce or distract resistance to persuasion. For example, in a classic study, [START_REF] Festinger | On resistance to persuasive communications[END_REF] presented participants with a comedy to

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Nonverbal Communication and Social Influence 5 distract them from a counterattitudinal persuasive message. Similarly, one can directly disrupt the extent of recipient counterargumentation to resist a persuasion attempt [START_REF] Knowles | Approach-avoidance model of persuasion: Alpha and omega strategies for change[END_REF]. As shown by [START_REF] Fennis | If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with nonsense: Extending the impact of the Disrupt-Then-Reframe technique of social influence[END_REF], this process underlies the impact of the DTR technique. More specifically, this research showed that the disruption interfered with the target's counteragumentation in response to the persuasion attempt, thus increasing the persuasive impact of the reframe.

There is reason to assume that nonverbal communication may play a role of significance in these settings -by itself and in interplay with these verbal influence strategies. For instance, a study of [START_REF] Mcginley | The influence of a communicator's body position on opinion change in others[END_REF] showed that agents with open body positions were evaluated more positively and were more persuasive than agents with closed body positions. In addition, [START_REF] Cesario | Making message recipients "feel right": How nonverbal cues can increase persuasion[END_REF] [START_REF] Cesario | Making message recipients "feel right": How nonverbal cues can increase persuasion[END_REF]. They showed that when recipients in a promotion focus -who perceive goals as hopes and aspirations and prefer eager, advancement strategies [START_REF] Higgins | Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle[END_REF]-viewed a message delivered in an eager nonverbal style, they developed more positive attitudes and also behaved more in accordance with the recommendation than when there was a misfit between nonverbal style and regulatory orientation. Likewise, when recipients in a prevention focus -who perceive goals as duties and obligations and prefer vigilant, cautious strategies [START_REF] Higgins | Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle[END_REF]-viewed a message delivered in a vigilant nonverbal style, they too showed more persuasion and advocacy

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Nonverbal Communication and Social Influence 6 congruent behavior. The experience of regulatory fit underlies these effects, such that a fit between the recipient's focus and the orientation indicated by the nonverbal style can augment persuasion and compliance, whereas a misfit can do the opposite and decrease persuasion and compliance [START_REF] Cesario | Making message recipients "feel right": How nonverbal cues can increase persuasion[END_REF].

Importantly, the experience of fit can arise from the interplay between message characteristics and recipient's orientation or it may reside in different features of the persuasive appeal itself (see for example [START_REF] Evans | Self-guide framing and persuasion: Responsibly increasing message processing to ideal levels[END_REF][START_REF] Koenig | Incidental experiences of regulatory fit and the processing of persuasive appeals[END_REF]. Hence, we extend previous research by examining the impact of fit and misfit within one and the same persuasive appeal and assess the effectiveness of (mis)fit of the type of verbal influence strategy and nonverbal style on recipient's behavioral compliance with a sales request. More specifically, we argue that the impact of alpha (approach) and omega (avoidance) influence strategies will be moderated by the type of nonverbal style. We propose that the effectiveness of these influence strategies will be boosted in situations of fit and attenuated in situations of misfit with the type of nonverbal style. Hence, alpha influence strategies will receive a boost when they are delivered in an eager non-verbal style. Similarly, the impact of omega influence strategies will be increased when delivered in a vigilant nonverbal style. In contrast, the impact of alpha (omega)

strategies will be reduced when delivered in a vigilant (eager) nonverbal style.

The effect of fit between influence strategy and the agent's nonverbal behavior style is investigated in two field studies where we solicited compliance with a purchase request. In Study 1, we examined whether the impact of an approach-oriented influence strategy, a Door-In-The-Face technique, would benefit when an influence agent exhibits an eager as opposed to vigilant nonverbal style. We expected the impact of the DITF technique on compliance to be more pronounced when delivered in an eager, rather than vigilant nonverbal style. In Study 2, we examined whether the impact of an avoidance-oriented influence strategy, a Disrupt-

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Nonverbal Communication and Social Influence 7

Then-Reframe technique, would benefit when an influence agent exhibits a vigilant as opposed to eager nonverbal style. We expected the impact of the DTR technique on compliance to be more pronounced when delivered in a vigilant, rather than eager nonverbal style.

Experiment 1

Method

Participants and Design

The present field-experiment employed a 2 (nonverbal style: eager vs. vigilant) * 2 (influence strategy: Door-In-The-Face (DITF) vs. target request-only) between participants design. In a commercial-selling context, a total of 99 consumers (20 male, 79 female; mean age 51.6 years, SD = 16.6 years) participated in the experiment. In this and the next experiment, participant gender did not show any main or interaction effect (all coefficients < 1) and hence, is not discussed further.

Procedure

Participants were randomly assigned to conditions. In a supermarket in an urbanized area, consumers were approached by one of four confederates (2 male, 2 female), blind to experimental hypotheses, acting as sales representatives. They tried to persuade shoppers to buy a box of (Christmas) candy. Each of the confederates exhibited either eager or vigilant nonverbal behavior during his/her interaction with the consumer (cf. [START_REF] Cesario | Making message recipients "feel right": How nonverbal cues can increase persuasion[END_REF]. In the eager style, the confederate used active, open gesticulation with hands projecting outward. In addition he/she actively leaned forward to the participant, and displayed fast body movement and fast speech rate. The vigilant nonverbal style, in contrast, involved a behavior pattern where the confederate used more passive gesticulation, keeping his/her hands close to the body. In addition, he/she leaned slightly backward and displayed slower body movement and speech rate.

