Framing effects within the ethical decision making process of consumers
Journal of Business Ethics 36 (1-2):119 - 140 (2002)
| Abstract | There has been neglect of systematic conceptual development and empirical investigation within consumer ethics. Scenarios have been a long-standing tool yet their development has been haphazard with little theory guiding their development. This research answers four questions relative to this gap: Do different scenario decision frames encourage different moral reasoning styles? Does the way in which framing effects are measured make a difference in the measurement of the relationship between moral reasoning and judgment by gender? Are true framing effects likely to vary with the situation? and Are true framing effects likely to vary by gender? The conclusions reached were that (1) different scenario frames encourage both types of reasoning, but rule based moral reasoning is dominant regardless of frame, (2) accounting for formal equivalency in the measurement of true framing effects is likely to enhance the interpretation of studies in moral reasoning and judgment, (3) True framing effects are more likely to occur in situations with low to moderate perceived ethicality, and (4) true framing effects are not likely to vary by gender. Explanations as to why these results occurred are discussed. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,875 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesThomas Nadelhoffer & Adam Feltz (2008). The Actor–Observer Bias and Moral Intuitions: Adding Fuel to Sinnott-Armstrong's Fire. Neuroethics 1 (2):133-144.
Martin Peterson (2004). Transformative Decision Rules, Permutability, and Non-Sequential Framing of Decision Problems. Synthese 139 (3):387-403.
Jay J. Caughron, Alison L. Antes, Cheryl K. Stenmark, Chase E. Thiel, Xiaoqian Wang & Michael D. Mumford (2011). Sensemaking Strategies for Ethical Decision Making. Ethics and Behavior 21 (5):351 - 366.
Keith E. Stanovich Richard & F. West (1998). Individual Differences in Framing and Conjunction Effects. Thinking and Reasoning 4 (4):289 – 317.
Vidya N. Awasthi (2008). Managerial Decision-Making on Moral Issues and the Effects of Teaching Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 78 (1-2):207 - 223.
B. Skyrms & K. J. S. Zollman (2010). Evolutionary Considerations in the Framing of Social Norms. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 9 (3):265-273.
John Maule & Gaëlle Villejoubert (2007). What Lies Beneath: Reframing Framing Effects. Thinking and Reasoning 13 (1):25 – 44.
Amber N. Bloomfield, Josh A. Sager, Daniel M. Bartels & Douglas L. Medin (2006). Caring About Framing Effects. Mind and Society 5 (2):123-138.
Jason Hanna (2011). Consent and the Problem of Framing Effects. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (5):517-531.
Alex Mintz & Steven B. Redd (2003). Framing Effects in International Relations. Synthese 135 (2):193 - 213.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads6 ( #147,054 of 556,837 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,847 of 556,837 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
