IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/judgdm/v4y2009i1p51-63_5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Speakers' choice of frame in binary choice: Effects of recommendation mode and option attractiveness

Author

Listed:
  • Buiten, Marc van
  • Keren, Gideon

Abstract

A distinction is proposed between recommending for preferred choice options and recommending against non-preferred choice options. In binary choice, both recommendation modes are logically, though not psychologically, equivalent. We report empirical evidence showing that speakers recommending for preferred options predominantly select positive frames, which are less common when speakers recommend against non-preferred options. In addition, option attractiveness is shown to affect speakers’ choice of frame, and adoption of recommendation mode. The results are interpreted in terms of three compatibility effects, (i) recommendation mode—valence framing compatibility: speakers’ preference for positive framing is enhanced under recommending for and diminished under recommending against instructions, (ii) option attractiveness—valence framing compatibility: speakers’ preference for positive framing is more pronounced for attractive than for unattractive options, and (iii) recommendation mode—option attractiveness compatibility: speakers are more likely to adopt a recommending for approach for attractive than for unattractive binary choice pairs.

Suggested Citation

  • Buiten, Marc van & Keren, Gideon, 2009. "Speakers' choice of frame in binary choice: Effects of recommendation mode and option attractiveness," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 51-63, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:4:y:2009:i:1:p:51-63_5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S193029750000070X/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:4:y:2009:i:1:p:51-63_5. 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.