Hanging the Anchor Off a New Ship: A Meta-Analysis of Anchoring Effects

Abstract

Anchoring effects are among the largest and easiest to replicate in social psychology. However, the ship on which anchoring research is floating has become brittle with respect to three domains: (a) the relationship between paradigm features (e.g., choice of anchor or type of scale) and effect sizes is mostly unknown, (b) there are numerous contradictory findings on moderators (e.g., role of incentives for accurate estimates), and (c) it is unclear which of the many theories on anchoring effects is best supported by the evidence overall. Method: To increase clarity and transparency in the field of anchoring effects research, we meta-analyzed the most comprehensive collection of openly available anchoring effects data in existence today. Results: We found large but also heterogeneous anchoring effects, g = 0.689, 95% CI [0.589, 0.789], σ² = 0.21, Ntotal = 17,708, k = 393. (a) Anchors communicated as randomly determined did not have effects, and some effects reversed when visual response scales were used. (b) For many previously contradictory results, we found null effects (e.g., incentives did not affect the magnitude of anchoring effects). (c) Overall, theories of anchoring that stress rationality and nonlinearity were best supported by the results. Discussion: By applying an open and robust empirical procedure, we provide anchoring researchers with a new ship. We recommend that future research increase trust in findings through preregistration, reduce heterogeneity between anchoring effects through standardization, and better explain the impact of moderators. Data and analyses are available online (https://osf.io/4t5mu/).

Thermostat Anchors: Do Temperature Scale Characteristics Affect the Selection of Temperature Setpoints for Residential Homes?

“…Instead, the selected temperatures were systematically affected by the current temperature that was displayed as well as the midpoint and range of the provided scales. Anchoring effects have been explained by various processes (see Epley & Gilovich [39]; Röseler et al [23]). Among others, the literature described anchoring effects as an anchoring and under-adjustment process where judges start with an anchor and process additional information in such a way that information processing is stopped once a plausible and acceptable judgment is reached.…”

“…Anchors provide an initial value that can be used as a default and direct, alter, or limit processing of subsequent information. Anchors have been shown to affect experts' estimations of house prices [18], influence negotiation outcomes [19,20], impact consumers' willingness to pay [21], sway decision making among judges [22], and alter numerical estimates [23].…”

Modeling Dependent Group Judgments: A Computational Model of Sequential Collaboration

“…Compared to the baseline distribution of plausible values, the updated distribution of plausible values differs in two ways. First, we assume that evaluating the judgment of a previous contributor leads to anchoring, the robust phenomenon that the presentation of unrelated numerical values influences subsequent numerical judgments (Röseler & Schütz, 2022;Schley, 2023;Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). For instance, letting participants determine a high or low random number from a wheel of fortune influences their subsequent judgment of the proportion of African countries in the United Nations (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974).…”