Abstract
Research on framing effects has been one of few multidisciplinary endeavors joined by psychologists, economists, political scientists, and management and marketing researchers. Framing effects epitomize the power of linguistic subtlety in regulating decision-making, showing that different ways of framing, phrasing, or presenting virtually identical choice options systematically affect risk preference, evaluation of experience, and persuasiveness of messages. Given its central role in the studies of decision biases, the framing effect has been used as an experimental probe for understanding general mechanisms of human judgment and decision-making. Researchers have proposed various models explaining the framing effect. However, it was not until recently that research of framing effects started to focus more on psychological mechanisms above and beyond phenomenology. We conducted a meta-analysis of neural correlates of framing effects. The topographic convergences from a total of 26 foci found in the fMRI studies of framing effects revealed two key brain areas underlying framing effects: the left anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the right inferior frontal gyrus (IFG). Together with behavioral findings, these results suggest that valence framing as a secondary cue becomes most salient and effective when primary contextual or social cues are absent or incongruent. The processing of choice problems under these conditions call for an ambiguity-reducing and conflict-monitoring function, which would result in the ACC activation. Second, the right IFG activation suggests that the nature of valence framing is both semantic and hedonic, involving not only verbatim linguistic analysis, but also interpretation of its affective tones and metaphorical implications.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Aron AR, Fletcher PC, Bullmore ET, Sahakian BJ, Robbins TW (2003) Stop-signal inhibition disrupted by damage to right inferior frontal gyrus in humans. Nat Neurosci 6:115–116
Aron AR, Robbins T, Poldrack R (2004) Inhibition and the right inferior frontal cortex. Trends Cogn Sci 8:170–177
Asahi S, Okamoto Y, Okada G, Yamawaki S, Yokota N (2004) Negative correlation between right prefrontal activity during response inhibition and impulsiveness: an fMRI study. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 254:245–251
Bless H, Betsch T, Franzen A (1998) Framing the framing effect: the impact of context cues on solutions to the “Asian disease” problem. Euro J Soc Psychol 28:287–291
Bloomfield AN (2006) Group size and the framing effect: treats to human beings and animals. Mem Cogn 34:929–937
Bloomfield AN, Sager JA, Bartels DM, Medin DL (2006) Caring about framing effects. Mind Soc 5:123–138
Bohm P, Lind H (1992) A note on the robustness of a classical framing result. J Econ Psychol 13:355–361
Botvinick MM (2007) Conflict monitoring and decision making: Reconciling two perspectives on anterior cingulate function. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 7:356–366
Botvinick MM, Cohen JD, Carter CS (2004) Conflict monitoring and anterior cingulate cortex: an update. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8:539–546
Breiter HC, Aharon H, Kahneman D, Dale A, Shizgal P (2001) Functional imaging of neural responses to expectancy and experience of monetary gains and losses. Neuron 30:619–639
Cendri A, Hutcherson CA, Plassmann H, Gross JJ, Rangel A (2012) Cognitive regulation during decision making shifts behavioral control between ventromedial and dorsolateral prefrontal value systems. J Neurosci 32:13543–13554
Chang CJ, Yen SH, Duh RR (2002) An empirical investigation of competing theories to explain the framing effect in accounting-related decision. Behav Res Acc 14:35–64
Chikazoe J, Konishi S, Asari T, Jimura K, Miyashita Y (2007) Activation of right inferior frontal gyrus during response inhibition across response modalities. J Cogn Neurosci Arch 19:69–80
Chong D, Druckman J (2007) Framing theory. Annu Rev Polit Sci 10:103–126
Christopoulos GI, Tobler PN, Bossaerts P, Dolan RJ, Schultz W (2009) Neural correlates of value, risk, and risk aversion contributing to decision making under risk. J Neurosci 29:12574–12583
Cohen NJ, Eichenbaum HE (1993) Memory, amnesia, and the hippocampal system. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
De Martino B, Kumaran D, Seymour B, Dolan RJ (2006) Frames, biases, and rational decision-making in the human brain. Science 313:684–687
Druckman JN (2001) On the limits of framing effects: Who can frame? J Polit 63:1041–1066
Dunegan KJ (1993) Framing, cognitive modes, and image theory: toward an understanding of a glass half full. J Appl Psychol 78:491–503
