Subliminal anchoring: Judgmental consequences and underlying mechanisms

Abstract Judgmental anchoring—the assimilation of a numeric estimate towards a previously considered standard—is an exceptionally ubiquitous effect that influences human judgment in a variety of domains and paradigms. Three studies examined whether anchoring effects even occur, if anchor values are presented subliminally, outside of judges’ awareness. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrate such subliminal anchoring effects: judges assimilated target estimates towards the subliminally presented anchor values. Study 3 further demonstrates that subliminal anchors produced a selective increase in the accessibility of anchor-consistent target knowledge. The implications of these findings for the ubiquity of judgmental anchoring, its different underlying mechanisms, and comparative information processing are discussed.

[1]  Thomas Mussweiler,et al.  Overcoming the Inevitable Anchoring Effect: Considering the Opposite Compensates for Selective Accessibility , 2000 .

[2]  T. K. Srull,et al.  The Role of Category Accessibility in the Interpretation of Information About Persons: Some Determinants and Implications , 1979 .

[3]  Thomas Mussweiler,et al.  Numeric Judgments under Uncertainty: The Role of Knowledge in Anchoring , 2000 .

[4]  J. Bargh,et al.  Automatic information processing and social perception: The influence of trait information presented outside of conscious awareness on impression formation. , 1982 .

[5]  F. Strack,et al.  Playing Dice With Criminal Sentences: The Influence of Irrelevant Anchors on Experts’ Judicial Decision Making , 2006, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[6]  J. Chertkoff,et al.  Opening offer and frequency of concession as bargaining strategies. , 1967 .

[7]  T. Mussweiler,et al.  What friends are for! The use of routine standards in social comparison. , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[8]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  Incorporating the Irrelevant: Anchors in Judgments of Belief and Value , 2002 .

[9]  D. Rubin,et al.  Contrasts and Correlations in Effect-Size Estimation , 2000, Psychological science.

[10]  Venkatesh,et al.  Computer Technology Training in the Workplace: A Longitudinal Investigation of the Effect of Mood. , 1999, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[11]  T. Mussweiler,et al.  Sources of Mental Contamination: Comparing the Effects of Self-Generated versus Externally Provided Primes☆ , 2000 .

[12]  F. Strack,et al.  The use of category and exemplar knowledge in the solution of anchoring tasks. , 2000, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[13]  L. Festinger.  A Theory of Social Comparison Processes , 1954 .

[14]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  A new look at anchoring effects: basic anchoring and its antecedents. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[15]  Thomas Mussweiler,et al.  Hypothesis-consistent testing and semantic priming in the anchoring paradigm: A selective accessibility model. , 1999 .

[16]  Michael A. Becker.  Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles , 1998 .

[17]  F. Strack,et al.  Explaining the Enigmatic Anchoring Effect: Mechanisms of Selective Accessibility , 1997 .

[18]  S. Plous,et al.  Thinking the Unthinkable : The Effects of Anchoring on Likelihood Estimates of Nuclear Warl , 1989 .

[19]  A. Galinsky,et al.  First offers as anchors: the role of perspective-taking and negotiator focus. , 2001, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[20]  Evidence for egocentric comparison in social judgment , 1996 .

[21]  G. Chapman,et al.  The fragile basic anchoring effect , 2002 .

[22]  Brian H. Bornstein,et al.  The More You Ask For, the More You Get: Anchoring in Personal Injury Verdicts , 1996 .

[23]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  Anchoring, Activation, and the Construction of Values. , 1999, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[24]  J. Bargh,et al.  Automaticity of social behavior: direct effects of trait construct and stereotype-activation on action. , 1996, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[25]  Dale T. Miller,et al.  Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives , 1986 .

[26]  D. Cervone,et al.  Anchoring, Efficacy and Action: The Influence of Judgmental Heuristics on Self-Efficacy Judgments a , 1986 .

[27]  E. Higgins.  Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience. , 1996 .

[28]  D. R. Brown,et al.  Stimulus-similarity and the anchoring of subjective scales. , 1953, The American journal of psychology.

[29]  G. Northcraft,et al.  Experts, amateurs, and real estate: An anchoring-and-adjustment perspective on property pricing decisions , 1987 .

[30]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  The limits of anchoring. , 1994 .

[31]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[32]  Thomas Mussweiler,et al.  Sentencing Under Uncertainty: Anchoring Effects in the Courtroom1 , 2001 .

[33]  Thomas Mussweiler,et al.  The Last Word in Court—A Hidden Disadvantage for the Defense , 2005, Law and human behavior.

[34]  Thomas Mussweiler,et al.  Comparing Is Believing: A Selective Accessibility Model of Judgmental Anchoring , 1999 .

[35]  Thomas Mussweiler,et al.  Considering The Impossible: Explaining The Effects of Implausible Anchors , 2001 .

[36]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Measures of Anchoring in Estimation Tasks , 1995 .

[37]  F. Strack,et al.  The Semantics of Anchoring , 2001 .

[38]  David Dunning,et al.  Evidence for egocentric comparison in social judgment , 1996 .

[39]  Thomas Gilovich,et al.  Are Adjustments Insufficient? , 2004, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[40]  H. Helson.  Adaptation-level theory : an experimental and systematic approach to behavior , 1964 .

[41]  T. K. Srull,et al.  Memory and Cognition in Its Social Context , 1989 .

[42]  J. Klayman,et al.  Confirmation, Disconfirmation, and Informa-tion in Hypothesis Testing , 1987 .

[43]  T. Mussweiler,et al.  I know you are, but what am I? Self-evaluative consequences of judging in-group and out-group members. , 2002, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[44]  E. Higgins,et al.  Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles. , 1996 .

[45]  T. Mussweiler.  Comparison processes in social judgment: mechanisms and consequences. , 2003, Psychological review.

[46]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment , 2002 .

[47]  Margaret A. Neale,et al.  Effects of cognitive heuristics and goals on negotiator performance and subsequent goal setting , 1986 .

[48]  N. Epley,et al.  Putting Adjustment Back in the Anchoring and Adjustment Heuristic: Differential Processing of Self-Generated and Experimenter-Provided Anchors , 2001, Psychological science.

[49]  Kin Fai Ellick Wong,et al.  Is 7300 m Equal to 7.3 km? Same Semantics but Different Anchoring Effects. , 2000, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[50]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  Implications of Attitude Change Theories for Numerical Anchoring: Anchor Plausibility and the Limits of Anchor Effectiveness , 2001 .

[51]  V. Hinsz,et al.  Using Judgmental Anchors to Establish Challenging Self-Set Goals Without Jeopardizing Commitment , 1997 .

[52]  A. Kruglanski,et al.  Classic and Current Social Comparison Research : Expanding the Perspective , 1990 .