Effects of framing and missing information in expert and novice judgment

We examined the effects of framing and missing information in experts and novices. The present study attempted to show the effect of framing, examined whether experts are less affected by the framing effect than are novices, and examined the differences between experts and novices in the way they respond to complete and missing information. A gambling task was used in which subjects rated their likelihood of taking a gamble on the basis of payoff or chance information, or both. Results showed a significant framing effect; that is, subjects are more likely to take a gamble if it is framed positively than if it is framed negatively. We found that experts and novices are similarly affected by framing but that novices attach more weight to chance information than do experts. Overall, analyses showed no significant difference in the way experts and novices respond to complete and incomplete information.

[1]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: analysis of decision under risk , 1979 .

[2]  J. Rybash,et al.  The framing heuristic influences judgements about younger and older adults' decision to refuse medical treatment. , 1989, Applied cognitive psychology.

[3]  S. Oskamp.  OVERCONFIDENCE IN CASE-STUDY JUDGMENTS. , 1965, Journal of consulting psychology.

[4]  A. Tversky,et al.  The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. , 1981, Science.

[5]  E. Fama.  The Behavior of Stock-Market Prices , 1965 .

[6]  M. Bazerman,et al.  The Effects of Framing and Negotiator Overconfidence on Bargaining Behaviors and Outcomes , 1985 .

[7]  Toshio Yamagishi,et al.  Adding versus averaging models revisited: A test of a path-analytic integration model. , 1981 .

[8]  I P Levin,et al.  Information integration in price-quality tradeoffs: The effect of missing information , 1984, Memory & cognition.

[9]  I. Levin,et al.  Confidence in judgments based on incomplete information: An investigation using both hypothetical and real gambles , 1988 .

[10]  I. Levin,et al.  Invariance of the weight parameter in information integration , 1976, Memory & cognition.

[11]  J. Shanteau.  Psychological characteristics and strategies of expert decision makers , 1988 .

[12]  Irwin P. Levin,et al.  Framing effects in judgment tasks with varying amounts of information , 1985 .

[13]  Irwin P. Levin,et al.  Framing effects in decisions with completely and incompletely described alternatives , 1986 .

[14]  Paul Slovic,et al.  Response-induced reversals of preference in gambling: An extended replication in las vegas , 1973 .

[15]  W. H. Loke.  The effects of framing and incomplete information on judgments , 1989 .

[16]  F. Fabozzi,et al.  Mutual Fund Systematic Risk for Bull and Bear Markets: An Empirical Examination , 1979 .

[17]  Paul Slovic,et al.  Dimensional Commensurability and Cue Utilization in Comparative Judgment. , 1974 .

[18]  J. Frank Yates,et al.  Evaluation of Partially Described Multiattribute Options , 1978 .

[19]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect Theory : An Analysis of Decision under Risk Author ( s ) : , 2007 .

[20]  J. Shanteau,et al.  Livestock judges: How much information can an expert use? , 1978 .

[21]  Joel Huber,et al.  The Impact of Inferential Beliefs on Product Evaluations , 1982 .

[22]  Carl-Axel S. Staël von Holstein,et al.  Probabilistic forecasting: An experiment related to the stock market , 1972 .