TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Why are we anchored often?

21 点作者 remotists将近 5 年前

8 条评论

motohagiography将近 5 年前
The advice to starting a negotiation with a favourable number as a conceptual anchor makes the mistake that a number should be at the beginning of a negotiation at all. The whole point of a negotiation is not to haggle down to a price, but to discover a &quot;true&quot; price based on seeking out principles. The point of negotiation isn&#x27;t to simply raise the number like in the haggle, it&#x27;s to influence their number to be the effect of your principles, so that the result is everyone feels they&#x27;ve got a good deal.<p>With practice, you can de-anchor discussions simply by re-framing their anchors using new principles.<p>e.g. Anchor: &quot;Given your current salary is probably around $50k, we think you&#x27;re way underpaid and we will offer you $52,500, which is a %5 raise just for switching jobs! You can thank me for getting you this incredible deal by signing right now.&quot;<p>Re-frame: &quot;I really appreciate your initial effort on this. We can&#x27;t disclose my current salary here because my employer treats it as competitive information and I&#x27;m still a member of this team so I can&#x27;t really comment on that. Let&#x27;s move the numbers discussion out a bit, and get a sense of the value I can provide in the role. However, looking at the glassdoor and city cost of living salary data for your company, the range you suggested is just below the average salary for other people in the role. I can solve one of your major problems with my unique experience out of the gate, which would take at least a quarter to six months in learning curve for your current team.&quot;<p>This simple re-framing is, destabilize the premise (their guess of your salary), add 2 new objective principles of a) competitive information, and b) glassdoor&#x2F;city data source, then provide them with relief from the instability stress you created using a soft sweetener (offer of hidden value) without even coming back with a number. This is a simplified case, but you get the idea. So yes, anchoring, but now that you see the reframing to your principles (a new anchor), it&#x27;s much less of an obstacle.
评论 #23900573 未加载
评论 #23898630 未加载
throwaway_pdp09将近 5 年前
Seems there may be more to it than the article says.<p>&quot;People are irrational. Example: You wouldn’t buy a new dress, or suit, that costs $100 (‘that’s far too much to spend!’) but you would buy one that was $300, but is now ‘reduced’ to $150 (‘but just look at how far down it’s come!’) Sound familiar? You’re not alone, it’s fairly well-known that humans are irrational (at least by those in advertising- some products in supermarkets are never meant to be bought- they’re just there to get you to buy other products more), but are other animals just as irrational?<p>Hummingbirds, starlings, and even bees have been shown to be irrational. But what about organisms even smaller than bees? A recent study1 found that even slime moulds (brain-less creatures, which live in damp places like mouldy leaves and logs) can be irrational.&quot;<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blogs.scientificamerican.com&#x2F;not-bad-science&#x2F;think-you-re-sometimes-irrational-you-re-not-the-only-one-8211-slime-moulds-are-irrational-too&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blogs.scientificamerican.com&#x2F;not-bad-science&#x2F;think-y...</a><p>This really implies something fundamental but I can&#x27;t guess what.
评论 #23900999 未加载
copperx将近 5 年前
That&#x27;s why it&#x27;s recommended to look into the distance when you enter a Costco, until you pass the electronics section.
contravariant将近 5 年前
That ended way more quickly than I thought it would.
评论 #23897895 未加载
code_scrapping将近 5 年前
If I see that the link is coming from substack, I&#x27;m actually discouraged to click (in fear of imminent &quot;pay for more&quot;)
totetsu将近 5 年前
It&#x27;s lIke the framing effect.
评论 #23898478 未加载
评论 #23897824 未加载
phailhaus将近 5 年前
Sounds like overfitting.
sokoloff将近 5 年前
&gt; think of you walking into a sports store and the first thing you spot is a pair of track pants worth $500. Now your brain is anchored on that price for a pair of track pants, so when you see another track pant this time with a price tag of $300 you will perceive it as cheap.<p>No, I will not. $25 for track pants I would perceive as cheap. There is no way in hell, no matter what overpriced items you show me first, that I will perceive $300 for track pants as &quot;cheap&quot;.
评论 #23899137 未加载
评论 #23899018 未加载
评论 #23899455 未加载
评论 #23903486 未加载