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Nonverbal Communication and Social Influence 8

In addition, participants were either exposed to a Door-In-The-Face (DITF) influence strategy or a target-request only control script. The DITF technique involved preceding the target request with an unreasonably large initial request [START_REF] Cialdini | Reciprocal concessions procedure for inducing compliance: The Door-In-The-Face technique[END_REF]. Hence, in the DITF condition, the confederate stated: "Good afternoon sir/madam, Christmas is rapidly approaching, and so these boxes of Christmas candy are on special offer today! I may offer you six boxes of candy for six Euros" The confederate then waited until the target responded (almost always by rejecting the offer) and continued: "You feel that six boxes is a bit too much? Ok, I understand. In that case I may also offer you one box for the price of 99

Eurocents!" In the target-request only condition, the consumer was only presented with the final sales request: "Good afternoon sir/madam, Christmas is rapidly approaching, and so these boxes of Christmas candy are on special offer today! I may offer you one box for the price of 99 Eurocents!" The sales representative waited until the consumer responded to his/her offer. The purchase of any number of boxes of candy served as a measure of compliance with the sales request.

Importantly, to rule out demand explanations, in this and the next experiment, confederates were explicitly instructed to adhere to the designated non-verbal style and influence script, and to do so regardless of the outcome of the persuasion attempt. In addition, the performance of all confederates was unobtrusively observed on random occasions, which confirmed the success of the instruction. Finally, confederates were carefully debriefed after each experiment and probed for awareness of the hypotheses. No confederate voiced any suspicions about the true objectives of the experiments.

Results and Discussion

A total of 67% of all consumers approached by the sales representatives purchased one or more boxes of candy. Due to the dichotomous nature of the dependent variable, the data were analyzed in a 2 (nonverbal style: eager vs. vigilant) * 2 (influence strategy: DITF vs. target

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Nonverbal Communication and Social Influence 9 request-only) logistic regression. This analysis showed a that larger proportion of consumers agreed to buy a box of candy when exposed to a sales representative displaying an eager nonverbal style (71%), than a vigilant nonverbal style (51%), Wald(1) = 6.57, p < .01. In addition, a significant impact of type of influence strategy was found, Wald(1) = 8.07, p < .01.

74% of those exposed to the DITF strategy complied with the sales request, whereas 48% of the participants in the target request-only condition did so. Importantly, this main effect was qualified by a significant interaction, Wald (1) = 3.90, p < .05. As expected, additional chisquare analyses to probe the interaction showed that the impact of the DITF technique was particularly pronounced when embedded in an eager nonverbal style, χ 2 (1, N = 99) = 10.08, p = .001. In contrast, when embedded in a vigilant nonverbal style, the DITF technique was no more effective than the target-request only control condition, χ 2 < 1 (see Table 1 for purchase rates per condition).

These findings provide empirical support for the hypothesis that a fit between nonverbal style and type of influence strategy may boost persuasion. More specifically, approachoriented nonverbal behavior patterns may boost the effectiveness of an approach-oriented influence strategy, whereas avoidance-oriented nonverbal cues do the opposite and attenuate its persuasive impact. Hence, using a DITF technique to promote the sales of Christmas candy resulted in higher purchase rates than merely stating the offer, but particularly when accompanied by cues associated with eagerness. The DITF effect shrunk to non-significance when vigilant nonverbal cues were used. The following study extends these findings by examining the moderating role of an eager vs. vigilant nonverbal style in the effectiveness of an avoidance, rather than approach, oriented influence strategy.

-------------------------------------------------

Insert Table 1 about here -------------------------------------------------

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Nonverbal Communication and Social Influence 10

Experiment 2

If approach-oriented nonverbal cues foster the impact of approach-oriented influence strategies, then by the same token avoidance-oriented nonverbal cues should do the same for avoidance-oriented influence strategies. The objective of the present experiment was to assess whether a specific avoidance-oriented influence strategy, the Disrupt-Then-Reframe (DTR)

technique [START_REF] Fennis | If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with nonsense: Extending the impact of the Disrupt-Then-Reframe technique of social influence[END_REF]2006) would show increased effectiveness when a sales agent exhibits a vigilant as opposed to eager nonverbal style. In addition, as a basis for comparison, the present experiment also included a neutral nonverbal control condition.

Method

Participants and Design

Again in a field setting, we used a 3 (nonverbal style: eager vs. vigilant vs. neutral) * 2 (influence strategy: Disrupt-Then-Reframe (DTR) vs. no disruption) between participants design. A total of 129 consumers (37 male, 92 female; mean age 46.7 years, SD = 14.8 years) participated in the experiment and were randomly assigned to conditions.

Procedure

In a different supermarket than the one used in Experiment 1, one of two confederates (one male, one female), blind to experimental hypotheses and acting as sales representatives, persuaded shoppers to buy one or more boxes of candy. As in Experiment 1, each of the confederates exhibited either an eager or vigilant nonverbal style during his/her interaction with the consumer. Moreover in the neutral control condition, the confederate exhibited normal rate speech and body movements, maintained a normal upright position and used limited gesticulation. Participants were either exposed to a Disrupt-Then-Reframe (DTR)

influence technique or a no-disruption control script. In the DTR condition, the sales-script included a subtle odd element (i.e., stating the price in eurocents before stating it in Euros) followed by a persuasive, concluding phrase: "Good afternoon sir/madam, these boxes of

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Nonverbal Communication and Social Influence 11 candy are on special offer today! I may offer you a box for the price of 100 eurocents…That's one Euro. It's a bargain!" In the no-disruption condition, the script was identical, but the phrase on stating the price in eurocents was omitted: "Good afternoon sir/madam, these boxes of candy are on special offer today! I may offer you a box for the price of one Euro. It's a bargain!" As with the previous study, the purchase of any number of boxes of candy served as a measure of compliance with the sales request.

Results and Discussion

A total of 53% of shoppers purchased one or more boxes of candy. We analyzed the data using a 3 (nonverbal style: eager vs. vigilant vs. neutral) * 2 (influence strategy: DTR vs. no disruption) logistic regression. Results from this analysis showed that only the interaction between nonverbal style and influence strategy reached significance, Wald(2) = 5.91, p < .05.

As expected, additional differential Chi-square analyses to probe the interaction showed that the impact of the DTR technique was most pronounced when the sales representative displayed a vigilant nonverbal style. In this nonverbal condition, the DTR script fostered higher purchase rates than the no disruption script, χ 2 (1, N = 129)= 14.50, p < .001 (see Table 1). In contrast, the type of influence strategy did not affect purchase rates in either the eager, χ 2 < 1, or the neutral nonverbal condition, χ 2 (1, N = 129) = 2.05 p > .15.

