The trigger for this post was a headline I read in the paper
“Cashed-up older buyers pay $325k over reserve”. A 3-bedroom house in
Brunswick, a suburb of Melbourne, was sold at auction in December 2019 for
325,000 $ above its reserve.
The auction must have been frantic with the auctioneers
playing the potential buyers off against each other and creating a competitive
environment. This is dangerous as people then lose sight of the true value and
the want to win takes over and subsequently people end up paying too much.
So, what is happening to us when we are in an auction and
why do we tend to overbid?
A study conducted by a team of neuroscientists and economists
at the NYU tried to understand exactly that question. Our prefrontal cortex is
the part of our brain where our logical and complex decisions are performed.
Our unconscious decision-making process is performed in a different part of our
brain which is called the Striatum. This also the part of where our fight or
flight response is performed; it is the part of our brain that responses to
threat.
The researchers have used fMRI,
functional magnetic resonance imaging, to examine patterns of brain activation while
the participants where participating in an auction. They found that rational
decision making diminishes and the principle of act first and think then kicks
in out of fear of loss. The excitement of the bidding process releases dopamine
which controls the pleasure centre of the brain and makes the bidder feel good,
hence the bidding continues, and more dopamine is released, a vicious circle.
This explains why people at an
auction can lose all rationality and continue to bid until later rationality
kicks back in and they then think ‘oh what have I done’.
The phenomenon that occurs is
called auction fever. This is created in an environment where emotions are
running high with the urge to win. It is the increase in emotions that bidders
experience during the auction. It is that high level of arousal and the urge to
win that is created in such an environment.
This results in the bidder to lose their ability to think clearly.
The researchers Ariely and Simonson
(2003) found that 76% of bidders consider the other fellow bidders as
competitors. The outcome of the auction is described by the participants as
either winning or losing.
The following elements trigger
auction fever:
Perceived ownership
Research in behavioural economy
has found that perceived ownership refers to the assumption that the highest
bidder feels like already being the owner of the item they are bidding on. The
term ‘endowment effect’ was introduced by behavioural economist Richard Thaler;
the endowment effect is the impact whereby we value something more if we are
the owner of the object. During the bidding process the highest bidder develops
a ‘pseudo endowment effect’ (Ariely and Simonson 2003) which refers to the
situation where the highest bidder gets attached to the object without actually
owning it yet.
Time Pressure
Behavioural research in decision
making has found that time pressure creates arousal and increases the
willingness to take risks. During auctions the bidders are put under time
pressure, so they have less time to think and are quick in making decisions.
This results in the bidder not being able to think clearly and taking decisions
in the heat of the moment.
Audience effect
In a public auction the bidders
feel put under the spotlight and feel that they are being watched. Competitive
behaviour I triggered when the auction is public and the need to win becomes
greater which then leads to competitive arousal and over bidding.
Rivalry
Rivalry is an essential attribute
of any public auction. There is a level of excitement and rivalry that is
created in an auction environment to create the need to win at all cost.
Thaler, R. H. (1980). Toward a
positive theory of consumer choice. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization,
1(1), 39–60.
Ariely, D., & Simonson, I. (2003). Buying,
bidding, playing, or competing? value assessment and decision dynamics in
online auctions. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13, 113–1
Comments
Post a Comment