Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumCommand of Evidence: Textual

In consumer psychology, the "decoy effect" occurs when the introduction of a third, asymmetric option changes a buyer's preference between two original options. Psychologist Dr. Kenji Tanaka hypothesized that this cognitive bias is not universal; specifically, he proposed that individuals who habitually engage in high levels of analytical, detail-oriented cognitive processing evaluate options based on absolute utility, making them less susceptible to the decoy effect than individuals who rely on intuitive, holistic processing. To test this hypothesis, Tanaka grouped participants by their cognitive style (analytical or intuitive) and presented them with consumer choices first with, and then without, decoy options. Which choice, if true, would most directly support Tanaka's hypothesis?

  1. A
    Analytical thinkers reported that they actively tried to calculate the financial value of each option, whereas intuitive thinkers relied on their immediate emotional responses.
  2. When decoy options were introduced, participants categorized as intuitive thinkers shifted their preferences toward the target option, while the preferences of participants categorized as analytical thinkers remained largely unchanged.Answer
  3. C
    Regardless of their cognitive style, participants selected the higher-priced option more frequently when they were given unlimited time to make their decisions.
  4. D
    For both groups of participants, the introduction of the decoy option caused a significant and equal shift in preferences toward the target option.

Answer

The choice stating that intuitive thinkers shifted their preferences toward the target option when decoys were introduced while analytical thinkers' preferences remained largely unchanged is the correct answer.
The correct answer is correct because it directly validates the hypothesis. By showing that the preferences of intuitive thinkers changed when a decoy was introduced while the preferences of analytical thinkers remained stable, it provides empirical proof that analytical thinkers are less susceptible to the decoy effect.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the core hypothesis of the researcher.
Tanaka hypothesized that analytical thinkers are less susceptible to the decoy effect than intuitive thinkers because they evaluate options on absolute utility.
Establishing the hypothesis determines what the correct evidence must show.
2
Determine what empirical evidence would validate this hypothesis.
The evidence must show a lower rate of preference shift (or no shift) in analytical thinkers compared to intuitive thinkers when a decoy is introduced.
This sets up the criteria for evaluating the choice options.
3
Compare the options to the target evidence criteria.
The option showing that intuitive thinkers shifted their preferences while analytical thinkers did not match the criteria.
This directly verifies the correct answer without relying on irrelevant or contradictory details.

Key Concept

Command of Evidence: Textual
Estimated Time:1m 30s
Rate this question

Topics

Command of Evidence: Textual

More questions from this topic