These findings extend the results of Experiment 1 by demonstrating that the persuasive impact of fit between nonverbal behavior and type of influence strategy works both ways. Not only is the effectiveness of an approach-oriented influence strategy augmented when delivered with an eager nonverbal style, an avoidance-oriented strategy similarly benefits from being embedded in vigilant nonverbal behavior. In addition, similar to Experiment 1, the present findings show that a misfit between nonverbal style and type of strategy attenuates the latter's persuasive impact compared to a condition of fit. Moreover, the relative impact of fit

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Nonverbal Communication and Social Influence 12 between verbal and nonverbal communication in this study was not only demonstrated compared to a condition of misfit, but also compared to a neutral nonverbal control condition.

General Discussion

The present studies extended previous research by assessing the persuasive influence of fit and misfit induced by different features within one and the same persuasive appeal on consumer compliance by zooming in on the interplay between verbal and nonverbal communication. As alpha and omega influence strategies operate differently by either mobilizing approach or avoidance forces, we argued that nonverbal styles that are congruent with a strategy might boost the strategy's effectiveness, whereas incongruent nonverbal styles might attenuate its impact. We tested our assumptions using a typical approach-oriented strategy, the DITF technique, and a more recently developed and tested avoidance-oriented strategy, the DTR technique.

In two field experiments involving "real" supermarket customers as participants, we found support for our notions. More specifically, Experiment 1, set up in a supermarket, showed that the impact of the DITF technique was more pronounced when delivered in an eager nonverbal style -when nonverbal cues fitted the verbal influence script-than in a vigilant nonverbal style -when nonverbal and verbal communication did not fit. The congruent, fitting, persuasive appeal was shown to result in a purchase rate over 1.6 times the purchase rate observed in the non-fitting DITF attempt, which may be considered an impressive illustration of the boosting role of fit between verbal and nonverbal communication on persuasion. Extending this line of reasoning, Experiment 2 showed comparable results in a different supermarket, using different customers, for a typical exemplar of an avoidance strategy; the DTR technique. In this supermarket, actual purchase rates in the condition where there was a fit between the DTR and the nonverbal style in which the script was delivered (i.e., a vigilant style) were almost 1.3 times higher than when the

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Nonverbal Communication and Social Influence 13 avoidance orientation associated with the DTR did not fit the type of nonverbal style. Hence, this study provided a second demonstration of the same underlying psychological process, using the antipode of an approach-oriented strategy.

Moreover, the studies also corroborate a direct implication of our hypothesis that a misfit within the same persuasive appeal (i.e., between verbal and nonverbal communication) might attenuate the impact of an influence strategy. In both studies, a misfit rendered either the DITF technique (Experiment 1) or the DTR technique (Experiment 2) no more effective than their respective control scripts. In addition, the results of Experiment 2 also point to the suggestion that the non-fitting appeal produced lower compliance rates than the condition where the DTR was delivered in a neutral nonverbal style, although the difference did not reach significance. Hence, future studies might include more fine-grained indices of behavioral compliance, such as actual number of products purchased to provide converging evidence for the notions outlined in the present paper. Nevertheless, the present results attest to the observation that although at first glance, vigilant, avoidance-oriented nonverbal behavior may be expected to hinder persuasion, it may actually do the opposite and boost it, at least to the extent that it is in congruence with the key orientation of the influence strategy used.

The present research extends work on the persuasive impact of regulatory fit (e.g., [START_REF] Cesario | Making message recipients "feel right": How nonverbal cues can increase persuasion[END_REF][START_REF] Lee | Bringing the frame into focus: The influence of regulatory fit on processing fluency and persuasion[END_REF] to influence settings of fit (and misfit) within a single persuasive attempt. Moreover, it is among the first studies to demonstrate the pivotal role of the interplay between verbal and nonverbal communication in this process.

Nevertheless, future studies might also take the recipient's regulatory focus into account. It might well be that the present effects might even be more pronounced when there is an additional source of fit present, i.e., between the joint orientation of the appeal and that of the recipient.

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Nonverbal Communication and Social Influence 14

In addition, the present two experiments provide a first direct empirical test of the approach-avoidance orientation distinction in social influence strategies [START_REF] Knowles | Approach-avoidance model of persuasion: Alpha and omega strategies for change[END_REF]) by zooming-in on one of the more important implications of that distinction; the match/mismatch with nonverbal cues. Attesting to the viability of the approach-avoidance model, our results indeed show that approach-oriented strategies may benefit from being delivered in approach-associated (i.e., eager) nonverbal style, whereas the opposite holds for avoidance-oriented strategies.

The observation that in both studies, a mismatch between nonverbal and verbal communication rendered the influence attempt ineffective in producing compliance also illustrates an important practical implication of the findings. Influence agents such as sales representatives, fundraisers and political candidates might be well advised to pay close attention to the nonverbal delivery style of their persuasive messages. Furthermore, ascertaining approach-avoidance fit between verbal and nonverbal communication appears more important in this respect than merely smiling, and appearing active and alert. Indeed, in contrast to the well-known marketing truism that an active, smiling, and eager style brings selling success, this is only half the story and may even backfire when such a style is at odds with the orientation of the influence strategy used. A more cautious, strategy which communicates vigilance, rather than eagerness, may be similarly beneficial in fostering persuasion and compliance, at least to the extent that it is in accordance with the type of influence strategy used.

