The Role of Cognitive Effort in Framing Effects

• Autorzy: Krzysztof Przybyszewski , Dorota Rutkowska

Warianty tytułu

Efekt sformułowania a zaangażowanie wysiłku poznawczego

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

Efekt sformułowania jest czestym błedem popełnianym przez ludzi podejmujacych decyzje ryzykowne. Powodem popełniania tego błedu, według teorii perspektywy, jest awersja do strat. W literaturze dotyczacej podejmowania decyzji zazwyczaj przyjmuje sie, ze wysiłek poznawczy moze zredukowac wystepowanie tego błedu, tj. przy wysokim poziomie zaangazowania wysiłku poznawczego w rozwiazywanie problemu, decydenci nie beda podlegali wpływowi sformułowania scenariusza decyzyjnego (de-biasing) w kategoriach zysku lub straty. Z drugiej strony, w badaniach prowadzonych w paradygmacie sformułowania celów (goal framing) stwierdzono, ze to własnie procesy umysłowe zwiazane z wysokim nakładem wysiłku poznawczego sa odpowiedzialne za powstawanie tego efektu. W prezentowanym badaniu, uczestnicy zostali poddani manipulacji, polegajacej na aktywizowaniu poprzez neutralne zadanie wysiłkowego i bezwysiłkowego trybu przetwarzania informacji, poprzedzajacej klasyczny scenariusz "azjatyckiej choroby". Tak, jak zakładano, efekt sformułowania pojawił sie tylko w grupie badanych przetwarzajacych informacje w sposób wysiłkowy. Wynik ten wskazuje na wysiłkowy i refleksyjny charakter efektu sformułowania.(abstrakt oryginalny)

EN

Framing effects are a common bias in people making risky decisions. The account for this bias is found in the loss aversion derived from Prospect Theory. Most often in the decision making literature this is the effortful processes that are claimed to reduce framing effects in risky choice tasks i.e. investing of mental effort should de-bias the decision makers. However, in goal framing studies, effortful mental processes may produce those effects. In our experiment participants were primed with either effortful or effortless modes of processing before a classical Asian Disease scenario. As hypothesised, framing effects were obtained only through effortful processing. This suggests the effortful and reflective nature of framing effects. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

PL

Przetwarzanie informacji; Podejmowanie decyzji; Efekty zewnętrzne; Procesy poznawcze; Efekt sformułowania

EN

Information processing; Decision making; Spillover effects; Cognitive processes; Framing effects

• Czasopismo: Roczniki Kolegium Analiz Ekonomicznych / Szkoła Główna Handlowa
• Rocznik: 2013
• Numer: nr 32 Mechanism design and related topics
• Strony: 107-119

