Psychophysics and the judgment of price: Judging complex objects on a non-physical dimension elicits sequential effects like those in perceptual tasks
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2009, Vol 4, Issue 1
Abstract
When participants in psychophysical experiments are asked to estimate or identify stimuli which differ on a single physical dimension, their judgments are influenced by the local experimental context — the item presented and judgment made on the previous trial. It has been suggested that similar sequential effects occur in more naturalistic, real-world judgments. In three experiments we asked participants to judge the prices of a sequence of items. In Experiment 1, judgments were biased towards the previous response (assimilation) but away from the true value of the previous item (contrast), a pattern which matches that found in psychophysical research. In Experiments 2A and 2B, we manipulated the provision of feedback and the expertise of the participants, and found that feedback reduced the effect of the previous judgment and shifted the effect of the previous item’s true price from contrast to assimilation. Finally, in all three experiments we found that judgments were biased towards the centre of the range, a phenomenon known as the “regression effect” in psychophysics. These results suggest that the most recently-presented item is a point of reference for the current judgment. The findings inform our understanding of the judgment process, constrain the explanations for local context effects put forward by psychophysicists, and carry practical importance for real-world situations in which contextual bias may degrade the accuracy of judgments.
Authors and Affiliations
William J. Matthews and Neil Stewart
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP677661
- DOI -
- Views 131
- Downloads 0
How do individuals evaluate and respond to pro-equality decision makers? It depends on joint outcome and Social Value Orientation
The current studies investigated how a manipulation in joint outcome influenced individuals’ responses to pro-equality/individualistic decision makers. In Study 1 (N = 175), we examined the impact of whether equal distri...
What do Americans know about inequality? It depends on how you ask them
A recent survey of inequality (Norton and Ariely, Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 9–12) asked respondents to indicate what percent of the nation’s total wealth is—and should be—controlled by richer and poorer q...
Hold on to it? An experimental analysis of the disposition effect
This paper experimentally investigates a well-known anomaly in portfolio management, i.e., the fact that paper losses are realized less than paper gains (disposition effect). I confirm the existence of the disposition ef...
Justifying the judgment process affects neither judgment accuracy, nor strategy use
Decision quality is often evaluated based on whether decision makers can adequately explain the decision process. Accountability often improves judgment quality because decision makers weigh and integrate information mor...
Is broad bracketing always better? How broad decision framing leads to more optimal preferences over repeated gambles
The effect of choice bracketing — the consideration of repeated decisions as a set versus in isolation — has important implications for products that are inherently time-sensitive and entail varying levels of risk, inclu...