The Ease-of-Computation Effect: The Interplay of Metacognitive Experiences and Naive Theories in Judgments of Price Differences

Consumers’ judgments of the magnitude of numerical differences are influenced by the ease of mental computations. The results from a set of experiments show that ease of computation can affect judgments of the magnitude of price differences, discount magnitudes, and brand choices. Participants seem to believe that it is easier to judge the size of a larger difference than that of a smaller difference. In the absence of appropriate corrective steps, this naive belief can lead to systematic biases in judgments. For example, when presented with two pairs of numbers, participants incorrectly judged the magnitude of the difference to be smaller for pairs with difficult computations (e.g., 4.97 – 3.96, an arithmetic difference of 1.01) than for pairs with easy computations (e.g., 5.00 – 4.00, an arithmetic difference of 1.00). The effect does not manifest when judgments do not entail mental computations or when participants are made aware that the ease or difficulty is caused by computational complexity. Furthermore, this effect is mitigated when participants’ prior experience is manipulated in a learning phase of the experiment. The results have implications for buyers and sellers and for understanding the role of metacognitive experiences in numerical judgments.

[1]  Christian Unkelbach,et al.  The Learned Interpretation of Cognitive Fluency , 2006, Psychological science.

[2]  R. Petty,et al.  The Malleable Meaning of Subjective Ease , 2006, Psychological science.

[3]  Nancy Kanwisher,et al.  Non-symbolic arithmetic in adults and young children , 2006, Cognition.

[4]  Angela Y. Lee,et al.  The Effect of Conceptual and Perceptual Fluency on Brand Evaluation , 2004 .

[5]  G. Menon,et al.  Ease-of-Retrieval as an Automatic Input in Judgments: A Mere-Accessibility Framework? , 2003 .

[6]  T. Meyvis,et al.  Effects of Brand Logo Complexity, Repetition, and Spacing on Processing Fluency and Judgment , 2001 .

[7]  M. McGlone,et al.  Birds of a Feather Flock Conjointly (?): Rhyme as Reason in Aphorisms , 2000, Psychological science.

[8]  N. Schwarz,et al.  Effects of Perceptual Fluency on Judgments of Truth , 1999, Consciousness and Cognition.

[9]  G. Menon,et al.  AIDS and Me, Never the Twain Shall Meet: The Effects of Information Accessibility on Judgments of Risk and Advertising Effectiveness , 1998 .

[10]  Michaela Wänke,et al.  There Are Many Reasons to Drive a BMW: Does Imagined Ease of Argument Generation Influence Attitudes? , 1997 .

[11]  N. Jane Zbrodoff,et al.  Why is 9+7 harder than 2+3? Strength and interference as explanations of the problem-size effect , 1995, Memory & cognition.

[12]  Paul Macaruso,et al.  Representing and using numerical information. , 1995, The American psychologist.

[13]  B. W. Whittlesea Illusions of familiarity. , 1993 .

[14]  F. Strack,et al.  Ease of retrieval as information: Another look at the availability heuristic. , 1991 .

[15]  Larry L. Jacoby,et al.  Illusions of immediate memory: evidence of an attributional basis for feelings of familiarity and perceptual quality , 1990 .

[16]  Mark H. Ashcraft,et al.  Cognitive arithmetic: Evidence for retrieval and decision processes in mental addition. , 1978 .

[17]  Daniel Kahneman,et al.  Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability , 1973 .

[18]  ROBERT S. MOYER,et al.  Time required for Judgements of Numerical Inequality , 1967, Nature.

[19]  N. Schwarz Metacognitive Experiences in Consumer Judgment and Decision Making , 2004 .

[20]  B. W. Whittlesea,et al.  The discrepancy-attribution hypothesis: I. The heuristic basis of feelings of familiarity. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[21]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Data analysis in social psychology. , 1998 .