Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Free Access - Register Here

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jacowitz, K. E.
Right arrow Articles by Kahneman, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Jacowitz, K. E.
Right arrow Articles by Kahneman, D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 21, No. 11, 1161-1166 (1995)
DOI: 10.1177/01461672952111004

Measures of Anchoring in Estimation Tasks

Karen E. Jacowitz

University of California, Berkeley

Daniel Kahneman

Princeton University

The authors describe a method for the quantitative study of anchoring effects in estimation tasks. A calibration group provides estimates of a set of uncertain quantities. Subjects in the anchored condition first judge whether a specified number (the anchor) is higher or lower than the true value before estimating each quantity. The anchors are set at predetermined percentiles of the distribution of estimates in the calibration group (15th and 85th percentiles in this study). This procedure permits the transformation of anchored estimates into percentiles in the calibration group, allows pooling of results across problems, and provides a natural measure of the size of the effect. The authors illustrate the method by a demonstration that the initial judgment of the anchor is susceptible to an anchoring-like bias and by an analysis of the relation between anchoring and subjective confidence.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Med Decis MakingHome page
N. T. Brewer, G. B. Chapman, J. A. Schwartz, and G. R. Bergus
The Influence of Irrelevant Anchors on the Judgments and Choices of Doctors and Patients
Med Decis Making, March 1, 2007; 27(2): 203 - 211.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
N. Epley and T. Gilovich
Are Adjustments Insufficient?
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, April 1, 2004; 30(4): 447 - 460.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
L. Van Boven and G. Loewenstein
Social Projection of Transient Drive States
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, September 1, 2003; 29(9): 1159 - 1168.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
T. Mussweiler, F. Strack, and T. Pfeiffer
Overcoming the Inevitable Anchoring Effect: Considering the Opposite Compensates for Selective Accessibility
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, November 1, 2000; 26(9): 1142 - 1150.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
L. van Boven, J. Kruger, K. Savitsky, and T. Gilovich
When Social Worlds Collide: Overconfidence in the Multiple Audience Problem
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, May 1, 2000; 26(5): 619 - 628.
[Abstract] [PDF]