IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceco/v40y2011i2p115-123.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Frames as choice superstructures

Author

Listed:
  • Lanzi, Diego

Abstract

The seminal research work by Kaheman and Tversky proved that framing effects can widely influence choice behavior. This finding has led to a new field of economic research to explain how individuals internalize referential structures, context conditions and social norms of behavior in choice problems. In this context, the idea of a frame of choice has been proposed, although this concept has been interpreted in different ways. In what follows, we firstly discuss different interpretations of what a frame is, then we propose a new tool, namely, the concept of choice superstructure, to characterize how frames of choice affect choice behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Lanzi, Diego, 2011. "Frames as choice superstructures," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 115-123, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:40:y:2011:i:2:p:115-123
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6W5H-51SWG37-1/2/8a8381c0d981aee20db6f388661b1c32
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simonson, Itamar, 1989. "Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(2), pages 158-174, September.
    2. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    3. Luce, R. Duncan, 1991. "Rank- and sign-dependent linear utility models for binary gambles," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 75-100, February.
    4. Shmuel Nitzan & Eyal Baharad, 2000. "Extended preferences and freedom of choice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 17(4), pages 629-637.
    5. Sugden, Robert, 1991. "Rational Choice: A Survey of Contributions from Economics and Philosophy," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(407), pages 751-785, July.
    6. Quiggin, John, 1982. "A theory of anticipated utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 323-343, December.
    7. Mark Granovetter, 2005. "The Impact of Social Structure on Economic Outcomes," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(1), pages 33-50, Winter.
    8. Amartya Sen, 1997. "Maximization and the Act of Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(4), pages 745-780, July.
    9. Hamilton, Rebecca W, 2003. "Why Do People Suggest What They Do Not Want? Using Context Effects to Influence Others' Choices," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 29(4), pages 492-506, March.
    10. Menon, Satya & Kahn, Barbara E, 1995. "The Impact of Context on Variety Seeking in Product Choices," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 22(3), pages 285-295, December.
    11. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    12. Gaertner, Wulf & Xu, Yongsheng, 1997. "Optimization and external reference; a comparison of three axiomatic systems," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 57-62, November.
    13. Donald Katzner, 2000. "Culture and the Explanation of Choice behavior," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 241-262, May.
    14. Johnson, Mark R. & Dean, Richard A., 2001. "Locally complete path independent choice functions and their lattices," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 53-87, July.
    15. Wulf Gaertner & Yongsheng Xu, 1999. "On the structure of choice under different external references," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 14(3), pages 609-620.
    16. Matthew Rabin, 2000. "Risk Aversion and Expected-Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1281-1292, September.
    17. Michael Ryan, 2004. "Framing, Switching and Preference Reversals," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 57(3), pages 181-211, November.
    18. Elster, Jon, 1989. "Social Norms and Economic Theory," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(4), pages 99-117, Fall.
    19. Elster, Jon, 1996. "Rationality and the Emotions," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(438), pages 1386-1397, September.
    20. Chateauneuf, Alain & Wakker, Peter, 1999. "An Axiomatization of Cumulative Prospect Theory for Decision under Risk," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 137-145, August.
    21. Read, Daniel & Loewenstein, George & Rabin, Matthew, 1999. "Choice Bracketing," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 19(1-3), pages 171-197, December.
    22. Candeal, Juan C. & Herves, Carlos & Indurain, Esteban, 1998. "Some results on representation and extension of preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 75-81, January.
    23. Wakker, Peter & Tversky, Amos, 1993. "An Axiomatization of Cumulative Prospect Theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 147-175, October.
    24. Daniel Kahneman & Dan Lovallo, 1993. "Timid Choices and Bold Forecasts: A Cognitive Perspective on Risk Taking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(1), pages 17-31, January.
    25. Broussolle, Damien, 2005. "Internal consistency of choice, Sen and the spirit of revealed preferences: A behaviorist approach," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 605-620, October.
    26. Binmore, Ken & Samuelson, Larry, 2006. "The evolution of focal points," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 21-42, April.
    27. Kotaro Suzumura, 1976. "Rational Choice and Revealed Preference," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 43(1), pages 149-158.
    28. Wulf Gaertner & Yongsheng Xu, 1999. "Rationality And External Reference," Rationality and Society, , vol. 11(2), pages 169-185, May.