Eickhoff SB, Laird AR, Grefkes C, Wang LE, Zilles K, Fox PT (2009) Coordinate-based activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis of neuroimaging data: a random-effects approach based on empirical estimates of spatial uncertainty. Hum Brain Mapp 30:2907–2926
Fagley NS, Miller PM (1987) The effects of decision framing on choice of risky vs. certain options. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 39:264–277
Fagley NS, Miller PM (1990) The effect of framing on choice: interactions with risk-taking propensity, cognitive style, and sex. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 16:496–510
Fagley NS, Miller PM (1997) Framing effects and arenas of choice: your money or your life? Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 71:355–373
Genovese CR, Lazar NA, Nichols TE (2002) Thresholding of statistical maps in functional neuroimaging using the false discovery rate. NeuroImage 15:870–878
Gigerenzer G, Hoffrage U, Kleinbölting H (1991) Probabilistic mental models: a Brunswikian theory of confidence. Psychol Rev 98:506–528
Gonzalez C, Dana J, Koshino H, Just M (2005) The framing effect and risky decisions: examining cognitive functions with fMRI. J Econ Psychol 26:1–20
Guitart-Masip M, Talmi D, Dolan R (2010) Conditioned associations and economic decision biases. NeuroImage 53:206–214
Holroyd CB, Nieuwenhuis S, Mars RB, Coles MGH (2004) Anterior cingulate cortex, selection for action, and error processing. In Posner MI (ed) Cognitive neuroscience of attention. Guilford Press, New York, pp 219–231
Honey GD, Fu CH, Kim J et al (2002) Effects of verbal working memory load on corticocortical connectivity modeled by path analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging data. NeuroImage 17:573–582
Jung-Beeman M (2005) Bilateral brain processes for comprehending natural language. Trends Cogn Sci 9:512–518
Kahneman D, Frederick S (2006) Frames and brains: elicitation and control of response tendencies. Trends Cogn Sci 11:45–46
Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory. Econometrica 47:263–292
Kringelbach ML, Rolls ET (2004) The functional neuroanatomy of the human orbitofrontal cortex: evidence from neuroimaging and neuropsychology. Prog Neurobiol 72:341–372
Kühberger A (1995) The framing of decisions: a new look at old problems. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 62:230–240
Kühberger A (1998) The influence of framing on risky decisions: a meta-analysis. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 75:23–55
Kühberger A, Schulte-Mecklenbeck M, Perner J (1999) The effects of framing, reflection, probability, and payoff on risk preference in choice tasks. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 78:204–231
Kuo FY, Hsu CW, Day RF (2009) An exploratory study of cognitive effort involved in decision under Framing-an application of the eye-tracking technology. Decis Support Syst 48:81–91
LeBoeuf RA, Shafir E (2003) Deep thoughts and shallow frames: on the susceptibility to framing effects. J Behav Decis Mak 16:77–92
Levin IP, Chapman DP (1990) Risk taking, frame of reference, and characterization of victim groups in AIDS treatment decisions. J Exp Soc Psychol 26:421–434
Levin IP, Gaeth GJ (1988) Framing of attribute information before and after consuming the product. J Consum Res 15:374–378
Levin IP, Schneider S, Gaeth GJ (1998) All frames are not created equal: a typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 76:149–188
McElroy T, Seta J (2003) Framing effects: an analytic-holistic perspective. J Exp Soc Psychol 39:610–617
McElroy T, Seta JJ (2004) On the other hand Am I rational? Hemispheric activation and the farming effect. Brain Cogn 55:572–580
Meyerowitz BE, Chaiken S (1987) The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior. J Pers Soc Psychol 52:500–510
Miller PM, Fagley NS (1991) The effects of framing, problem variations, and providing rationale on choice. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 17:517–522
Montague PR, Berns GS (2002) Neural economics and the biological substrates of valuation. Neuron 36:265–284
Moscovitch M (1994) Cognitive resources and dual-task interference effects at retrieval in normal people: the role of the frontal lobes and medial temporal cortex. Neuropsychology 8:524
O’Doherty J, Kringelbach ML, Rolls ET, Hornak J, Andrews C (2001) Abstract reward and punishment representations in the human orbitofrontal cortex. Nat Neurosci 4:95–102
Owen AM (1997) The functional organization of working memory processes within human lateral frontal cortex: the contribution of functional neuroimaging. Euro J Neurosci 9:1329–1339
