
The Effect of Wrapping Neatness on Gift Attitudes - mhb
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jcpy.1140
======
papln
Related, via
[https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/3T6p93Mut7G8qdkAs/evaluabili...](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/3T6p93Mut7G8qdkAs/evaluability-
and-cheap-holiday-shopping)

> According to Hsee—in a paper entitled “Less is Better”—if you buy someone a
> $45 scarf, you are more likely to be seen as generous than if you buy them a
> $55 coat.

and [https://www.behavioraleconomics.com/resources/mini-
encyclope...](https://www.behavioraleconomics.com/resources/mini-encyclopedia-
of-be/less-is-better-effect/)

> When objects are evaluated separately rather than jointly, decision makers
> focus less on attributes that are important and are influenced more by
> attributes that are easy to evaluate. The less-is-better effect suggests a
> preference reversal when objects are considered together instead of
> separately. One study presented participants with two dinner set options.
> Option A included 40 pieces, nine of which were broken. Option B included 24
> pieces, all of which were intact. Option A was superior, as it included 31
> intact pieces. When evaluated separately, individuals were willing to pay a
> higher price for set B. In a joint evaluation of both options, on the other
> hand, Option A resulted in higher willingness to pay (Hsee, 1998).

So put a fancy trinket in shabby wrapping, for maximum impact.

~~~
esotericn
I don't think it's fair to characterise this as some sort of 'trick'.

A high quality item, regardless of cost, is generally going to be far more
useful and long-lasting, than a low quality item in a different category which
costs more.

I would rather own, or buy myself, a $45 scarf than a $55 coat, assuming that
the scarf is actually better in its' class and not just a scam (like some
designer nonsense with a label on it).

~~~
BeetleB
I think the parent's point was that even though I spent _more_ , I would be
viewed as _less_ generous. Instead of buying you that $45 scarf, I'll go even
cheaper. I'll spend $25 for a fancy version of something that normally costs
only $10.

The "trick" is for the purchaser. If I don't want to spend much money buying
someone a gift, this is a hack where I can spend as little as suits me, and
still be viewed as generous.

Of course, the disconnect only occurs when people view all of this as zero
sum. This is a classic example of a win-win: Both sides are (legitimately)
happy with the situation. There's nothing wrong/evil about it.

~~~
esotericn
Sure, all of that makes sense, but my argument is that you actually are being
less generous by buying a lower quality product, even if it's more expensive.
The amount of money spent is not the relevant factor.

You're not merely "viewed" as such.

Consider a limiting case in which I spend thousands of dollars on something
you don't want at all and has no resale value. That's not generous, it's just
stupid, or possibly even spiteful.

~~~
BeetleB
I think you're seriously projecting (as perhaps am I). Not everyone will view
a useless $2K gift the way you would (on both the sender and receiver's side).

------
RcouF1uZ4gsC
> We recruited 180 university students who participated for extra credit
> (60.6% female, Mage = 25.71, SD = 6.40).

Just like we have cured pretty much every disease in studies in mice, I am
sure that in the social studies college demographic (who participate in
studies for extra credit) we have decoded the human psyche.

Unfortunately, often the mouse studies and college student social studies
translate poorly to the real world.

~~~
notafraudster
I would think a stronger indictment of the external validity of the study is
not the sample (I have no reason to believe people slightly older/younger are
materially different than college students, and to the extent that wealth is a
confounder I would expect the direction of confounding to attenuate the study
as presented), but rather the design: the way people perceive "prizes" won
from participating in a study is materially different than the way they
appreciate gifts given to them by people they know and have a bond with.

There's also an internal validity argument to be made that the effect size is
trivial in substantive terms. 7.06 versus 7.82 on a 9 point scale of
satisfaction for a mug? Who gives a shit? I would interpret both 7.06 and 7.82
as "I like this gift, it is a good gift". And also, who cares about getting a
mug? If a mug is anchored at a 7-7.8 for me, then every gift I actually get
from loved ones is going to be about a 500 out of 9.

Study 3 is meant to deal with the social-emotional element of giving a gift,
but that's the only study where people don't actually get a gift. They use
MTurkers and ask them to imagine. I would completely ignore this part of the
study.

The more interesting takeaway here is the 1.5 point spread in anticipation
between neat and sloppily wrapped gifts in Study 2. That's a way bigger effect
than I'd think.

------
lliamander
So, should I stop working on improving my gift wrapping skills?

"I got you some new socks, and since I wrapped it in a bundle of old
newspaper, you'll like it better!"

------
JamesCoyne
Does HN allow Sci-Hub links?

~~~
JamesCoyne
[https://sci-hub.se/10.1002/jcpy.1140](https://sci-hub.se/10.1002/jcpy.1140)

~~~
jraph
By the way, should this host not work on your domestic connection, I do not
advise you to switch away from your ISP DNS, nor, alternatively, to put the
following line:

    
    
       186.2.163.171 sci-hub.se
    

in your hosts file. Or

    
    
        186.2.163.90 sci-hub.tw
    

for that matter.

~~~
papln
Is it important to match the IP address to the domain name?

I assume that all the hosted sites are mirrors of each other.

~~~
jraph
I just tried, and yes, it is important to match the correct host with the ip
address. The server uses the Host HTTP header to find the right virtual host
and send the right SSL certificate. A wrong match seems to break the site.

But your assumption is right, I believe all these hosts are otherwise
identical mirrors of Sci-Hub.

------
swayvil
Speaking of gift-wrapping. Speaking as a guy who takes gift-wrapping very
seriously (I even print my own paper). I have one word to say about "gift
bags".

Shameful.

~~~
andreareina
Do you have a large-format printer, tend to give small gifts that can be
wrapped with a single sheet of letter/a4 paper, or just use multiple pieces
per gift? What paper do you use?

~~~
swayvil
I get my prints done at the the office supply store. Large format inkjet on
the cheapest paper (they call it engineering paper). A print the size of a
door for $6.

