I recently signed up with this great email service called
delanceyplace. Everyday they send you an email with a short excerpt from a nonfiction book. I don't read every one they send, but the ones I do read I usually find interesting, even to the point of considering reading the entire book. Below is a recent sample from them. It is from behavioral economist Dan Ariely's book,
Predictably Irrational. By the way, Ariely's article on "
Why we lie" is among one of the best psychology pieces I have read in the popular press in the last couple of years.
In
today's selection -- the decoy effect. Suppose, as suggested by psychologist
Daniel Ariely, someone is given a choice between two vacations -- a week in
either Paris and Rome at the same price with free breakfast each day -- where
they are equally likely to choose either one. Then further suppose that a third
choice is added -- Rome at the same price without the free breakfast. With that
third choice, that same person will become much more likely to select the
option of Rome with the free breakfast. That is because relativity helps us
make decisions in life -- he or she now has a better basis for assessing the
value of the Rome package: "it's the same price plus I get free breakfast
so it must be a good deal." This is known as the "decoy effect,"
and knowledgeable psychologists and marketers realize it extends to most
choices in life -- from buying a house to selecting someone to date. It is the
same phenomenon that causes some restaurants to include a highly expensive
entree on the menu even though few will order it, simply because it results in
more patrons ordering the second most expensive entree on the menu:
"I asked [25 MIT students] to pair the 30 photographs of MIT men and the
30 of women by physical attractiveness (matching the men with other men, and
the women with other women). That is, I had them pair the 'Brad Pitts' and the
'George Clooneys' of MIT, as well as the 'Woody Allens' and the 'Danny DeVitos'
(sorry, Woody and Danny). Out of these 30 pairs, I selected the six pairs --
three female pairs and three male pairs -- that my students seemed to agree
were most alike.
"Now, like Dr. Frankenstein himself, I set about giving these faces my
special treatment. Using Photoshop, I mutated the pictures just a bit, creating
a slightly but noticeably less attractive version of each of them. I found that
just the slightest movement of the nose threw off the symmetry. Using another
tool, I enlarged one eye, eliminated some of the hair, and added traces of
acne. ...
"For each of the 12 photographs, in fact, I now had a regular version as
well as an inferior (-) decoy version.
"It was now time for the main part of the experiment. I took all the sets
of pictures and made my way over to the student union. Approaching one student
after another, I asked each to participate. When the students agreed, I handed
them a sheet with three pictures. Some of them had the regular picture (A), the
decoy of that picture (-A), and the other regular picture (B). Others had the
regular picture (B), the decoy of that picture (-B), and the other regular
picture (A). ... After selecting a sheet with either male or female pictures,
according to their preferences, I asked the students to circle the people they
would pick to go on a date with, if they had a choice. ...
"What was my motive in all this? Simply to determine if the existence of
the distorted picture (-A or -B) would push my participants to choose the
similar but undistorted picture. In other words, would a slightly less
attractive George Clooney (-A) push the participants to choose the perfect
George Clooney over the perfect Brad Pitt?
"There were no pictures of Brad Pitt or George Clooney in my experiment,
of course. Pictures (A) and (B) showed ordinary students. ... Would the
existence of a less perfect person (-A or -B) push people to choose the perfect
one (A or B), simply because the decoy option served as a point of comparison?
"It did. Whenever I handed out a sheet that had a regular picture, its
inferior version, and another regular picture, the participants said they would
prefer to date the 'regular' person -- the one who was similar, but clearly
superior, to the distorted version -- over the other, undistorted person on the
sheet. This was not just a close call -- it happened 75 percent of the time
(out of a sample of 600). ...
"Let's take a look at the decoy effect in a completely different
situation. What if you are single, and hope to appeal to as many attractive
potential dating partners as possible at an upcoming singles event? My advice
would be to bring a friend who has your basic physical characteristics (similar
coloring, body type, facial features), but is slightly less attractive (-you).
"Why? Because the folks you want to attract will have a hard time
evaluating you with no comparables around. However, if you are compared with a
'-you,' the decoy friend will do a lot to make you look better, not just in
comparison with the decoy but also in general, and in comparison with all the
other people around. It may sound irrational (and I can't guarantee this), but
the chances are good that you will get some extra attention. Of course, don't
just stop at looks. If great conversation will win the day, be sure to pick a
friend for the singles event who can't match your smooth delivery and rapier
wit. By comparison, you'll sound great. ...
"Relativity helps us make decisions in life."
Author: Dan Ariely
Publisher: Harper Perennial
Date: Copyright 2009 by Dan Ariely
Pages: 11-15
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.