As a final observation, the present results also nicely align with the established observation that most influence strategies work best under conditions of consumer automaticity and mindlessness [START_REF] Cialdini | Influence: Science and practice[END_REF][START_REF] Fennis | Acts of benevolence: A limited-resource account of compliance with charitable requests[END_REF]. That is, under these conditions of reduced mental alertness, many influence techniques evoke the use of heuristic shown that congruence vs. incongruence of various verbal and nonverbal elements within a single persuasive message may affect the extent of experienced mindlessness (e.g., [START_REF] Smith | Speed of speech and persuasion: Evidence for multiple effects[END_REF][START_REF] Ziegler | Multiple source characteristics and persuasion: Source inconsistency as a determinant of message scrutiny[END_REF]. That is, incongruent message elements -for example a majority source that argues for a counterattitudinal position [START_REF] Baker | Majority and minority influence: Source position imbalance as a determinant of message scrutiny[END_REF]; a source that presents compelling message arguments, but in a slow-paced way [START_REF] Smith | Speed of speech and persuasion: Evidence for multiple effects[END_REF]; or a source that is high on expertise, but low on position certainty [START_REF] Karmarkar | Believe me, I have no idea what I'm talking about: The effects of source certainty on consumer involvement and persuasion[END_REF]-may prompt recipients to process the message more in depth, thus reducing the extent of mindlessness. In contrast, congruent message elements do the opposite and reduce the extent of message processing. In line with these notions, a condition of fit between verbal and nonverbal communication may procure consumer mindlessness, in contrast to a condition of non-fit, thus fostering the conditions in which many approach and avoidance-oriented influence strategies may flourish. Future research might explore these notions more in depth, for example by recording decision times as an indicator of mindless (or mindful) persuasion.

  principles as a simple shortcut to choice and decision-making. Research on persuasion has

A C C E P T E D

M A N U S C R I P T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT


Lottie Bullens
email: l.bullens@uva.nl

Frenk Van Harreveld

Jens Förster

Keeping Ones Options Open: The Detrimental Consequences of Decision Reversibility

Keywords: decision reversibility, accessibility, goal fulfillment, working memory capacity, cognitive dissonance, regret

People generally prefer to have the opportunity to revise their decisions. Surprisingly however, research has shown that keeping ones options open yields lower satisfaction with the decision outcome (Gilbert & Ebert, 2002). Two studies aimed to gain more insight into the detrimental consequences of decision reversibility and the cognitive processes underlying decision reversibility. Building upon literature on goal fulfillment we hypothesized and found in a first experiment that as long as decisions are still open to change, accessibility of decision-related constructs is increased compared to neutral constructs. A second experiment demonstrated that decision reversibility undermines working memory capacity. Moreover participants experienced higher regret after having made a reversible decision, an effect that was mediated by decreased working memory capacity. The study set implies that reversible decisions yield lower working memory capacity because people continue to think about the, still relevant, choice options. In the end this might increase dissatisfaction with the decision and regret.

A C C E P T E D

M A N U S C R I P T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

KEEPING ONES OPTIONS OPEN 3

People generally prefer decisions that can be revised at a later point in time (Gilbert & Ebert, 2002). Many individuals, for instance, tend to live together with their romantic partner for years before getting married, favor shops where they get the opportunity to return their goods, and give temporary contracts to new employees. All those examples may reflect peoples' proclivity to keep their options open rather than to make a final decision. Interestingly though, an experiment by Gilbert and Ebert (2002) showed that the opportunity to revise actually leads to lower levels of post-choice satisfaction. Accordingly, people have a preference for reversible decisions, but do not seem able to forecast its negative outcomes (Bullens, Förster, van Harreveld, & Liberman, in press). In the present research we will further examine the detrimental consequences of decision reversibility and try to gain more insight in what happens in people's minds when making reversible versus irreversible decisions. More specifically, we link decision reversibility to existing literature on goal fulfillment and demonstrate that reversible decisions put an extra strain upon peoples' cognitive resources as individuals appear to remain occupied with decisions until they become final and irreversible.

Decisions as Goals

In many situations, people want or need to decide, and thus decisions can be conceptualized as goals that one attains [START_REF] Liberman | Inferences from decision difficulty[END_REF]. From research on goals it is known that they stay active until they are attained. More specifically, theories in both social and cognitive psychology propose that motivational states, such as needs, goals, and intentions are characterized by increased accessibility of motivation-related constructs relative to constructs unrelated to the focal goal [START_REF] Goschke | Representation of intentions: Persisting activation in memory[END_REF]Förster, Liberman, & Higgins, 2005). Such relative enhancement of goal-related accessibility is thought to prepare the individual to efficiently detect goal-relevant cues in the environment, which, in turn, supports ultimate goal attainment [START_REF] Ach | Analyses des Willens[END_REF][START_REF] Bargh | The automaticity of everyday life[END_REF][START_REF] Moskowitz | Preconscious control of stereotype activation through chronic egalitarian goals[END_REF][START_REF] Kuhl | Motivation, Konflikt und Handlungskontrolle[END_REF].

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

KEEPING ONES OPTIONS OPEN 4 The accessibility of goal-related constructs has been found to persist as long as the goal is active [START_REF] Bargh | The automaticity of everyday life[END_REF]. When one, for instance, has 'reading' as a goal, constructs related to reading, such as 'book', remain relatively accessible until the goal is fulfilled. Upon goal fulfillment the accessibility is reduced or inhibited [START_REF] Liberman | Expression after suppression: A motivational explanation of post-suppressional rebound[END_REF][START_REF] Marsh | Activation of completed, uncompleted, and partially completed intentions[END_REF][START_REF] Marsh | The activation of unrelated and canceled intentions[END_REF][START_REF] Moskowitz | Preconscious control of stereotype activation through chronic egalitarian goals[END_REF][START_REF] Zeigarnik | Das Behalten erledigter und unerledigter handlungen [The memory of completed and uncompleted actions[END_REF]. Presumably, this is the case because upon goal fulfillment (e.g., reading), accessibility of goal-related constructs would only interfere with subsequent important tasks (e.g., cooking) (Förster et al. 2005;Förster, Liberman, & Friedman, 2007). In their studies, Förster et al. (2005), for instance, asked participants to search through a series of pictures with the goal of finding a picture of glasses followed by a picture of scissors. Four blocks of pictures were offered with the target combination presented in the third block. After each block of pictures, lexical decision times were assessed for words related to glasses (i.e., goal-related) and unrelated to glasses. Relative to a non-goal control group, reading times for goal-related words compared to unrelated words increased over time. However, after participants had found the combination of glasses and scissors in the third set, reading times for goal-related words slowed down compared to the pre-goal conditions, showing inhibition upon goal fulfillment [START_REF] Zeigarnik | Das Behalten erledigter und unerledigter handlungen [The memory of completed and uncompleted actions[END_REF].

