Estimation of factorial expressions and its improvement through calibration: A replication and extension of Tversky and Kahneman (1973).

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Jeffrey Kramer Bye, Vijay Marupudi, Reba Koenen, Jimin Park, Sashank Varma
{"title":"Estimation of factorial expressions and its improvement through calibration: A replication and extension of Tversky and Kahneman (1973).","authors":"Jeffrey Kramer Bye, Vijay Marupudi, Reba Koenen, Jimin Park, Sashank Varma","doi":"10.3758/s13421-024-01662-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Fifty years ago, Tversky and Kahneman (Cognitive Psychology, 5[2], 207-232, 1973) reported that people's speeded estimations of 8 × 7 × 6 × 5 × 4 × 3 × 2 × 1 were notably higher than their estimations for the equivalent expression in the opposite order, 1 × 2 × 3 × 4 × 5 × 6 × 7 × 8 (Median = 2,250 vs. 512, respectively). On top of this order effect, both groups grossly underestimated the correct value (40,320). The differential effect of the two orders on estimation has become famous as an early demonstration of the anchoring effect, where people's judgments under uncertainty are unduly influenced by an initial reference point (or \"anchor\"). Despite this fame, to the best of our knowledge, this effect has never been replicated. In a sample of 253 U.S. adults, the current study provides the first replication of this foundational example of anchoring. It extends this effect for the first time to a within-participants design, revealing its relative robustness even among participants who see the descending order first. Drawing on procedures from the mathematical cognition literature, it shows how the anchoring effect can be mitigated: calibrating to the correct value of 6! reduces this effect, and calibrating to 10! eliminates it altogether. An individual differences analysis measures the arithmetic fluency of participants and their accuracy on a new estimation assessment, and finds that higher estimation ability may be a \"protective factor\" against some anchoring effects. These findings affirm the anchoring effect of Tversky and Kahneman (1973, Study 6) while suggesting that calibration may be an effective strategy for helping to improve people's estimation of superlinear functions that are important in real-life contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":48398,"journal":{"name":"Memory & Cognition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Memory & Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-024-01662-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Fifty years ago, Tversky and Kahneman (Cognitive Psychology, 5[2], 207-232, 1973) reported that people's speeded estimations of 8 × 7 × 6 × 5 × 4 × 3 × 2 × 1 were notably higher than their estimations for the equivalent expression in the opposite order, 1 × 2 × 3 × 4 × 5 × 6 × 7 × 8 (Median = 2,250 vs. 512, respectively). On top of this order effect, both groups grossly underestimated the correct value (40,320). The differential effect of the two orders on estimation has become famous as an early demonstration of the anchoring effect, where people's judgments under uncertainty are unduly influenced by an initial reference point (or "anchor"). Despite this fame, to the best of our knowledge, this effect has never been replicated. In a sample of 253 U.S. adults, the current study provides the first replication of this foundational example of anchoring. It extends this effect for the first time to a within-participants design, revealing its relative robustness even among participants who see the descending order first. Drawing on procedures from the mathematical cognition literature, it shows how the anchoring effect can be mitigated: calibrating to the correct value of 6! reduces this effect, and calibrating to 10! eliminates it altogether. An individual differences analysis measures the arithmetic fluency of participants and their accuracy on a new estimation assessment, and finds that higher estimation ability may be a "protective factor" against some anchoring effects. These findings affirm the anchoring effect of Tversky and Kahneman (1973, Study 6) while suggesting that calibration may be an effective strategy for helping to improve people's estimation of superlinear functions that are important in real-life contexts.

因子表达式的估计及其通过校准的改进:Tversky和Kahneman(1973)的复制和扩展。
50年前,Tversky和Kahneman (Cognitive Psychology, 5 b[2], 207- 232,1973)报道,人们对8 × 7 × 6 × 5 × 4 × 3 × 2 × 1的速度估计明显高于对相反顺序的等价表达式1 × 2 × 3 × 4 × 5 × 6 × 7 × 8的速度估计(Median = 2250 vs. 512)。在这个顺序效应之上,两组都严重低估了正确值(40,320)。这两种顺序对估计的不同影响已经作为锚定效应的早期证明而闻名,锚定效应是指人们在不确定性下的判断受到初始参考点(或“锚”)的过度影响。尽管名声在外,但据我们所知,这种效应从未被复制过。在253名美国成年人的样本中,目前的研究首次复制了这一基本的锚定例子。它首次将这种效应扩展到参与者内部设计,揭示了它的相对稳健性,即使是在那些首先看到降序的参与者中。根据数学认知文献的程序,它展示了如何减轻锚定效应:校准到正确的值6!减少这种影响,并校准到10!完全消除它。个体差异分析测量了参与者的算术流畅性及其在新估计评估中的准确性,发现较高的估计能力可能是对抗锚定效应的“保护因素”。这些发现证实了Tversky和Kahneman (1973, Study 6)的锚定效应,同时表明校准可能是一种有效的策略,有助于提高人们对超线性函数的估计,这在现实生活中很重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Memory & Cognition
Memory & Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
112
期刊介绍: Memory & Cognition covers human memory and learning, conceptual processes, psycholinguistics, problem solving, thinking, decision making, and skilled performance, including relevant work in the areas of computer simulation, information processing, mathematical psychology, developmental psychology, and experimental social psychology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信