Literature DB >> 17286970

Anchors aweigh: a demonstration of cross-modality anchoring and magnitude priming.

Daniel M Oppenheimer1, Robyn A LeBoeuf, Noel T Brewer.   

Abstract

Research has shown that judgments tend to assimilate to irrelevant "anchors." We extend anchoring effects to show that anchors can even operate across modalities by, apparently, priming a general sense of magnitude that is not moored to any unit or scale. An initial study showed that participants drawing long "anchor" lines made higher numerical estimates of target lengths than did those drawing shorter lines. We then replicated this finding, showing that a similar pattern was obtained even when the target estimates were not in the dimension of length. A third study showed that an anchor's length relative to its context, and not its absolute length, is the key to predicting the anchor's impact on judgments. A final study demonstrated that magnitude priming (priming a sense of largeness or smallness) is a plausible mechanism underlying the reported effects. We conclude that the boundary conditions of anchoring effects may be much looser than previously thought, with anchors operating across modalities and dimensions to bias judgment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17286970     DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.12.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cognition        ISSN: 0010-0277


  8 in total

1.  Anomalies in the detection of change: When changes in sample size are mistaken for changes in proportions.

Authors:  Klaus Fiedler; Yaakov Kareev; Judith Avrahami; Susanne Beier; Florian Kutzner; Mandy Hütter
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2016-01

2.  Sample size bias in the estimation of means.

Authors:  Andrew R Smith; Paul C Price
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2010-08

3.  The middle range of the number line orients attention to the left side of visual space.

Authors:  Zaira Cattaneo; Juha Silvanto; Alvaro Pascual-Leone; Lorella Battelli
Journal:  Cogn Neuropsychol       Date:  2009-07-30       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Keeping one's distance: the influence of spatial distance cues on affect and evaluation.

Authors:  Lawrence E Williams; John A Bargh
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2008-03

5.  Cognitive Biases of Consumers' Risk Perception of Foodborne Diseases in China: Examining Anchoring Effect.

Authors:  Lijie Shan; Shusai Wang; Linhai Wu; Fu-Sheng Tsai
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-06-27       Impact factor: 3.390

6.  Anchoring in the past, tweeting from the present: Cognitive bias in journalists' word choices.

Authors:  Jihye Lee; James T Hamilton
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-03-02       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  How People Understand Risk Matrices, and How Matrix Design Can Improve their Use: Findings from Randomized Controlled Studies.

Authors:  Holly Sutherland; Gabriel Recchia; Sarah Dryhurst; Alexandra L J Freeman
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2021-09-14       Impact factor: 4.302

8.  Anchoring in Numeric Judgments of Visual Stimuli.

Authors:  Linda Langeborg; Mårten Eriksson
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2016-02-23
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.