Publications
Publications
- 2020
- HBS Working Paper Series
A Preference for Revision Absent Objective Improvement
By: Ximena Garcia-Rada, Leslie John, Ed O’Brien and Michael I. Norton
Abstract
Things change. Things also get changed—often. Why? The obvious reason is that revising things often makes them better. We document a less obvious reason: revising things makes consumers think they are better, even absent objective improvement. Eleven studies document the preference for revision and provide insight into its psychological underpinnings. Studies 1A–1C document the effect among MBA students engaged in a resume revision process, while Studies 2 and 3 demonstrate the effect both experientially (eating candy) and via choice (of pens). Revisions are preferred even when trivially different from their predecessors (study 4A), and even when there is no difference between original and revised versions (study 4B). Consumers overgeneralize their belief that revisers intend to improve their creations and that revisions represent the successful fruition of those intentions (studies 5A and 5B); as a result, consumers are relatively uncritical of flaws in purportedly revised products (a video game; study 6), unless cued to doubt that revisers can be trusted (study 7).
Keywords
Citation
Garcia-Rada, Ximena, Leslie John, Ed O’Brien, and Michael I. Norton. "A Preference for Revision Absent Objective Improvement." Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 19-087, February 2019. (Revised April 2020.)
About The Authors
