Low Anchors Research Articles

Anchoring effects on performance judgments

Three studies were conducted investigating the effects of irrelevant anchors on performance judgments. Both a lab and field study demonstrated that an alternative anchoring manipulation that did not involve an explicit comparative question had effects on performance judgments similar to a traditional anchoring manipulation. The final study examined whether the anchoring effects were more likely when the anchor was highly applicable to the final judgment. The results indicated that both highly applicable and low applicable anchors produced an anchoring effect, but the highly applicable anchors had a larger effect on performance judgments. Evidence was also found for asymmetrical anchoring effects. In two of the three studies, high anchors increased performance judgments relative to the control group, whereas low anchors were not significantly different from the control group.

A neuropsychological dimension for anchoring effects

Previous research has shown that strength of handedness predicts differences in sensory illusions, Stroop interference, episodic memory, and beliefs about body image and the origin of species. Recent evidence also suggests handedness differences in the susceptibility to information framing and persuasion. The present paper extends this line of work to decision anchoring effects. In Experiment 1, 131 introductory psychology students responded to 12 real-world knowledge questions after being given random, uninformative high or low anchors. Results indicated that “strong-handers” showed larger anchoring effects than “mixed-handers.” In Experiment 2, 89 introductory psychology students responded to 6 real-world knowledge questions in a modified, two-step anchoring task in which participants were given a credible source for the anchored information and asked to give pre- and post-anchor estimates. In contrast to Experiment 1, results revealed that mixed- and strong-handers were affected similarly by anchoring. In Experiment 3, 158 students were asked to estimate the answer to one of two versions of 8! (8 × 7 × 6 × 5 × 4 × 3 × 2 × 1 or 1 × 2 × 3 × 4 × 5 × 6 × 7 × 8)—a multiplication problem in which the high and low anchors are inherently informative. Here, mixed-handers showed larger anchoring effects than strong-handers. A theory centered around the notion of hemispheric specialization and the communication between the two halves of the brain as well as arguments about the informativeness of anchors, metacognition, and recent theorizing in the anchoring literature are used to account for these data. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

THE EFFECT OF ANCHORING PROCEDURES ON RATINGS OF PERCEIVED EXERTION DURING RESISTANCE EXERCISE

PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of different anchoring procedures on active muscle ratings of perceived exertion during the leg extension exercise. METHODS Fourteen subjects were assigned to either a physical (N = 7) or physical-cognitive (N = 7) anchoring group. Each subject participated in a one-repetition maximum (1-RM) assessment session and an experimental session in which perceived exertion was estimated at 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, and 90% 1-RM. Subjects in the physical (P) group performed an unweighted repetition and a maximal repetition to establish low and high anchors for the perceived exertion scale during both sessions. Subjects in the physical-cognitive (PC) group performed these procedures only during the 1-RM session. RESULTS A two-way (Group X Intensity) mixed factor ANOVA revealed a significant (p = 0.04) Group X Intensity interaction. As expected, ratings of perceived exertion increased with increasing resistance exercise intensity. Post-hoc analyses revealed significant differences in ratings of perceived exertion between groups when resistance exercise intensity was at 80% 1-RM or higher. CONCLUSIONS At resistance exercise intensities less than 80% 1-RM, ratings of perceived exertion are similar whether or not low and high anchors for the perceived exertion scale are established immediately prior to intensity estimation. Supported by Jump Rope for Heart Grant Program of IAHPERD

Temporary and Permanent Earth Anchors: Three Monitored Installations

This paper presents the results of measurements of earth anchor performance for three separate installations in Metropolitan Toronto. The first case records the results of instrumentation on the high grout pressure Bauer anchor used to support an approximately 30 ft (9.1 m) deep excavation in dense fine sand. The second presents the load measurements made on low grout pressure earth anchors installed in very stiff clay of a 29 ft (8.8 m) excavation. The third installation involved measurements on permanent vertical anchors set in extremely dense silt till.In the first instance the average measured load was somewhat lower than the installed load and the design assumption. In the second case, in the stiff clay, the load was somewhat higher than the design value but this was attributed to the probability of load transfer because of inadequate support at lower levels. In this case, considerable variation and possible overstressing of anchor wires was noted.A very high uplift resistance was recorded for the permanent anchors in dense till. Control of groundwater during installation of these anchors was the principal lesson learned from this work.