Routledge International Handbook of Consumer Psychology by Jansson-Boyd Cathrine V.; Zawisza Magdalena J.; & Magdalena J. Zawisza

Author:Jansson-Boyd, Cathrine V.; Zawisza, Magdalena J.; & Magdalena J. Zawisza
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Taylor & Francis Group

Figure 19.1 The Asian disease dilemma explained by prospect theory’s value function.

Note: In the domain of gains (“lives saved”), the value of saving 200 lives is more positive than one-third of the value of saving 600 lives. In the domain of losses (“lives lost”), however, the value of 400 people dying is more negative than two-third of the value of 600 people dying. As a consequence, the certain option is preferred in the domain of gains, whereas the uncertain option is preferred in the domain of losses.

Prospect theory serves as an empirically well-founded framework that helps in understanding and integrating framing effects of various typologies (e.g., risky choice framing, goal framing, outcome framing, task framing). Yet, Kahneman and Tversky (1979) introduced the theory as a descriptive model of decision making under risk rather than as an explanation of such behaviour. For prospect theory to be regarded as an actual explanation for framing effects, it needs to be backed up by psychological principles that provide reasons for the specific slope and shape of the value function. For instance, the value function’s differences in slope for gains versus losses may be rooted in a general negativity bias of giving greater weight to negative as compared with positive information (Rozin & Royzman, 2001). Likewise, the function’s concavity and convexity may be attributable to such fundamental psychophysical laws as the Weber–Fechner law and the economical principle of diminishing marginal utility.

Category accessibility and priming

Perception and cognition are essentially guided by mental categorization processes (Bruner, 1957). Human information processing is characterized by pre-organizing informational input and by differentiating it along the mental structures that are activated at the moment of encoding. Activated concepts prime the activation of related concepts. Different semantics evoke different associations.

Drawing on category accessibility and priming as fundamental principles of human cognition, Levin and colleagues (1998) suggested an account for attribute framing. In attribute framing, logically identical information is presented either in positive or in negative terms, such as success versus failure rates or winning versus losing proportions. As a consequence, the frames should evoke different associations in the recipient’s mind: Success rates and winning proportions activate predominantly positive associations; failure rates and losing proportions active mostly negative associations.

For instance, in Levin and Gaeth’s (1988) study on the framing of ground beef that was already introduced at the beginning of this chapter, one may easily imagine that upon hearing the word fat the consumer thinks of fat, how it looks, how it tastes and how unhealthy it is. In contrast, the word lean elicits completely different associations about the beef, such as healthiness or high nutritional value. Indeed, support for this idea of spreading activation can be found in the additional measures that were assessed in the study. The framing manipulation did not only affect judgements directly related to the greasiness of the beef, but also judgements related to its taste experience.

Related arguments to explain attribute framing have been put forward based on the notion of confirmation bias (Klayman & Ha, 1987): Once

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.