Levels of information: A framing hierarchy

Perspectives on Framing

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 35-63

  Sher, Shlomi ^a   Mckenzie, Craig R M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84896368057     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (78)

1. Acker, F. (2008). New findings on unconscious versus conscious thought in decision making: additional empirical data and meta-analysis. Judgment and Decision Making, 3, 292-303.
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: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
4. Azjen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
5. Chang, R. (1997). Incommensurability, incomparability, and practical reason. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
6. Chen, M. K., Lakshminarayanan, V., & Santos, L. R. (2006). How basic are behavioral biases? Evidence from capuchin monkey trading behavior. Journal of Political Economy, 114, 517-537.
7. Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 10, 103-126.
8. Converse, P. E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent (pp. 206-261). New York: Free Press.
9. Delli Carpini, M. X., & Keeter, S. (1996). What Americans know about politics and why it matters. New Haven: Yale University Press.
10. Dijksterhuis, A. (2004). Think different: The merits of unconscious thought in preference development and decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 586-598.
11. Dijksterhuis, A., Bos, M. W., Nordgren, L. F., & van Baaren, R. B. (2006). On making the right choice: The deliberation-without-attention effect. Science, 311, 1005-1007.
12. Dijksterhuis, A., & Nordgren, L. F. (2006). A theory of unconscious thought. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 95-109.
13. Druckman, J. N. (2001). The implications of framing effects for citizen competence. Political Behavior, 23, 225-256.
14. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43, 51-58.
15. Evans, J. St. B. T. (2003). In two minds: Dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 454-459.
16. Evans, J. St. B. T. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255-278.
17. Frisch, D. (1993). Reasons for framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54, 399-429.
18. Gilovich, T. (1991). How we know what isn't so: The fallibility of human reason in everyday life. New York: Free Press.
19. Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., & Kahneman, D. (2002). Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20. Johnson, E. J., & Goldstein, D. (2003). Do defaults save lives? Science, 302, 1338-1339.
21. Johnson-Laird, P. N., & Shafir, E. (1993). The interaction between reasoning and decision making: An introduction. Cognition, 49, 1-9.
22. Jou, J., Shanteau, J., & Harris, R. J. (1996). An information processing view of framing effects: The role of causal schemas in decision making. Memory and Cognition, 24, 1-15.
23. Kahneman, D. (2000a). A psychological point of view: Violations of rational rules as a diagnostic of mental processes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 681-683.
24. Kahneman, D. (2000b). Preface. In D. Kahneman & A. Tversky (Eds.), Choices, values, and frames (pp. ix-xvii). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. In Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., & Kahneman, D. (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 49-81). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
26. Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291.
28. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (2000). Choices, values, and frames. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
29. Kao, S.-F., & 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 and Cognition, 19, 1363-1386.
30. Keren, G., & Schul, Y. (2009). Two is not always better than one: A critical evaluation of two-systems theories. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 533-550.
31. Kühberger, A. (1998). The influence of framing on risky decisions: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 75, 23-55.
32. Levin, I. P. (1987). Associative effects of information framing. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 25, 85-86.
33. 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.
34. 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.
35. 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.
36. Levin, I. P., Wasserman, E. A., & Kao, S.-F. (1993). Multiple methods for examining biased information use in contingency judgments. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 55, 228-250.
37. Lipe, M. G. (1990). A lens-model analysis of covariation research. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 3, 47-59.
38. Marteau, T. M. (1989). Framing of information: Its influence upon decisions of doctors and patients. British Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 89-94.
39. McKenzie, C. R. M. (1994). The accuracy of intuitive judgment strategies: Covariation assessment and Bayesian inference. Cognitive Psychology, 26, 209-239.
40. McKenzie, C. R. M. (2003). Rational models as theories - not standards - of behavior. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 403-406.
41. McKenzie, C. R. M. (2004). Framing effects in inference tasks - and why they are normatively defensible. Memory and Cognition, 32, 874-885.
42. McKenzie, C. R. M. (2005). Judgment and decision making. In K. Lamberts & R. L. Goldstone (Eds.), Handbook of cognition (pp. 321-338). London: Sage Publications.
43. McKenzie, C. R. M., & Amin, M. B. (2002). When wrong predictions provide more support than right ones. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9, 821-828.
