ArticleCognitive science2026
The Robustness of Anchoring in a Naturalistic VR-Based Task.
Article in Cognitive science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anchoring occurs when a quantitative estimate is biased toward an initially presented value (the anchor). Anchoring occurs both in high-level explicit estimation of numeric quantities and in lower-level perceptual tasks and persists even when reliable information about the quantity being estimated is directly available at the point of judgment. This suggests anchoring might derive from generic processing underpinning estimation. Such tasks, however, are almost exclusively lab-based, and the information required to complete the task is rarely available to the participant in a way that reflects how such information is sampled in real-life. To address this, across two experiments, we immersed participants in a virtual world on a platform that could be placed at any height. After an anchor was presented, participants subsequently estimated their height naturally, by interpreting sensory and cognitive cues from the 3D environment in which they were immersed. We manipulated the amount of information directly available to the participant for making their judgment as well as the offset between the anchor and the actual height. To modulate the extent to which task-relevant information was acquired naturally from the environment, we also contrasted anchoring effects in and out of VR. Although participants clearly used the available perceptual and cognitive information to make height estimates, anchoring effects were evident, displayed similar properties to those reported in previous lab-based studies, and were consistent both in and out of VR. Our design also allowed us to recover a novel subjective anchoring measure that facilitated a particularly parsimonious descriptive model of our anchoring data. We conclude that anchoring is a generic feature of all estimation tasks, even when task-relevant information is acquired naturally, as in real-life estimation. These results emphasize the potential for this cognitive bias to have a significant impact on performance in any real-world task requiring quantitative estimation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.