A really simple example, and one I’ve mentioned before illustrates what I call the Adam Sandler effect.
What happens is this: Five of you decide to go to the movies this Saturday. So far so good.
But which movie? You and your group love movies, and surely you have a collective favourite to see. So you start discussing what’s on and four of you agree the new Clooney film is the one you want.
“Ah… but I’ve already seen that film,” says the fifth member of your clique.
The veto rule.
Okay what’s our next best choice? And so it goes. Whatever you choose, somebody has either already seen it, or has read a tepid review.
What you have here is a collision between two competing sets of rules. You set out to see your favourite film, and instead you and your group end up seeing the “least objectionable” film that, actually, nobody has wanted to see. This is where Adam Sandler, I swear, has earned his place as one of Hollywood’s three top grossing actors of the past 10 years.
Apart from The Wedding Singer which was a great little film, the rest have been an appalling bunch of half witted comedies. Little Nicky anyone?
It doesn’t matter. Every weekend at the movies there is a blockbuster or three – and then there is Adam Sandler, lurking there: his movies ready to pick up the fallout from your friends well-meaning decision process.
Now for researchers this has serious implications. If we only ask about what things people want, then we may end up with a theoretical ideal – but our research will never pick up the kind of goofy, half-assed, slacker productions that actually gross the big dollars. In our questionnaires we need to think about how we might pick up the Adam Sandler effect. Good luck to the guy. He has the knack of reading the Saturday night crowd much more accurately than most of our surveys could ever hope to achieve. We should learn from that.
- Choices depend on positives as well as vetoes
- When two or more people make a decision, the outcome depends more strongly on vetoes than on positives
- There is always a market for things that are least objectionable.