Authors
Sarah A Fisher
University of Vienna
Abstract
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 and ‘no’ people being saved. 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.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s13164-021-00556-3
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,261
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk.D. Kahneman & A. Tversky - 1979 - Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society:263--291.
Do Framing Effects Reveal Irrational Choice?David R. Mandel - 2014 - Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 143 (3):1185-1198.
Rationalising Framing Effects: At Least One Task for Empirically Informed Philosophy.Sarah A. Fisher - 2020 - Crítica, Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía 52 (156):5-30.

View all 8 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Fuzzy-Trace Theory: An Interim Synthesis.Valerie F. Reyna & Charles J. Brainerd - 1995 - Learning and Individual Differences 7 (1):1-75.
Rationalising Framing Effects: At Least One Task for Empirically Informed Philosophy.Sarah A. Fisher - 2020 - Crítica, Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía 52 (156):5-30.
Consent and the Problem of Framing Effects.Jason Hanna - 2011 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (5):517-531.
Alternatives in Framing and Decision Making.Bart Geurts - 2013 - Mind and Language 28 (1):1-19.
Moral Framing Effects Within Subjects.Paul Rehren & Walter Sinnott-Armstrong - 2021 - Philosophical Psychology 34 (5):611-636.
Effects of Attribute Framing on Cognitive Processing and Evaluation.Bård Kuvaas & Marcus Selart - 2004 - Organizional Behavior and Human Decision Processes 95:198-207.
Are Intuitions About Moral Relevance Susceptible to Framing Effects?James Andow - 2017 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 9 (1):115-141.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-05-10

Total views
5 ( #1,178,256 of 2,455,853 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,201 of 2,455,853 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes