1. //
  2. Start
  3. //
  4. Publikationen
  5. How and Why Different Forms of Expertise...
  6. Formate
  7. //

How and Why Different Forms of Expertise Moderate Anchor Precision in Price Decisions: A Pre-Registered Field Experiment

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

Standard

How and Why Different Forms of Expertise Moderate Anchor Precision in Price Decisions: A Pre-Registered Field Experiment . / Frech, Marie-Lena; Loschelder, David D.; Friese, Malte.
in: Experimental Psychology, Jahrgang 66, Nr. 2, 03.2019, S. 165-175.

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

Harvard

Frech, M-L, Loschelder, DD & Friese, M 2019, 'How and Why Different Forms of Expertise Moderate Anchor Precision in Price Decisions: A Pre-Registered Field Experiment ', Experimental Psychology, Jg. 66, Nr. 2, S. 165-175. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000441

APA

Frech, M.-L., Loschelder, D. D., & Friese, M. (2019). How and Why Different Forms of Expertise Moderate Anchor Precision in Price Decisions: A Pre-Registered Field Experiment . Experimental Psychology, 66(2), 165-175. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000441

Vancouver

Frech ML, Loschelder DD, Friese M. How and Why Different Forms of Expertise Moderate Anchor Precision in Price Decisions: A Pre-Registered Field Experiment . Experimental Psychology. 2019 Mär;66(2):165-175. doi: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000441

Bibtex

@article{202c90b01bb14c528b422b962ecc7e5a,
title = "How and Why Different Forms of Expertise Moderate Anchor Precision in Price Decisions: A Pre-Registered Field Experiment ",
abstract = "Increasing price precision leads to linearly stronger anchoring effects for amateurs, but highly precise anchors can backfire for experts. Previous research focused on experts bargaining about an object within their expertise domain (e.g., real-estate agents negotiated about a house listed at €978,781.63). This leaves unknown whether too much precision backfires for experts because of their (a) general negotiation expertise, (b) domain-specific pricing knowledge, or (c) the combination of general expertise and price-knowledge. Our pre-registered report seeks to replicate the too-much-precision effect and to experimentally separate general negotiation expertise from domain-specific price-knowledge. Seasoned experts (real-estate agents) negotiate about an object either within (house) or outside (motor yacht) their domain of expertise. We measure experts' willingness to pay (WTP), counteroffer, self-ascribed versus other-ascribed competence, and their self-ascribed versus other-ascribed price-knowledge. Based on responses of 400 professional real-estate agents, we replicate the advantageous anchor precision effect and illustrate that too much precision backfires regardless of whether agents negotiate within (house) or outside (yacht) their domain of expertise. Mediation analysis suggests that, consistent with previous research, the impact of precise anchors is due to the competence attributed to the negotiation opponent. Our results offer insights into the psychological mechanisms and theoretical understanding of anchor precision.",
keywords = "judgment, anchoring, precision, negotiation, experts, first offers, Business psychology",
author = "Marie-Lena Frech and Loschelder, {David D.} and Malte Friese",
year = "2019",
month = mar,
doi = "10.1027/1618-3169/a000441",
language = "English",
volume = "66",
pages = "165--175",
journal = "Experimental Psychology",
issn = "1618-3169",
publisher = "Hogrefe Publishing",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - How and Why Different Forms of Expertise Moderate Anchor Precision in Price Decisions

T2 - A Pre-Registered Field Experiment

AU - Frech, Marie-Lena

AU - Loschelder, David D.

AU - Friese, Malte

PY - 2019/3

Y1 - 2019/3

N2 - Increasing price precision leads to linearly stronger anchoring effects for amateurs, but highly precise anchors can backfire for experts. Previous research focused on experts bargaining about an object within their expertise domain (e.g., real-estate agents negotiated about a house listed at €978,781.63). This leaves unknown whether too much precision backfires for experts because of their (a) general negotiation expertise, (b) domain-specific pricing knowledge, or (c) the combination of general expertise and price-knowledge. Our pre-registered report seeks to replicate the too-much-precision effect and to experimentally separate general negotiation expertise from domain-specific price-knowledge. Seasoned experts (real-estate agents) negotiate about an object either within (house) or outside (motor yacht) their domain of expertise. We measure experts' willingness to pay (WTP), counteroffer, self-ascribed versus other-ascribed competence, and their self-ascribed versus other-ascribed price-knowledge. Based on responses of 400 professional real-estate agents, we replicate the advantageous anchor precision effect and illustrate that too much precision backfires regardless of whether agents negotiate within (house) or outside (yacht) their domain of expertise. Mediation analysis suggests that, consistent with previous research, the impact of precise anchors is due to the competence attributed to the negotiation opponent. Our results offer insights into the psychological mechanisms and theoretical understanding of anchor precision.

