Logos01 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. Show more comments above.

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).