Literature DB >> 8954876

Framing Effects: Dynamics and Task Domains

.   

Abstract

The author examines the mechanisms and dynamics of framing effects in risky choices across three distinct task domains (i.e., life-death, public property, and personal money). The choice outcomes of the problems presented in each of the three task domains had a binary structure of a sure thing vs a gamble of equal expected value; the outcomes differed in their framing conditions and the expected values, raging from 6000, 600, 60, to 6, numerically. It was hypothesized that subjects would become more risk seeking, if the sure outcome was below their aspiration level (the minimum requirement). As predicted, more subjects preferred the gamble when facing the life-death choice problems than facing the counterpart problems presented in the other two task domains. Subjects' risk preference varied categorically along the group size dimension in the life-death domain but changed more linearly over the expected value dimension in the monetary domain. Framing effects were observed in 7 of 13 pairs of problems, showing a positive frame-risk aversion and negative frame-risk seeking relationship. In addition, two types of framing effects were theoretically defined and empirically identified. A bidirectional framing effect involves a reversal in risk preference, and occurs when a decision maker's risk preference is ambiguous or weak. Four bidirectional effects were observed; in each case a majority of subjects preferred the sure outcome under a positive frame but the gamble under a negative frame. In contrast, a unidirectional framing effect refers to a preference shift due to the framing of choice outcomes: A majority of subjects preferred one choice outcome (either the sure thing or the gamble) under both framing conditions, with positive frame augmented the preference for the sure thing and negative frame augmented the preference for the gamble. These findings revealed some dynamic regularities of framing effects and posed implications for developing predictive and testable models of human decision making.

Entities:  

Year:  1996        PMID: 8954876     DOI: 10.1006/obhd.1996.0095

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Organ Behav Hum Decis Process        ISSN: 0749-5978


  16 in total

1.  Time trade-off and attitudes toward euthanasia: implications of using 'death' as an anchor in health state valuation.

Authors:  Liv A Augestad; Kim Rand-Hendriksen; Knut Stavem; Ivar Sønbø Kristiansen
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2012-06-08       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  A formal model of fuzzy-trace theory: Variations on framing effects and the Allais paradox.

Authors:  David A Broniatowski; Valerie F Reyna
Journal:  Decision (Wash D C )       Date:  2017-05-29

3.  Is human life worth peanuts? Risk attitude changes in accordance with varying stakes.

Authors:  Kazumi Shimizu; Daisuke Udagawa
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-08-09       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Group size and the framing effect: threats to human beings and animals.

Authors:  Amber N Bloomfield
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2006-06

5.  The Influence of Trait Emotion and Spatial Distance on Risky Choice Under the Framework of Gain and Loss.

Authors:  Fuming Xu; Long Huang
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-06-03

6.  Protected values: no omission bias and no framing effects.

Authors:  Carmen Tanner; Douglas L Medin
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-02

7.  Does ambiguity aversion influence the framing effect during decision making?

Authors:  Anaïs Osmont; Mathieu Cassotti; Marine Agogué; Olivier Houdé; Sylvain Moutier
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2015-04

8.  Relative status regulates risky decision-making about resources in men: Evidence for the co-evolution of motivation and cognition.

Authors:  Elsa Ermer; Leda Cosmides; John Tooby
Journal:  Evol Hum Behav       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 4.178

9.  How can group experience influence the cue priority? A re-examination of the ambiguity-ambivalence hypothesis.

Authors:  Kazumi Shimizu; Daisuke Udagawa
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2011-10-12

10.  The risks we dread: a social circle account.

Authors:  Mirta Galesic; Rocio Garcia-Retamero
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-04-11       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.