AB - Increasing price precision leads to linearly stronger anchoring effects for amateurs, but highly precise anchors can backfire for experts. Previous research focused on experts bargaining about an object within their expertise domain (e.g., real-estate agents negotiated about a house listed at €978,781.63). This leaves unknown whether too much precision backfires for experts because of their (a) general negotiation expertise, (b) domain-specific pricing knowledge, or (c) the combination of general expertise and price-knowledge. Our pre-registered report seeks to replicate the too-much-precision effect and to experimentally separate general negotiation expertise from domain-specific price-knowledge. Seasoned experts (real-estate agents) negotiate about an object either within (house) or outside (motor yacht) their domain of expertise. We measure experts' willingness to pay (WTP), counteroffer, self-ascribed versus other-ascribed competence, and their self-ascribed versus other-ascribed price-knowledge. Based on responses of 400 professional real-estate agents, we replicate the advantageous anchor precision effect and illustrate that too much precision backfires regardless of whether agents negotiate within (house) or outside (yacht) their domain of expertise. Mediation analysis suggests that, consistent with previous research, the impact of precise anchors is due to the competence attributed to the negotiation opponent. Our results offer insights into the psychological mechanisms and theoretical understanding of anchor precision.

KW - judgment

KW - anchoring

KW - precision

KW - negotiation

KW - experts

KW - first offers

KW - Business psychology

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85065125020&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1027/1618-3169/a000441

DO - 10.1027/1618-3169/a000441

M3 - Journal articles

C2 - 31044670

VL - 66

SP - 165

EP - 175

JO - Experimental Psychology

JF - Experimental Psychology

SN - 1618-3169

IS - 2

ER -

In der gleichen Zeitschrift

Top-Down Modulation of Motor Priming by Belief about Animacy: A Registered Replication Report

Cracco, E., Liepelt, R., Brass, M. & Genschow, O., 01.11.2023, in: Experimental Psychology. 70, 6, S. 355-365 11 S.

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

Anchoring and Sleep Inertia: Sleep Inertia during Nighttime Awakening Does Not Magnify the Anchoring Bias

Frech, M.-L., Häusser, J. A., Siems, M. C. & Loschelder, D. D., 01.05.2022, in: Experimental Psychology. 69, 3, S. 146-154 9 S.

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

The Effect of Money Priming on Self-Focus in the Imitation-Inhibition Task: A Registered Report

Genschow, O., Schuler, J., Cracco, E., Brass, M. & Wänke, M., 01.11.2019, in: Experimental Psychology. 66, 6, S. 423-436 14 S.

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

Assessment of cognitive load in multimedia learning using dual-task methodology

Brünken, R., Steinbacher, S., Plass, J. L. & Leutner, D., 2002, in: Experimental Psychology. 49, 2, S. 109-119 11 S.

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

Weitere Publikationen dieser Person(en)

Optimizing Counteroffers: How timing and magnitude shape sale prices and impasses in 26 million asynchronous online negotiations

Teichmann, L., Petrowsky, H. M., Escher, Y. A., Lee, A. J. & Loschelder, D. D., 2025, (Angenommen/Im Druck) in: Group Decision and Negotiation.

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

Self-Control Following Prior Exertion: An Empirical Test of the Motivational Shift and Compensatory Effort Hypotheses

Mlynski, C., Roth, L., Loschelder, D. D., Gieseler, K., Job, V. & Friese, M., 30.01.2025, in: Collabra: Psychology. 11, 1, 14 S., 128616.

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

Addressing climate change with behavioral science: A global intervention tournament in 63 countries

