Literature DB >> 19203167

Relatively fast! Efficiency advantages of comparative thinking.

Thomas Mussweiler1, Kai Epstude.   

Abstract

Comparisons are a ubiquitous process in information processing. Seven studies examine whether, how, and when comparative thinking increases the efficiency of judgment and choice. Studies 1-4 demonstrate that procedurally priming participants to engage in more vs. less comparison influences how they process information about a target. Specifically, they retrieve less information about the target (Studies 1A, 1B), think more about an information-rich standard (Study 2) about which they activate judgment-relevant information (Study 3), and use this information to compensate for missing target information (Study 4). Studies 2-5 demonstrate the ensuing efficiency advantages. Participants who are primed on comparative thinking are faster in making a target judgment (Studies 2A, 2B, 4, 5) and have more residual processing capacities for a secondary task (Study 5). Studies 6 and 7 establish two boundary conditions by demonstrating that comparative thinking holds efficiency advantages only if target and standard are partly characterized by alignable features (Study 6) that are difficult to evaluate in isolation (Study 7). These findings indicate that comparative thinking may often constitute a useful mechanism to simplify information processing. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19203167     DOI: 10.1037/a0014374

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen        ISSN: 0022-1015


  4 in total

1.  When More Is Better - Consumption Priming Decreases Responders' Rejections in the Ultimatum Game.

Authors:  Michael Zürn; Fritz Strack
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-12-20

2.  A randomised trial of the influence of racial stereotype bias on examiners' scores, feedback and recollections in undergraduate clinical exams.

Authors:  Peter Yeates; Katherine Woolf; Emyr Benbow; Ben Davies; Mairhead Boohan; Kevin Eva
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2017-10-25       Impact factor: 8.775

3.  The culture of social comparison.

Authors:  Matthew Baldwin; Thomas Mussweiler
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-09-10       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 4.  Brain mechanisms of social comparison and their influence on the reward system.

Authors:  Gayannée Kedia; Thomas Mussweiler; David E J Linden
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  2014-11-12       Impact factor: 1.837

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.