Psychophysics and the judgment of price: judging complex objects on a non-physical dimension elicits sequential effects like those in perceptual tasks
Matthews, William J. and Stewart, Neil. (2009) Psychophysics and the judgment of price: judging complex objects on a non-physical dimension elicits sequential effects like those in perceptual tasks. Judgment and Decision Making, Vol.4 (No.1). pp. 64-81. ISSN 1930-2975
WRAP_Stewart_Psychophysics.pdf - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Official URL: http://journal.sjdm.org/81104/jdm81104.html
When participants in psychophysical experiments are asked to estimate or identify stimuli which differ on a single
physical dimension, their judgments are influenced by the local experimental context — the item presented and judgment
made on the previous trial. It has been suggested that similar sequential effects occur in more naturalistic, real-world judgments. In three experiments we asked participants to judge the prices of a sequence of items. In Experiment 1, judgments were biased towards the previous response (assimilation) but away from the true value of the previous item (contrast), a pattern which matches that found in psychophysical research. In Experiments 2A and 2B, we manipulated the provision of feedback and the expertise of the participants, and found that feedback reduced the effect of the previous judgment and shifted the effect of the previous item’s true price from contrast to assimilation. Finally, in all three experiments we found that judgments were biased towards the centre of the range, a phenomenon known as the “regression effect” in psychophysics. These results suggest that the most recently-presented item is a point of reference for the current judgment. The findings inform our understanding of the judgment process, constrain the explanations for
local context effects put forward by psychophysicists, and carry practical importance for real-world situations in which contextual bias may degrade the accuracy of judgments.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Subjects:||H Social Sciences > HB Economic Theory
B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology
|Divisions:||Faculty of Science > Psychology|
|Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):||Value, Decision making -- Testing, Consumer behavior, Sequential analysis|
|Journal or Publication Title:||Judgment and Decision Making|
|Publisher:||Society for Judgment and Decision Making|
|Official Date:||February 2009|
|Number of Pages:||18|
|Page Range:||pp. 64-81|
|Access rights to Published version:||Open Access|
|Funder:||Economic and Social Research Council (Great Britain) (ESRC)|
|Grant number:||RES-000-23-1372 (ESRC)|
Baird, J. C., Green, D. M., & Luce, R. D. (1980). Variability and sequential effects in cross-modality matching of area and loudness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 6, 277–289.
Beckstead, J. W. (2007). A note on determining the number of cues used in judgment analysis studies: The issue of type II error. Judgment and Decision Making, 2, 317-325.
Beckstead, J. W. (2008). Modeling sequential context effects in judgment analysis: A time series approach. Judgment and Decision Making, 3, 570–584.
Brown, S. D., Marley, A. A. J., Donkin, C., & Heathcote, A. (2008). An integrated model of choices and responses times in absolute identification. Psychological Review, 115, 396–425.
DeCarlo, L. T. (1992). Intertrial interval and sequential effects in magnitude scaling. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 1080–1088.
DeCarlo, L. T., & Cross, D. V. (1990). Sequential effects in magnitude scaling: models and theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 375–396.
Epley, N., & Gilovich, T. (2006). The anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic: Why the adjustments are insufficient. Psychological Science, 17, 311–318.
Garner, W. R. (1953). An informational analysis of absolute judgments of loudness. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46, 373–380.
Holland, M. K., & Lockhead, G. R. (1968). Sequential effects in absolute judgments of loudness. Perception & Psychophysics, 3, 409–414.
Hollingworth, H. L. (1909). The inaccuracy of movement. Archives of Psychology, 13.
Jesteadt, W., Luce, R. D., & Green, D. M. (1977). Sequential effects in judgments of loudness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 92–104.
Laming, D. (1984). The relativity of ’absolute’ judgments. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 37, 152–183.
Laming, D. (1995). Screening cervical smears. British Journal of Psychology, 86, 507–516.
Laming, D. (2004). Human Judgment: The eye of the beholder. London: Thomson Learning.
