Framing effect in evaluation of others’ predictions
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2014, Vol 9, Issue 5
Abstract
This paper explored how frames influence people’s evaluation of others’ probabilistic predictions in light of the outcomes of binary events. Most probabilistic predictions (e.g., “there is a 75% chance that Denver will win the Super Bowl”) can be partitioned into two components: A qualitative component that describes the predicted outcome (“Denver will win the Super Bowl”), and a quantitative component that represents the chance of the outcome occurring (“75% chance”). Various logically equivalent variations of a single prediction can be created through different combinations of these components and their logical or numerical complements (e.g., “25% chance that Denver will lose the Super Bowl”, “75% chance that Seattle will lose the Super Bowl”). Based on the outcome of the predicted event, these logically equivalent predictions can be categorized into two classes: Congruently framed predictions, in which the qualitative component matches the outcome, and incongruently framed predictions, in which it does not. Although the two classes of predictions are logically equivalent, we hypothesize that people would judge congruently framed predictions to be more accurate. The paper tested this hypothesis in seven experiments and found supporting evidence across a number of domains and experimental manipulations, and even when the congruently framed prediction was logically inferior. It also found that this effect held even for subjects who saw both congruently framed and incongruently framed versions of a prediction and judged the two to be logically equivalent.
Authors and Affiliations
Saiwing Yeung
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP678141
- DOI -
- Views 128
- Downloads 0
A fine-grained analysis of the jumping-to-conclusions bias in schizophrenia: Data-gathering, response confidence, and information integration
Impaired decision behavior has been repeatedly observed in schizophrenia patients. We investigated several cognitive mechanisms that might contribute to the jumping-to-conclusions bias (JTC) seen in schizophrenia patient...
The psychology of moral reasoning
This article presents a theory of reasoning about moral propositions that is based on four fundamental principles. First, no simple criterion picks out propositions about morality from within the larger set of deontic pr...
What's bad is easy: Taboo values, affect, and cognition
Some decision situations are so objectionable or repugnant that people refuse to make a choice. This paper seeks to better understand taboo responses, and to distinguish choices that are truly taboo from those that are m...
How to make a risk seem riskier: The ratio bias versus construal level theory
Which statement conveys greater risk: “100 people die from cancer every day” or “36,500 people die from cancer every year”? In statistics where both frequencies and temporal information are used to convey risk, two theor...
Variations on anchoring: Sequential anchoring revisited
The anchoring effect, the assimilation of judgment toward a previously considered value, has been shown using various experimental paradigms. We used several variations of the sequential anchoring paradigm, in which a nu...