Contextual contrast in evaluative judgments: A test of pre- versus postintegration models of contrast.

Wedell, Douglas H.

doi:10.1037/0022-3514.66.6.1007

Cited by 29 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Overall, the range-frequency model describes the effect of the inferior decoy very well, with actual values for alternatives A and B shown as open circles and their predicted values shown as solid points. The inferred value of the weighting parameter, 1 Ϫ w ϭ .40, was within the normal range of values found in social judgment research (Wedell, 1994;Wedell, Parducci, & Geiselman, 1987). All differences in the locations of A and B across contextual conditions are explained by differences in frequency values.…”

Section: Fit Of the Range-frequency Modelmentioning

confidence: 69%

Examining Models of Nondominated Decoy Effects across Judgment and Choice

Pettibone

Wedell

2000

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

161

168

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three experiments explored cognitive models of inferior, compromise, and phantom decoy effects in both judgment and choice. Participants made judgments of attractiveness, justifiability, and evaluation anxiety associated with each alternative in the set, along with judgments of the attractiveness of each alternative's dimensional values. In another session, they also chose the alternative they most preferred. Results were analyzed in terms of the degree to which decoy effects reflected shifts in dimensional values or reflected emergent values based on relationships with other alternatives in the set. Both emergent-value and value-shift models of inferior decoy effects were supported, but only the emergent-value model of compromise decoy effects was supported. Results for the phantom decoy indicated that this effect was choice-based and did not occur in judgment. Thus, although decoy effects were largely similar in choice and judgment, they also differed in important ways. ᭧

show abstract

Section: Fit Of the Range-frequency Modelmentioning

confidence: 69%

Examining Models of Nondominated Decoy Effects across Judgment and Choice

Pettibone

Wedell

2000

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

161

168

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These results may be added to a growing body of research that indicates context can often affect the implicit scaling of dimensional values, which are later combined (Wedell, 1994) or used in comparative processes (Marks, 1991(Marks, ,1992Mellers, 1983Mellers, , 1986Sailor & Pineda, 1993;Wedell, 1995Wedell, , 1996. Although there is now substantial evidence for contextually based implicit scaling of values for use in cognitive operations, it should not be assumed that this type of contextual valuation will always occur in these cases.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Mellers and Birnbaum (1983) found no evidence that hypothetical test scores were contextually valued prior to being combined for judgments of performance, although they did find large contextual effects on the combined values of the test scores. Similarly, Wedell (1994) found evidence of individual differences in whether trait adjectives were contextually valued prior to being combined or after they were combined in an impression formation task. In judgments of differences, Mellers and Birnbaum (1982) found evidence that judgments of differences between simultaneously presented dot patterns were not contextually based.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing models of trade-off contrast in pairwise choice.

Wedell

1998

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In three experiments, students completed sets of three pairwise choices in each of several domains. The first two pairs in each set were contextual pairs, and the third was the target pair. Context was manipulated by widening the range of values on one dimension and narrowing it on the second dimension. Consistent with previous research, participants on target trials more often chose the alternative whose poorer value was on the widened dimension. Four models explained this effect as (a) decreased weighting of the wide dimension, (b) contextual shift in values, (c) a tendency to equalize responses, or (d) a tendency to add value based on dominance relationships. Path models provided evidence against weight change and response equalization, and manipulation of dominance did not reduce the effect. Results supported the value-shift explanation of trade-off contrast.When choosing between multiattribute alternatives, one is faced with the problem of having to make trade-offs between values on different attributes. For example, imagine a choice between two cars that differ primarily on the dimensions of gas mileage and safety features. Would you choose the car that gets high gas mileage but has few safety features or the one that gets low gas mileage but has many safety features? Ultimately the choice depends on whether the increase in gas mileage is worth the decrease in safety: a trade-off.How are such trade-offs resolved? One approach to the problem is given by multiattribute utility theory, in which preference values are assigned to each level on a dimension and importance weights are assigned to the different dimensions (Von Winterfeldt & Edwards, 1986). The overall utility of an alternative is determined by combining weights and values, typically using a weighted additive model:( 1) where Vy is the preference value of alternative i on attribute/ Wj is the weight assigned to that attribute, and m indexes the set of relevant attributes. The choice rule is then to select the alternative with the highest overall attractiveness or utility, a difference operation. If one considers a dimensionwise processor of information in a pairwise choice situation, the weighted additive model can give rise to the weighted difference model. When Equation 1 is rearranged, the difference in utilities for two alternatives can be expressed as

show abstract

“…Range-frequency theory has successfully predicted the pattern of judgments in both psychophysical domains, such as judgments of numerosity or size (Birnbaum, 1974;Parducci & Wedell, 1986;Wedell, 1996), and social domains, such as judgments of attractiveness, happiness, likableness, and performance (Mellers & Birnbaum, 1983;Smith, Diener, & Wedell, 1989;Wedell, 1994;Wedell, Parducci, & Geiselman, 1987). However, contextual manipulations can also produce disordinal effects not explained by range-frequency theory.…”

Section: Judgmental Relativitymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Thick and the Thin of It: Contextual Effects in Body Perception

Wedell¹,

Santoyo²,

Pettibone³

2005

Basic and Applied Social Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research investigated how and when exposure to different body contexts alters body ideals used in judgment. University students judged the width and pleasantness of human figures, with context manipulated by presenting mostly narrow or mostly wide forms. In Experiment 1, silhouettes were presented simultaneously on the page. In Experiment 2, figures were presented successively on a computer screen as detailed pictures. In both experiments, width ratings were consistent with A. Parducci's (1995) range-frequency theory, which predicted the same figure is judged thinner in the wide context. Pleasantness ratings were well described by an ideal-point model that used a gaussian similarity function, with the ideal shifting to a narrower width in the narrow context. The assimilative shifts in ideals with mere exposure to a small set of contextual stimuli supports the hypothesis that mass media presentations of ultrathin individuals may lead women to adopt a "thin ideal" in judging themselves and others. Although exposure to narrow or wide sets of figures had no consistent effect on measures of body satisfaction, individual differences in body satisfaction were related to ideal-point shifts. Women who were dissatisfied with their own bodies consistently used thin ideals to judge body images and were insensitive to the contextual manipulation of body image.

show abstract

Contextual contrast in evaluative judgments: A test of pre- versus postintegration models of contrast.

Cited by 29 publications

References 46 publications

Examining Models of Nondominated Decoy Effects across Judgment and Choice

Examining Models of Nondominated Decoy Effects across Judgment and Choice

Testing models of trade-off contrast in pairwise choice.

The Thick and the Thin of It: Contextual Effects in Body Perception

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About