Even Number Preference in Quantity Decisions (with D.A. Small and J. Goldenberg)
All study instruments, data, and code for analyses are available upon request, except the 2018 Kilts-Nielsen Consumer Panel Data. While we do not have the permission to share these data, you can request your own access via Kilts Center for Marketing at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business [link]. If you have not used Globus for file transfer before, there may be a learning curve when you download the data--happy to help you navigate through it!
All study instruments, data, and code for analyses are available upon request, except the 2018 Kilts-Nielsen Consumer Panel Data. While we do not have the permission to share these data, you can request your own access via Kilts Center for Marketing at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business [link]. If you have not used Globus for file transfer before, there may be a learning curve when you download the data--happy to help you navigate through it!
Klusowski, J., Small, D.A., & Simmons, J.P. (in press). Does choice cause an illusion of control? Psychological Science [link].
Previous research suggests that choice causes an illusion of control—that it makes people feel more likely to achieve preferable outcomes, even when they are selecting among options that are functionally identical (e.g., lottery tickets with an identical chance of winning). This research has been widely accepted as evidence that choice can have significant welfare effects, even when it confers no actual control. In this article, we report the results of 17 experiments (N = 10,825 online/laboratory participants) examining whether choice truly causes an illusion of control. We find that choice rarely makes people feel more likely to achieve preferable outcomes—unless it makes the preferable outcomes actually more likely—and when it does, it is not because choice causes an illusion, but because choice reflects some participants’ pre-existing (illusory) beliefs that the functionally identical options are not identical. Overall, choice does not seem to cause an illusion of control.
All study instruments, data, and code for analyses are available on Open Science Framework [link].
Previous research suggests that choice causes an illusion of control—that it makes people feel more likely to achieve preferable outcomes, even when they are selecting among options that are functionally identical (e.g., lottery tickets with an identical chance of winning). This research has been widely accepted as evidence that choice can have significant welfare effects, even when it confers no actual control. In this article, we report the results of 17 experiments (N = 10,825 online/laboratory participants) examining whether choice truly causes an illusion of control. We find that choice rarely makes people feel more likely to achieve preferable outcomes—unless it makes the preferable outcomes actually more likely—and when it does, it is not because choice causes an illusion, but because choice reflects some participants’ pre-existing (illusory) beliefs that the functionally identical options are not identical. Overall, choice does not seem to cause an illusion of control.
All study instruments, data, and code for analyses are available on Open Science Framework [link].