CRITICAL THINKING - Cognitive Biases: Anchoring [HD]

In this video, the cognitive scientist Laurie Santos (Yale University) explains the phenomenon of anchoring. She shows how arbitrary information sometimes can sometimes act as an anchor that affects our judgments in unexpected ways.

Help us caption & translate this video!

[Petticca]

So, I had not heard of "anchoring" before, and paused @1:40 to get a basic understanding of the experiment/ study with the two presentations of a multiplication task.

I am _always_ wary of how meaningful the conclusion is from anything that researchers found by way of some study, or experiment, that puts people in weird, ad hoc scenarios, or situations, from which some insight about human behavior in the wild, as it were, is supposedly gleaned.

Whenever I hear about something, based on some social/psycological study designed to demonstrate the thing, I always immediately find I have a boat load of questions, based on what has been presented. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that I should not be expected to just take it for granted that the conclusion of the study is meritorious, and make the logical leap that it must be, a smart person is presenting it after all!

Ted talks are full of presentations that are done this way, and the problem is that essentially it becomes impossible, for the target audience, ie lay people, with varying levels of ignorance, to differentiate between well supported, meritorious concepts, and nonsense, or ideas supported by results that can't be replicated, or that don't demonstrably support the conclusion.

At 1:40, I get the "Why" question is being asked, but I don't see how the experiment described is supposed to be enough to understand why that is a question that should be considered at this point.

So far, essentially:

Researchers devised an experiment to study if people do Y by taking a group of people and putting them in some ad hoc scenario X.

People in the ad hoc scenario X did Y.

Conclusion, the study demonstrated humans did Y in this ad hoc scenario X, therefore all humans, regardless of circumstance, do Y.

Does not follow.

So, it's probably worth noting that the people in the study were shown one, _or_ the other set of numbers, and given five seconds to come up with an estimate..

Without that information, there is the suggestion that people were given both and came to give not only wildly inaccurate estimates, but also bizarrely, answers to the two presentations that are in conflict with one another.

This lack of clarity results in a very different understanding by the viewer of what the study purportedly demonstrated.

If there's merit in the concept of anchoring, I sure as sht can't extract it from this.

[Kendo]

This is a great learning tool, I use these routinely to reinforce the understanding of cognitive bias in our work and social lives. Thank you.

[rahul.harsh]

the way that you teach, the visuals and the pace of the video was perfect !! thank you. it was very interesting, Laurie.

[alannamueller]

Anchoring is a really powerful tool and the way to exploit it isn't even mentioned in this video.

Say you begin a real estate price negotiation. You throw the seller a very low number and they will find it mentally difficult to offer you a number much higher than that one.

Or let's say you work at a company and triple the value you are bringing in next year. They will find it difficult to triple your salary because they don't want to go too far from the amount they are currently paying you (anchoring). So it is best you look for a job elsewhere.

It is a really strong bias.

[bgbbft]

Being a lazy sod, I grouped the numbers, and rounded to make them easy to multiply. (2x5) x (7*3) * (4*6) * 8 is about 10 x 20 x 25 x 8 is about 200 x 200 is about 40000.

I do get what you mean by anchoring, though. Every mattress store in my town is having a continuous 70% off clearance sale.

[grimreaper]

I guessed about 30 000, I realized that the result must have 5 digits because I grouped together 56, 30 and 24 and increase 56 to 60, 30 remains 30 and 24 to 20 to get a rough estimate but calculate it in my head, I was off by 10 000

[shubhtripathi]

This was the perfect example and definition of anchoring effect on human mind. Thanks for your time and effort! 😊

[qoheleth]

if we can control our urge to guess we can fix the anchor problem... simply refuse to guess... find the answer.

[paradigmarson]

I wonder if people higher in trait openness are less susceptible to anchoring. Ooh, what about agreeableness? Could actually test that.

[recoveringsoul]

I thought anchoring might be something to do with maybe a person displaced from their home, but they manage to get one item to take with them. To anchor them so they don't feel completely adrift. Or is that more Object Relations Theory? I have so much to learn.

[alkydah]

Stores do it all the time, offering three price/value/quality levels of similar products. We've allowed them to set the hi and low limits of said item, knowing that most will select the median priced product tricking us into thinking we've made a prudent decision even tho it was overpriced to begin with.

[logan]

I rarely comment. The way u taught is 🔥

[Dare]

I got the math problem right in my head, but I did pause the video. I'd like to think if I was asked to guess I wouldn't be off by so much.

[boboiing]

Can triage bias be defined as anchoring bias? It may be natural for subsequent providers to follow the initial diagnosis.
It’s because if all subsequent providers make their diagnoses, the efficiency of treatment decreases.

[DharmendraRaiMindMap]

Wow ! This concept is anchored in my mind !

[saitenotoshuitsnaini]

there's this LCGC in my country, practically a city car "Low Cost Green Car", that were sell out like crazy even when the prices were pretty close to what usually family car would be priced. and what does a LCGC are actually an air-conditioned cabin with wheels on it to ride on. no safety measures, fragile materials and boring features: total rip off from an anchored pricing estimates.

[ziggyzaggy]

I got higher on right than left??? I round up/down numbers since we have to count it fast. Numbers below shows what went on in my head. Anyone else got higher right too?

8 x 7 = 55.
55 x 6 = 330
330 x 5 = 1600
1600 x 4 = 6500
6500 x 3 = 19000
18000 x 2 = 38000

2 x 3 x 4 = 24
24 x 5 = 120
120 x 6 = 720
720 x 7 = 5000
5000 x 8 = 40, 000

[src]

the answer to both math problems is 8!, I didn't evaluate them.

[escanormorph]

I'm surprised of how some people say they got 512 or 2250. Where has your maths gone?

[MnemoHistory]

Reposting my response below here:

You can restate the “refuse to guess” premise with the philosophical principle of not attempting to evaluate the arbitrary. When someone asserts an arbitrary premise you dismiss it unless they give a justification for their premise. Proof is a epistemically positive process.