Abstract

The less-is-better effect emerges when an option of lesser quantitative value is preferred or overvalued relative to a quantitively greater alternative (e.g., 24-piece dinnerware set > 24-piece dinnerware set with 16 additional broken dishes; Hsee, 1998, Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 11, 107-121). This decisional bias emerges when the option of lesser quantitative value is perceived as qualitatively better (e.g., smaller set of intact dishes > larger set of partially broken dishes). Interestingly, this effect emerges for adult humans when options are evaluated separately but dissipates when options are considered simultaneously. The less-is-better bias has been attributed to the evaluability hypothesis: individuals judge objects on the basis of easy-to-evaluate attributes when judged in isolation, such as the brokenness of items within a set, yet shift to quantitative information when evaluated jointly, such as the overall number of dishes. This bias emerges for adult humans and chimpanzees in a variety of experimental settings but has not yet been evaluated among children. In the current study, we presented a joint evaluation task (larger yet qualitatively inferior option vs. smaller yet qualitatively superior option) to children aged 3 to 9 years old to better understand the developmental trajectory of the less-is-better effect. Children demonstrated the bias across all choice trials, preferring an objectively smaller set relative to a larger yet qualitatively poorer alternative. These developmental findings suggest that young children rely upon salient features of a set to guide decision-making under joint evaluation versus more objective attributes such as quantity/value.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call