Framing effects in inference tasks - And why they are normatively defensible

Memory and Cognition

Volumn 32, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 874-885

  McKenzie, Craig R M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR; COVARIANCE; FRAMING EFFECT; HUMAN; HYPOTHESIS; INFORMATION PROCESSING; TASK PERFORMANCE;

EID: 11144290736     PISSN: 0090502X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03196866     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. ALLAN, L. G. (1980). A note on measurement of contingency between two binary variables in judgment tasks. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 15, 147-149.
2. ALLAN, L. G. (1993). Human contingency judgments: Rule based or associative? Psychological Bulletin, 114, 325-448.
3. ANDERSON, J. R. (1990). The adaptive character of thought. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. ANDERSON, J. R., & SHEU, C.-F. (1995). Causal inferences as perceptual judgments. Memory & Cognition, 23, 510-524.
5. ARKES, H. R., & HARKNESS, A. R. (1983). Estimates of contingency between two dichotomous variables. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 112, 117-135.
6. CHENG, P. W. (1997). From covariation to causation: A causal power theory. Psychological Review, 104, 367-405.
7. CHENG, P. W., & NOVICK, L. R. (1990). A probabilistic contrast model of causal induction. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 58, 545-567.
8. CHENO, P. W., & NOVICK, L. R. (1992). Covariation in natural causal induction. Psychological Review, 99, 365-382.
9. CROCKER, J. (1981). Judgment of covariation by social perceivers. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 272-292.
10. CROCKER, J. (1982). Biased questions in judgment of covariation studies. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 8, 214-220.
11. EINHORN, H. J., & HOGARTH, R. M. (1986). Judging probable cause. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 3-19.
12. EVANS, J. ST. B. T. (1989). Bias in human reasoning: Causes and consequences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. FISCHHOFF, B., & BEYTH-MAROM, R. (1983). Hypothesis testing from a Bayesian perspective. Psychological Review, 8, 239-260.
14. GIGERENZER, G. (1991). How to make cognitive illusions disappear: Beyond "heuristics and biases." European Review of Social Psychology, 2, 83-115.
15. GIGERENZER, G., HOFFRAGE, U., & KLEINBOLTING, H. (1991). Probabilistic mental models: A Brunswikian theory of confidence. Psychological Review, 98, 506-528.
16. HILGARD, E. R., & BOWER, G. H. (1975). Theories of learning (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
17. HILTON, D. J. (1995). The social context of reasoning: Conversational inference and rational judgment. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 248-271.
18. HOLLAND, J. H., HOLYOAK, K. J., NISBETT, R. E., & THAGARD, P. R. (1986). Induction: Processes of inference, learning, and discovery, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
19. HORWICH, P. (1982). Probability and evidence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20. INHELDER, B., & PIAGET, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking: From childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Books.
21. JENKINS, H. M., & WARD, W. C. (1965). Judgment of contingency between responses and outcomes. Psychological Monographs: General & Applied, 79(1, Whole No. 594).
22. JOHNSON-LAIRD, P. N. (1968a). The choice of the passive voice in a communicative task. British Journal of Psychology, 59, 7-15.
23. JOHNSON-LAIRD, P. N. (1968b). The interpretation of the passive voice; Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 69-73.
24. KAHNEMAN, D., & TVERSKY, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291.
25. KAHNEMAN, D., & TVERSKY, A. (1984). Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341-350.
26. KAO, S.-E, & WASSERMAN, E. A. (1993). Assessment of an information integration account of contingency judgment with examination of subjective cell importance and method of information presentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 19, 1363-1386.
27. KLAYMAN, J. (1995). Varieties of confirmation bias. In D. L. Medin (Series Ed.) & J. Busemeyer & R. Hastie (Vol. Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 32, pp. 385-418). San Diego: Academic Press.
28. KLAYMAN, J., & HA, Y.-W. (1987). Confirmation, disconfirmation, and information in hypothesis testing. Psychological Review, 94, 211-228.
29. KOTOVSKY, K., HAYES, J. R., & SIMON, H. A. (1985). Why are some problems hard? Evidence from Tower of Hanoi. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 248-294.
30. KÜHBERGER, A. (1998). The influence of framing on risky decisions: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 75, 23-55.
31. LEVIN, I. P., & GAETH, G. J. (1988). How consumers are affected by the framing of attribute information before and after consuming the product. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 374-378.
32. LEVIN, I. P., SCHNEIDER, S. L., & GAETH, G. J. (1998). All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 76, 149-188.
33. LEVIN, I. P., SCHNITTJER, S. K., & THEE, S. L. (1988). Information framing effects in social and personal decisions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 520-529.
34. LEVIN, I. P., WASSERMAN, E. A., & KAO, S.-F. (1993). Multiple methods for examining biased information use in contingency judgments. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 55, 228-250.
35. LIPE, M. G. (1990). A lens-model analysis of covariation research. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 3, 47-59.
36. MACKIE, J. L. (1963). The paradox of confirmation. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 13, 265-277.
37. MACKIE, J. L. (1974). The cement of the universe: A study of causation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Clarendon Press.
