Framing Effects and Fuzzy Traces: ‘Some’ Observations
Tóm tắt
Framing effects occur when people respond differently to the same information, just because it is conveyed in different words. For example, in the classic ‘Disease Problem’ introduced by Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman, people’s choices between alternative interventions depend on whether these are described positively, in terms of the number of people who will be saved, or negatively in terms of the corresponding number who will die. In this paper, I discuss an account of framing effects based on ‘fuzzy-trace theory’. The central claim of this account is that people represent the numbers in framing problems in a ‘gist-like’ way, as ‘some’; and that this creates a categorical contrast between ‘some’ people being saved (or dying) and ‘no’ people being saved (or dying). I argue that fuzzy-trace theory’s gist-like representation, ‘some’, must have the semantics of ‘some and possibly all’, not ‘some but not all’. I show how this commits fuzzy-trace theory to a modest version of a rival ‘lower bounding hypothesis’, according to which lower-bounded interpretations of quantities contribute to framing effects by rendering the alternative descriptions extensionally inequivalent. As a result, fuzzy-trace theory is incoherent as it stands. Making sense of it requires dropping, or refining, the claim that decision-makers perceive alternatively framed options as extensionally equivalent; and the related claim that framing effects are irrational. I end by suggesting that, whereas the modest lower bounding hypothesis is well supported, there is currently less evidence for the core element of the fuzzy trace account.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Brainerd, C.J., and J. Kingma. 1984. Do children have to remember to reason? A fuzzy-trace theory of transitivity development. Developmental Review 4: 311–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-2297(84)90021-2.
Brainerd, C.J., and J. Kingma. 1985. On the independence of short-term memory and working memory in cognitive development. Cognitive Psychology 17: 210–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(85)90008-8.
Broniatowski, D.A., and V.F. Reyna. 2018. A formal model of fuzzy-trace theory: Variations on framing effects and the Allais paradox. Decision 5 (4): 205–252. https://doi.org/10.1037/dec0000083.
Chick, C.F., V.F. Reyna, and J.C. Corbin. 2016. Framing effects are robust to linguistic disambiguation: A critical test of contemporary theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition 42 (2): 238–256. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000158.
Chierchia, G., D. Fox, and B. Spector. 2012. The grammatical view of scalar implicatures and the relationship between semantics and pragmatics. In Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, ed. C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger, and P. Portner, vol. 3, 2297–2332. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
De Neys, W., and Schaeken, W. (2007). When people are more logical under cognitive load: dual task impact on scalar implicature. Experimental Psychology 54 (2): 128–133.
Fisher, S. (2020). Rationalising framing effects: At least one task for empirically informed philosophy. Crítica. Revista Hispanoamericana De Filosofía 52 (156): 5–30. https://doi.org/10.22201/iifs.18704905e.2020.1221.
Kahneman, D., and A. Tversky. 1979. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47 (2): 263–291. https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185.
Kühberger, A. 1998. The influence of framing on risky decisions: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 75 (1): 23–55. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1998.2781.
Kühberger, A., and P. Gradl. 2013. Choice, rating, and ranking: Framing effects with different response modes. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 26 (2): 109–117. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.764.
Kühberger, A., and C. Tanner. 2010. Risky choice framing: Task versions and a comparison of prospect theory and fuzzy-trace theory. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 23 (3): 314–329. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.656.
Leong, L.M., C.R.M. McKenzie, S. Sher, and J. Müller-Trede. 2017. The role of inference in attribute framing effects. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 30 (5): 1147–1156. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2030.
Levin, I.P. 1987. Associative effects of information framing. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 25 (2): 85–86. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03330291.
Levin, I.P., and G.J. Gaeth. 1988. How consumers are affected by the framing of attribute info. Journal of Consumer Research 15 (3): 374. https://doi.org/10.1086/209174.
Levin, I.P., R.D. Johnson, P.J. Deldin, L.M. Carstens, L.J. Cressey, and C.R. Davis. 1986. Framing effects in decisions with completely and incompletely described alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 38: 48–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(86)90025-7.
Levin, I.P., R.D. Johnson, C.P. Russo, and P.J. Deldin. 1985. Framing effects in judgment tasks with varying amounts of information. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 36: 362–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(85)90005-6.
Levin, I.P., S.L. Schneider, and G.J. Gaeth. 1998. Not all frames are created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 76 (2): 149–188. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1998.2804.
Macdonald, R.R. 1986. Credible conceptions and implausible probabilities. The British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 39 (1): 15–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1986.tb00842.x.
Mandel, D.R. 2001. Gain-loss framing and choice: Separating outcome formulations from descriptor formulations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 85 (1): 56–76. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2000.2932.
Mandel, D. R. (2014). Do framing effects reveal irrational choice? Journal of experimental psychology. General, 143(3), 1185–1198. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034207.
Mandel, D. R. (2020). Framing effects, replications, and scientific inference: Reply to commentary by Simmons and Nelson (2013) on Mandel (2014). Doi:https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/34jeg.
Maule, A.J. 1989. Positive and negative decision frames: A verbal protocol analysis of the Asian disease problem of Tversky and Kahneman. In Process and structure in human decision making, ed. H. Montgomery and O. Svenson. Chichester: Wiley.
McKenzie, C. R. M., & Nelson, J. D. (2003). What a speaker's choice of frame reveals: Reference points, frame selection, and framing effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review: A Journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc, 10(3), 596. doi: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196520, 10, 596, 602.
Panizza, D., Y.T. Huang, G. Chierchia, and J. Snedeker. 2015. Relevance of polarity for the online interpretation of scalar terms. Semantics and Linguistic Theory 360. https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v0i0.2530.
Reyna, V.F., and C.J. Brainerd. 1991. Fuzzy-trace theory and framing effects in choice: Gist extraction, truncation, and conversion. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 4 (4): 249–262. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.3960040403.
Reyna, V.F., and C.J. Brainerd. 2011. Dual processes in decision making and developmental neuroscience: A fuzzy-trace model. Developmental Review 31 (2): 180–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2011.07.004.
Reyna, V.F., C.F. Chick, J.C. Corbin, and A.N. Hsia. 2014. Developmental reversals in risky decision making: Intelligence agents show larger decision biases than college students. Psychological Science 25 (1): 76–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613497022.
Sher, S., and C.R.M. McKenzie. 2006. Information leakage from logically equivalent frames. Cognition 101 (3): 467–494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2005.11.001.
Sher, S., and C.R.M. McKenzie. 2008. Framing effects and rationality. In The probabilistic mind: Prospects for Bayesian cognitive science, ed. N. Chater and M. Oaksford, 79–96. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sher, S., & McKenzie, C. R. M. (2011). Levels of information: A framing hierarchy. In G. Keren (Ed.), Perspectives on framing (pp. 35-63). Abingdon, Oxfordshire; New York: Psychology press.
Simmons, J., & Nelson, L. (2013). "Exactly": The most famous framing effect is robust to precise wording. Retrieved from http://datacolada.org/11.
Tombu, M., and D.R. Mandel. 2015. When does framing influence preferences, risk perceptions, and risk attitudes? The explicated valence account. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 28 (5): 464–476. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.1863.
Tversky, A., and D. Kahneman. 1981. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211 (4481): 453–458. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7455683.
Wang, X.T. 1996. Framing effects: Dynamics and task domains. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 68: 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1996.0095.