File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1525/collabra.77859
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-85167428716
- Find via
Supplementary
-
Citations:
- Scopus: 0
- Appears in Collections:
Article: "Less Is Better" in Separate Evaluations Versus “More Is Better” in Joint Evaluations: Mostly Successful Close Replication and Extension of Hsee (1998)
Title | "Less Is Better" in Separate Evaluations Versus “More Is Better” in Joint Evaluations: Mostly Successful Close Replication and Extension of Hsee (1998) |
---|---|
Authors | |
Keywords | biases and heuristics judgment and decision making less is better more is better replication |
Issue Date | 11-Jul-2023 |
Publisher | University of California Press |
Citation | Collabra: Psychology, 2023, v. 9, n. 1 How to Cite? |
Abstract | We conducted a preregistered close replication and extension of Studies 1, 2, and 4 in Hsee (1998). Hsee found that when evaluating choices jointly, people compare and judge the option higher on desirable attributes as better (“more is better”). However, when people evaluate options separately, they rely on contextual cues and reference points, sometimes resulting in evaluating the option with less as being better (“less is better”). We found support for “less is better” across all studies (N = 403; Study 1 original d = 0.70 [0.24,1.15], replication d = 0.99 [0.72,1.26]; Study 2 original d = 0.74 [0.12,1.35], replication d = 0.32 [0.07,0.56]; Study 4 original d = 0.97 [0.43,1.50], replication d = 0.76 [0.50,1.02]), with weaker support for “more is better” (Study 2 original d = 0.92 [0.42,1.40], replication dz = 0.33 [.23,.43]; Study 4 original d = 0.37 [0.02,0.72], replication dz = 0.09 [-0.05,0.23]). Some results of our exploratory extensions were surprising, leading to open questions. We discuss remaining implications and directions for theory and measurement relating to economic rationality and the evaluability hypothesis. Materials/data/code: https://osf.io/9uwns/ |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/348356 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 3.1 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.182 |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Vonasch, Andrew J | - |
dc.contributor.author | Hung, Wing Yiu | - |
dc.contributor.author | Leung, Wai Yee | - |
dc.contributor.author | Nguyen, Anna Thao Bich | - |
dc.contributor.author | Chan, Stephanie | - |
dc.contributor.author | Cheng, Bo Ley | - |
dc.contributor.author | Feldman, Gilad | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-10-09T00:30:59Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2024-10-09T00:30:59Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2023-07-11 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Collabra: Psychology, 2023, v. 9, n. 1 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 2474-7394 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/348356 | - |
dc.description.abstract | <p>We conducted a preregistered close replication and extension of Studies 1, 2, and 4 in Hsee (1998). Hsee found that when evaluating choices jointly, people compare and judge the option higher on desirable attributes as better (“more is better”). However, when people evaluate options separately, they rely on contextual cues and reference points, sometimes resulting in evaluating the option with less as being better (“less is better”). We found support for “less is better” across all studies (N = 403; Study 1 original d = 0.70 [0.24,1.15], replication d = 0.99 [0.72,1.26]; Study 2 original d = 0.74 [0.12,1.35], replication d = 0.32 [0.07,0.56]; Study 4 original d = 0.97 [0.43,1.50], replication d = 0.76 [0.50,1.02]), with weaker support for “more is better” (Study 2 original d = 0.92 [0.42,1.40], replication dz = 0.33 [.23,.43]; Study 4 original d = 0.37 [0.02,0.72], replication dz = 0.09 [-0.05,0.23]). Some results of our exploratory extensions were surprising, leading to open questions. We discuss remaining implications and directions for theory and measurement relating to economic rationality and the evaluability hypothesis. Materials/data/code: https://osf.io/9uwns/<br></p> | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.publisher | University of California Press | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | Collabra: Psychology | - |
dc.rights | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. | - |
dc.subject | biases and heuristics | - |
dc.subject | judgment and decision making | - |
dc.subject | less is better | - |
dc.subject | more is better | - |
dc.subject | replication | - |
dc.title | "Less Is Better" in Separate Evaluations Versus “More Is Better” in Joint Evaluations: Mostly Successful Close Replication and Extension of Hsee (1998) | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1525/collabra.77859 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-85167428716 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 9 | - |
dc.identifier.issue | 1 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 2474-7394 | - |
dc.identifier.issnl | 2474-7394 | - |