Elaboration and numerical anchoring: Breadth,depth, and the role of (non‐)thoughtful processes in anchoring theories

Noted Judgment and Decision Making (JDM) researchers differ in their opinions of whether and how an attitudes and persuasion (A&;P) view of anchoring might add to the existing anchoring literature. Epley and Gilovich (2010) and Russo (2010) supported the breadth of variables that an attitudinal view of brings to bear on anchoring phenomena and the potential operation of different psychological processes across different contexts. They also suggest extensions to other types of anchors (along with Frederick et al. 2010), to alternative paradigms, and to other classes of moderators, such as goals. Authors of all three commentaries wondered if the evidence we presented speaks to traditional issues related to processes underlying anchoring. Frederick et al. (2010) also took a different approach in suggesting that anchoring is always due to non-thoughtful processes despite the fact that thoughtful processes can also influence judgments. This approach diverges from prominent reviews of the anchoring literature and implies that the presence of any simple, associative mechanism makes the overall process that involves that mechanism “non-thoughtful.” We discuss how this approach differs from our own, and we discuss the implications of the other observations in each commentary.     

Elaboration and consequences of anchored estimates: An attitudinal perspective on numerical anchoring

In the standard numerical anchoring paradigm, the influence of externally provided anchors on judgment is typically explained as a result of elaborate thinking (i.e., confirmatory hypothesis testing that selectively activates anchor-consistent information in memory). In contrast, theories of attitude change suggest that the same judgments can result from relatively thoughtful or non-thoughtful processes, with more thoughtful processes resulting in judgments that last longer over time and better resist future attempts at change. Guided by an attitudinal approach to anchoring, four studies manipulated participants’ level of cognitive load to produce relatively high versus low levels of thinking. These studies show that, although anchoring can occur under both high and low thought conditions, anchoring based on a higher level of thinking involves greater use of judgment-relevant background knowledge, persists longer over time, is more resistant to subsequent attempts at social influence, and is less likely to result from direct numeric priming.     

Expectation theories of decision making for duplex gambles

Complete tests of subjectively expected utility (SEU), subjectively expected value (SEV), expected utility (EU) and expected value (EV) theories were made for duplex gambles without measuring subjective probability or subjective utility. All gambles were hypothetical and offered on booklets. The duplex gambles consisted of winning gambles, which offered a chance to win a certain amount of money or to break even; and losing gambles, which offered a chance to lose a certain amount of money or break even.The results indicated that SEU, SEV and EU theories could not account for the strategies of 33%, 53% and 86% of the Ss respectively in the losing form of gambles, while EV theory accounted for 78% of the behavior of Ss.In the winning form of gambles, SEU, SEV and EU theory held for 77%, 65%, and 54% of the Ss respectively, while EV theory held for only 40% of the Ss. Suggestions for further research were made.     

Systematic behavior research for understanding consumer decision making

This study incorporates means—end chain (MEC) theory and dynamic programming for understanding the implications of consumer decision making. The conceptual framework of this study can help programmers design information systems for analyzing consumption behaviors. Such analyses will provide marketers with meaningful information for formulating marketing strategies. The main contributions of this article are as follows: (1) to enable researchers to obtain information for consumer cognitive hierarchies utilizing an information system, (2) to enhance the functions of traditional MEC methodology and provide an integrated method for analyzing consumption information, and (3) to construct an information system for analyzing consumer decision-making processes.     

决策与判断中的分解效应

分解效应是人类主观判断中的一种较稳固的行为偏差,并且判断结果会对随后的决策产生重要影响,因此,对该领域研究成果的全面梳理具有重要的理论意义和实际价值。本文主要介绍了支持理论中的分解效应,总结梳理了概率判断与时间判断中分解效应的研究,综述了其他社会判断中的分解效应研究成果,展望了决策与判断中的分解效应的未来研究方向。通过上述内容的阐述,希望能为该领域研究者提供新的思路,推动国内相关领域研究的发展。     

Implications of the Elaboration Likelihood Model for interviewer decision processes

One dimension of corporate social performance is concern for employee relations. The selection interview represents one of the earliest points at which employers develop relationships with future employees. The Elaboration Likelihood Model (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986) is useful for predicting when variables which are irrelevant for predicting performance on the job can influence an interviewer's rating of an applicant. Such knowledge is helpful for organizations in terms of improving the validity of their selection interview decisions and enhancing applicants' perceptions of fairness.     

Automatic and controlled components of judgment and decision making

The categorization of inductive reasoning into largely automatic processes (heuristic reasoning) and controlled analytical processes (rule-based reasoning) put forward by dual-process approaches of judgment under uncertainty (e.g., K. E. Stanovich & R. F. West, 2000) has been primarily a matter of assumption with a scarcity of direct empirical findings supporting it. The present authors use the process dissociation procedure (L. L. Jacoby, 1991) to provide convergent evidence validating a dual-process perspective to judgment under uncertainty based on the independent contributions of heuristic and rule-based reasoning. Process dissociations based on experimental manipulation of variables were derived from the most relevant theoretical properties typically used to contrast the two forms of reasoning. These include processing goals (Experiment 1), cognitive resources (Experiment 2), priming (Experiment 3), and formal training (Experiment 4); the results consistently support the author's perspective. They conclude that judgment under uncertainty is neither an automatic nor a controlled process but that it reflects both processes, with each making independent contributions.     

