Reports Longer is better Scott Eidelman a, ⁎, Jennifer Pattershall a , Christian S. Crandall b a Department of Psychology, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, United States b Department of Psychology, University of Kansas, Fayetteville, AR, United States abstract article info Article history: Received 12 April 2010 Revised 25 June 2010 Available online 18 July 2010 Keywords: Existence bias Social influence Heuristics Status quo maintenance The longer something is thought to exist, the better it is evaluated. In Study 1, participants preferred an existing university requirement over an alternative; this pattern was more pronounced when the existing requirement was said to be in place for a longer period of time. In Study 2, participants rated acupuncture more favorably as a function of how old the practice was described. Aesthetic judgments of art (Study 3) and nature (Study 4) were also positively affected by time in existence, as were gustatory evaluations of an edible consumer good (Study 5). Features of the research designs argue against mere exposure, loss aversion, and rational inference as explanations for these findings. Instead, time in existence seems to operate as a heuristic; longer means better. © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Merchants tend to highlight the longevity of their wares. Goods and services are marketed as traditional (e.g., Chinese medicine) or classic (e.g., Coca-Cola) to imply a sense of establishment. Do marketers hope longevity implies goodness? Are older objects and practices perceived as better? We set out to test for a causal link between time in existence and positive evaluation. “Longer” may lead to “better” for several reasons. Favorable evaluation develops as a straightforward result of exposure and contact (Bornstein, 1989; Festinger, Schachter, & Back, 1950; Zajonc, 1968), and longevity provides more of these opportunities. Longevity may also lead to goodness by way of the status quo bias, where previously chosen options are preferred, largely due to regret avoidance and loss aversion (Anderson, 2003; Kahneman, Knetsch, & Thaler, 1991; Samuelson & Zeckhauser, 1988). Longer time in existence could make these concerns loom larger, increasing relative preference for the status quo. A causal link between longevity and goodness might be based on logical inference. Outcomes that have withstood the test of time and beat competitors should be considered better for such feats, reasoning that resembles the tenants of Darwinian natural selection and “survival of the fittest.” Attribution theory prescribes perceivers to augment perceptions of potency as a function of the strength and number of countervailing forces (Kelley, 1971), to which they seem to oblige (e.g., Eidelman & Biernat, 2007; Jussim, Coleman, & Lerch, 1987; Trafimow & Schneider, 1994). We propose a separate and independent process that links time in existence with favorable evaluation. In much the same way that ease of retrieval is a cue to frequency (Schwarz et al., 1991; Tversky & Kahneman, 1973) and effort is a cue to quality (Kruger et al., 2003), time in existence may indicate goodness. That is, people treat longevity as a heuristic from which goodness is inferred. As with other heuristics, such an inference often has merit. Because time vets bad ideas, products, and institutions, a rational case could be built for favoring lengthy existence (e.g., Kelley, 1971). But longevity often results for reasons other than superiority; habit, inertia, and any number of “artificial” selection pressures (e.g., ingroup bias, marketing power, obstacles for competitors to enter the market) may lead to the persistence of existing practice. In such cases, an inference of goodness from time in existence is illogical (and potentially inaccurate). Overgeneralization is a hallmark of heuristic thinking (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974); we demonstrate this marker in the studies that follow. Conceptually, longer-is-better is related to the existence bias (Eidelman, Crandall, & Pattershall, 2009). People infer goodness from precedent, and thus overvalue existing states. The existence bias research concerned existing reality of no specified length (i.e., mere existence; cf. Study 5). We provide a linear extension of this argument; if mere existence is good, longer existence is better. We also extend our previous work by demonstrating people's lack of awareness that time in existence indicates goodness. This inference does not appear to be deliberate, and provides additional evidence that it operates as a heuristic (Kahneman & Frederick, 2002). In Study 1, students evaluated two possible degree requirements at their university, of which one was randomly assigned to represent the status quo. We crossed this manipulation with another that varied the length of time the existing requirement was said to be in place. In Study 2, participants rated an alternative medical practice that differed in how long ago it had been established. In a pair of studies focusing on aesthetic evaluations, participants were exposed to a painting (Study 3) or tree (Study 4) that varied in its time in existence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 46 (2010) 993–998 ⁎ Corresponding author. 211 Memorial Hall, Department of Psychology, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, United States. E-mail address: eidelman@uark.edu (S. Eidelman). 0022-1031/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2010.07.008 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Experimental Social Psychology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jesp