Overcoming the Inevitable Anchoring Effect: Considering the Opposite Compensates for Selective Accessibility

Anchoring effects—the assimilation of a numeric estimate to a previously considered standard—have proved to be remarkably robust. Results of two studies, however, demonstrate that anchoring can be reduced by applying a consider-the-opposite strategy. Based on the Selective Accessibility Model, which...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inPersonality & social psychology bulletin Vol. 26; no. 9; pp. 1142 - 1150
Main Authors Mussweiler, Thomas, Strack, Fritz, Pfeiffer, Tim
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Thousand Oaks, CA SAGE Publications 01.09.2000
Sage Publications, Inc
SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC
Subjects
Accessibility
Anchoring
Factors
Judgments
Knowledge
Opposites
Social psychology
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Anchoring effects—the assimilation of a numeric estimate to a previously considered standard—have proved to be remarkably robust. Results of two studies, however, demonstrate that anchoring can be reduced by applying a consider-the-opposite strategy. Based on the Selective Accessibility Model, which assumes that anchoring is mediated by the selectively increased accessibility of anchor-consistent knowledge, the authors hypothesized that increasing the accessibility of anchor-inconsistent knowledge mitigates the effect. Considering the opposite (i.e., generating reasons why an anchor is inappropriate) fulfills this objective and consequently proves to be a successful corrective strategy. In a real-world setting using experts as participants, Study 1 dem-onstrated that listing arguments that speak against a provided anchor value reduces the effect. Study 2 further revealed that the effects of anchoring and considering the opposite are additive.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0146-1672
1552-7433
DOI:10.1177/01461672002611010