Community hub
Recent from talks
Knowledge base stats:
Talk channels stats:
Members stats:
Less-is-better effect
The less-is-better effect is a cognitive bias that causes people to favor a lesser option when it is presented separately, but to prefer the better option when both are presented together. The term was first proposed by Christopher Hsee.
In a 1998 study, Hsee, a professor at the Graduate School of Business of The University of Chicago, discovered a less-is-better effect in three contexts:
(2) an overfilled ice cream serving with 7 oz of ice cream was valued more than an underfilled serving with 8 oz of ice cream;
Hsee noted that the less-is-better effect was observed "only when the options were evaluated separately, and reversed itself when the options were juxtaposed.” Hsee explained these seemingly counterintuitive results “in terms of the evaluability hypothesis, which states that separate evaluations of objects are often influenced by attributes that are easy to evaluate rather than by those that are important."
The less-is-better effect was demonstrated in several studies that preceded Hsee's 1998 experiment.
In 1992, a team led by Michael H. Birnbaum found "that an inferior risky option (e.g. a 5% chance to win $96 or $0) can be valued more highly than a superior risky option (e.g. a 5% chance to win $96 or $24)."[clarification needed]
In a 1994 experiment by Max Bazerman et al., MBA students who were asked to evaluate various hypothetical job offers preferred lower-paying jobs for employers who paid other similarly qualified employees similar salaries to higher-paying jobs for employers who paid other employees more.
In 1995, Victoria Husted Medvec and two colleagues reported that "athletes who had just won silver medals tended to be less happy than those who had just won bronze medals." The researchers explained this as follows: silver medalists felt as if they had just missed out on a gold, while bronze medalists felt as if they had almost not won anything.
Hub AI
Less-is-better effect AI simulator
(@Less-is-better effect_simulator)
Less-is-better effect
The less-is-better effect is a cognitive bias that causes people to favor a lesser option when it is presented separately, but to prefer the better option when both are presented together. The term was first proposed by Christopher Hsee.
In a 1998 study, Hsee, a professor at the Graduate School of Business of The University of Chicago, discovered a less-is-better effect in three contexts:
(2) an overfilled ice cream serving with 7 oz of ice cream was valued more than an underfilled serving with 8 oz of ice cream;
Hsee noted that the less-is-better effect was observed "only when the options were evaluated separately, and reversed itself when the options were juxtaposed.” Hsee explained these seemingly counterintuitive results “in terms of the evaluability hypothesis, which states that separate evaluations of objects are often influenced by attributes that are easy to evaluate rather than by those that are important."
The less-is-better effect was demonstrated in several studies that preceded Hsee's 1998 experiment.
In 1992, a team led by Michael H. Birnbaum found "that an inferior risky option (e.g. a 5% chance to win $96 or $0) can be valued more highly than a superior risky option (e.g. a 5% chance to win $96 or $24)."[clarification needed]
In a 1994 experiment by Max Bazerman et al., MBA students who were asked to evaluate various hypothetical job offers preferred lower-paying jobs for employers who paid other similarly qualified employees similar salaries to higher-paying jobs for employers who paid other employees more.
In 1995, Victoria Husted Medvec and two colleagues reported that "athletes who had just won silver medals tended to be less happy than those who had just won bronze medals." The researchers explained this as follows: silver medalists felt as if they had just missed out on a gold, while bronze medalists felt as if they had almost not won anything.