Inasmuch as decisions can be conceptualized as goals to attain, one could argue that reversible decisions are akin to unfulfilled goals; when a decision can still be revised, the goal to make a decision is not yet completely fulfilled. For this reason, decision-related constructs should remain relatively accessible as long as the decision is reversible, shielding the goal against conflicting goals and distractions [START_REF] Shah | Forgetting all else: On the antecedents and consequences of goal shielding[END_REF]. Once the decision changes from reversible to irreversible (e.g. the return period has expired), however, other formerly de-activated concepts may become accessible to peoples' mind and cognitive resources are free to be applied to other goals or tasks.

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

KEEPING ONES OPTIONS OPEN 5

Hence, on the basis of research on goal fulfillment, it is to be expected that people remain more occupied with reversible than irreversible decisions, as it is likely that constructs related to reversible decisions remain relatively more accessible. Previous research, however, could not establish any differences in strength of decisional engagement after reversible versus irreversible decision-making. Gilbert and Ebert (2002) manipulated decision reversibility and (using self-report measures) found that participants were as occupied with reversible decisions as they were with irreversible ones. This in contrast with extant research on goal fulfillment, which would suggest higher decisional engagement after making reversible decisions as the relative accessibility of unfulfilled goals (i.e., reversible decisions) is higher than the relative accessibility of fulfilled goals (i.e., irreversible decisions). The fact that Gilbert and Ebert did not find any differences in the amount of thoughts participants reported about the decision could imply that people are unaware of their decisional engagement or that the measures were for other reasons not sensitive enough to capture differences in accessibility -which are typically found using more implicit measurements (see for a similar perspective [START_REF] Fazio | On the automatic activation of associated evaluations: an overview[END_REF].

Indeed, there is some evidence demonstrating that decision-or thought processes can occur outside of awareness (Fitzsimons et al., 2002). Therefore, in order to see whether decision-makers do remain more occupied with reversible decisions, in Study 1 we used an implicit classic measurement of accessibility i.e. a lexical decision time task containing words related versus unrelated to the decision.

Study 1

The goal of the first study was to examine whether reversible decisions operate similar to unfulfilled goals with respect to accessibility. As we discussed before, research on goal activation (Förster, et al. 2005) shows that 1) relative accessibility of goal-related constructs The study was a one factor (irreversible, reversible) between subjects design with the difference between reaction times for decision-related versus unrelated lexical decisions as a measure for relative accessibility [START_REF] Denzler | How goal-fulfillment decreases aggression[END_REF].

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C
Materials and procedure. Upon entering the lab, participants were seated in individual cubicles and were randomly assigned to one of two experimental conditions. All tasks were presented on a computer.

The experiment was introduced as a study on decision-making in lotteries. Participants were informed that draws were going to be held for two different prizes (an iPod and a portable DVD-player). They could only enter one of the draws, hence, participants were asked to decide which draw they wanted to enter. This decision was either irreversible or reversible.

Those in the irreversible decision condition were told that they would not be able to revise their decision at a later point in time. Participants in the reversible decision condition were told that the decision would only be preliminary and that they would have the opportunity to revise their decision right before the end of the experimental hour. Participants were given unlimited time to read the prize descriptions and to make their decision.

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T

Immediately after having made their decision, participants were introduced to an ostensibly unrelated task on "speed of word recognition": the lexical decision task (Block 1).

Participants were told that letter strings would appear at the center of the screen and were instructed to press as accurately and quickly as possible the "Z"-key if the string was a word and the "/"-key if the string was a non-word. They were instructed to put their right and left index fingers on the response keys before the start of the experiment and to keep them there throughout the experimental trials. In each trial, an uppercase letter string (font size 16, Arial)

was presented at the center of the computer screen and remained there until the response. The next letter string appeared immediately after the response. In random order, 23 words related to the decision (e.g., music), 20 words unrelated to the decision (e.g., plant), and 40 nonwords (e.g., pesfen) were presented. Decision-related and -unrelated words did not differ in length or word frequency.

After finishing the lexical decision task, all participants continued with the next part of the experimental session that was outside the focus of the current study. At the end of the experimental hour, they returned to the lottery experiment and were asked, as a manipulation check, to indicate on a 7-point Likert scale the extent to which they thought the decision had been a final one (on a scale ranging from not at all (1) to very much (7)). Subsequently, participants in the reversible decision condition were told that they could revise their prior decision if they wished to do so. At this point their decision thus became final. Furthermore, this group of participants was asked to again perform the lexical decision task (Block 2) in order to establish whether the relative accessibility of decision-related words reduces after decisions change from reversible to irreversible. Finally, all participants were thanked for their participation and debriefed.

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T

Results and discussion

Manipulation check. Results revealed that those in the irreversible decision condition considered the decision to be more final (M = 1.44, SD = .88) than those in the reversible decision condition (M = 3.60, SD = 1.95), t (79) = -6.333, p < .001. None of the participants in the reversible condition changed their preliminary decision.

Accessibility of the decision. As suggested by [START_REF] Fazio | A practical guide to the use of response latencies in social psychological research[END_REF], we conducted logarithmic transformations (ln) of the reaction times to reduce the skewness of the response distribution.

In order to assess relative accessibility of decision-related words, for each block of the LDT we computed difference scores between the log-transformed mean reaction times to words unrelated and to words related to the decision. A higher score on that index indicates higher relative accessibility of decision-related words. We excluded incorrect responses (4.7% of the responses). The number of incorrect responses did not differ across conditions. Although transformed reaction times were used for the analysis, for a clear interpretation of the results, we only report non-transformed reaction times throughout this results section.

Relative accessibility Block 1. We first tested whether the relative accessibility of decision-related words was indeed contingent upon decision reversibility. It was hypothesized that words related to the decision would be relatively more accessible for those in the reversible decision condition than for those in the irreversible decision condition. As expected, in Block 1, the mean difference of reaction times between words related and unrelated to the decision was indeed larger in the reversible decision condition (M = 78 ms, SD = 66 ms) than in the irreversible decision condition (M = 43 ms, SD = 40), t (79) = -2.586, p < .05. Accordingly, when the goal to make a decision is not yet fulfilled, words related to the decision remain relatively more accessible (see also Table 1).

Goal-accessibility is generally assumed to be a relative phenomenon, in the sense that one construct is relatively more on top of ones' mind than others. The mental system can

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

KEEPING ONES OPTIONS OPEN 9 achieve such differences by activating goal-related constructs or by deactivating goalunrelated constructs. Hence, the use of difference scores in this type of literature seems to be appropriate (see also for instance Gollwitzer & Denzler, 2009). Nonetheless, we wanted to gain more insight into the nature of the relative difference. Therefore, mean reaction times to words related and unrelated to the decision were subjected to a 2 (related, unrelated constructs) by 2 (reversible, irreversible decision) mixed-factorial ANOVA. The significant main effect of relatedness demonstrates that decision-related words were more accessible than decision-unrelated words, F (1, 79) = 179.001, p <.001. There was no main effect of decision reversibility, F (1, 79) = 2.241, p = .138. Mirroring the aforementioned results of the difference scores, the significant interaction, F (1, 79) = 6.686, p < .05, reveals that the difference between related and unrelated words was more pronounced in the reversible condition. This difference, as can be seen in 1).

Thus, consistent with our prediction, when decisions changed from reversible to irreversible, the relative accessibility of decision-related constructs decreased. This effect can hardly be explained by simply forgetting about the decision due to time, because reaction times to goal-related words even decreased from Block 1 to Block 2. To more elegantly rule out alternative explanations (e.g., forgetting, decay due to time, etc.), however, one may consider adding a lexical decision task for the irreversible condition at the time of Block 2.

In sum, in both a within (comparisons between Block 1 and Block 2) and a between (comparisons within Block 1) participants' design we showed a relative decrease in decisionrelated accessibility after decisions become irreversible. In contrast to Gilbert and Ebert's (2002) finding, the results of Study 1 thus suggest that as long as people are able to change their minds, they remain occupied with the decision, at least on an implicit level.

Interestingly, the effects seem to have occurred more on the neutral rather than the decisionrelated words. One may thus conclude that the mental occupation in the reversible condition resulted from some sort of goal shielding, a possibility that we will discuss in the General Discussion. Materials and procedure. Decision reversibility was manipulated in the exact same way as in the first experiment: participants were asked to either make an irreversible or reversible decision for entering one of two prize draws. After having made their decision,

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

KEEPING ONES OPTIONS OPEN 12 participants were introduced to an ostensibly unrelated task on analytical performance. This task was initiated in order to assess working memory capacity.

We used an adapted version of the operation-span task [START_REF] Schmader | Converging evidence that stereotype threat reduces working memory capacity[END_REF] that was originally developed by Engle and his colleagues (La [START_REF] Pointe | Simple and complex word spans as measures of working memory capacity[END_REF][START_REF] Turner | Is working memory capacity task dependent?[END_REF]. In this task, participants evaluated mathematical equations while memorizing words for later recall. On each trial, an equation appeared on the screen together with an answer. Participants had to indicate whether the presented answer was correct or incorrect [e.g., Is (7 x 7) -12 = 36?]. After each mathematical equation a word was presented that participants should remember (e.g., rhythm), as at the end of a series of equation/word combinations (i.e., a set) they were asked to recall as many words from the preceding set as possible. Working memory capacity was indexed as the number of words that participants recalled correctly from each set. The test included 18 sets, consisting of three to five equation/word combinations. Participants were instructed to press as accurately and as quickly as they could the "1"-key if the presented answer was correct and the "2"-key if the presented answer was incorrect.

After reading the instructions and before starting the task, participants were asked to indicate on a 7-point Likert scale their motivation to perform the task and the extent to which they valued performing well on the task (both on a scale ranging from not at all (1) to very much (7)) in order to rule out the possibility that our manipulation of reversibility influenced motivation to perform the task. The working memory capacity task took approximately 15 minutes to complete. All participants then returned to the lottery experiment and were asked to indicate on a 7-point Likert scale how much they regretted their decision and, as a manipulation check, to report the extent to which they thought that the decision was a final one (both on a scale ranging from not at all (1) to very much (7)). For those in the irreversible decision condition the experiment then ended. Those in the reversible decision condition were

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T

told that they would now be able to revise their decision if they wished to do so. In other words, their decision at this point changed from a reversible to an irreversible one. At the end of the experimental session, all participants were thanked and debriefed.

Results and discussion

Manipulation check. Results revealed that those in the irreversible decision condition considered the decision to be more final (M = 1.31, SD = .67) than those in the reversible decision condition (M = 3.52, SD = 2.07), t (91) = -6.824, p < .001. Only two of the participants in the reversible condition changed their preliminary decision.

Working memory capacity. Working memory capacity was assessed by calculating the total number of words participants recalled correctly (La [START_REF] Pointe | Simple and complex word spans as measures of working memory capacity[END_REF]. Results revealed that, as predicted those in the reversible condition performed worse on the working memory task (M = 62, SD = 5.54) than those in the irreversible decision condition (M = 64.42, SD = 4.22), t (91) = 2.362, p < .05. This pattern of results supports our prediction that reversible decisions lower ones' working memory capacity.

Although we did not expect to find an effect of our manipulation of decision reversibility on participants' performance on the basic mathematical equations as being used in this experiment [START_REF] Schmader | Converging evidence that stereotype threat reduces working memory capacity[END_REF], we did analyze participants' mathematical ability. As expected, decision reversibility did not affect math ability (Fs < 1.5). Furthermore, no significant differences were found for the average amount of time spent on the task, for participant's motivation to perform the task, and for the extent to which they valued performing well on the task at hand (Fs < 1.5). Thus, higher working memory capacity of those in de irreversible decision condition cannot be explained by an elevated motivation to perform well.

