Anchoring effect

Abstract

An assimilation of an estimate towards a previously considered standard is defined as judgmental anchoring. Anchoring constitutes a ubiquitous phenomenon that occurs in a variety of laboratory and real-world settings. Anchoring effects are remarkably robust. They may occur even if the anchor values are clearly uninformative or implausibly extreme, are sometimes independent of participants’ motivation and expertise, and may persist over long periods of time. Different underlying mechanisms may contribute to the generation of anchoring effects. Specifically, anchoring may result from insufficient adjustment, from the use of conversational inferences, from selective accessibility of information consistent with an anchor, or from the distortion of a response scale.

Relational frame theory 20 years on: The Odysseus voyage and beyond

“…Furthermore, motivation is directly relevant to concepts that already exist inside behavior analysis (i.e., establishing/motivational operations), and even inside RFT itself (i.e., the concept of a motivative augmental). In addition, specific behavioral effects that we have identified on the IRAP are likely relevant to 'anchoring effects' and/or salience asymmetry effects in binary-based tasks generally (e.g., Bahník et al, 2017;Rothermund & Wentura, 2004). We certainly do not deny all of these and many other potentially important links and connections to the wider psychological literature.…”

Cognitive biases, heuristics, and logical fallacies in clinical practice: A brief field guide for practicing clinicians and supervisors.

“…Although first impressions can be accurate, they are often incorrect and can powerfully influence clinical decisions. This broader phenomenon is the anchoring and insufficient adjustment heuristic , the tendency of people to be overly influenced by initial information and fail to sufficiently update their first impressions with new information (Bahnik, Englich, & Mussweiler, 2017). The anchoring heuristic can affect clinical decision-making; in one study, symptoms of a medical condition were weighted more heavily when presented first in a case review than when they were presented later (Eva & Cunnington, 2006).…”

Failures to replicate a key result of the selective accessibility theory of anchoring.

“…Discourse in the anchoring literature now tends to recognize the likelihood that multiple processes underlie anchoring effects (see, e.g., Bahník, Englich, & Strack, 2017;Frederick & Mochon, 2012;Simmons, LeBoeuf, & Nelson, 2010). While some suggest the simultaneous operation of multiple mechanisms (Chaxel, 2014;Simmons et al, 2010), others prefer the potential for different processes underlying different anchoring effects (Bahník et al, 2017;Frederick & Mochon, 2012).…”

“…Discourse in the anchoring literature now tends to recognize the likelihood that multiple processes underlie anchoring effects (see, e.g., Bahník, Englich, & Strack, 2017;Frederick & Mochon, 2012;Simmons, LeBoeuf, & Nelson, 2010). While some suggest the simultaneous operation of multiple mechanisms (Chaxel, 2014;Simmons et al, 2010), others prefer the potential for different processes underlying different anchoring effects (Bahník et al, 2017;Frederick & Mochon, 2012). While all accounts have been supported by data from experiments carefully designed specifically to test theoretical predictions, there is an open question of how to determine whether a particular process has generated any given anchoring effect.…”