We prefer items in the middle of a range: When participants were presented with a line of five pictures, they preferred pictures in the centre rather than at either end. This applies when the line of pictures was arranged horizontally or vertically and when participants selected from five pairs of identical socks arranged vertically. The results support the centre-stage explanation of location-based preference rather than the hemispheric difference or body-specific accounts. (
If I'm reading this right, you're saying that when people are presented with a set of options, they re-normalize their evaluations of those options, and then generally prefer those that seem closer to the middle of this new spectrum, and are more willing to compromise standards and ideals in favor of practical judgment of these "near-center" options. The takeaway being that if we want to engage our best analysis of an options practical pros and cons, we should attempt to envision a spectrum of options that, when renormalized for comparison, has the option we wish to analyze near its center, but if we want to come up with creative ways to pursue that option, we should renormalize in a way that makes our considered option seem extreme, as this encourages us to maintain ideals and standards in pursuit of it.
i.e. You'd do best to evaluate the prospect of going to college by envisioning it as between abandoning all other pursuits and devoting your life to obscure academia and dropping all academic pursuits and pursuing your passion for, say, dance.
If, however, you want to be creative about how best to pursue college, you could renormalize so that you're considering a spectrum which has at one end very noncomittal pursuits to education - you'll watch a Discovery channel documentary once a week, and college at the other end. This encourages thinking of all the necessary circumstances to ensure your college education is up to standards.
looks like it trashed the code I pasted.
Change the url
http://c.brightcove.com/ser...
to
http://c.brightcove.com/ser...
toward the beginning of the code...
We prefer symmetry. Either end is different, the middle is not different / like itself.
It's easy Ari. Things in the middle are far away, things that are near you are in the middle, while things that are far away are close by. Capische?
If I'm reading this right, you're saying that when people are presented with a set of options, they re-normalize their evaluations of those options, and then generally prefer those that seem closer to the middle of this new spectrum, and are more willing to compromise standards and ideals in favor of practical judgment of these "near-center" options. The takeaway being that if we want to engage our best analysis of an options practical pros and cons, we should attempt to envision a spectrum of options that, when renormalized for comparison, has the option we wish to analyze near its center, but if we want to come up with creative ways to pursue that option, we should renormalize in a way that makes our considered option seem extreme, as this encourages us to maintain ideals and standards in pursuit of it.
i.e. You'd do best to evaluate the prospect of going to college by envisioning it as between abandoning all other pursuits and devoting your life to obscure academia and dropping all academic pursuits and pursuing your passion for, say, dance.
If, however, you want to be creative about how best to pursue college, you could renormalize so that you're considering a spectrum which has at one end very noncomittal pursuits to education - you'll watch a Discovery channel documentary once a week, and college at the other end. This encourages thinking of all the necessary circumstances to ensure your college education is up to standards.
So you are saying that in near mod... wait you lost me in the middle of your post!