Attribute framing affects the perceived fairness of health care allocation principles

Judgment and Decision Making

Volumn 5, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 11-20

  Gamliel, Eyal ^a   Peer, Eyal ^b  

^a RUPPIN ACADEMIC CENTER   (Israel)

^b HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM   (Israel)

Author keywords

Attribute framing; Health care resource allocation; Perceived fairness

Indexed keywords

EID: 77449083192     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19302975     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Alwin, D. F. (1992). Equity theory. In G. H. Elder, E. Borgatta & M. Borgatta (Eds.), Encyclopedia of sociology (pp. 563-575). New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.
2. Apanovitch, A. M., McCarthy, D., & Salovey, P. (2003). Using message framing to motivate HIV testing among low-income, ethnic minority women. Health Psychology, 22, 60-67.
3. Banks, S. M., Salovey, P., Greener, S., Rothman, A. J., Moyer, A., Beauvais, J., et al. (1995). The effects of message framing on mammography utilization. Health Psychology, 14, 178-184.
4. Brickman, P., Folger, R., Goode, E., & Schul, Y. (1981). Microjustice and macrojustice. In M. J. Lerner, & S. C. Lerner (Eds.), The justice motive in social behavior (pp. 173-202). New York: Plenum.
5. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
6. Cuadras-Morató, X., Pinto-Prades, J. L., & Abellán-Perpiñán, J. M. (2001). Equity considerations in health care: The relevance of claims. Health Economics, 10, 187-205.
7. Detweiler, J. B., Bedell, B. T., Salovey, P., Pronin, E., & Rothman, A. J. (1999). Message framing and sun-screen use: Gain-framed messages motivate beachgoers. Health Psychology, 18, 189-196.
8. Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice. Journal of Social Issues, 31, 137-150.
9. Deutsch, M. (1985). Distributive justice: A social-psychological perspective. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
10. Elster, J. (1989). Social norms and economic theory. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 3, 99-117.
11. Ganzach, Y. (1995). Attribute scatter and decision out-come: Judgment versus choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62, 113-122.
12. Ganzach, Y., & Schul, Y. (1995). The influence of quantity of information and goal framing on decision. Acta Psychologica, 89, 23-36.
13. Goodwin, B. (1992). Justice by lottery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
14. Green, M. J., Fong, S., Mauger, D. T., & Ubel, P. A. (2001). Rationing HIV medications: What do patients and the public think about allocation policies? Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 26, 56-62.
15. Jasper, J. D., Goel, R., Einarson, A., Gallo, M., & Koren, G. (2001). Effects of framing on teratogenic risk perception in pregnant women. The Lancet, 358, 1237-1238.
16. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291.
17. Kayser, E., & Lamm, H. (1980). Input integration and input weighting in decisions on allocations of gains and losses. European Journal of Social Psychology, 10, 1-15.
18. Levin, I. P., & Chapman, D. P. (1993). Risky decision making and allocation of resources for leukemia and AIDS programs. Health Psychology, 12, 110-117.
19. 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.
20. 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 and Human Decision Processes, 76, 149-188.
21. Lewin-Epstein, N., Kaplan, A., & Levanon, A. (2003). Distributive justice and attitudes toward the welfare state. Social Justice Research, 16, 1-27.
22. 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.
23. Miller, D. (1976). Social justice. Oxford: Clarendon.
24. Miller, D. (1999). Principles of social justice. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
25. Moore, R. F. (1996). Caring for identified versus statistical lives: An evolutionary view of medical distributive justice. Ethology and Sociobiology, 17, 379-401.
26. Neuberger, J., Adams, D., MacMaster, P., Maidment, A., & Speed, M. (1998). Assessing priorities for allocation of donor liver grafts: Survey of public and clinicians. British Medical Journal, 317, 172-175.
27. Neuberger, J., & Ubel, P. A. (2000). Finding a place for public preferences in liver allocation decisions. Transplantation, 70, 1411-1413.
28. Peters, T. G., Kittur, D., McGaw, L., First, M., & Nelson, E. (1996). Organ donors and non-donors. Archives of Internal Medicine, 156, 2419-2424.
29. Ratcliffe, J. (2000). Public preferences for the allocation of donor liver grafts for transplantation. Health Economics, 9, 137-148.
30. Rothman, A. J., & Salovey, P. (1997). Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message framing. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 3-19.
31. Rothman, A. J., Salovey, P., Antone, C., Keough, K., & Martin, C. D. (1993). The influence of message framing on intentions to perform health behaviors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 408-433.
32. Sabbagh, C. (2001). A taxonomy of normative and empirically oriented theories of distributive justice. Social Justice Research, 14, 237-263.
33. Sabbagh, C., & Schmitt, M. (1998). Exploring the structure of positive and negative justice judgments. Social Justice Research, 11, 381-396.
34. Schlottmann, A., & Tring, J. (2005). How children reason about gains and losses: Framing effects in judgement and choice. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 64, 153-171.
35. Schweitzer, M. (1995). Multiple reference points, framing, and the status quo bias in health care financing decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 63, 69-72.
36. Shafir, E. (1993). Choosing versus rejecting: Why some options are both better and worse than others. Memory and Cognition, 21, 546-556.
37. Skitka, L. J., & Tetlock, P. E. (1992). Allocating scarce resources: A contingency model of distributive justice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 491-522.
38. Skitka, L. J., & Tetlock, P. E. (1993). Providing public assistance: Cognitive and motivational processes underlying liberal and conservative policy preferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1205-1205.
39. Törnblom, K. Y. (1988). Positive and negative allocations: A typology and a model for conflicting justice principles. Advances in Group Processes, 5, 141-168.
40. Törnblom, K. Y. (1992). The social psychology of distributive justice. In K. R. Scherer (Ed.), Justice: Inter-disciplinary perspectives (pp. 177-236). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
41. Törnblom, K., & Ahlin, E. (1998). Mode of accomplishing positive and negative outcomes: Its effect on fairness evaluations. Social Justice Research, 11, 423-442.
42. Tornblom, K. Y., & Jonsson, D. R. (1985). Subrules of the equality and contribution principles: Their perceived fairness in distribution and retribution. Social Psychology Quarterly, 48, 249-261.
43. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.
44. Tversky, A., Sattath, S., & Slovic, P. (1988). Contingent weighting in judgment and choice. Psychological Review, 95, 371-384.
45. Ubel, P. A., Baron, J., & Asch, D. A. (2001). Preference for equity as a framing effect. Medical Decision Making, 21, 180-189.
46. Ubel, P. A., Baron, J., Nash, B., & Asch, D. A. (2000). Are preferences for equity over efficiency in health care allocation all or nothing? Medical Care, 38, 366-373.
47. Ubel, P. A., & Loewenstein, G. (1996). Distributing scarce livers: The moral reasoning of the general public. Social Science & Medicine, 42, 1049-1055.
48. Westenberg, M. R., & Koele, P. (1992). Response modes, decision processes and decision outcomes. Acta Psychologica, 80, 169-184.