In a telling experiment under the same protocol as the ones listed above, people asked to reflect upon their choices were more likely to choose the house with the extra room for Grandma than the house with the shorter commute times, because the extra reflection gave more opportunity for the availability heuristic to come into play.

In this experiment, did they control fro the availability heuristic in any way? Like having a list where they are asked whether they prefer short commute times to several low-probability things and so that they compete with one another over the heuristic? Something like:

There are four houses, equivalent in all ways except for as specified. Which house would you prefer? a. Have a long commute and get a grandmother room b. Have a long commute and get an outdoor pool c. Have a long commute but live a short walk away from an awesome gym or d. Not have a long commute

It would obviously take more than that to cut to the matter, but it may help reveal some interesting differences that the study could have missed. If potential owners individually answered the quiz, it could reveal a difference in incentives more than a bias towards vivid images. For instance, maybe one buyer wants a shorter commute but they have a partner who has never worked a day in their life. Maybe when they read all kinds of low-probability options, they realize that having a pool or a gym or a room that never gets used are all basically the same and useless.