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

KEEPING ONES OPTIONS OPEN 14

Regret. Finally, we also analyzed the effect of decision reversibility on regret and found that levels of regret differed marginally significant between conditions, t (91) = -1.794, p = .076. Participants assigned to the reversible decision condition experienced more regret in comparison to participants assigned to the irreversible decision condition (M = 2.27, SD = 1.32; M = 1.84, SD = .93 respectively).

Additional analysis. Although we did not have any specific hypotheses on possible indirect effects, we found that the effect of decision reversibility on regret is carried indirectly through working memory capacity. In other words, the strain experienced when working memory is low accounts at least in part for the association between decision reversibility and feelings of regret. More specifically, results revealed a significant main effect of decision reversibility on working memory capacity. Subsequently, results also showed that working memory capacity affects regret (β = -.237, p < .05). But most importantly, the marginal effect of decision reversibility on feelings of regret was considerably lowered when working memory capacity was controlled for (β = -.204, p = .198). As recommended by [START_REF] Shrout | Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: new procedures and recommendations[END_REF], a bootstrapping analysis was performed tot test the mediation effect, demonstrating that the estimation of the mediation effect parameter was significantly different from zero, p < .05, two-tailed. Thus, the (marginal) effect of decision reversibility on regret was carried indirectly through working memory capacity.

In sum, it appears that reversible decision-making affects working memory capacity.

As expected, people having made a reversible decision have lower working memory capacity than those having made an irreversible decision. These results are in line with the findings from Study 1 which showed that people are more engaged in reversible decisions.

Presumably, such decisional engagement puts a strain upon people's cognitive resources and consequently curtails performance on other tasks.

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT KEEPING ONES OPTIONS OPEN 15 This study also showed that decision reversibility affects regret. Moreover, exploratory analyses demonstrated that this effect is carried indirectly through working memory capacity: reversible decision-making hampers working memory capacity, which in turn augments feelings of regret. Taken together, from the findings of both studies one may conclude that making reversible decisions yields lower working memory capacity because people continue to think about the, still relevant, choice options.

General Discussion

In two studies we demonstrated that, in line with research on accessibility from goals, constructs related to reversible decisions remain relatively more accessible than constructs related to irreversible decisions. Furthermore, we showed that decision reversibility puts a strain upon people's cognitive resources as participants who made a reversible decision had lower working memory capacity as compared to those who had made a decision that could not be revised. Finally, working memory capacity seems to mediate the relation between decision reversibility and feelings of regret.

A closer look at our data indicates that for reversible decisions deactivation of irrelevant constructs took place, rather than activation of relevant constructs. This effect seems similar to what is known as goal shielding [START_REF] Shah | Forgetting all else: On the antecedents and consequences of goal shielding[END_REF]. That is, people making a reversible decision appear to shield their goal to make a decision against interference from constructs unrelated to the goal at hand. This deactivation, like the activation of decisionrelated constructs supports our general functional model, predicting that people still making a decision hold decision-related concepts on top of their minds relative to unrelated thoughts.

This interpretation fits well with the results of Study 2 showing reduced working memory capacity in reversible decision conditions, as working memory capacity is usually defined as inhibition (Feldman Barrett, Tugade, & Engle, 2004;[START_REF] Hoffman | Impulse and self-control from a dual-system perspective[END_REF].

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

KEEPING ONES OPTIONS OPEN 16

Although decision reversibility may, in certain situations, be something positive (e.g., when a purchase turns out to be malfunctioning), apparently, there are also drawbacks. Not only do these types of decisions negatively influence satisfaction (Gilbert & Ebert, 2002), they also seem to hinder decision-makers from successfully performing other tasks and augment feelings of regret. These findings are especially interesting in light of the fact that people often do not change their minds (Gilbert & Ebert, 2002), an effect that we also found in our studies. This common reluctance to change is probably due to decision-makers already experiencing a sense of ownership of the preliminary chosen object (i.e., endowment effect; [START_REF] Kahneman | Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase Theorem[END_REF][START_REF] Thaler | Toward a positive theory of consumer choice[END_REF][START_REF] Bar-Hillel | Why are people reluctant to exchange lottery tickets[END_REF]. Changing this object for another one will then feel as a loss, which people generally try to avoid as losses loom larger than gains [START_REF] Kahneman | Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk[END_REF][START_REF] Tversky | Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference dependent model[END_REF]. To summarize then, even though reversible decisions consume resources, the cognitive business involved in them does not lead to better decisions which is reflected in the fact that people do not change their minds and in the fact that they are not more satisfied with them as shown in Gilbert and Ebert's (2002) research on satisfaction and our findings on regret (Study 2).

The current studies can be viewed as a starting point learning more about the cognitive processes underlying decision reversibility. On the basis of the present research we believe that people's minds remain occupied with a changeable decision and that the cognitive processes activated by decision reversibility eventually result in lower levels of satisfaction and stronger feelings of regret. Gilbert and Ebert (2002) ascribed the lower levels of satisfaction after reversible decision-making to the inability of the psychological immune system to start operating. The psychological immune system involves people's propensity to restructure their views of outcomes in such a way that these outcomes are experienced more positively. As the authors argue: "human beings are famous for seeking, attending to, interpreting, and remembering information in ways that allow them to feel satisfied with themselves and their lots" (p.503). Cognitive dissonance theory [START_REF] Brehm | Post-decision changes in the desirability of choice alternatives[END_REF]Festinger, 1957) is one of the most prominent theories that depict this general tendency within the decision-making domain. Research on cognitive dissonance theory has persuasively shown that, after people have made a difficult decision, they increase the attractiveness of the chosen alternative and decrease the attractiveness of the rejected alternative(s) (i.e., the desirability ratings of the chosen and rejected alternatives spread apart).