Vlasceanu, M., Doell, K. C., Bak-Coleman, J. B., Todorova, B., Berkebile-Weinberg, M. M., Grayson, S. J., Patel, Y., Goldwert, D., Pei, Y., Chakroff, A., Pronizius, E., Broek, K. L. V. D., Vlasceanu, D., Constantino, S., Morais, M. J., Schumann, P., Rathje, S., Fang, K., Aglioti, S. M., Alfano, M., Alvarado-Yepez, A. J., Andersen, A., Anseel, F., Apps, M. A. J., Asadli, C., Awuor, F. J., Azevedo, F., Basaglia, P., Bélanger, J. J., Berger, S., Bertin, P., Białek, M., Bialobrzeska, O., Blaya-Burgo, M., Bleize, D. N. M., Bø, S., Boecker, L., Boggio, P. S., Borau, S., Bos, B., Bouguettaya, A., Brauer, M., Brick, C., Brik, T., Briker, R., Brosch, T., Buchel, O., Buonauro, D., Butalia, R., Carvacho, H., Chamberlain, S. A. E., Chan, H.-Y., Chow, D., Chung, D., Cian, L., Cohen-Eick, N., Contreras-Huerta, L. S., Contu, D., Cristea, V., Cutler, J., D'Ottone, S., Keersmaecker, J. D., Delcourt, S., Delouvée, S., Diel, K., Douglas, B. D., Drupp, M. A., Dubey, S., Ekmanis, J., Elbaek, C. T., Elsherif, M., Engelhard, I. M., Escher, Y. A., Etienne, T. W., Farage, L., Farias, A. R., Feuerriegel, S., Findor, A., Freira, L., Friese, M., Gains, N. P., Gallyamova, A., Geiger, S. J., Genschow, O., Gjoneska, B., Gkinopoulos, T., Goldberg, B., Goldenberg, A., Gradidge, S., Grassini, S., Gray, K., Grelle, S., Griffin, S. M., Grigoryan, L., Grigoryan, A., Grigoryev, D., Gruber, J., Guilaran, J., Hadar, B., Hahnel, U. J. J., Halperin, E., Harvey, A. J., Haugestad, C. A. P., Herman, A. M., Hershfield, H. E., Himichi, T., Hine, D. W., Hofmann, W., Howe, L., Huaman-Chulluncuy, E. T., Huang, G., Ishii, T., Ito, A., Jia, F., Jost, J. T., Jovanović, V., Jurgiel, D., Kácha, O., Kankaanpää, R., Kantorowicz, J., Kantorowicz-Reznichenko, E., Mintz, K. K., Kaya, I., Kaya, O., Khachatryan, N., Klas, A., Klein, C., Klöckner, C. A., Koppel, L., Kosachenko, A. I., Kothe, E. J., Krebs, R., Krosch, A. R., Krouwel, A. P. M., Kyrychenko, Y., Lagomarsino, M., Lamm, C., Lange, F., Cunningham, J. L., Lees, J., Leung, T. Y., Levy, N., Lockwood, P. L., Longoni, C., Ortega, A. L., Loschelder, D. D., Lu, J. G., Luo, Y., Luomba, J., Lutz, A. E., Majer, J. M., Markowitz, E., Marsh, A. A., Mascarenhas, K. L., Mbilingi, B., Mbungu, W., McHugh, C., Meijers, M. H. C., Mercier, H., Mhagama, F. L., Michalakis, K., Mikus, N., Milliron, S., Mitkidis, P., Monge-Rodríguez, F. S., Mora, Y. L., Moreau, D., Motoki, K., Moyano, M., Mus, M., Navajas, J., Nguyen, T. L., Nguyen, D. M., Nguyen, T., Niemi, L., Nijssen, S. R. R., Nilsonne, G., Nitschke, J. P., Nockur, L., Okura, R., Öner, S., Özdoğru, A. A., Palumbo, H., Panagopoulos, C., Panasiti, M. S., Pärnamets, P., Paruzel-Czachura, M., Pavlov, Y. G., Payán-Gómez, C., Pearson, A. R., Costa, L. P. D., Petrowsky, H. M., Pfattheicher, S., Pham, N. T., Ponizovskiy, V., Pretus, C., Rêgo, G. G., Reimann, R., Rhoads, S. A., Riano-Moreno, J., Richter, I., Röer, J. P., Rosa-Sullivan, J., Ross, R. M., Sabherwal, A., Saito, T., Sarrasin, O., Say, N., Schmid, K., Schmitt, M. T., Schoenegger, P., Scholz, C., Schug, M. G., Schulreich, S., Shreedhar, G., Shuman, E., Sivan, S., Sjåstad, H., Soliman, M., Soud, K., Spampatti, T., Sparkman, G., Spasovski, O., Stanley, S. K., Stern, J. A., Strahm, N., Suko, Y., Sul, S., Syropoulos, S., Taylor, N. C., Tedaldi, E., Tinghög, G., Huynh, L. D. T., Travaglino, G. A., Tsakiris, M., Tüter, İ., Tyrala, M., Uluğ, Ö. M., Urbanek, A., Valko, D., Linden, S. V. D., Schie, K. V., Stekelenburg, A. V., Vanags, E., Västfjäll, D., Vesely, S., Vintr, J., Vranka, M., Wanguche, P. O., Willer, R., Wojcik, A. D., Xu, R., Yadav, A., Zawisza, M., Zhao, X., Zhao, J., Żuk, D. & Bavel, J. J. V., 09.02.2024, in: Science Advances. 10, 6, 19 S., eadj5778.