    29. Muthukrishnan, A V & Kardes, Frank R, 2001. "Persistent Preferences for Product Attributes: The Effects of the Initial Choice Context and Uninformative Experience," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 28(1), pages 89-104, June.
    30. Belk, Russell W, 1975. "Situational Variables and Consumer Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 2(3), pages 157-164, December.
    31. Amartya K. Sen, 1971. "Choice Functions and Revealed Preference," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 38(3), pages 307-317.
    32. Sen, Amartya K, 1980. "Description as Choice," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(3), pages 353-369, November.
    33. Diego Lanzi, 2010. "Embedded choices," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 263-280, March.
    34. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1986. "Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages 251-278, October.
    35. Luce, R Duncan & Fishburn, Peter C, 1991. "Rank- and Sign-Dependent Linear Utility Models for Finite First-Order Gambles," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 29-59, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Borie, Dino & Jullien, Dorian, 2020. "Description-dependent preferences," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    2. Dorian Jullien, 2016. "All Frames Created Equal are Not Identical: On the Structure of Kahneman and Tversky's Framing Effects," GREDEG Working Papers 2016-17, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    3. Diego Lanzi, 2018. "On Embedded Choice Theory: Re-framing and Emotions," Review of Economics & Finance, Better Advances Press, Canada, vol. 11, pages 19-30, February.
    4. Lanzi, Diego, 2013. "Frames and social games," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 227-233.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Diego Lanzi, 2010. "Embedded choices," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 263-280, March.
    2. P Brooks & H Zank, 2004. "Attitudes on Gain and Loss Lotteries: A Simple Experiment," Economics Discussion Paper Series 0402, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    3. Horst Zank, 2010. "On probabilities and loss aversion," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 243-261, March.
    4. Glenn W. Harrison & J. Todd Swarthout, 2016. "Cumulative Prospect Theory in the Laboratory: A Reconsideration," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2016-04, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    5. Peter Brooks & Horst Zank, 2005. "Loss Averse Behavior," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 301-325, December.
    6. Birnbaum, Michael H. & Chavez, Alfredo, 1997. "Tests of Theories of Decision Making: Violations of Branch Independence and Distribution Independence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 161-194, August.
    7. Ulrich Schmidt & Horst Zank, 2012. "A genuine foundation for prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 97-113, October.
    8. Birnbaum, Michael H., 2004. "Tests of rank-dependent utility and cumulative prospect theory in gambles represented by natural frequencies: Effects of format, event framing, and branch splitting," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 40-65, September.
    9. Amit Kothiyal & Vitalie Spinu & Peter Wakker, 2011. "Prospect theory for continuous distributions: A preference foundation," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 195-210, June.
    10. Horst Zank, 2007. "On the Paradigm of Loss Aversion," Economics Discussion Paper Series 0710, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    11. Schmidt, Ulrich & Zank, Horst, 2009. "A simple model of cumulative prospect theory," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(3-4), pages 308-319, March.
    12. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2002. "Foundations of Behavioral and Experimental Economics: Daniel Kahneman and Vernon Smith," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2002-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    13. Liang Zou, 2006. "An Alternative to Prospect Theory," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 7(1), pages 1-28, May.
    14. Michael Birnbaum, 2005. "A Comparison of Five Models that Predict Violations of First-Order Stochastic Dominance in Risky Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 263-287, December.
    15. Michal Skořepa, 2007. "Zpochybnění deskriptivnosti teorie očekávaného užitku [Doubts about the descriptive validity of the expected utility theory]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2007(1), pages 106-120.
    16. Birnbaum, Michael H. & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2010. "Allais paradoxes can be reversed by presenting choices in canonical split form," Kiel Working Papers 1615, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    17. Henry Stott, 2006. "Cumulative prospect theory's functional menagerie," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 101-130, March.
    18. Philippe, Fabrice, 2000. "Cumulative prospect theory and imprecise risk," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 237-263, November.
    19. Ulrich Schmidt & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 2008. "Third-generation prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 203-223, June.
    20. Schmidt, Ulrich & Zank, Horst, 2010. "Endogenizing prospect theory's reference point," Kiel Working Papers 1611, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).

    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:eee:soceco:v:40:y:2011:i:2:p:115-123. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620175 .

    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.