According to Gilbert and Ebert (2002), the psychological immune system is activated after making irreversible decisions, and thus, decisional conflict can be resolved. It is, however, not activated after making reversible decisions because for these types of decisions each alternative is still relevant to the decision-maker. Hence, possible conflicting thoughts about the reversible decision (i.e., thinking about the positive aspects of the rejected alternatives and the negative aspects of the chosen alternative) are not being resolved, resulting in lower levels of satisfaction. Consistently, our exploratory results of our second study show that whatever people are occupied with during their changeable decision leads them to experience regret. The findings of the first study at least suggest that they are occupied with the decision. Future research should demonstrate which aspects of an irreversible versus reversible decision exactly remain accessible. One may suggest that for irreversible decisions, the positive aspects of the chosen alternative (and perhaps the negative aspects of the rejected alternative) remain particularly accessible, as this would be an efficient mean to reduce potential dissonant feelings about the decision. For reversible decisions, on the other hand, the positive aspects of the rejected alternative (and perhaps the negative aspects of the chosen alternative) may remain accessible, because in this situation, the rejected alternative is still relevant and so are its positive aspects [START_REF] Liberman | Inferences from decision difficulty[END_REF]. Hence, accessibility of choice alternatives, especially thinking about positive aspects of the rejected

A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T
alternative, could further fuel counterfactual thinking which could in the end provoke regret and dissatisfaction [START_REF] Epstude | The functional theory of counterfactual thinking[END_REF].

We suggested goal-related processes to be involved in the process of decision-making, and it is interesting to speculate about boundary conditions that follow from a motivational analysis. Since value and expectancy play an important role in the accessibility of goal-related thoughts (Förster et al., 2005) one may suggest that decision-related accessibility in reversible decision situations should be especially increased before the final decision is made and it should be especially decreased or even inhibited upon goal fulfillment when the decision is important and when there is a high likelihood of actually receiving the chosen alternative. To illustrate, in the aforementioned studies by Förster et al. (2005) when participants had to search for a combination of glasses and scissors presented within a series of pictures, glasses related words were more accessible when participants were rewarded for finding the combination and when they had high expectancy that the combination would actually occur.

Following this reasoning, we would expect even stronger results for reversible decisions when people know that they eventually will get the prize and when they value it highly.

Furthermore, it is possible that decision difficulty serves as a basis for decision importance. Difficult decisions usually signal to the individual that the decision is relevant and important [START_REF] Schwarz | Feelings and Emotional Experiences[END_REF] and recent research shows that difficulty during decision-making, even if caused by a different source (e.g., a distracting tape) is misattributed to the importance of the decision, increasing dissonance effects [START_REF] Liberman | Inferences from decision difficulty[END_REF]).

Thus, one may expect stronger accessibility effects when decisions are difficult. In the end we hope that our goal account of decision-making [START_REF] Epstude | The functional theory of counterfactual thinking[END_REF] Note. The advantage of words related to the decision is the difference in response latencies between words unrelated to the decision and words related to the decision. A larger value represents greater accessibility of words related to the decision relative to words unrelated to the decision.

  of Study 1 provide us with more insight in what happens in people's minds when having made a reversible decision, uncertainty remains about the decisional engagement. If this engagement is strong and decision-makers are truly occupied, this should impair performance on other cognitively demanding tasks because cognitive resources are limited. The goal of our second study was to test this assumption, by examining whether reversible decision-making and its related decisional engagement affects working memory capacity. According to[START_REF] Engle | What is working memory capacity?[END_REF], working memory capacity is the ability to focus one's attention on a given task while keeping task-irrelevant thoughts at bay. People with lower working memory capacity are less able to focus their attention on a task than people with higher working memory capacity. We propose that decision-makers who have just made a reversible decision have lower working memory capacity than decision-makers for whom the decision is final.As argued earlier, Gilbert and Ebert (2002) found people to be less satisfied after reversible than irreversible decisions. In the second study we therefore also included a measurement of post-decisional regret with the aim to provide further support for the assumption that keeping ones options open can be detrimental to the decision-maker.MethodParticipants and design. Ninety-five students (18 males and 77 females; M age = 20.49, SD age = 2.38) participated in the present study. Two outliers were excluded from the analysis, leaving a final sample of ninety-three. The experiment was the first one in a longer session with various unrelated experiments. Participants received course credit or a monetary reward for their participation. The study was a one factor (irreversible, reversible) between subjects design with working memory capacity and regret as the main dependent variables.

  L., Tugade, M.M.,& Engle, R.W. (2004). Individual differences in working memory capacity and dual-process theories of the mind. PsychologicalBulletin, 130, 553-573. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University. Fitzsimons, G., Hutchinson, J.W., Williams, P., Alba, J.W., Chartrand, T., Huber, J., Kardes, F., Menon, G., Raghubir, P., Russo, J.E.,Shiv, B., & Tavassoli, N. (2002). Nonconscious Influences on Consumer Choice. Marketing Letters, 13, 269-279. Forster, K.I., & Davis, C. (1984). Repetition priming and frequency attenuation in lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 680-698. Förster, J., Liberman, N., & Higgins, T.E. (2005). Accessibility from active and fulfilled goals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 220-239. Förster, J., Liberman, N., & Friedman, R. S. (2007). Seven principles of goal activation: A systematic approach to distinguishing goal priming from priming of nongoal constructs. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 211-233. Gilbert, D.T., & Ebert, J.E.J. (2002). Decisions and revisions: The affective forecasting of changeable outcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 503-514. Gollwitzer, P.M. (1999). The volitional benefits of planning. In P.M. Gollwitzer & J.A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action (pp. 287-312). New York: Guilford. Gollwitzer, M., & Denzler, M. (2009). What makes revenge sweet: Seeing the offender suffer or delivering a message? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 840-844. A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T Table1 Mean response latencies on a lexical decision task by Decision reversibility and Word type (Study 1, N = 81. Standard deviations are in parentheses)

A C C E P T E D

M A N U S C R I P T