Dissecting the risky-choice framing effect: Numeracy as an individual-difference factor in weighting risky and riskless options

Judgment and Decision Making

Volumn 3, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 435-448

  Peters, Ellen ^a   Levin, Irwin P ^b  

^a DECISION RESEARCH   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

Author keywords

Attribute framing; Framing; Individual differences; Numeracy; Risky choices

Indexed keywords

EID: 69049086361     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19302975     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (in press). Mixed-effect modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language.
2. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306-307.
3. Dehaene, S. (1997). The number sense: How the mind creates mathematics. New York: Oxford University Press.
4. Ellsberg, D. (1961). Risk, ambiguity and the savage axioms. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75, 643-669.
5. Fagerlin, A., Ubel, P. A., Smith, D. M., & Zikmund- Fisher, B. A. (2007). Making numbers matter: Present and future research in risk communication. American Journal of Health Behavior, 31, S47-S56.
6. Fagley, N. S. & Miller, P. M. (1997). Framing effects and arenas of choice: Your money or your life? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 71, 355-373.
7. Fischhoff, B. (in press). Risk perception and communication. In Oxford Textbook of Public Health, Fifth Edition. R. Detels, R. Beaglehole, M. A. Lansang, & M. Gulliford (Eds.). Oxford University Press.
8. Garcia, S. (2006). Effects of numeracy in risky-choice and attribute-framing problems. Submitted to the Psychology Department, University of Oregon in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Masters of Science.
9. Highhouse, S. & Paese, P. W. (1996). Problem domain and prospect frame: Choice under opportunity versus threat. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 124-132.
10. Huber, J., Payne, J.W., & Puto, C. (1982). Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis. Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 90-98.
11. Irwin, J. R. & McClelland, G. H. (2001). Misleading heuristics and moderated multiple regression models. Journal of Marketing Research 37(8): 100-109.
12. Kühberger, A. (1998). The influence of framing on risky decisions: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 75, 23-55.
13. Lauriola, M., Levin, I. P., & Hart, S. S. (2007). Common and distinct factors in decision making under ambiguity and risk: A psychometric study of individual differences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 104, 130-149.
14. Levin, I. P., Gaeth, G. J., Schreiber, J., & Lauriola, M. (2002). A new look at framing effects: Distribution of effect sizes, individual differences, and independence of types of effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88, 411-429.
15. 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(2), 149-188.
16. Lipkus, I. M., Samsa, G., & Rimer, B. K. (2001). General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples. Medical Decision Making, 21, 37-44.
17. Peters, E. (2006). Affect, numeracy, and decision making. Invited talk at the Work Group Meeting on Decision Making and Aging, Bethesda, Maryland, August 16-17, 2006, National Institute on Aging, Behavioral and Social Research Program.
18. Peters, E., Dieckmann, N., Västfjäll, D., Mertz, C. K., Slovic, P., & Hibbard, J. (under review). Bringing meaning to numbers: The functions of affect in choice.
19. Peters, E., Hibbard, J. H., Slovic, P., & Dieckmann, N. (2007). Numeracy skill and the communication, comprehension, and use of risk-benefit information. Health Affairs, 26(3), 741-748.
20. Peters, E., Västfjäll, D., Slovic, P., Mertz, C. K., Mazzocco, K., & Dickert, S. (2006). Numeracy and decision making. Psychological Science, 17, 407-413.
21. Schwartz, L. M., Woloshin, S., & Welch, H. G. (1997). The role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography. Annals of Internal Medicine, 127, 966-972.
22. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.
23. Wang, X. T. (1996). Framing effects: Dynamics and task domains. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 68, 145-157.