đŸȘŽ Quartz 4.0

Unreasonable as expected

Feb 12, 201911 min read

image

Reprinted from the blog http://d.hatena.ne.jp/nishiohirokazu/20110119/1295463867 #Leverage memo This is a good book that explains the results of social behavior research in easy-to-understand language while giving papers as references.

- [[relativity]]
- What would happen if 100 people were asked to choose which they would prefer: 68 would choose the cheaper web-only subscription. Now, what happens if we add "$125 for print only" as an option? Obviously, this is a worse choice than "$125 for the web and print edition. People are not stupid and would not choose this. But a whopping 84 people chose "a set of web and print editions". When you have two candidates that are difficult to decide between, you can guide the decision by adding a similar but clearly inferior option to one of them.

- If you are trying to buy a $25 fountain pen and a store 15 minutes away offers the same thing for $18, most people will move on; if you are trying to buy a $455 suit and a store 15 minutes away offers it for $448, most people will not move on. Either your 15 minutes are worth $7 or they are not.

  • Supply and demand, anchoring.

    • When we ask people to answer a question about whether they would buy a certain product with the last two digits of their social security number (well, if you are Japanese, you can read it as your driver’s license number) and then ask them to bid on how much they would buy that product, there is a positive correlation with a correlation coefficient of 0.32 to 0.52. However, the question “Do you think it had an impact?” returns NO.

    • Earlier, the group asked, “Would you pay 3.00, while the group asked, “If I pay you 4.8.

    • What did Starbucks do to avoid this anchoring effect? It differentiated the atmosphere of its stores.

  • Zero Benefit

    • If you prepare truffles with a market price of 30 cents and regular cheap chocolate and sell the former for 15 cents and the latter for 1 cent, 73% bought the truffles. But if you reduced the price of both by 1 cent to 14 cents and “free! 69% chose the free one.
    • In the past, Amazon launched a service that offered free shipping for orders of a certain amount, and sales grew. But in France, sales did not grow. Why? Only in France, it was “free! but rather 1 franc (about 20 yen). When they changed it to free, sales increased.
    • If you’re going to discount, you should subdivide the bill and discount something to zero.

  • Volunteer Effectiveness

    • When asked to do a trivial task, when offered a reward of 5 person worked 1.5 times more diligently than the 50-cent person, but the free person was even slightly more diligent. 5 dollars worth of chocolate, 50 cents worth of chocolate as reward. The same as in the case of the free case. However, mentioning the amount of money as “$5 worth of chocolate” lowered the results.
    • Thus, making people aware of rewards in the form of money reduces motivation. The effects of money awareness are not limited to rewards. When the groups were divided into those on the topic of money and those on the topic of neutrality in a random sentence construction problem (a problem in which random word sequences are arranged to form correct sentences), the group on the topic of money was less likely to ask for help, less likely to help others, avoid tasks requiring teamwork, and more likely to want to be alone.
    • When fines were imposed for tardiness at day care centers, the number of tardies increased from before the introduction of the fines. When the fines were stopped, the number of tardiness increased even more.
    • It is often said that engineers avoid talking about money, but I think this is because the “atmosphere” created by talking about money is different from the “atmosphere” created when talking about open source or participating in events for free. I think it is beneficial to be exposed to both kinds of atmosphere, and it is true that I feel that my money literacy is too low, but that does not mean that it is appropriate to talk about money at any time. They say that it is important to have friends with whom you don’t talk about money. I think that talking about money all the time is a way to lose the opportunity to make such friends.

  • Effects of sexual arousal

    • The responses to the question, “How do you think you would respond when you are statically aroused?” were significantly different from those in which the participants were actually masturbated and asked to respond under the influence of sexual arousal. Sexual arousal affects judgment more than I think it does when I am calm.

  • Setting Deadlines

    • The results were better for the first three groups: the group that set the deadline, the group that let the students decide and declare the deadline themselves, and the group that did not set the deadline. An “outside voice” is necessary. The next best thing is to decide and declare by oneself.

  • ownership effect

    • The average price for those who won tickets in the lottery when asked how much they would sell them for was 175, a difference of 14 times. If we were to act rationally, these averages should match.
    • The quirk of falling in love with and overestimating what you already have. The habit of seeing what you have to lose as greater than what you can gain. The habit of assuming that others will see things the same way you do.
    • The “30-day money-back guarantee” is valid because once you take it home, the ownership effect occurs, and you begin to feel that losing it is a loss.

