User:Agamash/sandbox
The Ikea effect is a cognitive bias where labor enhances affection for its results. The name for this psychological phenomenon is in honor of the wildly successful Swedish manufacturer named Ikea, whose products typically arrive with some assembly required. A large portion of products produced by Ikea are self-assembled, leaving it up to the purchaser to put together their own furniture. The nature of the "Ikea effect" is the result of over admiration of a particular item one puts together on their own. [1] It is seen as an actual psychological situation which is linked to consumer placing an overload of value towards an object they built even though it is not worth as much as they believe.
The Experiment[edit]
Research conducted by Michael I. Norton of Harvard Business School, Daniel Mochon of Yale University, and Dan Ariely of Duke University, shows that when people construct products themselves, from bookshelves to Build-a-Bears, they come to overvalue their sometimes poorly made creations.
Michael Norton, along with his colleagues, conducted an experiment based around the principle question of whether consumers would pay a higher price for products that required self-assembly. [2] The research consisted of three different experiments where consumers built with Lego, folder origami figures and assembled Ikea boxes.
In the first experiment performed, the test subjects were given Ikea boxes to build. Researchers then implemented prices on the objects built with the intention of observing if the test subjects were willing to more for the boxes they built themselves as opposed to those already built. [3] Their results were correct with their prediction and individuals were in fact willing to pay more for the box they built themselves as opposed to and identical pre-assembled box.
In the second experiment conducted, researchers manipulated the object being assembled to frog and crane origami compositions. In this experiment, researchers gave test subjects to make either origami frogs or cranes. They then determined how much these test subjects, who were the builders of the origami, were willing to pay for their work. Following this, researchers gather another group of test subjects who had not taken part in the building of the origami structures.[4] In this part of the experiment, two factors were analyzed. Firstly, test subjects were asked how much they were willing to pay for an origami built by the previous test subject builders. Following this, they were asked to see how much they were willing to pay for an expertly build origami.[5] The results demonstrated that those who did not take part in the building of the origami were willing to pay more for the origami built by and expert than the origami built by the previous test subjects.[6]
This second experiment had a second part to it as well. Apart from bidding on their own work, individuals who took part in the building of the origami were given a display or origami, one set with the ones they had built themselves and one set that had been expertly built. [7]Without knowing that their own origami was part of the display as well, these test subjects were asked to bid on the different origami. The second experiment proved that individuals were just as likely to value an item they built themselves as one built professionally.[8]
The final, third experiment, conducted was based around a theory of incompletion. Two sets of test subjects were collected. The first set consisted of individuals who were instructed to built a complete Ikea box. The second set of individuals were told to only partially construct the box. Both groups then took part in bidding over theses objects. This experiment concluded that individuals who had built the box completely were willing to pay more than the individuals who had only partially built the box. This experiment supported the Ikea theory, which states that more value is placed on an object that is built by oneself. [9]
Additional research has shown that labor leads to higher valuation only when the labor is fruitful. When participants failed to complete a task requiring their own labor, the IKEA effect dissipated. The IKEA effect is thought to contribute to the sunk costs effect, whereby managers continue to devote resources to sometimes failing projects in which they have invested their labor, and to the not invented here syndrome, whereby they discount good ideas developed elsewhere in favor of their (sometimes inferior) internally developed ideas.
Conclusion[edit]
The experiments performed by Michael I. Norton, Daniel Mochon and Dan Ariely demonstrated the impact that self-assembly had on the value of a product. The Ikea theory suggests that when one uses their own labour to constructing a particular product, they value and love it more than if they didn't put any effort in building it. [10] Even if badly assembled, individuals will still place a higher worth on an object that they built themselves. This is essentially what is considered to be the Ikea effect.[11]
References[edit]
- Vedantam, Shankar (2013), "Why You Love That Ikea Table, Even If It's Crooked." NPR. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/2013/02/06/171177695/why-you-love-that-ikea-table-even-if-its-crooked
- Norton, Michael I. (2009), "The IKEA Effect: When Labor Leads to Love." Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from http://hbr.org/web/2009/hbr-list/ikea-effect-when-labor-leads-to-love
- ^ Norton, Michael I.; Mochon, Daniel; Ariely, Dan [1], "Journal of Consumer Psychology", July 2012
- ^ Berman, Jillian [2], "The IKEA Effect: Study Finds Consumers Over-Value Products They Build Themselves", September 2011
- ^ Norton, Michael I.; Mochon, Daniel; Ariely, Dan [3], "Journal of Consumer Psychology", July 2012
- ^ Norton, Michael I.; Mochon, Daniel; Ariely, Dan [4], "Journal of Consumer Psychology", July 2012
- ^ Norton, Michael I.; Mochon, Daniel; Ariely, Dan [5], "Journal of Consumer Psychology", July 2012
- ^ Norton, Michael I.; Mochon, Daniel; Ariely, Dan [6], "Journal of Consumer Psychology", July 2012
- ^ Norton, Michael I.; Mochon, Daniel; Ariely, Dan [7], "Journal of Consumer Psychology", July 2012
- ^ Norton, Michael I.; Mochon, Daniel; Ariely, Dan [8], "Journal of Consumer Psychology", July 2012
- ^ Norton, Michael I.; Mochon, Daniel; Ariely, Dan [9], "Journal of Consumer Psychology", July 2012
- ^ Dibeehi, Qaalfa [10], "Beyond Philosophy", March 2013
- ^ Dibeehi, Qaalfa [11], "Beyond Philosophy", March 2013
 | This psychology-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |