What’s Accessible Is Expressible
When Advice Seekers Are More Likely to Anchor Their Advisors
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21209753 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Jessica A Reif (0009-0007-6057-8524, Duke University, corresponding author), Richard P Larrick (0000-0002-0491-426X, Duke University), Jack B Soll (0000-0002-4496-1976, Duke University) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Volume | 17 |
| Issue | 6 |
| Pages | 759-767 |
| Publication date | 2026-08-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Social Psychological and Personality Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1948-5506 • E-ISSN: 1948-5514 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/19485506251392961 |
| OpenAlex | W4416633653 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 32 |
Despite evidence that advice is most beneficial for increasing decision accuracy when advisors form independent judgments, people sometimes undermine this independence by sharing their preliminary conclusions when seeking advice. We propose that following the prescription to think independently before seeking advice paradoxically leads people to make this mistake. Specifically, we argue that deeper engagement with a decision makes one’s own perspective more accessible and likely to be shared during an advice interaction. In two preregistered studies ( N = 2,109), we demonstrate that higher levels of engagement with the decision prior to seeking advice increase the likelihood that the seeker will anchor the advisor. This suggests that advice seekers who follow prescriptions to form a judgment prior to seeking advice may inadvertently introduce bias into advice interactions, undermining the independence of the advice they seek. These findings contribute to the advice-seeking literature by revealing a process by which anchors emerge naturally in information exchange
Decision process · Help-seeking · Information seeking · Seekers · Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics · Psychology of Social Influence · Social and Intergroup Psychology
Communication and Persuasion
The Difference
Advice taking and decision-making
Cueing and Cognitive Conflict in Judge-Advisor Decision Making
Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1
Averaging probability judgments
The limits of anchoring
Implications of Attitude Change Theories for Numerical Anchoring
Hypothesis-Consistent Testing and Semantic Priming in the Anchoring Paradigm
How mental systems believe
First offers as anchors
Explaining the enigmatic anchoring effect
Mental contamination and mental correction
Explanation, imagination, and confidence in judgment
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |