Precise numbers are more potent anchors than round ones. Two theoretical mechanisms have been suggested to account for this anchor precision effect: (1) the scale-granularity account postulates that individuals adjust away from the anchor in smaller steps on a finer-grained mental scale, and (2) the attribution-of-competence account postulates that people ascribe more competence to a precise-opening individual. Direct empirical evidence for both accounts is scarce, however, and exists mainly for the attribution-of-competence account in a negotiation context. In two experiments, we examined the two competing mechanisms simultaneously (Experiment 1) and contrasted them in a negotiation and in an estimation context (Experiment 2). Moreover, we developed and validated (Pilot Study) a direct measurement of scale-granularity. Mediation analyses showed that both attribution-of-competence and, for the first time, scale-granularity mediate the anchor-precision effect. The results refine our theoretical understanding of anchor precision. Implications for decision-making, negotiation, and estimation research are discussed.

Abstract. Increasing price precision leads to linearly stronger anchoring effects for amateurs, but highly precise anchors can backfire for experts. Previous research focused on experts bargaining about an object within their expertise domain (e.g., real-estate agents negotiated about a house listed at €978,781.63). This leaves unknown whether too much precision backfires for experts because of their (a) general negotiation expertise, (b) domain-specific pricing knowledge, or (c) the combination of general expertise and price-knowledge. Our pre-registered report seeks to replicate the too-much-precision effect and to experimentally separate general negotiation expertise from domain-specific price-knowledge. Seasoned experts (real-estate agents) negotiate about an object either within (house) or outside (motor yacht) their domain of expertise. We measure experts’ willingness to pay (WTP), counteroffer, self-ascribed versus other-ascribed competence, and their self-ascribed versus other-ascribed price-knowledge. Based on responses of 400 professional real-estate agents, we replicate the advantageous anchor precision effect and illustrate that too much precision backfires regardless of whether agents negotiate within (house) or outside (yacht) their domain of expertise. Mediation analysis suggests that, consistent with previous research, the impact of precise anchors is due to the competence attributed to the negotiation opponent. Our results offer insights into the psychological mechanisms and theoretical understanding of anchor precision.

Overweight individuals often struggle to lose weight. While previous studies established goal setting as an effective strategy for weight loss, little is known about the effects of numeric goal precision. The present research investigated whether and how the precision of weight loss goals—the number of trailing zeros—impacts a goal’s effectiveness. In two preregistered, longitudinal experiments, we contrasted competing predictions as to whether precise (e.g., 2.923 kg) or round (e.g., 3.000 kg) goals are more effective compared to a waiting control condition. In Experiment 1 (N = 121), participants in the two goal conditions lost more weight compared to the control condition—an effect that was mainly driven by precise (rather than round) goals. In Experiment 2 (N = 150), we sought to replicate this effect but found no significant weight loss differences. An individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis across both experiments revealed that (a) the goal groups jointly lost more weight than the waiting control group and (b) the precise and round goal groups did not differ in weight loss success. An IPD-based multiple mediation analysis showed that healthier eating, but not physical exercise accounted for goal-setting-induced weight loss. We discuss possible explanations for the null findings in Experiment 2 and highlight directions for future research.

Despite a rich literature on goals, the notion of successful goal pursuit remains somewhat unclear. Most research on personal goal pursuit relies on subjective measures of goal progress and research that uses objective measures (e.g., grade point average) often ignores individuals’ idiosyncratic goals. The present research investigated the relation between diverse measures of goal progress in the context of academic and weight loss goals using four datasets (total sample = 351). Overall, subjective measures were positively related to objective measures. The magnitudes of these associations varied across studies and were generally smaller than would be expected if the measures assessed the same construct (R² = .05–.39). These findings suggest that subjective and objective measures may reflect related but distinct constructs. The present research draws attention to an important topic in the goals literature and highlights the need for additional research on the conceptualization and operationalization of successful goal pursuit.

People's estimates are biased toward previously considered numbers (anchoring).We have aggregated all available data from anchoring studies that included at least two anchors into one large dataset. Data were standardized to comprise one estimate per row, coded according to a wide range of variables, and are available for download and analyses online (https://metaanalyses.shinyapps.io/OpAQ/). Because the dataset includes both original and meta-data it allows for fine-grained analyses (e.g., correlations of estimates for different tasks) but also for meta-analyses (e.g., effect sizes for anchoring effects).