1 The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, USA.
2 Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA.
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2017 Jul;43(7):972-985. doi: 10.1177/0146167217702613. Epub 2017 Apr 29.
The anchoring effect has been replicated so extensively that it is generally thought to be ubiquitous. However, anchoring has primarily been tested in domains in which people are motivated to reach accurate conclusions rather than biased conclusions. Is the anchoring effect robust even when the anchors are threatening? In three studies, participants made a series of probability judgments about their own futures paired with either optimistic anchors (e.g., "Do you think that the chances that your current relationship will last a lifetime are more or less than 95%?"), pessimistic anchors (e.g., "more or less than 10%?"), or no anchors. A fourth study experimentally manipulated motivation to ignore the anchor with financial incentives. Across studies, anchors that implied high probabilities of unwanted events occurring were ineffective. Together, these studies suggest that anchoring has an important boundary condition: Personally threatening anchors are ignored as a result of motivated reasoning processes.
锚定效应已经被广泛复制，以至于人们普遍认为它无处不在。然而，锚定主要是在人们有动机得出准确结论而不是有偏差的结论的领域进行测试的。即使在锚定具有威胁性的情况下，锚定效应是否仍然稳健？在三项研究中，参与者对自己的未来做出了一系列的概率判断，这些判断与乐观的锚定（例如，“你认为你目前的关系持续一生的可能性大于或小于 95%？”）、悲观的锚定（例如，“大于或小于 10%？”）或没有锚定相关联。第四项研究通过财务激励来实验性地操纵忽略锚定的动机。在所有研究中，暗示高概率发生不想要的事件的锚定都是无效的。这些研究共同表明，锚定有一个重要的边界条件：由于动机推理过程，对个人具有威胁性的锚定被忽略了。