  • Fear of losing options

    • The game is played by clicking on one of three choices to get a certain range of rewards that vary depending on the choice. It takes one extra click to buy one choice for another, and the total number of clicks is fixed. If you let the game play normally, you click a little bit on each of the three choices and put all the remaining clicks where you think you have the most. However, if you add the rule that the choices must be clicked 12 times before they disappear and a “shrinking door” to represent this, before the choices are gone, the player is left wondering, “Did I really make the right decision?” before the choices disappear, the act of keeping the choices alive with the anxiety of “Was I really making the right decision? The amount of money earned decreased by 15%. Even if the cost of changing the choice was changed from clicks to cents, and even if the choice was restored with one click after disappearing 12 times, the same behavior of keeping the choice alive still occurred.
    • Erich Fromm, “Running from Freedom” People suffer from being too free in modern society.
    • Buridan’s donkey. A donkey starving to death between two haystacks, two very similar choices, and we procrastinate because we fear the decision to choose one and discard the other. The fact that we are worried means that they are so similar that we can’t make a decision.

  • prediction

    • A delicious-looking atmosphere, clean containers, and high-end ingredients influence the perceived taste of the food. When the participants were given a Pepsi and a Coke without telling them what kind of cola they were drinking and asked to choose the tastier one, Pepsi was chosen, but when the brand name was revealed, Coke was chosen.

    • The Asian American stereotype is “strong in math” and the female stereotype is “weak in math. In a group of Asian American women who were asked gender-related questions, such as coeducational student housing, and a group who were asked ethnicity-related questions, such as languages they could speak, the group who were made aware of their female identity performed significantly worse in math.

    • Even if we saw the same thing, we would not feel the same way. It is wrong to assume that if you tell the facts as they are, the other person will make the same judgment as you.

    • placebo

    • When the control group, the group that drank the nutritional drink, and the group that drank the nutritional drink discounted to half price were asked to solve an anagram quiz task, the first two had the same score of 9 out of 15 questions, but the last had 6.5 questions. In other words, nutritional drinks do not make you smarter, but they do make you worse. When the pamphlet was falsified to add that it works well for quiz assignments, etc., the non-discounting group got 3.3 more questions correct. In other words, the fact that the nutritional drink says it works is more effective than the ingredients in the drink.

  • fraud

    • Compared to the groups that normally solve questions with mark sheets, those groups that allow cheating, and those for which the evidence is destroyed, will cheat. The degree to which this occurs does not depend on the degree to which the evidence is destroyed. Also, since the distribution of the number of correct answers was the same and only the mean was off, we can conclude that many subjects cheated little by little rather than that some cheated a lot.
    • In the group that was asked to recall 10 titles of books they had read in high school before the cheating test and the group that was asked to recall the Ten Commandments, the former of course cheated, but surprisingly, the latter did not. The same effect is seen when the students are asked to sign a “Code of Ethics for Unsupervised Testing,” which does not exist. Maybe the oath does have an effect.
    • In the case of the test where the reward was given directly in cash, and once the substitute currency was given and redeemed at an exchange point about 4 meters away, the latter was more than twice as likely to be fraudulent. And the subjects themselves responded that there should be no difference in the amount of fraud. If virtual currency is used more in society, will the amount of fraud increase?

  • Desire for uniqueness and peer pressure

    • The number of brands selected was higher in the former case when the menu was selected verbally in order and when the menu was written on a piece of paper at the same time. The desire for uniqueness, not liking to be the same as others. When the same experiment was conducted in Hong Kong, the tendency to choose the same items as those selected by others was observed.

  • Others (e.g., what you wrote on Twitter)

    • If it is difficult to understand, it will lead to procrastination. Presenting a simplified plan is a benefit to the customer.
    • When conducting an auction, the appropriate system is that the person who gave the highest price pays the amount of the second highest price.
    • The seller’s side said that in order to remove the anchor, it is important to differentiate so as not to be seen as the same object. What about the buyer’s side? Should they train themselves to question the habits they are repeating? Socrates said that an unexamined life is not worth living. So systematic discarding is important.
    • Free triggers irrational excitement. We choose free when it is rational to pay the price. When we pay a price, we think about whether it is the right deal, but when it is zero, we stop thinking about it. Free is not a discount, but an added value that you don’t have to pay.
    • Priming about money in a random composition assignment takes longer to get help. Do not help others. Avoid teamwork. Don’t make them think about money, even unconsciously, to keep them within social norms. If you impose a cheap fine, you will break the social norm and instead increase the behavior you wanted to stop.
    • Resources are attracted to open source activities because they are not rewarded, and activities that profit from them are bashed because they bring market norms into the community of social norms. Love, loyalty, and motivation cannot be bought with money.

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/äșˆæƒłă©ăŠă‚Šă«äžćˆç† using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.

Graph View

Backlinks