The effect of effects on effectiveness: A boon-bane asymmetry

Beliefs about how effective a cause will be at achieving possible outcomes are critical inputs into a range of decisions, from how to treat an illness to which products to purchase. We identify scope—the number of distinct outcomes a cause is known to achieve—as an important input into judgments of...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Cognition 2020-06, Vol.199, p.104240-104240, Article 104240
Main Authors: Sussman, Abigail B., Oppenheimer, Daniel M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Causal reasoning
Decision making
Efficacy
Judgment
Mental models
Scope
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Beliefs about how effective a cause will be at achieving possible outcomes are critical inputs into a range of decisions, from how to treat an illness to which products to purchase. We identify scope—the number of distinct outcomes a cause is known to achieve—as an important input into judgments of efficacy. We compare causes that lead to worse outcomes (i.e., banes) to those leading to improvements (i.e., boons). People believe that banes with broader scope (i.e., those that lead to more possible outcomes) are more effective and lead to stronger outcomes. In contrast, people believe that boons with narrower scope (i.e., those that lead to fewer possible outcomes) are more effective and lead to stronger outcomes. We document this pattern across four experiments, finding support for differences in mental models for boons and banes.
ISSN:0010-0277
1873-7838
DOI:10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104240