Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (5):517-531 (2011)
AbstractOur decision-making is often subject to framing effects: alternative but equally informative descriptions of the same options elicit different choices. When a decision-maker is vulnerable to framing, she may consent under one description of the act, which suggests that she has waived her right, yet be disposed to dissent under an equally informative description of the act, which suggests that she has not waived her right. I argue that in such a case the decision-maker’s consent is simply irrelevant to the permissibility of proceeding. I then consider two alternative views. According to the first, people susceptible to framing are able to give valid consent so long as they are sufficiently informed. This suggestion, I argue, maintains an overly narrow focus on mere quantity of information to the exclusion of other choice-affecting factors. A second response, which appeals to hypothetical consent, is likewise of little use in resolving the moral problem posed by framing effects. I conclude that if susceptibility to framing undermines the validity of consent, we may have good reason to reconsider whether consent has the rights-waiving function commonly attributed to it
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
Freedom of the Will and the Concept of a Person.Harry Frankfurt - 1971 - Journal of Philosophy 68 (1):5-20.
Intricate Ethics: Rights, Responsibilities, and Permissible Harm.Frances Kamm - 2007 - New York ;Oxford University Press.
Choices, Values, and Frames.Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky (eds.) - 2000 - Cambridge University Press.
Citations of this work
Biases and Heuristics in Decision Making and Their Impact on Autonomy.J. S. Blumenthal-Barby - 2016 - American Journal of Bioethics 16 (5):5-15.
The Heteronomy of Choice Architecture.Chris Mills - 2015 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 6 (3):495-509.
Justifying Clinical Nudges.Moti Gorin, Steven Joffe, Neal Dickert & Scott Halpern - 2017 - Hastings Center Report 47 (2):32-38.
Similar books and articles
Framing Effects in International Relations.Alex Mintz & Steven B. Redd - 2003 - Synthese 135 (2):193 - 213.
What Does Respect for the Patient's Autonomy Require?Kam-Yuen Cheng - 2013 - Bioethics 27 (9):493-499.
Informed Consent: A Primer for Clinical Practice.Deborah Bowman - 2011 - Cambridge University Press.
Framing Effects Within the Ethical Decision Making Process of Consumers.Connie Rae Bateman, John Paul Fraedrich & Rajesh Iyer - 2002 - Journal of Business Ethics 36 (1-2):119 - 140.
What Lies Beneath: Reframing Framing Effects.John Maule & Gaëlle Villejoubert - 2007 - Thinking and Reasoning 13 (1):25 – 44.
Consent and Informational Responsibility.Shaun D. Pattinson - 2009 - Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (3):176-179.
Collective Informed Consent and Decision Power.Jukka Varelius - 2009 - Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (1):39-50.
Framing as Path Dependence.Natalie Gold & Christian List - 2004 - Economics and Philosophy 20 (2):253-277.
Caring About Framing Effects.Amber N. Bloomfield, Josh A. Sager, Daniel M. Bartels & Douglas L. Medin - 2006 - Mind and Society 5 (2):123-138.
To Tell the Truth, the Whole Truth, May Do Patients Harm: The Problem of the Nocebo Effect for Informed Consent.Rebecca Erwin Wells & Ted J. Kaptchuk - 2012 - American Journal of Bioethics 12 (3):22-29.
Do Undergraduate Student Research Participants Read Psychological Research Consent Forms? Examining Memory Effects, Condition Effects, and Individual Differences.Eric R. Pedersen, Clayton Neighbors, Judy Tidwell & Ty W. Lostutter - 2011 - Ethics and Behavior 21 (4):332 - 350.
Consent Under Pressure: The Puzzle of Third Party Coercion.Joseph Millum - 2014 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 17 (1):113-127.