A developmental approach to the effects of scarcity on judgment and decision-making

稀缺性对判断和决策有着深远的影响。想象一下，你正在购买一瓶葡萄酒，并在两个品牌之间做出决定。没有太多的信息，你可以依靠一个深思熟虑的决定，因为这两个品牌同样陌生，他们的价格差异是微不足道的。然而，它们在相对频率上不同，因为一个品牌是丰富的，而另一个是稀缺的。很有可能你会认为稀缺的更好，喜欢它而不是丰富的。这个决策过程是稀缺效应的一个例子，即稀缺性增强了事物的感知价值和可取性。营销人员和广告商长期以来一直利用这种效应，通过使用“仅限3天”和“每人限一个”等策略来影响人们的购买决定。这种效应不仅适用于经济行为，也适用于对资源、信息、机会、经验和个人特征的判断和决策。商品理论描述了稀缺性对决策者的心理影响：任何可以拥有的东西，有用的，可以从一个人转移到另一个人的东西，都会在稀缺或难以获得的程度上被估价。随后的研究提供了大量的经验证据支持这一理论。人们提出了三种可能的机制来解释稀缺效应是如何产生的：稀缺性可以a）满足人们对独特性的需求，B）威胁人们的选择自由并导致动机觉醒，c）作为一种启发式或经验法则。这些机制可能指向稀缺效应的进化含义。支持这一点的是，在一些动物中观察到了这种效果。因此，稀缺效应可能具有进化意义，如果是这样的话，它应该在发育的早期就存在。令人惊讶的是，以前所有关于稀缺效应的研究都只关注成年人。目前还没有任何研究从发展的角度对其进行研究。拟议的研究旨在解决文献中的这一差距。在三个系列的研究中，我调查了a）稀缺性对判断和决策的影响的发展起源（例如，物品的稀缺性是否会增强其对幼儿的感知价值和可取性，如果是，这种效应何时在发展中出现）; B）稀缺性对年龄较大的儿童的影响的可能调节因素（例如，年龄较大的儿童在对稀缺与丰富的对象做出判断或决定时是否考虑对象的吸引力和稀缺的原因），以及c）可能引起对年龄较小的儿童的稀缺效应的可能机制（例如，属性的共变和由于对自由选择的威胁而引起的动机激发是否会引起对年幼儿童的稀缺效应）。该研究具有重要的理论和实践意义。从理论上讲，它将从发展的角度推进我们对稀缺性如何影响人类判断和决策的理解，这是一种过去没有研究过的方法。这些发现将有助于讨论稀缺效应可能的进化含义，并将引起心理学家，人类学家，生物学家，行为经济学家以及营销和广告研究人员的广泛兴趣。实际上，这项研究可能会吸引公众。对稀缺性的感知对我们的日常判断和决策有着重大影响，从日常购买，选择礼物，选择伴侣，到争夺资源。研究稀缺效应的发展轨迹可能会产生与所有这些实际问题相关的见解。

Scarcity has a profound impact on judgment and decision-making. Imagine that you are buying a bottle of wine and deciding between two brands. There is not much information you can rely on for a well thought-out decision, as the two brands are equally unfamiliar and the difference in their prices is negligible. However, they differ in relative frequency, in that one brand is abundant whereas the other one is scarce. Chances are you may judge the scarce one as better and prefer it to the abundant one. This decision-making process is an example of the scarcity effect, that is, scarcity enhances perceived value and desirability of things. Marketers and advertisers have long been capitalizing on this effect, by using tactics such as “available for 3 days only” and “limit one per person” to influence people’s purchase decisions. This effect applies not only to economic behaviour, but also to judgment and decision-making about resources, information, opportunities, experiences, and personal characteristics. The commodity theory describes the psychological effects of scarcity on decision-makers: Anything that can be owned, is useful, and can be transferred from one person to another will be valued to the extent that they are scarce or hard to obtain. Subsequent studies have provided a substantial body of empirical evidence supporting this theory. Three possible mechanisms have been proposed to explain how the scarcity effect arises: Scarcity can a) serve to people’s need for uniqueness, b) threaten people’s freedom of choices and lead to motivational arousal, and c) serve as a heuristic or rule-of-thumb. These mechanisms may point to the evolutionary implications of the scarcity effect. Supporting this, the effect has been observed in some animals. Thus, the scarcity effect may have evolutionary significance, and if so, it should be present early in development. Surprisingly, all previous studies on the scarcity effect have focused exclusively on adults. No studies have yet examined it from a developmental perspective. The proposed research aims to address this gap in the literature. In three series of studies, I investigate a) the developmental origins of the scarcity effect on judgment and decision-making (e.g., whether the scarcity of objects enhances their perceived value and desirability for young children, and if so, when this effect emerges in development); b) possible moderators of the scarcity effect on older children (e.g., whether older children take into account the attractiveness of objects and the cause of scarcity when they make a judgment or decision about scarce vs. abundant objects), and c) possible mechanisms that may induce the scarcity effect on younger children (e.g., whether covariation of attributes and motivational arousal due to threat to freedom of choices can induce the scarcity effect on younger children). The proposed research has significant theoretical and practical implications. Theoretically, it will advance our understanding of how scarcity influences human judgment and decision-making from a developmental perspective, an approach that has not been studied in the past. The findings will contribute to the discussions about the possible evolutionary implications of the scarcity effect, and will be of broad interest to psychologists, anthropologists, biologists, behavioural economists, and researchers in marketing and advertisement. Practically, this research is likely to appeal to the general public. The perception of scarcity is a major influence on our everyday judgments and decisions, from making daily purchases, choosing gifts, selecting mates, to competing for resources. Studying the developmental trajectory of the scarcity effect may yield insights pertinent to all of these practical issues.