Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,Gilboa, Itzhak, Fabio Maccheroni, Massimo Marinacci, and David Schmeidler. Two evolutions are worth noting in KT’s subsequent uses of “framing” regarding the rationality of decision makers. 95% chance to win $10,000 is high probability and a gain). 2010. On the one hand, the notion of equivalence is central (yet often confused with identity) in comments on the empirical structure of framing experiments. N =72 [83]* [17] The data show that 82 per cent of the subjects chose B in Problem 1, and 83 per cent of the subjects chose C in Problem 2. In both the loose version of these framings there was such a relation of dominance. In Marcel Boumans (ed. This concerns the relation between their theoretical explanation using prospect theory and the positive/normative distinction involved in models of individual behaviors. They indicate that probability judgments are attached not to events but to descriptions of events. To conclude with some thoughts on this question, the following retrospective comment by Kahneman is especially worth discussing:We eventually adopted a less theory-bound view of what makes two problems the same. The third item indicates how most people would behave given each of the prospects (either Risk Averse or Risk Seeking). Molti lo reputavano un saggio, all'avanguardia e dotato di un'impressionante lucidità. There are many workers anxious to work at the company. Again, this is obvious in the isolation effect: {} and {C, D} taken in isolation, are gains and losses respectively. Framing as Path Dependence. On Mathematics and Mathematical Economics. van Buiten, Marc and Gideon Keren. By contrast (as we shall highlight), Kahneman can be seen to have focused more on prospect theory’s value function, commenting more on the implications of experienced utility (i.e., KT’s early position) but on different decision problems than the ones involving strict or loose framing effects.However, Kahneman displays a rather subtle position on the normative dimension of framings of outcomes in the chapter of (Kahneman, 2011, Chap. KT speak of an external frame as if it had the intentionality of an internal frame. In psychology, this claim is detailed in most of the surveys on the framing experiments that have been conducted following KT’s work on the topic (see esp. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 36, 1, 83–102.Staddon, John (2017) Scientific Method: How science works, fails to work or pretends to work. In the Asian Disease, the reference point is the same: “expected to kill 600 people” (and is arguably less clear because of the temporal dimension).
It relies on further conceptual equivalence in terms of economic theory. It shows how various conventions involved in economic theory allow for the establishment of different equivalence relations between pairs of problems in framing experiments. The idea is that if the framing of some outcomes not only influence the decision maker’s choices, but also his experience of the outcomes of his choices, then there is a hedonistic rationale to explain these choices. Theory and Decision, 82(4), 567-596. The company decides to increase salaries [by] only 5% this year.There is a change for real income (i.e., purchasing power) that, in both frames, is equivalent to a 7% decrease. The seat was not marked and the ticket cannot be recovered.There is a sunk cost that, in both frames, is equivalent to € 10. If we set the frame to the current wealth, the decision would be to either 2011a. The following two subsections discuss two respective instances of such comments, useful in characterizing the evolution of the meaning of “framing” in KT’s separate work.Tversky and Koehler (1994) propose a theory of the formation of probabilistic beliefs called support theory, where the objects of judgments are not events but descriptions of events. It was the 2012 winner of the National Academies Communication Award for best creative work that helps the public understanding of topics in behavioral science, engineering and medicine. Throughout, a methodological framework is developed with a distinction between identity, equivalence and equality (borrowed from philosopher Craig Dilworth) for a critical analysis of the relation between external frames (the empirical structure of a decision problem) and internal frames (the psychological representation of the decision problem by decision makers).We use the term “decision frame” to refer to the decision-maker’s conception of the acts, outcomes, and contingencies associated with a particular choice. Furthermore, the editing phase of the 1979 version came to be replaced by “the framing phase, [where] the decision maker constructs a representation of the acts, contingencies, and outcomes that are relevant to the decision” (ibid, 299). From these contributions, it appears, on the one hand, that formally fleshing out the implicit axiom of description invariance is not an easy task, and, on the other hand, that economists are at best agnostic on the rationality of the behaviors underlying framing effects, otherwise following KT’s late position that they are not rational.
Wakker, Peter P. 1999.