When and why is ease of retrieval informative?

Raghubir, Priya; Menon, Geeta

doi:10.3758/bf03193077

Cited by 29 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, there is growing evidence that subjectively experienced effort is only one of many variables that can influence judgments in the ''ease-of-retrieval paradigm''. Thus, literature shows that judgment effects in this paradigm are influenced by variables such as imagined effort (Wänke et al 1997), the difference between expected and experienced effort (Raghubir and Menon 2005;Hansen and Wänke in press), or confidence in the information conveyed by one's own thoughts (Tormala et al 2002). Examining the role of these variables may help understand why the mediation from the manipulation to the judgment effects via subjective effort was not significant in the full mediation model.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Exploring the hardship of ease: Subjective and objective effort in the ease-of-processing paradigm

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Exploring the hardship of ease: Subjective and objective effort in the ease-of-processing paradigm

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In most cases, it is illogical for people to assume that they have as much information about the experiences of others as they do about their own experiences. If people tend not to expect that their memory for others' behavior will be as comprehensive as their memory for their own behavior (see, e.g., Raghubir & Menon, 2005), they may look to their relative lack of expertise as an explanation for their experienced difficulty when making inferences about another, thereby rendering such experience less informative than it would be for the self.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of experienced retrieval ease in self and social judgments

Caruso¹

2008

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Accessibility Of Information In Memorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, if recent behaviors are recalled as they are diagnostic of the health hazard in question, risk perceptions are likely to be inflated. On the other hand, if the behaviors that lead to the disease are recalled but are less accessible because they occurred further back in time, they may be (wrongly) judged to be less diagnostic of the disease, and discounted when arriving at risk perceptions, even though a single encounter of unprotected sex with a person with AIDS might result in a person becoming HIV positive (see Raghubir and Menon, 2005b, for when the recency of information recalled undercuts the diagnosticity of recalling more numerous pieces of information on judgments related to the content of this information).Another factor that affects information accessibility, and hence risk perceptions based on this information, is the frequency with which people engage in behaviors or are exposed to information about these behaviors. Furthermore, the regularity of the frequent behavior is also key in how this information is represented in memory and whether this information is going to more or less accessible and in what form.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Health Risk Perceptions and Consumer Psychology

2006

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter outlines recent developments in the consumer psychology literature examining people's health-related risk perceptions. We first define risk, and discuss the importance of studying risk perceptions in the health domain. We integrate extant models proposed in social and health psychology and build a theoretical model for examining risk perceptions. We then describe the model in terms of the antecedents of health risk perceptions (e.g., motivational, cognitive, affective, contextual, and individual differences), their consequences (e.g., awareness and interest in the health hazard, trial and adoption of precautions or medical treatments, and subsequent behavior in terms of continued adoption or repetition, and word-of-mouth/recommendations of precautionary steps or treatments), and the factors that moderate the link between these two (e.g., financial, performance, psycho-social, and physiological risk). A primary contribution of our approach is to suggest that eliciting risk perceptions serves a persuasive role besides a measurement role, leading to the provocative question as to whether marketers should knowingly leverage their knowledge of how consumers assess risk to encourage behaviors leading to a healthier lifestyle. Implications for public policy makers, consumer welfare advocates, and commercial marketing companies are also discussed. WHAT IS RISK?Risk, according to the Miriam Webster Online dictionary i , is defined as the possibility of loss or injury. In any task that involves action, people typically assess the probability of such loss or injury. If the probability falls with the "acceptable" range, people engage in the risky behavior (see chapters in Fischhoff et al. 1984). Otherwise, they refrain. This assessment of what qualifies as acceptable risk can vary depending on the context.Risk has been studied from many different perspectives:economic, psychological and consumption. Economists and insurers define risk in terms of a company, country, or instrument defaulting (i.e., not following through on a promised or expected return; see McFadden 1999). Finance defines risk in terms of the volatility of price around a mean (Shefrin 2005). Statisticians think of risk in terms of uncertainty, or a probabilistic assessment of the likelihood of an event occurring versus not occurring with this usage common in the behavioral decision theory literature as well (Tversky and Kahneman 1974). Because of the multi-dimensional nature of risk, methods for studying and observing its effects have varied within and across paradigms and disciplines.In this chapter, we define risk as a negatively-valenced likelihood assessment that an unfavorable event will occur. Risk, as defined by us, differs from an uncertainty judgment in three dfferent ways. First, uncertainty judgments can be positively valenced (e.g., winning a sweepstake) or negatively-valenced (e.g., having an accident), whereas we define risk as always being in a negatively-valenced domain. Second, events that occur with a probability of 0.50 are m...

show abstract

When and why is ease of retrieval informative?

Cited by 29 publications

References 31 publications

Exploring the hardship of ease: Subjective and objective effort in the ease-of-processing paradigm

Exploring the hardship of ease: Subjective and objective effort in the ease-of-processing paradigm

Use of experienced retrieval ease in self and social judgments

Health Risk Perceptions and Consumer Psychology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About