Framing, czyli efekt sformułowania

• Autorzy: Piotr Zielonka

Warianty tytułu

Framing

• Języki publikacji: PL

Abstrakty

Niewielka różnica w sformułowaniu komunikatu może prowadzić do odmiennego zachowania jego odbiorcy. Zjawisko to nosi nazwę efektu sformułowania lub ramowania (ang. framing). W artykule opisano trzy rodzaje framingu: efekt sformułowania decyzji ryzykownych (ang. risky choice framing effect), efekt sformułowania cechy (ang. attribute framing effect) oraz efekt sformułowania celu (ang. goal framing). Pokazano, że zjawiskiem odpowiedzialnym za powstawanie efektu sformułowania jest, powszechnie występująca u ludzi, silna awersja do strat. Omówiono przykłady znaczenia zjawiska framingu w różnych obszarach gospodarczych, takich jak: kształtowanie cen, polityka podatkowa czy negocjowanie. (abstrakt oryginalny)

EN

A slight difference in the message formulation may lead to a different behavior of the recipient. This phenomenon is called the framing effect. The article describes three types of framing: the risky choice framing effect, the attribute framing effect and the goal framing effect. It has been shown that the phenomenon responsible for framing effect is, commonly occurring in humans, a strong loss aversion. Examples of the implementation of framing in various economic areas, such as price policy, taxation, or negotiation, are discussed. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

PL

Efekt sformułowania; Podejmowanie decyzji

EN

Framing effects; Decision making

• Czasopismo: Decyzje
• Rocznik: 2017
• Numer: nr 27
• Strony: 41--68

Twórcy

autor

Piotr Zielonka

• Szkoła Główna Gospodarstwa Wiejskiego w Warszawie

Bibliografia

• Banks, S.M., Salovey, P., Greener, S., Rothman, A.J., Moyer, A., Beauvais, J., et al. (1995). The effects of message framing on mammography utilization. Health Psychology, 14(2), 178-184.
• Bastiat, F. (1850, polskie wyd. 2014). Co widać i czego nie widać. Fijorr Publishing.
• Chang, O.H., Nichols, D.R., Schultz, J.J. (1987). Taxpayer Attitudes toward Tax Audit Risk. Journal of Economic Psychology, 8, 299-309.
• Cwalina, W., Falkowski, A., Newman, B.I. (2012). The macro and micro views of political marketing: The underpinnings of a theory of political marketing. Journal of Public Affairs, 12(4), 254-269.
• Cwalina, W., Falkowski, A. and Newman, B.I. (2014). Persuasion in political context. Opportunities and threats. W: Stewart (ed.), Handbook of Persuasion and Social Marketing (pp. 11-34). Thousand Oaks CA: SAGE.
• Garner, S.J. (1986). Perceived risk and information sources in services purchasing. The mid-Atlantic journal of business, 24(2), 49-58.
• Grewal, D., Gotlieb, J. and Marmorstein, H. (1994). The Moderating Effects of Message Framing and Source Credibility on the Price-Perceived Risk Relationship. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(June), 145-153.
• Highhouse, S., & Paese, P.W. (1996). Problem domain and prospect frame: Choice under opportunity versus threat. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 124-132.
• Johnson, E.J., Hershey, J., Meszaros, J. and Kunreuther, H. (1993). Framing, Probability Distortions, and Insurance Decisions. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 7(1), 35-51.
• Kahneman, D. (2012). Pułapki myślenia. O myśleniu szybkim i wolnym. Wydawnictwo: Media Rodzina.
• Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291.
• Kaid, L.L. (1997). Effects of television spots on images of Dole and Clinton. American Behavioral Scientist, 40(8), 1085-1094.
• Kitch, E.W. (1990). The Framing Hypothesis: Is It Supported by Credit Card Issuer Opposition to a Surcharge on a Cash Price? Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 6 (1).
• Krishnamurthy, Parthasarathy, Patrick Carter, and Edward Blair (2001). Attribute Framing and Goal Framing Effects in Health Decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 85(July), 382-399.
• Kühberger, A., Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., and Perner, J. (1999). The effect of probabilities and payoff on framing: A meta-analysis and an empirical test. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 78(3), 204 - 231.
• Lalor, K.M., & Hailey, B. J. (1989). The effects of message framing and feelings of susceptibility to breast cancer on reported frequency of breast self-examination. International Quarterly of Community Health Education, 10(3), 183-192. doi: 10.2190/GMFB-WYND-QJYA-8LJC
• Lauver, D., & Rubin, M. (1990). Message framing, dispositional optimism, and follow-up for abnormal papanicolaou tests. Research in Nursing & Health, 13, 199-207.
• Lakshminarayanan V.R., Chen, M.K. and Santos, L. R. (2011). The evolution of decision-making under risk: framing effects in monkey risk preferences. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol., 47, 689 - 693. (doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2010.12.011).
• Levin, I.P. and Gaeth, G.J. (1988). How Consumers Are Affected by the Framing of Attribute Information before and after Consuming the Product, Journal of Consumer Research, 15(December), 374-378.
• Levin, I.P., Schneider, S.L., & Gaeth, G.J. (1998). All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76(2), 149-188.
• Meyerowitz, B. E. and Chaiken, S. (1987). The Effect of Message Framing on Breast Self-Examination Attitudes, Intentions, and Behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 500-510.
• Nagle, T.T. and Holden, R (1995). The Strategy and Tactics of Pricing: A Guide to Profi table Decision Making. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Neale, M.A., and Bazerman, M.H. (1992). Negotiator cognition and rationality: A behavioral decision-theory perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 51(2), 157-175.
• Puto, C.P. (1987). The framing of buying decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 301-315.
• Quattrone, G.A., and Tversky, A. (1988). Contrasting Rational and Psychological Analysis of Political Choice. American Political Science Review, 82(3), 719-36.
• Rutkowska, D. and Przybyszewski, K. (2015). Efekt sformułowania (framing effect): zaangażowanie poznawczego wysiłku a wpływ kontekstualnych informacji o zysku lub stracie na podejmowanie decyzji. Psychologia Społeczna, tom 10, 3(34), 248-265.
• Schepanski, A., and Kelsey, D. (1990). Testing for framing effects in taxpayer compliance decisions. Journal of the American Taxation Association, 12(2), 60-77.
• Steffen, V.J., Sternberg, L., Teegarden, L.A., and Shepherd, K. (1994). Practice and persuasive frame: Effects on beliefs, intention, and performance of a cancer self-examination. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 897-925.
• Teigen, K.H. (2015). Framing of numeric quantities. The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making, Wiley-Blackwell (wydanie on-line), 568-589.
• Thaler, R. (1999). Mental Accounting Matters. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12, 183-206.
• Tversky, A., and Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.
• Wang, X.T., and Johnston, V.S. (1995). Perceived social context and risk preference: A re-examination of framing effects in a life-death decision problem. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 8, 279-293.
• Wong, K.F.E., and Kwong, J.Y.Y. (2005). Comparing two tiny giants or two huge dwarfs? Preference reversals owing to number size framing. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 98, 54-65.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.85