Perspectives on consumer decision making: an integrated approach

In the consumer behaviour literature several perspectives on consumer decision making have been considered, including the ‘value perspective’, the ‘information processing perspective’, the ‘emotional perspective’ and ‘cue utilisation theory’. In this paper, a framework which integrates several perspectives on consumer decision making and hypothesises possible links between several basic constructs is developed. The framework is tested by the use of two experimental designs. The results of this study support the complexity of consumer decision making with the following findings. First, consumers do not use their cognitive and affective skills independently, rather they affect each other. Secondly, the cognitive, evaluative constructs of quality and attitude had significant direct effects on buying intention in both experiments, whereas the affective construct of emotion had no significant effects on buying intention in both experiments. Thirdly, in both experiments price affected perceived quality, which in turn affected attitude, which in turn affected buying intention. At the same time, price had no direct effect on buying intention. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Motivated information processing in group judgment and decision making.

This article expands the view of groups as information processors into a motivated information processing in groups (MIP-G) model by emphasizing, first, the mixed-motive structure of many group tasks and, second, the idea that individuals engage in more or less deliberate information search and processing. The MIP-G model postulates that social motivation drives the kind of information group members attend to, encode, and retrieve and that epistemic motivation drives the degree to which new information is sought and attended to, encoded, and retrieved. Social motivation and epistemic motivation are expected to influence, alone and in combination, generating problem solutions, disseminating information, and negotiating joint decisions. The MIP-G model integrates the influence of many individual and situational differences and combines insight on human thinking with group-level interaction process and decision making.     

Distinguishing choice and subjective probability estimation processes: Implications for theories of judgment and for cross-cultural comparisons

Research on subjective probability (SP) often focuses on the difference between the fraction of correct binary choices and the SP that they are correct or on the deviation of the calibration curve from the diagonal. On the assumption that choice and SP judgments reflect different, albeit closely related, processes, it is important to analyze the two sources of data separately. This article uses data collected by Yates, Lee, Shinotsuka, Patalano, and Sieck (1998) from Chinese, Japanese, and Americans to demonstrate the advantages of doing so and to yield new conclusions regarding cross-cultural comparisons of judgment. One new result is that a discrete threshold model with an error term best described the choice data of all groups. From their analyses, Yates et al. (1998) had concluded that the Chinese were more overconfident than the American or Japanese. According to the present results, the Chinese appeared either more overconfident or more underconfident, depending on how the data are analyzed. The dual outcome is a consequence of the greater variability both in their SP judgments and in their binary choices. Additionally, the Chinese participants’ choices and SPs were more responsive to the base rate than were those of the other groups.     

An exploration of values in ethical consumer decision making

Consumer concern for ethical issues has been well documented across much of the developed world. Research on values is also prominent in the literature. Neglected in consumer behaviour is an understanding of the pertinence of particular values in ethical decision making contexts. This paper outlines the results of qualitative research, which explores those values pertinent to ethical consumers in decision making and the nature of their influence in grocery consumption contexts. A questionnaire was used to ascertain the dominance and nature of values influencing consumer decision making in this context.     

Mere exposure and the endowment effect on consumer decision making

Previous researchers (e.g., J. A. Bargh, 1992, 2002) demonstrated the importance of nonconscious processes on consumer choice behavior. Using an advertisement, the authors determined the effect of two nonconscious processes--the mere exposure effect, which increases object preference by increasing consumer exposure to an object, and the endowment effect, which increases object valuation by providing consumer possession of an object--on consumer behavior. Although the mere exposure effect and endowment effect did not produce an interaction, they produced independent effects. The endowment effect increased object valuation but not object preference. The mere exposure effect increased object preference but not object valuation. Thus, at the unconscious level, an increase in object preference does not lead to an increase in object valuation, nor does an increase in object valuation lead to an increase in object preference. The authors discuss the importance of developing measures of unconscious process in advertising effectiveness.     

A constructive process view of decision making: Multiple strategies in judgment and choice

A viewpoint that has recently emerged in decision research is that preferences for objects of any complexity are often constructed — not merely revealed — in generating a response to a judgement or choice task. This paper reviews a program of research that traces the constructiveness of preferences to the use of multiple strategies in decision making, contingent on task demands. It is argued that individuals often build strategies opportunistically, changing their processing on the spot depending upon the information they encounter during the course of solving the decision problem.     

Principled moral sentiment and the flexibility of moral judgment and decision making

Three studies test eight hypotheses about (1) how judgment differs between people who ascribe greater vs. less moral relevance to choices, (2) how moral judgment is subject to task constraints that shift evaluative focus (to moral rules vs. to consequences), and (3) how differences in the propensity to rely on intuitive reactions affect judgment. In Study 1, judgments were affected by rated agreement with moral rules proscribing harm, whether the dilemma under consideration made moral rules versus consequences of choice salient, and by thinking styles (intuitive vs. deliberative). In Studies 2 and 3, participants evaluated policy decisions to knowingly do harm to a resource to mitigate greater harm or to merely allow the greater harm to happen. When evaluated in isolation, approval for decisions to harm was affected by endorsement of moral rules and by thinking style. When both choices were evaluated simultaneously, total harm -- but not the do/allow distinction -- influenced rated approval. These studies suggest that moral rules play an important, but context-sensitive role in moral cognition, and offer an account of when emotional reactions to perceived moral violations receive less weight than consideration of costs and benefits in moral judgment and decision making.