**Replications of moderator effects on self-generated versus experimenter-provided anchoring.** Moderators: - Forewarning - Need for Cognition - Cognitive Load ----------------- **Background:** Anchoring, the assimilation of numerical estimates toward previously considered numbers, had been separated into anchoring from self-generated anchors (e.g., people thinking of nine months when asked for the gestation period of an animal) and experimenter-provided anchors (e.g., experimenters letting participants spin fortune wheels). After two different theoretical accounts had been assigned to the two types of anchoring, the difference was resolved again. What remains, however, are contradictions between past and recent findings. **Method:** We conducted three replications (*Ntotal* = 653) of seminal studies on the distinction of self-generated versus experimenter-provided anchoring effects. **Results:** We found no evidence of either type of anchoring being moderated by need for cognition, cognitive load, or forewarnings. In line with recent replication efforts, we found that anchoring effects were robust, but moderator findings of anchoring should be treated with caution. **References of Original Studies:** - Epley, N., & Gilovich, T. (2005). When effortful thinking influences judgmental anchoring: Differential effects of forewarning and incentives on self-generated and externally provided anchors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 18(3), 199–212. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.495 - Epley, N., & Gilovich, T. (2006). The anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic: Why the adjustments are insufficient. Psychological Science, 17(4), 311–318. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01704.x