In Fooled by Randomness, Nicholas Taleb writes:Īnchoring to a number is the reason people do not react to their total wealth, but rather to differences of wealth from whatever number they are currently anchored to. According to this account, the comparative question task activates information into memory that is subsequently more accessible when making an absolute judgment….Įpley (2004) listed four findings that are consistent with the selective memory account: (1) People attend to shared features between the anchor and target more than to unique features (2) Completion of a standard anchoring task speeds identification of words consistent with implications of an anchor value rather than words inconsistent with it (3) The size of anchoring effects can be influenced by altering the hypothesis tested in the comparative assessment (for example, asking whether the anchor is less than a target value has a different effect to asking whether it is more than a target value) (4) People with greater domain knowledge are less susceptible to the effects of irrelevant anchors. One theory that has been proposed is that of selective anchoring (Mussweilier and Strack, 1997). In one of these studies, Northcraft and Neale (1987) demonstrated anchoring effects in the pricing estimates of estate agents…ĭespite the robustness of the anchoring effect, there has been little agreement as to the true nature of the underlying processes. In Judgment and Decision Making, David Hardman says :Īnchoring effects have been observed in a variety of domains including pricing, negotiation, legal judgment, lotteries and gambles, probability estimates, and general knowledge. Instead, anchoring effects observed in the standard paradigm appear to be produced by the increased accessibility of anchor consistent information.
People estimate that Gandhi lived to be roughly 67 years old, for example, if they first decided whether he died before or after the age of 140, but only 50years old if they first decided whether he died before or after the age of 9.Īnchoring effects have traditionally been interpreted as a result of insufficient adjustment from an irrelevant value, but recent evidence casts doubt on this account. Countless experiments have shown that people’s absolute answers are influenced by initial comparison with the irrelevant anchor. After this comparative assessment, participants provide an absolute answer.
“To examine this heuristic, Tversky and Kahneman (1974) developed a paradigm in which participants are given an irrelevant number and asked if the answer to the question is greater or less than that value. Heuristic and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment offers : First impressions are a form of anchoring.Malcolm Gladwell talks more about anchoring in his book outliers. Teachers tend to expect children assigned to the lower group to achieve little and have much higher expectations of children in the top group (for more info see Darley and Gross, 1983). Children are tracked by schools that categorize them by ability at an early age and based on this initial “anchor” teachers derive expectations.There are numerous examples of anchoring in everyday life: Availability may also play a role in anchoring. We selectively access hypothesis-consistent information without realizing it. The power of anchoring can be explained by the confirmation heuristic and by the limitations of our own mind.
Other studies have reproduced similar results. They used the number in their question as their anchor. Participants in the first group gave much lower estimates. Another group was asked if it were greater or lower than 65%. In one experiment, they asked participants to estimate the percentage of African nations which are members of the United Nations (UN.) One group was asked if the figure were greater or lower than 35%. Psychologists Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman first identified the concept of anchoring.
This can even affect those whose jobs are based on computing numerical figures, such as accountants. It can occur any time you need to give a numerical estimate. Experts and non-experts in a given area are affected by it alike. Sellers tend to use the price they paid for the house as their starting point.Īnchoring is a fascinating psychological phenomenon. For example, when people buy houses, they tend to negotiate with the listed price as their starting point. Once we establish an anchor, we tend to focus on information which is consistent with it, ignoring information which is not. One way this can play out is in the form of ‘anchoring.’ When we make an estimate, we can end up using irrelevant information as our ‘anchor.’ We then adjust from there, often failing to make sufficient updates. We often pay attention to irrelevant information when making decisions.
0 kommentar(er)
