| Summary: | Anchoring has been
shown to influence numeric judgments in various domains, including preferential
judgment tasks. Whereas many studies and a recent Many Labs project have shown
robust effects in classic anchoring tasks, studies of anchoring effects on
preferential judgments have had inconsistent results. In this paper, we
investigate the replicability and robustness of anchoring on
willingness-to-pay, which is a widely used measure for consumer preference. We
employ a combination of approaches, aggregating data from previous studies and
also contributing additional replication studies designed to reconcile
inconsistent previous results. We examine the effect of differing experimental
procedures used in prior studies, and test whether publication bias could
contribute to the inconsistent findings. We find that different experimental
procedures used in previous studies do not explain the divergent results, and
that anchoring effects are generally robust to differences in procedures,
participant populations, and experimental settings.
|
|---|
