IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/judgdm/v3y2008i6p435-448_1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dissecting the risky-choice framing effect: Numeracy as an individual-difference factor in weighting risky and riskless options

Author

Listed:
  • Peters, Ellen
  • Levin, Irwin P.

Abstract

Using five variants of the Asian Disease Problem, we dissected the risky-choice framing effect by requiring each participant to provide preference ratings for the full decision problem and also to provide attractiveness ratings for each of the component parts, i.e., the sure-thing option and the risky option. Consistent with previous research, more risky choices were made by respondents receiving negatively framed versions of the decision problems than by those receiving positively framed versions. However, different processes were evident for those scoring high and low on numeracy. Whereas the choices of the less numerate showed a large effect of frame above and beyond any influence of their evaluations of the separate options, the choices of the highly numerate were almost completely accounted for by their attractiveness ratings of the separate options. These results are consistent with an increased tendency of the highly numerate to integrate complex numeric information in the construction of their preferences and a tendency for the less numerate to respond more superficially to non-numeric sources of information.

Suggested Citation

  • Peters, Ellen & Levin, Irwin P., 2008. "Dissecting the risky-choice framing effect: Numeracy as an individual-difference factor in weighting risky and riskless options," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(6), pages 435-448, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i:6:p:435-448_1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1930297500000012/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i:6:p:435-448_1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jdm .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.