ANCHORING IN JUDGEMENT AND DECISION-MAKING 1 Examining the Anchoring Phenomenon in Judgement and Decision-Making With Manipulations to Memory Load and Question Similarity SID: 510502791 PSYC2016: Perception, Cognition, and Intelligence Tutor: Luca 4 October 2022 Word Count: 1966
ANCHORING IN JUDGEMENT AND DECISION-MAKING 2 Abstract Anchoring refers to the phenomenon in which an initial value serves as an anchor for subsequent judgments and decisions (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). This study examined anchoring in decision-making and judgements by utilising a paired-question task while manipulating memory load and question similarity. We hypothesised that a high or low anchor would have a greater effect on absolute estimates when the comparative and subsequent questions were the same. This effect was also expected to be greater when participants were under an extra memory load. The interaction between anchor size and question similarity was found to be significant as well as their effect on anchoring. No other significant interactions were found. Data showed promising evidence for the selective accessibility model but failed to show significant interactions between increased memory load and anchoring. Future research should continue to manipulate variables such as motivation and effort as well as explore different memory span tasks.
ANCHORING IN JUDGEMENT AND DECISION-MAKING 3 Tversky & Kahneman (1974) argued that in the face of uncertainty, heuristics simplify decision-making by providing a more practical approach to quickly find an adequate estimation or end goal. Although effective in reaching a solution, the use of heuristics in decision-making can lead to systematic errors known as cognitive biases. Anchoring is the phenomenon by which an initial numerical value or reference point acts as an 8anchor9 when making predictions or decisions clouded with uncertainty (Epley & Gilovich, 2006). Introduced as the anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic by Tversky & Kahneman (1974), initial information or a numerical value is adjusted until a plausible answer for a given problem arises. The methodology of Tversky & Kahneman (1974) provides the foundations on which the anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic is examined in emerging literature. In their study, participants were instructed to estimate various statistics or quantities (e.g. the percentage of African countries in the United Nation) (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974, p. 185) by first deciding whether or not the quantity in question was higher or lower than an arbitrary number produced by spinning a wheel and then asked for their actual estimate. The general procedure for examining anchoring effects involves a comparison task (e.g. indicate whether the total rainfall in Australia in 2020 was higher or lower than 300 mm) followed by an estimation task (What was the average rainfall in Australia in 2020) (Onuki et al., 2021). A prominent explanation for anchoring bias is an insufficient adjustment from the anchor to the absolute value (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). Epley & Gilovich (2006) claim that the anchoring bias occurs due to poor adjustment from the anchor. That is, adjustments are made until a plausible answer is reached within reasonable bounds of the anchor and further adjustment stops. Similarly, Lieder et al. (2018) propose the inefficiency to evaluate