Lockhead, G. R. (1984). Sequential predictors of choice in psychophysical tasks. In S. Kornblum & J. Requin (Eds.), Preparatory states and processes (pp. 27–47). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Lockhead, G. R., & King, M. C. (1983). A memory model of sequential effects in scaling tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 461–473.
Lorch, R. F., & Myers, J. L. (1990). Regression analyses of repeated measures data in cognitive research. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 149–157.
Masson, M. E. J., & Loftus, G. R. (2003). Using confidence intervals for graphically based data interpretation. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 203–220.
Matthews, W. J., Benjamin, C., & Osborne, C. (2007). Memory for moving and static images. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 989–993.
Matthews, W. J., & Stewart, N. (in press). The effect of inter-stimulus interval on sequential effects in absolute identification. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology.
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for information processing. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.
Mori, S. (1998). Effects of stimulus information and number of stimuli on sequential dependencies in absolute identification. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52, 72–83.
Mori, S., & Ward, L. M. (1995). Pure feedback effects in absolute identification. Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 1065–1079.
Mussweiler, T., & Englich, B. (2005). Subliminal anchoring : Judgmental consequences and underlying mechanisms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 98, 133–143.
Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (1999). Hypothesis-consistent testing and semantic priming in the anchoring paradigm : A selective accessibility model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 136–164.
Neter, J., Kutner, M. H., Nachtsheim, C. J., & Wasserman, W. (1996). Applied linear regression models (3rd Ed.). London : Irwin.
Parducci, A. (1965). Category judgment : A range frequency model. Psychological Review, 72, 407–418.
Parducci, A. (1968). The relativism of absolute judgment. Scientific American, 219, 84–90.
Petzold, P., & Haubensak, G. (2001). Higher order sequential effects in psychophysical judgments. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 969–978.
Reynolds, G. S., & Stevens, S. S. (1960). Binaural summation of loudness. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 32, 1337–1344.
Staddon, J. E. R., King, M., & Lockhead, G. R. (1980). On sequential effects in absolute judgment experiments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 6, 290–301.
Stevens, S. S., & Guirao, M. (1962). Loudness, reciprocality, and partition scales. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 34, 1466–1471.
Stewart, N., Brown, G. D. A., & Chater, N. (2005). Absolute identification by relative judgment. Psychological Review, 112, 881–911.
Stewart, N., & Simpson, K. (2008). A decision-by-sampling account of decision under risk. In N. Chater & M. Oaksford (Ed.s), The probabilistic mind: Prospects for Bayesian cognitive science, (pp. 261-276). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Treisman, M., & Williams, T. C. (1984). A theory of criterion setting with an application to sequential dependencies. Psychological Review, 91, 68–111.
Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.
Vlaev, I. & Chater, N. (2007). Context effects in games: Local versus global sequential effects on choice in the prisoner’s dilemma game. Judgment and Decision Making, 2, 380–389.
Ward, L. M. (1979). Stimulus information and sequential dependencies in magnitude estimation and cross-modality matching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5, 444–459.
Ward, L. M. (1982). Mixed-modality psychophysical scaling: Sequential dependencies and other properties. Perception & Psychophysics, 31, 53–62.
Ward, L. M. (1985). Mixed-modality psychophysical scaling: Inter- and intramodality sequential dependencies as a function of lag. Perception & Psychophysics, 38, 512–522.
Ward, L. M. (1987). Remembrance of sounds past: Memory and psychophysical scaling. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 216–227.
Ward, L. M. (1990). Mixed-methods mixed-modality psychophysical scaling. Perception & Psychophysics, 48, 571-582.
Ward, L. M., & Lockhead, G. R. (1970). Sequential effects and memory in category judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 84, 27–34.
Ward, L. M., & Lockhead, G. R. (1971). Response system processed in absolute judgment. Perception & Psychophysics, 9, 73–78.
Wilson, T. D., Houston, C. E., Etling, K. M., & Brekke, N. (1996). A new look at anchoring effects: Basic anchoring and its antecedents. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 125, 387–402.
Actions (login required)
Downloads per month over past year