44. 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 and Human Decision Processes, 85, 291-309.
45. McKenzie, C. R. M., Liersch, M. J., & Finkelstein, S. R. (2006). Recommendations implicit in policy defaults. Psychological Science, 17, 414-420.
46. McKenzie, C. R. M., & Mikkelsen, L. A. (2000). The psychological side of Hempel's paradox of confirmation. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 7, 360-366.
47. McKenzie, C. R. M., & Mikkelsen, L. A. (2007). A Bayesian view of covariation assessment. Cognitive Psychology, 54, 33-61.
48. McKenzie, C. R. M., & Nelson, J. (2003). What a speaker's choice of frame reveals: Reference points, frame selection, and framing effects. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10, 596-602.
49. McKenzie, C. R. M., & Sher, S. (2009). Product attribute framing and information leakage. Unpublished manuscript.
50. Nelson, T. E., Clawson, R. A., & Oxley, Z. M. (1997a). Media framing of a civil liberties conflict and its effect on tolerance. American Political Science Review, 91, 567-583.
51. Nelson, T. E., & Kinder, D. R. (1996). Issue frames and group-centrism in American public opinion. Journal of Politics, 58, 1055-1078.
52. Nelson, T. E., Oxley, Z. M., & Clawson, R. A. (1997b). Toward a psychology of framing effects. Political Behavior, 19, 221-246.
53. Oaksford, M., & Chater, N. (1994). A rational analysis of the selection task as optimal data selection. Psychological Review, 101, 608-631.
54. Payne, J. W., Samper, A., Bettman, J. R., & Luce, M. F. (2008). Boundary conditions on unconscious thought in complex decision making. Psychological Science, 19, 1118-1123.
55. Popkin, S. L. (1994). The reasoning voter: Communication and persuasion in presidential campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
56. Quattrone, G. A., & Tversky, A. (1988). Contrasting rational and psychological analyses of political choice. American Political Science Review, 82, 719-736.
57. Rey, A., Goldstein, R. M., & Perruchet, P. (2009). Does unconscious thought improve complex decision making? Psychological Research, 73, 372-379.
58. Rubinstein, A. (1998). Modeling bounded rationality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
59. Savage, L. J. (1954). The foundations of statistics. New York: Wiley.
60. Schustack, M. W., & Sternberg, R. J. (1981). Evaluation of evidence in causal inference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 110, 101-120.
61. Schwarz, N., Strack, F., Hilton, D., & Naderer, G. (1991). Base rates, representativeness, and the logic of conversation: The contextual relevance of "irrelevant" information. Social Cognition, 15, 67-84.
62. Shafer, G. (1988). Savage revisited. In D. E. Bell, H. Raiffa, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Decision making: Descriptive, normative, and prescriptive interactions (pp. 193-236). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
63. Shafir, E. (1993). Choosing versus rejecting: Why some options are both better and worse than others. Memory and Cognition, 21, 546-556.
64. Shafir, E., & LeBoeuf, R. A. (2002). Rationality. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 491-517.
65. Shavell, S. (2004). Foundations of economic analysis of law. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
66. Sher, S., & McKenzie, C. R. M. (2006). Information leakage from logically equivalent frames. Cognition, 101, 467-494.
67. Sher, S., & McKenzie, C. R. M. (2008). Framing effects and rationality. In N. Chater & M. Oaksford (Eds.), The probabilistic mind: Prospects for Bayesian cognitive science (pp. 79-96). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
68. Simons, D. J., Hannula, D. E., Warren, D. E., & Day, S. W. (2007). Behavioral, neuro-imaging, and neuropsychological approaches to implicit perception. In P. Zelazo, M. Moscovitch, & E. Thompson (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of consciousness (pp. 207-250). New York: Cambridge University Press.
69. Sniderman, P. M., & Theriault, S. M. (2004). The structure of political argument and the logic of issue framing. In W. E. Sarris & P. M. Sniderman (Eds.), Studies in Public Opinion: Attitudes, nonattitudes, measurement error, and change (pp. 133-165). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
70. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2000). Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 645-665.
71. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.
72. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1986). Rational choice and the framing of decisions. Journal of Business, 59, S251-278.
73. Van Buiten, M., & Keren, G. (2009). Speaker-listener incompatibility: Joint and separate processing in risky choice framing. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108, 106-115.
74. Wason, P. C. (1968). Reasoning about a rule. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 273-281.
75. Wasserman, E. A., Dorner, W. W., & Kao, S.-F. (1990). Contributions of specific cell information to judgments of interevent contingency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 509-521.
76. Williams, B. (1973). A critique of utilitarianism. In J. J. C. Smart & B. Williams (Eds.), Utilitarianism: For and against (pp. 77-150). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
77. Wilson, D. K., Kaplan, R. M., & Schneidermann, L. J. (1987). Framing of decisions and selections of alternatives in health care. Social Behaviour, 2, 51-59.
78. Wilson, T. D., Lisle, D., Schooler, J. W., Hodges, S. D., Klaaren, K. J., & LaFleur, S. J. (1993). Introspecting about reasons can reduce post-choice satisfaction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 331-339.