Thought of the Day 01.05.09

I recently put a candy dish on my desk, which I filled with two types of non-standard candy corn: caramel chocolate (tan and brown) and caramel apple (tan and red). At first, people were cautious in taking them because quality was an unknown. They quickly discovered both kinds were good, just not equally good.

My coworkers clearly prefer the chocolate to the apple. So, although I fill each side equally, the chocolate disappears more quickly until it’s all gone. If I then refill that side, the same preference shows up. But if I don’t, people will simply eat the apple since it’s all that’s available. Any economist understands this perfectly well.

Given new products of the same price (free), people will sample them to decide quality, then consume the alternative they like best, and eventually settle for consuming what is merely available if they must. The implications for elections, relationships, jobs, and even church membership (in addition to mere economic questions) are fairly obvious.
Posted by at

1 comment:

Benjamin said...

Are you saying that no matter what is available, if it is the only thing available, then people will take it? I have two thoughts about this: 1. it reminds me of you mentioning cognitive dissonance. If something is available to be taken, then the thought is that it must be pretty good since it's available. 2. People will consume just to consume. It's like it's a given that to consume or to take is better than to not consume or not to take. So, if marriage was not an available option, if the idea for marriage was not out there, then not near as many people would want to get married simply because it's availability as an option was not something they were aware of. This line of thinking seems to underscore the importance and influence of ideas.

January 11, 2010 at 1:45 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)