Positive versus negative framing affects justice judgments

Social Justice Research

Volumn 19, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 307-322

  Gamliel, Eyal ^a   Peer, Eyal ^b  

^a RUPPIN ACADEMIC CENTER   (Israel)

^b HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM   (Israel)

Author keywords

Framing; Justice judgments; Positive versus negative modes of allocation; Resource allocation

Indexed keywords

EID: 33748674009     PISSN: 08857466     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11211-006-0009-5     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Alwin, D. F. (1992). Equity theory. In Borgatta, E. F. and Borgatta, M. L. (eds.), Encyclopedia of Sociology, Macmillan Publishing Co, New York, pp. 563-575.
2. Brickman, P., Folger, R., Goode, E., and Schul, Y. (1981). Microjustice and macrojustice. In Lerner, M. J., and Lerner, S. C. (eds.), The Justice Motive in Social Behavior, New York: Plenum Press, pp. 173-202.
3. Chang, C. J., Yen, S. H., and Duh, R. R.. (2002). An empirical investigation of competing theories to explain the framing effect in accounting-related decision. Behav. Res. Accoun. 14: 35-64.
4. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.), Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Davis, M. A., and Bobko, P. (1986). Contextual effects on escalation processes in public sector decision making. Organ. Beh. Hum. Dec. Proc. 7: 121-138.
6. Detweiler, J. B., Bedell, B. T., Salovey, P., Pronin, E., and Rothman, A. J.. (1999). Message framing and sunscreen use: Gain-framed messages motivate beach goers. Health Psych. 18: 189-196.
7. Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice? J. Soc. Issues 31: 137-150.
8. Deutsch, M. (1985). Distributive Justice: A Social-Psychological Perspective, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
9. van Dijk, E., Engelen, M., van Leeuwen, E., Monden, L., and Sluijter, E. (1999). Distributive justice and the allocation of costs, losses and profits. Soc. Jus. Res. 12(1): 5-18.
10. Elster, J. (1989). Social norms and economic theory. J. Eorn. Persp. 3(4): 99-117.
11. Elster, J. (1995).The empirical study of justice. In Miller, D., and Walzer, M. (ed.), Pluralism, Justice and Equality, Oxford University Press, pp. 81-89.
12. Goodwin, B. (1992). Justice by Lottery, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
13. Jasper, J. D., Goel, R., Einarson, A., Gallo, M., and Koren, G (2001). Effects of framing on teratogenic risk perception in pregnant women. The Lancet 358: 1237-1238.
14. Kahneman, D., and Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47: 111-132.
15. Kayser, E., and Lamm, H. (1980). Input integration and input weighting in decisions on allocations of gains and losses. Euro. J. Soc. Psych. 10: 1-15.
16. Lamm, H., Kayser, E., and Schanjz, V. (1983). An attributional analysis of interpersonal justice: Ability and effort as inputs in the allocation of gains and loss. J. Soc. Psych. 119: 269-281.
17. Levin, I. P., and Gaeth, G. J. (1988). How consumers are affected by the framing of attribute information before and after consuming the product. J. Consumer Res. 15: 374-378.
18. Levin, I. P., Gaeth, G. J., Schreiber, J., and Lauriola, M.. (2002). A new look at framing effects: Distribution of effect sizes, individual differences, and independence of types of effects. Organ. Beh. Hum. Dec. Proc. 88: 411-429.
19. Levin, I. P., Schneider, S. L., and Gaeth, G. J. (1998). All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organ. Beh. Hum. Dec. Proc. 76: 149-188.
20. Lewin-Epstein, N., Kaplan, A., and Levanon, A. (2003). Distributive justice and attitudes towards the welfare state. Soc. Jus. Res. 16: 1-27.
21. Meyerowitz, B. E., and Chaiken, S. (1987). The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions and behavior. J. Pers. Soc. Psych. 52: 500-510.
22. Miller, D. (1976). Social Justice, Oxford: Clarendon.
23. Miller, D. (1999). Principles of Social Justice, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
24. Sabbagh, C. (2002). A taxonomy of normative and empirically oriented theories of distributive justice. Soc. Jus. Res. 14(3): 237-265.
25. Sabbagh, C., and Schmidt, M. (1998). Exploring the structure of positive and negative justice judgments. Soc. Jus. Res. 11(4): 381-396.
26. Törnblom, K. Y. (1988). Positive and negative allocations: A typology and a model for conflicting justice principles. Adv. Group Process 5: 141-168.
27. Törnblom, K. Y. (1992). The social psychology of distributive justice. In Scherer, K. R. (ed.), Justice: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Cambridge University Press, pp. 177-236.
28. Törnblom, K. Y., and Ahlin, E. (1998). Mode of accomplishing positive and negative outcomes: Its effect on fairness evaluations. Soc. Jus. Res. 11(4): 423-442.
29. Törnblom, K.Y., and Jonsson, D. R. (1985). Subrules of the equality and contribution principles: Their perceived fairness in distribution and retribution. Soc. Psych. Quart. 48: 249-261.
30. Tversky, A., and Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211: 453-458.
31. Zhang, Y., and Buda, R. (1999). Moderating effects of need for cognition on responses to positively versus negatively framed advertising messages. J. Advert. 28: 1-15.