Risky-choice framing and rational decision-making
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4079149 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Sarah A Fisher (0000-0003-1115-6134, University of Vienna, corresponding author), David R Mandel (0000-0003-1036-2286, Defence Research and Development Canada) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Volume | 16 |
| Issue | 8 |
| Publication date | 2021-08-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Philosophy Compass (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1747-9991 • E-ISSN: 1747-9991 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/phc3.12763 |
| OpenAlex | W3171185325 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 8 |
| References cited | 64 |
This article surveys the latest research on risky-choice framing effects, focusing on the implications for rational decision-making. An influential program of psychological research suggests that people's judgements and decisions depend on the way in which information is presented, or 'framed'. In a central choice paradigm, decision-makers seem to adopt different preferences, and different attitudes to risk, depending on whether the options specify the number of people who will be saved or the corresponding number who will die. It is standardly assumed that such responses violate a foundational tenet of rational decision-making, known as the principle of description invariance. We discuss recent theoretical and empirical research that challenges the dominant 'irrationalist' narrative. These approaches typically pay close attention to how decision-makers represent decision problems (including their interpretation of numerical quantifiers or predicate choice) and they highlight the need for a more robust characterization of the description invariance principle. We conclude by indicating avenues for future research that could bring us closer to a complete-and potentially rationalizing-explanation of framing effects
Economics · Empirical research · Epistemology · Framing (construction · Framing effect · Management science · Microeconomics · Narrative · Prospect theory · Computer Science · Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics · Forecasting Techniques and Applications · Optimism, Hope, and Well-being · Philosophy · Psychology · Social Psychology
Do claims about certainty make estimates less certain
Standard and non-standard framing effects
Accelerating Psychological Science With Metastudies
Verbal and numeric probabilities differentially shape decisions
Risky-choice framing effects persist when option descriptions are matched and complete
Description invariance
When Half Is at Least 50
Bayesians Commit the Gambler's Fallacy
Informativeness, relevance and scalar implicature
The Effects of Framing, Reflection, Probability, and Payoff on Risk Preference in Choice Tasks
All Frames Are Not Created Equal
Information leakage from logically equivalent frames
Reasons for Framing Effects
Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions
The Influence of Framing on Risky Decisions
What a speaker’s choice of frame reveals
Prospect Theory
The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice
A New Look at the Semantics and Pragmatics of Numerically Quantified Noun Phrases
Rationalising Framing Effects
Framing Effects and Fuzzy Traces
The Rationality of Risky Decisions
Risk Perception and Affect
Do children have to remember to reason? A fuzzy-trace theory of transitivity development*1
Dual processes in decision making and developmental neuroscience
The Role of Inference in Attribute Framing Effects
Framing of imprecise quantities
When Does Framing Influence Preferences, Risk Perceptions, and Risk Attitudes? The Explicated Valence Account
The illusion of the framing effect in risky decision making
Fuzzy‐trace theory and framing effects in choice
Frame It Again
Sense and Reference
A Natural history of negation
A note concerning reflection effects versus framing effects
Risk as feelings
Philosophical Expertise
How Consumers are Affected by the Framing of Attribute Information Before and After Consuming the Product
| Unique citing works | 8 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 2 |
| Citation span | 2022 - 2026 (5) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 8 |