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

Correction: The Open Anchoring Quest Dataset: Anchored Estimates from 96 Studies on Anchoring Effects (Journal of Open Psychology Data, (2022), 10, 1, (16), 10.5334/jopd.67)

Röseler, L., Weber, L., Helgerth, K., Stich, E., Günther, M., Tegethoff, P., Wagner, F. S., Ambrus, E., Antunovic, M., Barrera-Lemarchand, F., Halali, E., Ioannidis, K., Genschow, O., McKay, R., Milstein, N., Molden, D. C., Papenmeier, F., Pavlovic, Z., Rinn, R., Schreiter, M. L., Zimdahl, M. F., Allen, E., Bahník, Š., Bermeitinger, C., Blower, F. B. N., Bögler, H. L., Burgmer, P., Cheek, N. N., Dorsch, L., Fels, S. A., Frech, M. L., Freira, L., Harris, A. J. L., Hartig, B., Häusser, J. A., Hedgebeth, M. V., Henkel, M., Horvath, D., Imhoff, R., Intelmann, P., Klamar, A., Knappe, E., Köppel, L.-M. A., Krueger, S. M., Lagator, S., Bóo, F. L., Navajas, J., Norem, J. K., Novak, J., Onuki, Y., Page, E., Pearton, J., Ponader, S., Rebholz, T. R., Rostekova, A., Sartorio, M., Schindler, S., Seida, C., Shanks, D. R., Siems, M. C., Speekenbrink, M., Stäglich, P., Starkulla, M., Stitz, M., Straube, T., Thies, K., Thum, E., Ueda, K., Undorf, M., Urlichich, D., Vadillo, M. A., Wolf, A. H., Zhou, A. & Schütz, A., 23.08.2024, in: Journal of Open Psychology Data. 12, 1, 3 S., 8.

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Kommentare / Debatten / Berichte › Forschung

Defeminizing Sustainability: How to Boost Men’s Motivation for Proenvironmental Behavior

Hällfritzsch, M., Volpi, L., Daniel, K. G., Somogyi, C., Kause, A., Reese, G. & Loschelder, D. D., 2024, (Elektronische Veröffentlichung vor Drucklegung) in: Motivation Science.

Publikation: Beiträge in Zeitschriften › Zeitschriftenaufsätze › Forschung › begutachtet

DOI

Zuletzt angesehen

Aktivitäten

  1. Verbraucherschutzforum
  2. Podiumsdiskussion
  3. JoSch - Journal für Schreibforschung
  4. Mutual Knowledge Conference
  5. Seed predation of common grassland species along an experimental plant diversity gradient
  6. University of Brighton
  7. Local alternatives of agrobiodiversity use and management in the rurality of Bogotá, Colombia
  8. Towards more radical forms of governance for business and human rights: From management practice to management education
  9. Processing Uncertainty. Timescapes in German Schools in the Context of Refugee Migration from Ukraine
  10. Sprach-Los - Grenzen-Los
  11. Ästhetische Langeweile Aushalten
  12. BA-Arbeiten 2020
  13. ISEOR and AoM: International Conference on Evaluation Metrics of CSR
  14. Entangled Identities and Transcultural Dynamics of Cloth Introduced by Nadzeya Kalbaska
  15. Provenance of the Clast Population of Some Fra Mauro Breccias
  16. Universität Concordia
  17. Assessing knowledge cumulation in earth system governance research: An analysis of 100 published ESG papers
  18. IDG Summit 2023
  19. ETCE/OMAE Conference 2000
  20. Perspective Rules! 2017

Publikationen

  1. Comparison of different FEM code approaches in the simulation of the die deflection during aluminium extrusion
  2. „Wie gehe ich mit Widersprüchlichkeiten um?“
  3. Do You Like What You (Can't) See? The Differential Effects of Hardware and Software Upgrades on High-Tech Product Evaluations
  4. ADORE-Project Teaching Adolescent Struggling Readers
  5. Cognitive and affective processes in multimedia learning
  6. The conservation against development paradigm in protected areas
  7. Mapping and analysing historical indicators of ecosystem services in Germany
  8. Toward a better understanding of the mindsets of negotiators
  9. Das AGG in der Beratungspraxis
  10. Traits of butterfly communities change from specialist to generalist characteristics with increasing land-use intensity
  11. The GLOBTEC Tech Adoption Tracker
  12. Experimental Investigation of Efficiency and Deposit Process Temperature During Multi-Layer Friction Surfacing
  13. Challenges in political interviews
  14. The theory of human development
  15. Ecosystem services flows
  16. Adapting and evolving-learning place cooperation in change
  17. Comparing eye movements during mathematical word problem solving in Chinese and German
  18. Water quantity and quality in the Zerafshan river basin - only an upstream riparian problem?
  19. Quantifying ecosystem services of rewetted peatlands − the MoorFutures methodologies
  20. Emissions of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in Zurich, Switzerland, determined by a combination of measurements and modeling
  21. Random year intercepts in mixed models help to assess uncertainties in insect population trends
  22. Integrated reporting with CSR practices
  23. Prolog und relationale Datenbanken als Grundlagen zur Implementierung einer NF2-Datenbank
  24. Indicators for relational values of nature’s contributions to good quality of life