The influence of quantity of information and goal framing on decision

Abstract The paper examines how goal framing (i.e. formulating the decision problem in terms of acceptance vs. rejection) interacts with the quantity of information to determine judgment and choice. We trace the interaction between goal framing and information quantity to the effect of frames on the weight associated with positive and negative information. In three experiments we show that as the quantity of information increases, the differences in choice (Experiments 1 and 3) and judgment (Experiment 2) between accept and reject frames increase as well.

[1]  Benjamin Czaczkes,et al.  On Detecting Nonlinear Noncompensatory Judgment Strategies: Comparison of Alternative Regression Models , 1995 .

[2]  Daniel Kahneman,et al.  The Framing of Decisions and the Rationality of Choice. , 1980 .

[3]  Eldar Shafir,et al.  Choosing versus rejecting: Why some options are both better and worse than others , 1993, Memory & cognition.

[4]  Christopher P. Puto,et al.  The Framing of Buying Decisions , 1987 .

[5]  John J. Skowronski,et al.  Social judgment and social memory: The role of cue diagnosticity in negativity, positivity, and extremity biases. , 1987 .

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

[7]  Y. Ganzach.  Theory and configurality in expert and layperson judgment. , 1994 .

[8]  D. R. Lehman,et al.  The Focus of Judgment Effect: A Question Wording Effect Due to Hypothesis Confirnation Bias , 1992 .

[9]  Steven J. Sherman,et al.  The influence of unique features and direction of comparison of preferences , 1989 .

[10]  E. Hirt,et al.  DIAGNOSTIC AND CONFIRMATION STRATEGIES IN TRAIT HYPOTHESIS TESTING , 1990 .

[11]  Mark Snyder,et al.  Testing Hypotheses about Other People , 1980 .

[12]  H. J. Einhorn.  The use of nonlinear, noncompensatory models in decision making. , 1970, Psychological bulletin.

[13]  O. Larichev,et al.  Contemporary issues in decision making , 1990 .

[14]  R. Wyer.  Information redundancy, inconsistency, and novelty and their role in impression formation , 1970 .

[15]  Mirjam R. M. Westenberg,et al.  Response modes, decision processes and decision outcomes , 1992 .

[16]  I. Levin,et al.  Differential weighting of positive and negative traits in impression formation as a function of prior exposure. , 1973, Journal of experimental psychology.

[17]  David E. Kanouse,et al.  Negativity in evaluations. , 1987 .

[18]  Donal E. Carlston,et al.  Negativity and extremity biases in impression formation: A review of explanations. , 1989 .

[19]  P. Wason.  On the Failure to Eliminate Hypotheses in a Conceptual Task , 1960 .

[20]  A. Tversky.  Features of Similarity , 1977 .

[21]  Norman H. Anderson,et al.  Methods of information integration theory , 1982 .

[22]  J. Klayman,et al.  Confirmation, Disconfirmation, and Informa-tion in Hypothesis Testing , 1987 .

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

[24]  Margaret W. Matlin.  The Pollyanna principle: Selectivity in language, memory, and thought , 1978 .

[25]  N. Anderson.  Likableness ratings of 555 personality-trait words. , 1968, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[26]  Roderick M. Kramer,et al.  Windows of vulnerability or cognitive illusions? Cognitive processes and the nuclear arms race , 1989 .

[27]  Susan T. Fiske,et al.  Attention and weight in person perception: The impact of negative and extreme behavior. , 1980 .

[28]  R. Skov,et al.  Information-gathering processes: Diagnosticity, hypothesis-confirmatory strategies, and perceived hypothesis confirmation. , 1986 .

[29]  S. Chaiken,et al.  The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior. , 1987, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[30]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias , 1991 .