quentin comments on Behavioral psychology and buying a warranty at Menards - Less Wrong

26 Post author: jwhendy 15 November 2011 02:57AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (38)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: quentin 15 November 2011 06:28:50AM *  7 points [-]

A small, but common related occurrence:

When you are checking out at a grocery store, or sometimes at fast food joints, they'll ask you to donate $1 to charity. Of course it is some sub-optimal charity, but the looming discomfort of saying no factors in far more than it should. Plus, it is really hard to tell some random person "sorry, but the utilon-to-dollar ratio is insufficient".

It seems to generalize to a category of 1-of things that arise in social situations. You know it is sub-optimal to along, you know it would be uncomfortable to speak up, but (at least personally) you find it difficult to gauge the actual cost of doing so (in socialons), and wonder if you aren't just overthinking the whole thing - by which point, of course, the decision is already in motion.

Comment author: r_claypool 16 November 2011 05:02:24AM 6 points [-]

I usually respond "No thank you, not today". Adding "not today" reminds me that I contribute to charity on many other days, and I pick those organizations more carefully.

Comment author: Incorrect 15 November 2011 08:21:23AM 5 points [-]

Unless the donation is expected as part of a cultural tradition just say "No Thank You" and keep walking. It really isn't that hard and they probably wont respond unfavorably.

Comment author: shokwave 15 November 2011 07:22:01AM 1 point [-]

socialons

Useful idea and term. Thank you.

Comment author: Logos01 15 November 2011 07:04:20AM 0 points [-]

Plus, it is really hard to tell some random person "sorry, but the utilon-to-dollar ratio is insufficient".

While I'm curious as to how the results would turn out, I have strong suspicions already -- but I wonder how people would react if instead of asking for your donation, they arranged matters such that they could assume you would donate: i.e.; 'do you require us to not contribute one dollar in your name to so-and-so organization?'

Why I'm curious: I wonder how those of us who have learned the language of 'utilon-to-dollar ratio' would react in a functionally equivalent situation that required active denial rather than active compliance.

Comment author: Normal_Anomaly 16 November 2011 10:24:12PM *  0 points [-]

'do you require us to not contribute one dollar in your name to so-and-so organization?'

This makes it sound as if they will just keep the dollar if you say no. If what you mean is "do you want to opt out of a $1 extra charge for charity" then I probably wouldn't figure it out in time if I was in a hurry. Otherwise I'd be able to say "no thank you".

Comment author: TimS 15 November 2011 09:39:23PM 0 points [-]

When I pay my mandatory dues to the Bar Association, the final total on the form includes a donation to the public relations fund. That is, the mandatory dues are ~$300 and total you are told to write on the check if you don't mess with anything on the form is ~$400.

I always have written the check for ~$300, but it doesn't bother me that much that they ask the other way. I think the public relations fund is probably a decent value for the utility it provides (if I could afford to donate at all).