Twórcy

autor

Krzysztof Przybyszewski

• Kozminski University, Warsaw, Poland

autor

Dorota Rutkowska

• University of Warsaw, Poland

Bibliografia

• Arkes H.R. (1991), Costs and benefits of judgment errors: Implications for debiasing. "Psychological Bulletin", 110 (3), pp. 486-498.
• Bargh J.A., & Chartrand T.L. (2000), The mind in the middle: A practical guide to priming and automaticity research, in H. T. Reiss, & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 253-285), New York, NY US: Cambridge University Press.
• Bless H., Tilmann B., & Franzen A. (1998), Framing the framing effect: The impact of context cues on solutions to the 'Asian disease' problem, "European Journal of Social Psychology", 28 (2), pp. 287-291.
• De Martino B., Kumaran D., Seymour B., & Dolan R.J. (2006). Frames, biases, and rational decision making in the human brain, "Science" 313, pp. 684-687.
• De Neys W. (2006), Dual processing in reasoning. Two systems but one reasoner, "Psychological Science", 17(5), pp.428-433.
• De Neys W., & Schaeken W. (2007), When people are more logical under cognitive load: Dual task impact on scalar implicature, "Experimental Psychology", 54 (2), pp. 128-133.
• Frederick S. (2005), Cognitive reflection and decision making, "Journal of Economic Perspectives", 19 (4), pp. 25-42.
• Igou R., & Bless H. (2007), On undesirable consequences of thinking: Framing effects as a function of substantive processing, "Journal of Behavioral Decision Making", 20 (2), pp. 125-142.
• Kahneman D., & Tversky A. (1979), Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk, "Econometrica", 47 (2), pp. 263-292.
• Klaczynski P.A. (2009), Cognitive and social cognitive development: Dual process research and theory, in J. St. B. T. Evans, & K. Frankish (Eds.), In two minds: dual processes and beyond (pp. 265-292) . Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
• K¨uhberger A. (2002), The Rationality of risky decisions. A changing message, "Theory & Psychology", 12 (4), pp. 427-452.
• K¨uhberger A., Schulte-Mecklenbeck M., & Perner J. (1999), The effects of framing, reflection, probability, and payoff on risk preference in choice tasks, "Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes", 78 (3), pp. 204-231.
• LeBoeuf R.A., & Shafir, E. (2003), Deep thoughts and shallow frames: on the susceptibility to framing effects, "Journal of Behavioral Decision Making", 16 (2), pp. 77-92.
• 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 (2), pp. 149-188.
• Maheswaran D. & Meyers-Levy J. (1990), The influence of message framing and issue involvement, "Journal of Marketing Research", 27, pp. 361-367.
• Mandel D.R. (2001), Gain-loss framing and choice: Separating outcome formulations from descriptor formulations, "Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes", 85 (1), pp. 56-76.
• Maule A.J. (1989). Positive and negative decision frames: A verbal protocol analysis of the Asian Disease problem of Tversky and Kahneman, in H. Montgomery, & O. Svenson (Eds.), Process and structure in human decision making (pp. 163-180). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
• Maule A.J., Hodgkinson G.P., & Bown N.J. (2003), Cognitive mapping of causal reasoning in strategic decision making, in D. Hardman, & L. Macchi (Eds.), Thinking: Psychological perspectives on reasoning, judgment, and decision-making (pp. 253-272). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
• Maule J., & Villejoubert G. (2007), What lies beneath: Reframing framing effects, "Thinking & Reasoning", 13 (1), pp. 25-44.
• McElroy T., & Seta J. J. (2003), Framing effects: An analytic - holistic perspective, "Journal of Experimental Social Psychology", 39 (6), pp. 610-617.
• Meyers-Levy J., & Maheswaran D. (2004), Exploring message framing outcomes when systematic, heuristic, or both types of processing occur, "Journal of Consumer Psychology", 14 (1&2), pp. 159-167.
• Sieck W., & Yates J.F. (1997), Exposition effects on decision making: Choice and confidence in choice, "Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes", 70 (3), pp. 207-219.
• Simon A.F., Fagley N.S., & Halleran J.G. (2004), Decision framing: Moderating effects of individual differences and cognitive processing, "Journal of Behavioral Decision Making", 17 (2), pp. 77-93.
• Smith S.M., & Levin I.P. (1996), Need for cognition and choice framing effects, "Journal of Behavioral Decision Making", 9 (4), pp. 283-290.
• Stanovich K.E., & West R.F. (2000), Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate, "Behavioral and Brain Sciences", 23 (5), pp. 645-665.
• Stanovich K.E., &West R.F. (2008), On the relative independence of thinking biases and cognitive ability, "Journal of Personality and Social Psychology", 94 (4), pp.672-695.
• Svenson O., & Benson L., III. (1993), Framing and time pressure in decision making. in O. Svenson, & A. J. Maule (Eds.), Time pressure and stress in human judgment and decision making (pp. 133-144). New York: Plenum.
• Takemura K. (1994), Influence of elaboration on the framing of decision, "The Journal of Psychology", 128 (1), pp. 33-39.
• Tversky A., & Kahneman D. (1981), The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice, "Science", 211, pp. 453-458.
• Tversky A. & Kahneman D. (1986), Rational choice and framing of decisions, "Journal of Business", 59 (4), pp. 251-278.