Tie Aversion

The present research introduces the phenomenon of tie aversion, which is the general observation that all else being equal, tied outcomes engender a comparatively negative response from consumers. In a variety of head-to-head contests, a tie (or draw)—the equivalent performance or scores of competitors—may be a viable and relatively stable third outcome that is distinct from a win or a loss. Despite the occurrence of ties in everyday life, surprisingly little is known about how consumers experience and evaluate equal outcomes between entities. Eleven studies, including two real-world datasets, demonstrate that tied outcomes in adversarial contexts tend to be perceived as closer to losses than wins both evaluatively and affectively. The authors provide support for a reference-dependence mechanism underlying tie aversion, whereby consumers compare tied outcomes to their desired outcome (i.e., typically a win). This comparison process produces a mental partition between ties and wins that exaggerates the perceptual distance between these two outcomes and can adversely influence expectations and associated behaviors (e.g., wagers, betting odds).