• Please log in or register to access this feature.

Research article

You have free access to this content

Knowledge matters: Anchoring effects are moderated by knowledge level

  1. Andrew R. Smith1,*,
  2. Paul D. Windschitl2,
  3. Kathryn Bruchmann2

Article first published online: 17 DEC 2012

DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.1921

Issue

European Journal of Social Psychology

European Journal of Social Psychology

Volume 43, Issue 1, pages 97–108, February 2013

Additional Information

How to Cite

Smith, A. R., Windschitl, P. D. and Bruchmann, K. (2013), Knowledge matters: Anchoring effects are moderated by knowledge level. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol., 43: 97–108. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.1921

Author Information

  1. 1

    Department of Psychology, Appalachian State University, Boone, USA

  2. 2

    Department of Psychology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, USA

* Correspondence to: Andrew R. Smith, Appalachian State University, Department of Psychology, ASU Box 32109, Boone, NC 28608-2109, USA.
E-mail: smithar3@appstate.edu

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 29 JAN 2013
  2. Article first published online: 17 DEC 2012
  3. Manuscript Accepted: 7 OCT 2012
  4. Manuscript Revised: 5 OCT 2012
  5. Manuscript Received: 23 JAN 2012

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (216K)

REFERENCES

  • Abelson, R. P., & Prentice, D. A. (1997). Contrast tests of interaction hypotheses. Psychological Methods, 2, 315–328.
  • Ariely, D., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2003). Coherent arbitrariness: Stable demand curves without stable preferences. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118, 73–105.
  • Blankenship, K. L., Wegener, D. T., Petty, R. E., Detweiler-Bedell, B., & Macy, C. L. (2008). Elaboration and consequences of anchored estimates: An attitudinal perspective on numerical anchoring. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1465–1476. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.07.005
  • Brewer, N. T., & Chapman, G. B. (2002). The fragile basic anchoring effect. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15, 65–77.
    Direct Link:
  • Brewer, N. T., Chapman, G. B., Schwartz, J. A., & Bergus, G. R. (2007). The influence of irrelevant anchors on the judgments and choices of doctors and patients. Medical Decision Making, 27, 203–211.
  • Buhrmester, M. D., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon's Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 3–5. doi: 10.1177/1745691610393980
  • Chapman, G. B., & Bornstein, B. H. (1996). The more you ask for, the more you get: Anchoring in personal injury verdicts. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 519–540.
    Direct Link:
  • Chapman, G. B., & Johnson, E. J. (1999). Anchoring, activation, and the construction of values. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 79, 115–153.
  • Chapman, G. B., & Johnson, E. J. (2002). Incorporating the irrelevant: Anchors in judgments of belief and value. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 120–138). Cambridge University Press: New York.
  • Critcher, C. R., & Gilovich, T. (2007). Incidental environmental anchors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 21, 241–251.
    Direct Link:
  • Englich, B. (2008). When knowledge matters—Differential effects of available knowledge in standard and basic anchoring. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 896–904.
    Direct Link:
  • Englich, B., & Soder, K. (2009). Moody experts—How mood and expertise influence judgmental anchoring. Judgment and Decision Making, 4, 41–50.
  • Englich, B., Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (2006). Playing dice with criminal sentences: The influence of irrelevant anchors on experts' judicial decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 188–200.
  • Epley, N. (2004). A tale of tuned decks? Anchoring as accessibility and anchoring as adjustment. In D. J. Koehler, & N. Harvey (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making (pp. 240–256). Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell Publishers.
  • Epley, N., & Gilovich, T. (2001). Putting adjustment back in the anchoring and adjustment heuristic: Differential processing of self-generated and experimenter-provided anchors. Psychological Science, 12, 391–396.
    Direct Link:
  • Epley, N., & Gilovich, T. (2004). Are adjustments insufficient? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 447–460.
  • Epley, N., & Gilovich, T. (2005). When effortful thinking influences judgmental anchoring: Differential effects of forewarning and incentives on self-generated and externally-provided anchors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 18, 199–212.
    Direct Link:
  • Furnham, A., & Boo, H. C. (2011). A literature review of the anchoring effect. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 40, 35–42.
  • Galinsky, A. D., & Mussweiler, T. (2001). First offers as anchors: The role of perspective-taking and negotiator focus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 657–669.
  • Judd, C. M., Westfall, J., & Kenny, D. A. (2012). Treating stimuli as a random factor in social psychology: A new and comprehensive solution to a pervasive but largely ignored problem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 54–69.
  • Klayman, J., & Ha, Y. (1987). Confirmation, disconfirmation, and information in hypothesis testing. Psychological Review, 94, 211–228.
  • Marti, M. W., & Wissler, R. L. (2000). Be careful what you ask for: The effect of anchors on personal-injury damages awards. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied, 6, 91–103.
  • Mussweiler, T., & Englich, B. (2003). Adapting to the Euro: Evidence from bias reduction. Journal of Economic Psychology, 24, 285–292.
  • Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (1999). Hypothesis-consistent testing and semantic priming in the anchoring paradigm: A selective accessibility model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 136–164.
  • Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (2000). Numeric judgment under uncertainty: The role of knowledge in anchoring. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 495–518.
  • Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (2001). Considering the impossible: Explaining the effects of implausible anchors. Social Cognition, 19, 145–160.
  • Mussweiler, T., Strack, F., & Pfeiffer, T. (2000). Overcoming the inevitable anchoring effect: Considering the opposite compensates for selective accessibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1142–1150.
  • Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1987). Experts, amateurs, and real estate: An anchoring-and-adjustment perspective on property pricing decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 84–97.
  • Oppenheimer, D. M., LeBoeuf, R. A., & Brewer, N. T. (2008). Anchors aweigh: A demonstration of cross-modality anchoring and magnitude priming. Cognition, 106, 13–26.
  • Paolacci, G., Chandler, J., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2010). Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Judgment and Decision Making, 5, 411–419.
  • Quattrone, G. A., Lawrence, C. P., Finkel, S. E., & Andrus, D. C. (1981). Explorations in anchoring: The effects of prior range, anchor extremity, and suggestive hints. Unpublished manuscript, Stanford University.
  • Simmons, J. P., Leboeuf, R. A., & Nelson, L. D. (2010). The effect of accuracy motivation on anchoring and adjustment: Do people adjust from provided anchors? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 917–932. doi: 10.1037/a0021540
  • Simonson, I., & Drolet, A. (2004). Anchoring effects on consumers' willingness-to-pay and willingness-to-accept. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 681–690. doi: 10.1086/425103
  • Smith, A. R., & Windschitl, P. D. (2011). Biased calculations: Numeric anchors influence answers to math equations. Judgment and Decision Making, 6, 139–146.
  • Strack, F., & Mussweiler, T. (1997). Explaining the enigmatic anchoring effect: Mechanisms of selective accessibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 437–446.
  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.
  • Wilson, T. D., Houston, C. E., Etling, K. M., & Brekke, N. (1996). A new look at anchoring effects: Basic anchoring and its antecedents. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 125, 387–402.
  • Wong, K. F. E., & Kwong, J. Y. Y. (2000). Is 7300 m equal to 7.3 km? Same semantics but different anchoring effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82, 314–333.
View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (216K)