38. MANDEL, D. R., & LEHMAN, D. R. (1998). Integration of contingency information in judgments of cause, covariation, and probability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 269-285.
39. MARTEAU, T. M. (1989). Framing of information: Its influence upon decisions of doctors and patients. British Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 89-94.
40. MCKENZIE, C. R. M. (1994). The accuracy of intuitive judgment strategies: Covariation assessment and Bayesian inference. Cognitive Psychology, 26, 209-239.
41. MCKENZIE, C. R. M. (1998). Taking into account the strength of an alternative hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 24, 771-792.
42. MCKENZIE, C. R. M. (1999). (Non)complementary updating of belief in two hypotheses. Memory & Cognition, 27, 152-165.
43. MCKENZIE, C. R. M. (2004). Hypothesis testing and evaluation. In D. J. Koehler & N. Harvey (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making (pp. 200-219). Oxford: Blackwell.
44. MCKENZIE, C. R. M., & AMIN, M. B. (2002). When wrong predictions provide more support than right ones. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 821-828.
45. MCKENZIE, C. R. M., FERREIRA, V. S., MIKKELSEN, L. A., MCDERMOTT, K. J., & SKRABLE, R. P. (2001). Do conditional hypotheses target rare events? Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 85, 291-309.
46. MCKENZIE, C. R. M., & MIKKELSEN, L. A. (2000). The psychological side of Hempel's paradox of confirmation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 360-366.
47. MCKENZIE, C. R. M., & MIKKELSEN, L. A. (in press). A Bayesian view of covariation assessment. Cognitive Psychology.
48. MCKENZIE, C. R. M., & NELSON, J. D. (2003). What a speaker's choice of frame reveals: Reference points, frame selection, and framing effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 596-602.
49. MCKENZIE, C. R. M., WIXTED, J. T., NOELLE, D. C., & GYURJYAN, G. (2001). Relation between confidence in yes-no and forced-choice tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 140-155.
50. MEYEROWITZ, B. E., & CHAIKEN, S. (1987). The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 52, 500-510.
51. MOXEV, L. M., & SANFORD, A. J. (2000). Communicating quantities: A review of psycholinguistic evidence of how expressions determine perspectives. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14, 237-255.
52. MYNATT, C. R., DOHERTY, M. E., & TWENEV, R. D. (1977). Confirmation bias in a simulated research environment: An experimental study of scientific inference. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 29, 85-95.
53. NICKERSON, R. S. (1996). Hempel's paradox and Wason's selection task: Logical and psychological puzzles of confirmation. Thinking & Reasoning, 2, 1-31.
54. NICKERSON, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2, 175-220.
55. OAKSFORD, M., & CHATER, N. (1994). A rational analysis of the selection task as optimal data selection. Psychological Review, 101, 608-631.
56. OAKSFORD, M., & CHATER, N. (1996). Rational explanation of the selection task. Psychological Review, 103, 381-391.
57. OAKSFORD, M., & CHATER, N. (2003). Optimal data selection: Revision, review, and re-evaluation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 289-318.
58. OAKSFORD, M., CHATER, N., & GRAINGER, B. (1999). Probabilistic effects in data selection. Thinking & Reasoning, 5, 193-243.
59. OAKSFORD, M., CHATER, N., GRAINGER, B., & LARKIN, J. (1997). Optimal data selection in the reduced array selection task (RAST). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 23, 441-458.
60. SANFORD, A. J., FAY, N., STEWART, A., & MOXEY, L. (2002). Perspective in statements of quantity, with implications for consumer psychology. Psychological Science, 13, 130-134.
61. SCHUSTACK, M. W., & STERNBERG, R. J. (1981). Evaluation of evidence in causal inference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 110, 101-120.
62. SCHWARZ, N. (1996). Cognition and communication: Judgmental biases, research methods, and the logic of conversation. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
63. SHAKLEE, H., & TUCKER, D. (1980). A rule analysis of judgments of covariation between events. Memory & Cognition, 8, 459-467.
64. SHER, S., & MCKENZIE, C. R. M. (2004). Information leakage from logically equivalent frames. Manuscript submitted for publication.
65. SMEDSLUND, J. (1963). The concept of correlation in adults. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 4, 165-173.
66. SMITH, E. E., & MEDIN, D. L. (1981). Categories and concepts. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
67. SNYDER, M. (1981). Seek and ye shall find: Testing hypotheses about other people. In E. T. Higgins, C. P. Heiman, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), Social cognition: The Ontario symposium on personality and social psychology (pp. 277-303). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
68. SNYDER, M., & SWANN, W. B., JR. (1978). Hypothesis testing in social interaction. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 36, 1202-1212.
69. TVERSKY, A., & KAHNEMAN, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.
70. TVERSKY, A., & KAHNEMAN, D. (1986). Rational choice and the framing of decisions. Journal of Business, 59, S251-S278.
71. WARD, W. C., & JENKINS, H. M. (1965). The display of information and the judgment of contingency. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 19, 231-241.
72. WASON, P. C. (1960). On the failure to eliminate hypotheses in a conceptual task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, 129-140.
73. WASSERMAN, E. A., DORNER, W. W., & KAO, S.-R (1990). Contributions of specific cell information to judgments of interevent contingency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 16, 509-521.
74. WILSON, D. K., KAPLAN, R. M., & SCHNEIDERMAN, L. J. (1987). Framing of decisions and selections of alternatives in health care. Social Behaviour, 2, 51-59.