I'm I the only one who is concerned by the validity of their experiment. The last experiment lets me very dubious.
Imagine you have 3 smileys. They have similar ratings, but for sure there is one you prefer, one you rate 2nd and one you rate 3rd. Now, let's just see the result we would have for each scenario.
Rating of cards 1/2/3 ; 3rd card chosen after initial choice ; 3rd card chosen without initial choice (so just between card 2 and card 3)
1/2/3 ; False (1 chosen on first pass) ; False
1/3/2 ; True (1 chosen on first pass) ; True
2/1/3 ; False (1 chosen on first pass) ; False
2/3/1 ; True (2 chosen on first pass) ; True
3/1/2 ; True (1 chosen on first pass) ; False
3/2/1 ; True (2 chosen on first pass) ; True
Which makes in the first experiment 50% chances of choosing the third card and 66% when we made a previous "preselection". This is approximately the figures children had. Monkeys had lower 3rd card preference, maybe because they prefer to take cards in order.
About the rest of the article, I'm just as dubious. If you choose a product, for sure you rate it better. It's called the cause of you choosing it, not a consequence ...