Volume 58, Issue 3 pp. 388-411
Original Article

Unveiling the Associative Mechanisms Underlying the Additive Bias: Using an Implicit Association Test to Gain Insight into People's Preference for Additive Actions

Maria Adriana Neroni

Corresponding Author

Maria Adriana Neroni

Suor Orsola Benincasa University

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Maria Adriana Neroni, Università Suor Orsola Benincasa, Via Suor Orsola, 10, 10135 Napoli, Italy. E-mail: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
Nathan Crilly

Nathan Crilly

University of Cambridge

Search for more papers by this author
Maria Antonella Brandimonte

Maria Antonella Brandimonte

Suor Orsola Benincasa University

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 20 May 2024

ABSTRACT

When faced with the need to transform an object, idea, or situation, people have a tendency to favor adding new components rather than removing existing ones. This is called the additive bias. Previous research, along with historical and anecdotal examples, shows that this bias may significantly reduce problem-solving abilities and have a detrimental impact on the innovation process. In this study, our objective was to develop a novel tool, the additive bias implicit association test (ad-IAT), to investigate the reasons underlying people's preference for additive actions. By using this tool, we empirically demonstrated that people displayed an inherent tendency to assign a positive valence to additive concepts and to perceive additive actions as safer and more functional than subtractive concepts. Importantly, we also found that implicit preference for addition resulted in participants favoring additive actions while neglecting subtractive alternatives when engaged in a problem-solving task. Collectively, our series of experiments substantiated the effectiveness of our ad-IAT in uncovering and quantifying the additive bias. This, in turn, provided a deeper comprehension of the underlying factors contributing to the bias and its impact on people's behavior.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors have no conflict of interests related to this publication.

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Materials and data for all the experiments described in the manuscript will be available upon request.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.