Why Do People Like Natural? Instrumental and Ideational Bases for the Naturalness Preference

Naturalness preference refers to the tendency to prefer natural things to otherwise equivalent unnatural alternatives. Previous research suggests that the naturalness preference is largely due to ideational reasons (moral or aesthetic appeals), rather than instrumental reasons (inferred functional superiority), because the natural and unnatural alternatives were specified as identical. The current studies showed that people do not always believe that natural and unnatural alternatives can be identical. Responses that in previous studies would have been interpreted as ideational‐based naturalness preference were correlated with beliefs in instrumental advantages of natural products. We propose that instrumental and ideational reasons are closely connected, and instrumental beliefs may contribute to the “natural is better” heuristic. The financial consequence of naturalness preference was also demonstrated.     

The effects of accountability on bias in physician decision making: Going from bad to worse

Members of the Iowa Academy of Family Physicians participated in a survey study in which they were asked to make hypothetical decisions in either high- or low-conflict treatment conditions. In the low-conflict treatment condition the options were a common medication with a referral or a referral only. In the high-conflict treatment condition the same two options were given plus another attractive medication. In addition, we manipulated accountability by asking half of the participants to provide a written defense of their treatment options, which they would then agree to discuss at a later time. The results showed that physicians in the high-conflict condition chose the referral-only option significantly more than the physicians in the low-conflict condition, thus violating the normative rule of regularity. Moreover, that pattern was significantly amplified for physicians who were held accountable for their treatment decisions. These findings replicate and extend previous research and are discussed within the framework of reason-based choice.     

The effects of impairments on employment and wages: estimates from the 1984 and 1990 SIPP

Unlike the minority groups covered by civil rights laws in the past, the disabled population is a heterogeneous group. Because of differences in the nature and onset of health conditions, it is important to study the labor market experiences of different impairment groups separately, rather than treating "disabled workers" as a single group. This article uses data from the 1984 and the 1990 panels of the Survey of Income and Program Participation to analyze trends in the employment and wages of six impairment groups in the years immediately preceding the ADA. The results confirm the diversity of labor market experiences within the disabled population and suggest that policies designed to improve labor market outcomes for workers with disabilities in response to the ADA should be targeted to the different needs of different impairment groups.