Semantic Anchoring in Sequential Evaluations of Vices and Virtues
AbstractHow do people evaluate sequentially presented items? Prior research suggests that sequential evaluations are subject to anchoring biases, such that the values of subsequently evaluated alternatives are assimilated toward the initially considered option. The present research argues, however, that sequential valuations often lead to contrast rather than assimilation effects, whereby values of the subsequently estimated alternatives are distanced from the initially evaluated option. These contrast effects are attributed to semantic anchoring, which stems from evaluating conceptually related options classified into opposing categories (e.g., vices and virtues).
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by University of Chicago Press in its journal Journal of Consumer Research.
Volume (Year): 37 (2011)
Issue (Month): 5 ()
Pages: 761 - 774
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JCR/
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Mochon, Daniel & Frederick, Shane, 2013. "Anchoring in sequential judgments," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 69-79.
- Murtha, Brian R., 2013. "Peaking at the right time: Perceptions, expectations, and effects," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 120(1), pages 62-72.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Journals Division).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.