Abstract
Over the last decade, researchers have debated whether anchoring effects are the result of semantic or numeric priming. The present study tested both hypotheses. In four experiments involving a sensory detection task, participants first made a relative confidence judgment by deciding whether they were more or less confident than an anchor value in the correctness of their decision. Subsequently, they expressed an absolute level of confidence. In two of these experiments, the relative confidence anchor values represented the midpoints between the absolute confidence scale values, which were either explicitly numeric or semantic, nonnumeric representations of magnitude. In two other experiments, the anchor values were drawn from a scale modally different from that used to express the absolute confidence (i.e., nonnumeric and numeric, respectively, or vice versa). Regardless of the nature of the anchors, the mean confidence ratings revealed anchoring effects only when the relative and absolute confidence values were drawn from identical scales. Together, the results of these four experiments limit the conditions under which both numeric and semantic priming would be expected to lead to anchoring effects.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baranski, J. V., & Petrusic, W. M. (1994). The calibration and resolution of confidence in perceptual judgments. Perception & Psychophysics, 55, 412–428.
Chapman, G. B., & Johnson, E. J. (1994). The limits of anchoring. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 7, 223–242. doi:10.1207/ s15516709cog2901_5
Henmon, V. A. C. (1911). The relation of the time of a judgment to its accuracy. Psychological Review, 18, 186–201. doi:10.1037/h0074579
Jacowitz, K. E., & Kahneman, D. (1995). Measures of anchoring in estimation tasks. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 1161–1166. doi:10.1177/01461672952111004
Lammertyn, J., & Fias, W. (2005). Negative priming with numbers: No evidence for a semantic locus. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A, 1153–1172. doi:10.1080/02724980443000520
Moyer, R. S., & Landauer, T. K. (1967). Time required for judgments of numerical inequality. Nature, 215, 1519–1520.
Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (2001). The semantics of anchoring. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 86, 234–255. doi:10.1006/obhd.2001.2954
Scheck, P., Meeter, M., & Nelson, T. O. (2004). Anchoring effects in the absolute accuracy of immediate versus delayed judgments of learning. Journal of Memory & Language, 51, 71–79. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2004.03.004
Strack, F., & Mussweiler, T. (1997). Explaining the enigmatic anchoring effect: Mechanisms of selective accessibility. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 73, 437–446. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.3.437
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131. doi:10.1126/ science.185.4157.1124
Wong, K. F. E., & Kwong, J. Y. Y. (2000). Is 7300 m equal to 7.3 km? Same semantics but different anchoring effects. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 82, 314–333. doi:10.1006/ obhd.2000.2900
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Additional information
This work was supported by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada Graduate Scholarship to S.R.C. and Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada Individual Discovery grants to W.M.P. and C.L.-S.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Carroll, S.R., Petrusic, W.M. & Leth-Steensen, C. Anchoring effects in the judgment of confidence: Semantic or numeric priming?. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 71, 297–307 (2009). https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.71.2.297
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.71.2.297