Numbers do not add up! The pragmatic approach to the framing of medical treatments
The risky choice framing effect disclosed that presenting data in a loss scenario lead decision-makers towards risky choices. Conversely, a gain scenario prevents them from taking a risk. Framing effect robustness has been widely confirmed by psychological literature. However, the framing of medical...
Main Authors: | , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Society for Judgment and Decision Making
2021-05-01
|
Series: | Judgment and Decision Making |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://journal.sjdm.org/20/200728c/jdm200728c.pdf |
id |
doaj-88efd27b8123489fb5fb7bf360c0d413 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-88efd27b8123489fb5fb7bf360c0d4132021-05-31T13:28:08ZengSociety for Judgment and Decision MakingJudgment and Decision Making1930-29752021-05-01163586613Numbers do not add up! The pragmatic approach to the framing of medical treatmentsLaura MacchiEdoardo ZulatoThe risky choice framing effect disclosed that presenting data in a loss scenario lead decision-makers towards risky choices. Conversely, a gain scenario prevents them from taking a risk. Framing effect robustness has been widely confirmed by psychological literature. However, the framing of medical treatments, based on McNeil et al. (1982) paradigm, raised both methodological doubts and contrasting evidence. Our research aimed to investigate the presence and the nature of the framing effect in the McNeil et al. (1982) paradigm. In particular, we thought that the obtained switch of preferences across frames was due to a misleading formulation of the data given in a negative cumulative frequency format. We conducted three studies: (1) we replicated McNeil et al.’s (1982) original study (N=150) with medicine (n=50), statistics (n=50) and lay (n=50) students; (2) we tested (N=180) our hypothesis by comparing a cumulative frequency format with an alternative version, namely a linear progression one; (3) we compared (N=430) the effect of different formats (cumulative frequency, linear progression and interval frequency) on choices. Our results showed that, while the framing effect is present when employing a cumulative frequency format, it disappears when using a linear progression one. Moreover, our results show that decision-makers better understand information when given in a linear progression and an interval frequency format. In the current paper, we argue that the way in which a problem is formulated plays a relevant role in the representation of the decisional task and the decision-making. Keywords: medical framing effect, reverse pattern of choice, understanding numerical information, pragmatic approach.http://journal.sjdm.org/20/200728c/jdm200728c.pdfthe risky choice framing effect disclosed that presenting data in a loss scenario lead decision-makers towards risky choices. conversely a gain scenario prevents them from taking a risk. framing effect robustness has been widely confirmed by psychological literature. however the framing of medical treatments based on mcneil et al. (1982) paradigm raised both methodological doubts and contrasting evidence. our research aimed to investigate the presence and the nature of the framing effect in the mcneil et al. (1982) paradigm. in particular we thought that the obtained switch of preferences across frames was due to a misleading formulation of the data given in a negative cumulative frequency format. we conducted three studies |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Laura Macchi Edoardo Zulato |
spellingShingle |
Laura Macchi Edoardo Zulato Numbers do not add up! The pragmatic approach to the framing of medical treatments Judgment and Decision Making the risky choice framing effect disclosed that presenting data in a loss scenario lead decision-makers towards risky choices. conversely a gain scenario prevents them from taking a risk. framing effect robustness has been widely confirmed by psychological literature. however the framing of medical treatments based on mcneil et al. (1982) paradigm raised both methodological doubts and contrasting evidence. our research aimed to investigate the presence and the nature of the framing effect in the mcneil et al. (1982) paradigm. in particular we thought that the obtained switch of preferences across frames was due to a misleading formulation of the data given in a negative cumulative frequency format. we conducted three studies |
author_facet |
Laura Macchi Edoardo Zulato |
author_sort |
Laura Macchi |
title |
Numbers do not add
up! The pragmatic approach to the framing of medical treatments |
title_short |
Numbers do not add
up! The pragmatic approach to the framing of medical treatments |
title_full |
Numbers do not add
up! The pragmatic approach to the framing of medical treatments |
title_fullStr |
Numbers do not add
up! The pragmatic approach to the framing of medical treatments |
title_full_unstemmed |
Numbers do not add
up! The pragmatic approach to the framing of medical treatments |
title_sort |
numbers do not add
up! the pragmatic approach to the framing of medical treatments |
publisher |
Society for Judgment and Decision Making |
series |
Judgment and Decision Making |
issn |
1930-2975 |
publishDate |
2021-05-01 |
description |
The risky choice
framing effect disclosed that presenting data in a loss scenario lead
decision-makers towards risky choices. Conversely, a gain scenario prevents
them from taking a risk. Framing effect robustness has been widely confirmed by
psychological literature. However, the framing of medical treatments, based on
McNeil et al. (1982) paradigm, raised both methodological doubts and
contrasting evidence. Our research aimed to investigate the presence and the
nature of the framing effect in the McNeil et al. (1982) paradigm. In
particular, we thought that the obtained switch of preferences across frames
was due to a misleading formulation of the data given in a negative cumulative
frequency format. We conducted three studies: (1) we replicated McNeil et al.’s
(1982) original study (N=150) with medicine (n=50), statistics (n=50) and lay
(n=50) students; (2) we tested (N=180) our hypothesis by comparing a cumulative
frequency format with an alternative version, namely a linear progression one;
(3) we compared (N=430) the effect of different formats (cumulative frequency,
linear progression and interval frequency) on choices. Our results showed that,
while the framing effect is present when employing a cumulative frequency
format, it disappears when using a linear progression one. Moreover, our
results show that decision-makers better understand information when given in a
linear progression and an interval frequency format. In the current paper, we
argue that the way in which a problem is formulated plays a relevant role in
the representation of the decisional task and the decision-making. Keywords:
medical framing effect, reverse pattern of choice, understanding numerical
information, pragmatic approach. |
topic |
the risky choice framing effect disclosed that presenting data in a loss scenario lead decision-makers towards risky choices. conversely a gain scenario prevents them from taking a risk. framing effect robustness has been widely confirmed by psychological literature. however the framing of medical treatments based on mcneil et al. (1982) paradigm raised both methodological doubts and contrasting evidence. our research aimed to investigate the presence and the nature of the framing effect in the mcneil et al. (1982) paradigm. in particular we thought that the obtained switch of preferences across frames was due to a misleading formulation of the data given in a negative cumulative frequency format. we conducted three studies |
url |
http://journal.sjdm.org/20/200728c/jdm200728c.pdf |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT lauramacchi numbersdonotaddupthepragmaticapproachtotheframingofmedicaltreatments AT edoardozulato numbersdonotaddupthepragmaticapproachtotheframingofmedicaltreatments |
_version_ |
1721419063466393600 |