Anchoring effect in judgments of objective fact and subjective preference

Andersson, Hanna; Bökman, Fredrik; Wallhagen, Marita; Holmgren, Mattias; Sörqvist, Patrik; Ahonen-Jonnarth, Ulla

doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.104102

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on past research, it is not clear if preferential judgments such as compensation demands are robust to the influence from anchoring, or whether they too are susceptible to anchoring effects just like judgments of objective facts (Andersson et al ., 2021; Bunčić et al ., 2021; Yoon et al ., 2019). The susceptibility to extraneous information on these compensation demand judgments, as found in the current paper, suggests that compensation demands are not fixed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Anchoring effects are very robust psychological phenomena (Furnham and Boo, 2014) and influences estimates of objective facts (such as the height of the Eiffel Tower) as well as preferential judgments (such as judgments of willingness to pay for grocery products; Andersson et al ., 2021; Yoon et al ., 2019). One setting in which anchoring has a tangible effect on consumer behavior is pay-what-you-want pricing (Roy et al ., 2021).…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The demand-what-you-want strategy to service recovery: achieving high customer satisfaction with low service failure compensation using anchoring and precision effects

Kron,

Björkman,

et al. 2023

JSTP

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposePrevious research suggests that the compensation offered to customers after a service failure has to be substantial to make customer satisfaction surpass that of an error-free service. However, with the right service recovery strategy, it might be possible to reduce compensation size while maintaining happy customers. The aim of the current study is to test whether an anchoring technique can be used to achieve this goal.Design/methodology/approachAfter experiencing a service failure, participants were told that there is a standard size of the compensation for service failures. The size of this standard was different depending on condition. Thereafter, participants were asked how much they would demand to be satisfied with their customer experience.FindingsThe compensation demand was relatively high on average (1,000–1,400 SEK, ≈ $120). However, telling the participants that customers typically receive 200 SEK as compensation reduced their demand to about 800 SEK (Experiment 1)—an anchoring effect. Moreover, a precise anchoring point (a typical compensation of 247 SEK) generated a lower demand than rounded anchoring points, even when the rounded anchoring point was lower (200 SEK) than the precise counterpart (Experiment 2)—a precision effect.Implications/valueSetting a low compensation standard—yet allowing customers to actually receive compensations above the standard—can make customers more satisfied while also saving resources in demand-what-you-want service recovery situations, in particular when the compensation standard is a precise value.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

The demand-what-you-want strategy to service recovery: achieving high customer satisfaction with low service failure compensation using anchoring and precision effects

Kron,

Björkman,

et al. 2023

JSTP

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, the strength of the anchoring effect is determined by several factors that vary in different situations. The combination of the two external information sources has more influence on customers' judgment of objective facts than on their subjective preferences (Andersson et al, 2021). As Strack and Mussweiler explained in their study, a primary factor that influences the strength of the anchoring effect is the applicability of activated memory (Strack & Mussweiler, 1997).…”

Section: Definitionmentioning

confidence: 95%

The Effect of Anchoring on Economic Decision-Making

Xu¹

2022

BCPBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The anchoring effect is a cognitive heuristic that influences human decision-making processes. People consistently perceive the initially available information as an anchor and use this reference point to form decisions. However, decision-makers' over-reliance on anchors causes them to falsely believe the information they perceive without further thought. This paper explains the definition, underlying mechanism, and applications of anchoring. For methodology, the paper uses qualitative research to illustrate examples of anchoring in different scenarios. To conclude, even though the automatic generation of heuristics is difficult to detect, it is important to understand the way anchoring affects economic decisions in advance. The research results of this paper have practical contributions and far-reaching implications. Different from the mathematical analysis method, the case analysis method more accurately reflects the importance of anchoring in real life environment. In addition, some people have prejudices about the anchoring effect. This paper can bring enlightenment to people and help them better understand the way in which anchoring facilitates the generation of economic gains and losses.

show abstract

“…Crucially for the current study, people with higher environmental concern have also been found to be more affected by an anchor. Andersson et al (2021) report that participants with higher environmental concern were willing to pay a higher price for an everyday food product when they received a high anchor, as well as a lower price when they received a low anchor, in comparison with people with lower environmental concern. Moreover, in a tradeoff task, Bökman et al (2021) found that participants were willing to travel longer to decrease CO 2 emissions when a normative message was combined with a high anchor, and that this interaction was strongest when environmental concern was high.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

What Influences People’s Tradeoff Decisions Between CO2 Emissions and Travel Time? An Experiment With Anchors and Normative Messages

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the today’s greatest challenges is to adjust our behavior so that we can avoid a major climate disaster. To do so, we must make sacrifices for the sake of the environment. The study reported here investigates how anchors (extrinsic motivational-free information) and normative messages (extrinsic motivational information) influence people’s tradeoffs between travel time and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in the context of car travel and whether any interactions with environmental concern (an intrinsic motivational factor) can be observed. In this study, people received either a CO2, health or no normative message together with either a high anchor, a low anchor, or no anchor. People that received both a high anchor and a CO2 emission normative message were willing to travel for a longer time than those that only received a high anchor. If a low anchor was presented, no differences in willingness to travel for a longer time were found between the three different conditions of normative message groups, i.e., CO2 normative message, health normative message, or no normative message. People with higher concern for the environment were found to be willing to travel for a longer time than those with lower concern for the environment. Further, this effect was strongest when a high anchor was presented. These results suggest that anchors and normative messages are among the many factors that can influence people’s tradeoffs between CO2 emission and travel time, and that various factors may have to be combined to increase their influence over pro-environmental behavior and decisions.

show abstract

Anchoring effect in judgments of objective fact and subjective preference

Cited by 7 publications

References 20 publications

The demand-what-you-want strategy to service recovery: achieving high customer satisfaction with low service failure compensation using anchoring and precision effects

The demand-what-you-want strategy to service recovery: achieving high customer satisfaction with low service failure compensation using anchoring and precision effects

The Effect of Anchoring on Economic Decision-Making

What Influences People’s Tradeoff Decisions Between CO2 Emissions and Travel Time? An Experiment With Anchors and Normative Messages

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About