The Top-Ten Effect: Consumers' Subjective Categorization of Ranked Lists

Abstract

Long lists of ranked items, such as Bloomberg Businessweek's rankings of MBA programs, are ubiquitous in Western culture, and they are often used in consumer decision making. Six studies show that consumers mentally subdivide ranked lists into a smaller set of categories and exaggerate differences between consecutive items adjacent to category boundaries. Further, despite prior work suggesting that people might subjectively produce place-value categories (e.g., single digits, the twenties), this research shows that consumers interpret ranked lists by generating round-number categories ending in zero or five (e.g., top 10, top 25). Thus, for example, consumers will more favorably evaluate improvements in rank that cross round-number-category boundaries (e.g., shifting from rank 11 to rank 10) than improvements in rank that cross place-value-category boundaries (e.g., shifting from rank 10 to rank 9). This phenomenon, labeled the top-ten effect, occurs because round numbers are cognitively accessible to consumers due to their prevalent use in everyday communication. L ong lists of ranked items are ubiquitous in Western culture. For example, each December, Car and Driver magazine lists the 10 best-performing cars and the 10 worst-performing cars of the year. Bloomberg Businessweek magazine publishes biennial rankings, listing the top 25 business schools. Billboard magazine publishes a weekly "Hot 100" list, a ranking of the sales and airplay of popular songs. Further, highly publicized ranked lists are not a new phenomenon. In 1930, the Chicago Tribune published an article that ranked Chicago's 28 most prominent and influential gangsters, and it placed the notorious gangster Al Capone atop the list, making him "public enemy number one" (Bergreen 1994).

Round Off the Bargaining: The Effects of Offer Roundness on Willingness to Accept

“…First, round numbers are usually the last in a series of numbers. For example, Isaac and Schindler (2014) found that individuals tended to divide a series of numbers into small categories based on round numbers, which is why rankings such as top 10, top 50, and top 100 are so ubiquitous. In each of these rankings, round numbers are last, functioning as the boundaries of numerical categories.…”

Lasting performance: Round numbers activate associations of stability and increase perceived length of product benefits

“…Second, individuals see round (more than precise) numbers as salient reference points (Rosch, 1975). As a consequence, people commonly configure categories to contain a round number of elements (Isaac & Schindler, 2014). For instance, people create lists of hierarchy with multiples of 10 (e.g., top 10, bottom 10, etc.…”

Changing Ethics Policies Without Scandal: State Responses to Published Reports and the Importance of Accurate Information

“…Ranked lists are unique in that they already contain arranged sets of defined objects (Verguts & De Moor, 2005). Given their already defined nature, categorizations within rankings can affect the perceived distance between items in a list, so that the top 10 can seem significantly different than the top 20 even though 10 and 11 are only one unit apart; Isaac and Schindler (2013) showed that people tend to subdivide rankings in this way. Further, they also showed that these rankings have significant effects on how people perceive the relative value or performance of items between the rounded categories.…”