scispace - formally typeset
Journal ArticleDOI

Explaining the Enigmatic Anchoring Effect: Mechanisms of Selective Accessibility

TLDR
This article showed that the anchor effect depends on the applicability of activated information, and that the activated information was not representative for the absolute judgment and the targets of the two judgment tasks were sufficiently different.
Abstract
Results of 3 studies support the notion that anchoring is a special case of semantic priming; specifically, information that is activated to solve a comparative anchoring task will subsequently be more accessible when participants make absolute judgments. By using the logic of priming research, in Study 1 the authors showed that the strength of the anchor effect depends on the applicability of activated information. Study 2 revealed a contrast effect when the activated information was not representative for the absolute judgment and the targets of the 2 judgment tasks were sufficiently different. Study 3 demonstrated that generating absolute judgments requires more time when comparative judgments include an implausible anchor and can therefore be made without relevant target information that would otherwise be accessible.

read more

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality.

TL;DR: Determinants and consequences of accessibility help explain the central results of prospect theory, framing effects, the heuristic process of attribute substitution, and the characteristic biases that result from the substitution of nonextensional for extensional attributes.
Book

Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment

TL;DR: In this article, a review is presented of the book "Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment, edited by Thomas Gilovich, Dale Griffin, and Daniel Kahneman".
Journal ArticleDOI

Reflective and Impulsive Determinants of Social Behavior

TL;DR: A 2-systems model that explains social behavior as a joint function of reflective and impulsive processes is described, which extends previous models by integrating motivational components that allow more precise predictions of behavior.
Journal ArticleDOI

Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate?

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examined the implica- tions of individual differences in performance for each of the four explanations of the normative/descriptive gap, including performance errors, computational limitations, the wrong norm being applied by the experi- menter, and a different construal of the task by the subject.
Book ChapterDOI

Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment.

TL;DR: The program of research now known as the heuristics and biases approach began with a survey of 84 participants at the 1969 meetings of the Mathematical Psychology Society and the American Psychological Association (Tversky & Kahneman, 1971) as discussed by the authors.
References
More filters
Book

Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases

TL;DR: The authors described three heuristics that are employed in making judgements under uncertainty: representativeness, availability of instances or scenarios, and adjustment from an anchor, which is usually employed in numerical prediction when a relevant value is available.
Journal ArticleDOI

Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference, and Consciousness

Marilyn Ford, +1 more
- 01 Dec 1985 - 
TL;DR: Johnson-Laird as discussed by the authors argues that we apprehend the world by building inner mental replicas of the relations among objects and events that concern us, and provides both a blueprint for building such a model and numerous important illustrations of how to do it.
Book

Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles.

TL;DR: Forster, Liberman, and Shafir, Decisions Constructed Locally: Some Fundamental Principles of the Psychology of Decision Making as mentioned in this paper, and Shaver, Mikulincer, Attachment theory and research: Core Concepts, Basic Principles, Conceptual Bridges.
Journal ArticleDOI

Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment.

TL;DR: The conjunction rule as mentioned in this paper states that the probability of a conjunction cannot exceed the probabilities of its constituents, P (A) and P (B), because the extension (or the possibility set) of the conjunction is included in the extension of their constituents.

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory

TL;DR: The authors investigated the possibility that assessment of confidence is biased by attempts to justify one's chosen answer and disregarding evidence contradicting it, and found that only the listing of contradicting reasons improved the appropriateness of confidence.
Related Papers (5)