A meta‐analysis of extremeness aversion
通过对142项实验观察的元分析，发现极端厌恶（避免极端选项的倾向）是稳健现象，但研究设计和测量方法会显著影响其强度，甚至导致矛盾结论。
Abstract Using a meta‐analysis of 142 experimental observations, this work examines the influence of different research design and outcome measures on extremeness aversion (i.e., the propensity to avoid extreme options in choice situations). The results indicate that extremeness aversion is a robust phenomenon: middle options are significantly more often selected than other options. However, the strength of this behavioral effect exhibits substantial variation (up to three times the average magnitude) across methodological decisions: employing price‐quality tradeoffs, nondurable categories, or binary‐trinary choice‐set comparisons tend to reduce the probability of extremeness aversion among consumers, whereas using a larger number of tradeoff dimensions, non‐numeric attributes, high‐quality extensions, or utilitarian products increase its likelihood. Because extremeness aversion has been assessed using three different measurement paradigms (absolute‐share changes, relative‐share shifts, and middle‐option proportions), we discuss their characteristics and investigate their degree of agreement. We find that the three measures can lead to rather different effect magnitudes and even contradictory conclusions about the effect of moderators.