Framing effects and arenas of choice: Your money or your life?

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

Volumn 71, Issue 3, 1997, Pages 355-373

  Fagley, N S ^a   Miller, Paul M ^b  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b New Century Education   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031236231     PISSN: 07495978     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/obhd.1997.2725     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Bohm P., Lind H. A note on the robustness of a classical framing result. Journal of Economic Psychology. 13:1992;355-361.
2. Budescu D. V., Weiss W. Reflection of transitive and intransitive preferences: A test of prospect theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 39:1987;184-202.
3. G. B. Chapman, 1994, Nov. Temporal discounting and utility of health and money.
4. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 1988;Erlbaum, Hillsdale.
5. Cohen J., Cohen P. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. 1983;Erlbaum, Hillsdale.
6. Cohen M., Jaffray J., Said T. Experimental comparison of individual behavior under risk and under uncertainty for gains and for losses. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 39:1987;1-22.
7. Cook T., Campbell D. Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. 1979;Rand McNally, Chicago.
8. Davis M. A., Bobko P. Contextual effects of escalation processes in public sector decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process. 37:1986;121-138.
9. Dunegan K. J. Framing, cognitive modes, and image theory: Toward an understanding of a glass half full. Journal of Applied Psychology. 78:1993;491-503.
10. Eraker S. A., Sox H. C. Assessment of patients' preferences for therapeutic outcomes. Medical Decision Making. 1:1981;29-39.
11. Fagley N. S. A note concerning reflection effects versus framing effects. Psychological Bulletin. 113:1993;451-452.
12. Fagley N. S., Miller P. M. The effects of decision framing on choice of risky vs certain options. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 39:1987;264-277.
13. Fagley N. S., Miller P. M. The effect of framing on choice: Interactions with risk-taking propensity, cognitive style, and sex. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 16:1990;496-510.
14. Fischhoff B. Predicting frames. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 9:1983;103-116.
15. Frisch D. Reasons for framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 54:1993;399-429.
16. Gilligan C. In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development. 1982;Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
17. Gilligan C., Attanucci J. Two moral orientations. Mapping the moral domain. 1988;Center for the study of Gender, Education, and Human Development, Harvard University, Cambridge.
18. Haase R. F., Waechter D. M., Solomon G. S. How significant is a significant difference? Average effect size of research in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 29:1982;58-65.
19. Hershey J. C., Schoemaker P. J. H. Prospect theory's reflection hypothesis: A critical examination. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 25:1980;395-418.
20. Highhouse S., Paese P. W. Problem domain and prospect frame: Choice under opportunity versus threat. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 22:1996;124-132.
21. Hogarth R. Judgment and choice. 1987;Wiley, New York.
22. Kahneman D., Tversky A. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica. 47:1979;263-291.
23. R. P. Larrick, E. E. Smith, J. F. Yates, 1992, Nov. Reflecting on the reflection effect: Disrupting the effects of framing through thought.
24. Levin I. P., Chapman D. P. Risk taking, frame of reference, and characterization of victim groups in AIDS treatment decisions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 26:1990;421-434.
25. Levin I. P., Schnittjer S. K., Thee S. L. Information framing effects in social and personal decisions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 24:1988;520-529.
26. Lopes L. L. On modeling risky choice: Why reasons matter. Caverni J. P., Bar-Hillel M., Barron F. H., Jungermann H. Contributions to decision making: I. 1995;Elsevier Science B. V. New York.
27. Maher B. A. Stimulus sampling in clinical research: Representativeness design reviewed. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 46:1978;643-647.
28. McKean K. Decisions, decisions. Discover. 6:1985;22-31.
29. Meyerowitz B. E., Chaiken S. The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 52:1987;500-510.
30. P. M. Miller, 1987, August, Effects of framing, problem, and providing rationale on choice.
31. Miller P. M., Fagley N. S. The effects of framing, problem variations, and providing rationale on choice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 17:1991;517-522.
32. Neale M. A., Bazerman M. H. The effects of framing and negotiator overconfidence on bargaining behaviors and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal. 28:1985;34-49.
33. Payne J. W., Bettman J. R., Johnson E. J. The adaptive decision maker. 1993;Cambridge University Press, New York.
34. Petrinovich L., O'Neill P., Jorgensen M. An empirical study of moral intuitions: Toward an evolutionary ethics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 64:1993;467-478.
35. Phelps C. E. Health economics. 1992;HarperCollins, New York.
36. Roszkowski M. J., Snelbecker G. E. Effects of "framing" on measures of risk tolerance: Financial planners are not immune. Journal of Behavioral Economics. 19:1990;237-246.
37. Schneider S. L. Framing and conflict: Aspiration level contingency, the status quo, and current theories of risky choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 18:1992;1040-1057.
38. Schneider S. L., Lopes L. L. Reflection in preferences under risk: Who and when may suggest why. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 12:1986;535-548.
39. Schoemaker P. J. H. Are risk-attitudes related across domains and response modes? Management Science. 36:1990;1451-1463.
40. Sedlmeier P., Gigerenzer G. Do studies of statistical power have an effect on the power of studies? Psychological Bulletin. 105:1989;309-316.
41. Siminoff L. A., Fetting J. H. Effects of outcome framing on treatment decisions in the real world: Impact of framing on adjuvant breast cancer decisions. Medical Decision making. 9:1989;262-271.
42. Tetlock P. E. The impact of accountability on judgment and choice: Toward a social contingency model. Advances in experimental social psychology. 25:1992;331-376.
43. Torrance G. W. Utility approach to measuring health-related quality of life. Journal of Chronic Disease. 40:1987;593-600.
44. Treiber F. A. A comparison of the positive and negative consequences approaches upon car restraint usage. Journal of Pediatric Psychology. 11:1986;15-24.
45. Tversky A., Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science. 211:1981;453-458.
46. Verhoef L. C. G., DeHaan A. F. J., Van Daal W. A. J. Risk attitude in gambles with years of life: Empirical support for prospect theory. Medical Decision Making. 14:1994;194-200.
47. Wagenaar W. A., Keren G., Lichtenstein S. Islanders and hostages: Deep and surface structures of decision problems. Acta Psychologica. 67:1988;175-189.
48. Wiseman D. B., Levin I. P. Comparing risky decision making under conditions of real and hypothetical consequences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 66:1996;241-250.