Literature DB >> 22229776

Framing effects and risk-sensitive decision making.

Sandeep Mishra1, Margaux Gregson, Martin L Lalumière.   

Abstract

Prospect theory suggests that people are risk-averse when facing gains, but risk-prone when facing losses, a pattern known as the framing effect. Although framing effects have been widely demonstrated, few studies have investigated framing effects under conditions of need. Risk-sensitivity theory predicts that decision makers should prefer high-risk options in situations of high need, when lower risk options are unlikely to meet those needs. In two experiments, we examined (1) whether framing effects occurred in behavioural tasks involving risky decision making from description and decision making from experience, (2) whether participants' risky decision making conformed to the predictions of risk-sensitivity theory, and (3) whether decision framing interacted with conditions of need to influence decision making under risk. The results suggest that under all circumstances, risky decision making conformed to the predictions of risk-sensitivity theory. Framing effects were at least partially demonstrable under all experimental conditions. Finally, negative frames interacted with situations of high need to produce particularly elevated levels of risky choice. Together, the results suggest that risk-sensitivity theory can augment prospect theory to explain choice under conditions of need. ©2011 The British Psychological Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22229776     DOI: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.2011.02047.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Psychol        ISSN: 0007-1269


  12 in total

1.  Loss restlessness and gain calmness: durable effects of losses and gains on choice switching.

Authors:  Eldad Yechiam; Gal Zahavi; Eli Arditi
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2015-08

2.  Reinforcer pathology: Narrative of hurricane-associated loss increases delay discounting, demand, and consumption of highly palatable snacks in the obese.

Authors:  Sarah E Snider; Alexandra M Mellis; Lindsey M Poe; Matthew A Kocher; Jamie K Turner; Warren K Bickel
Journal:  Psychol Addict Behav       Date:  2019-09-02

3.  Developmental risk sensitivity theory: the effects of socio-economic status on children's risky gain and loss decisions.

Authors:  Teresa Harvey; Peter R Blake
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2022-09-28       Impact factor: 5.530

4.  Decision-making in Orthopaedic Oncology: Does Cognitive Bias Affect a Virtual Patient's Choice Between Limb Salvage and Amputation?

Authors:  Richard W Gurich; Amy M Cizik; Stephanie E Punt; Michael Namekata; Christopher N Johnson; Rebecca G Symons; Elena G Brewer; Matthew J Thompson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 4.755

5.  Speculating on Precarious Income: Finance Cultures and the Risky Strategies of Healthy Volunteers in Clinical Drug Trials.

Authors:  Jill A Fisher; Megan M Wood; Torin Monahan
Journal:  J Cult Econ       Date:  2020-12-21

6.  Dissociable effects of basolateral amygdala lesions on decision making biases in rats when loss or gain is emphasized.

Authors:  Melanie Tremblay; Paul J Cocker; Jay G Hosking; Fiona D Zeeb; Robert D Rogers; Catharine A Winstanley
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 3.526

7.  Forecasted economic change and the self-fulfilling prophecy in economic decision-making.

Authors:  Diamantis Petropoulos Petalas; Hein van Schie; Paul Hendriks Vettehen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-03-23       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Gamble for the needy! Does identifiability enhances donation?

Authors:  Marc Wyszynski; Adele Diederich; Ilana Ritov
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-06-30       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  The influence of income and testosterone on the validity of facial width-to-height ratio as a biomarker for dominance.

Authors:  Emilou Noser; Jessica Schoch; Ulrike Ehlert
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-11-09       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  What is a disease? Perspectives of the public, health professionals and legislators.

Authors:  Kari A O Tikkinen; Janne S Leinonen; Gordon H Guyatt; Shanil Ebrahim; Teppo L N Järvinen
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2012-12-02       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.