How rank position and list length shape people’s evaluations

How do people use ranking information when making evaluations? In eight preregistered experiments, we find a persistent preference for options ranked within shorter (vs. longer) lists. For instance, participants reported preferring to hire a prospective employee ranked 3rd of 12 employees over one ranked 6th of 24, despite both having the same relative position within their respective lists (25th percentile). We propose that when people evaluate rankings, they primarily consider the option's position relative to the best option on the list (i.e., distance from the top-ranked alternative). Thus, they tend to prefer options ranked in shorter lists, even when their relative percentile ranking is the same as—or even worse than—an alternative ranked in longer lists. Accordingly, we find that the effect attenuates when we: (a) draw attention to the distance from the bottom-ranked option by highlighting the number of alternatives ranked below the focal option, and (b) emphasize the focal option's relative position on the list. These findings are theoretically important for advancing the understanding of how people process ranking information and practically important to managers and other practitioners who construct and communicate ranked lists and use rankings in evaluations themselves.