Social cues and verbal framing in risky choice

Wang, X. T; Simons, Frédéric; Brédart, Serge

doi:10.1002/1099-0771(200101)14:1<1::aid-bdm361>3.3.co;2-e

Cited by 29 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is of interest that while there was no significant gender difference in the framing effect under the positive frame, there was a significant gender difference in the framing effect under the negative frame. Women exhibited greater framing effects than men, which is consistent with previous research [24,25,66]. The results are related to some studies in psychology that have shown that women are more risk averse than men [13], which stems from differences in probability weighting and loss aversion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The online framing effect: the moderating role of warning, brand familiarity, and product type

Chen

Chang

2015

Electron Commer Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the framing effect on online consumer purchase intention. Three framing effect moderators-warning type (text-based/picturebased), brand familiarity (familiar/unfamiliar), and product type (utilitarian/hedonic)-were considered. The results demonstrated that a positive frame message could create more favorable preferences toward the product than a negative frame message could. Further, consumers with text-based warnings who received positive framing messages had higher purchase intentions toward the target product than did those receiving negative framing messages. However, the online framing effect was not significant for consumers receiving picture-based warnings. Moreover, the online framing effect was significant for consumers familiar with the brand. Finally, positive messages resulted in higher purchase intention for hedonic rather than utilitarian products. This study further examined gender differences in framing effects and found women exhibited greater framing effects than men under the negative frame. The findings provide guidance for designing appropriate product strategy to induce online consumer purchase intentions that favor online retailers.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The online framing effect: the moderating role of warning, brand familiarity, and product type

Chen

Chang

2015

Electron Commer Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Wang et al (2001) presented participants with a framing scenario describing a threat to the lives of six billion humans or six billion extraterrestrials. Participants who responded to the human life scenario showed typical framing effects (36% preferred the risky option in the positive frame, 66% in the negative frame).…”

Section: Caring and Framing Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Wang and Johnston (1995) found that, while participants faced with a group of 6,000 or 600 victims showed framing effects (41% choice of the risky option in the positive frame, 62% in the negative frame for 6,000; 40 and 68% for 600), framing effects did not appear for small groups of 60 or 6 (68% risky choices in the positive condition and 65% in the negative condition for group size 60%, 64% and 70% for group size 6). Wang (1996a-c) (see also Rode and Wang 2000) and Wang et al (2001) explain the influence of group size on framing effects through an evolutionary hypothesis: he argues that the susceptibility of decision makers to the irrelevant information provided by framing arises from the decision situation being socially and ecologically novel. In this situation, there are no more important cues than the frame of the options to guide choice.…”

Section: Group Size and Framing Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this situation, there are no more important cues than the frame of the options to guide choice. Scenarios that describe small victim groups present the decision in a more relevant context (because humans evolved as members of small groups), so participants are not as susceptible to the irrational cue of frame (Wang et al 2001). Wang (1996a) suggests that participants responding to small group scenarios prefer the risky option because they find the loss of 2/ 3 of a small group emotionally unacceptable: the gain of 1/3 of the members for sure is not seen as a viable option.…”

Section: Group Size and Framing Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For animals, however, this effect did not occur: framing effects were shown for neither the large nor the small group scenarios (29% choice of the risky option in the negative frame, 22% in the positive frame and 56% choice of the risky option in the negative frame, 60% in the positive frame, respectively). It is possible that participants in Bloomfield's study had a near linear value function for animal lives, similar to the value function Levin and Chapman (1990) participants had for IV drug users and Wang et al (2001) participants had for extraterrestrial lives. If this is the case, Bloomfield's findings indicate that small group size affects choice (encouraging more choices of the risky option) even in situations where the value function for what is at stake is near linear and a framing effect would not be expected.…”

Section: Group Size and Framing Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Caring about framing effects

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Multiple Framing: Verbal, Facial, and Vocal Cues in Risky Choice

Garelik

Wang

2016

Behavioral Decision Making

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Verbal framing effects have been widely studied, but little is known about how people react to multiple framing cues in risk communication, where verbal messages are often accompanied by facial and vocal cues. We examined joint and differential effects of verbal, facial, and vocal framing on risk preference in hypothetical monetary and life-death situations. In the multiple framing condition with the factorial design (2 verbal frames × 2 vocal tones × 4 basic facial expressions × 2 task domains), each scenario was presented auditorily with a written message on a photo of the messenger's face. Compared with verbal framing effects resulting in preference reversal, multiple frames made risky choice more consistent and shifted risk preference without reversal. Moreover, a positive tone of voice increased risk-seeking preference in women. When the valence of facial and vocal cues was incongruent with verbal frame, verbal framing effects were significant. In contrast, when the affect cues were congruent with verbal frame, framing effects disappeared. These results suggest that verbal framing is given higher priority when other affect cues are incongruent. Further analysis revealed that participants were more risk-averse when positive affect cues (positive tone or facial expressions) were congruently paired with a positive verbal frame whereas participants were more risk-seeking when positive affect cues were incongruent with the verbal frame. In contrast, for negative affect cues, congruency promoted risk-seeking tendency whereas incongruency increased risk-aversion. Overall, the results show that facial and vocal cues interact with verbal framing and significantly affect risk communication.

show abstract

Social cues and verbal framing in risky choice

Cited by 29 publications

References 0 publications

The online framing effect: the moderating role of warning, brand familiarity, and product type

The online framing effect: the moderating role of warning, brand familiarity, and product type

Caring about framing effects

Multiple Framing: Verbal, Facial, and Vocal Cues in Risky Choice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About