Payne JW, Bettman JR, Johnson EJ (1993) The adaptive decision maker. Cambridge University Press, New York
Piazza M, Izard V, Pinel P, Le Bihan D, Dehaene S (2004) Tuning curves for approximate numerosity in the human intraparietal sulcus. Neuron 44:547–555
Pinel P, Piazza M, Le Bihan D, Dehaene S (2004) Distributed and overlapping cerebral representations of number, size, and luminance during comparative judgments. Neuron 41:983–993
Rapp AM, Leube DT, Erb M, Grodd W, Kircher TTJ (2004) Neural correlates of metaphor processing. Cogn Brain Res 20:395–402
Reyna VF, Brainerd CJ (1991) Fuzzy-trace theory and framing effects in choice: Gist extraction, truncation, and conversion. J Behav Decis Mak 4:249–262
Reyna VF, Brainerd CJ (1995) Fuzzy-trace theory: an interim synthesis. Learn Individ Differ 7:1–75
Reyna VF, Brainerd CJ (2011) Dual processes in decision making and developmental neuroscience: a fuzzy-trace model. Dev Rev 31:180–206
Roiser JP, De Martino B, Tan GCY, Kumaran D, Seymour B, Wood NW, Dolan R (2009) A genetically mediated bias in decision making driven by failure of amygdala control. J Neurosci 29:5985–5991
Shimizu K, Udagawa D (2011a) A re-examination of the effect of contextual group size on people’s attitude to risk. Judgment and Decision Making 6:156–162
Shimizu K, Udagawa D (2011b) How can group experience influence the cue priority? A re-examination of the ambiguity-ambivalence hypothesis. Front Evol Psychol 2:1–9
Sieck W, Yates JF (1997) Exposition effects on decision making: choice and confidence in choice. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 70:207–219
Sokol-Hessner P, Hutcherson C, Hare T, Rangel A (2012) Decision value computations adjust to the available decision time. Eur J Neurosci 35:1065–1074
Stanovich KE, West RF (1998) Individual differences in framing and conjunction effects. Think Reason 4:289–317
Takemura K (1994) Influence of elaboration on the framing of decision. J Psychol 128:33–39
Talmi D, Hurlemann R, Patin A, Dolan R (2010) Framing effect following bilateral amygdala lesion. Neuropsychologia 48:1823–1827
Tom SM, Fox CR, Trepel C, Poldrack RA (2007) The neural basis of loss aversion in decision making under risk. Science 315:515–518
Tulving E, Kapur S, Craik FIM, Markowitsch HJ, Houle S (1994) Hemispheric encoding/retrieval asymmetry in episodic memory: positron emission tomography findings. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91:2016–2020
Turkeltaub PE, Eden GF, Jones KM, Zeffiro TA (2002) Meta-analysis of the functional neuroanatomy of single-word reading: method and validation. Neuroimage 16:765–780
Tversky A, Kahneman D (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211:453–458
Wang XT (1996a) Framing effects: Dynamics and task domains. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 68:145–157
Wang XT (1996b) Domain-specific rationality in human choices: violations of utility axioms and social contexts. Cognition 60:31–63
Wang XT (2008) Risk communication and risky choice in context: ambiguity and ambivalence hypothesis. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1128:78–89
Wang XT, Johnson GJ (2012) A tri-reference point theory of decision making under risk. J Exp Psychol Gen 141:743–756
Wang XT, Johnston V (1995) Perceived social context and risk preference: a re-examination of framing effects in a life-death decision problem. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 8:279–293
Wang XT, Simons F, Brédart S (2001) Social cues and verbal framing in risky choice. J Behav Decis Mak 14:1–15
Whitney P, Rinehart CA, Hinson JM (2008) Framing effects under cognitive load: The role of working memory in risky decisions. Psychon Bull Rev 15:1179–1184
Zhang Y, Miao D (2008) Social cues and framing effects in risky decisions among Chinese military students. Asian J Soc Psychol 11:241–246
Zheng H, Wang XT, Zhu L (2010) Framing effects: behavioral dynamics and neural basis. Neuropsychologia 48:3198–3204
Acknowledgments
This work was partially supported by National Science Foundation (NSF) Grant SES-1123341, and a research fund from the Key Laboratory of Behavioral Science, Institute of Psychology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences to the first author, and a research fund (No. Y2CQ043005) from the Institute of Psychology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences to the second author. We thank Steven Garelik for his helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wang, XT., Rao, L., Zheng, H. (2016). Framing Effects: Behavioral Dynamics and Neural Basis. In: Reuter, M., Montag, C. (eds) Neuroeconomics. Studies in Neuroscience, Psychology and Behavioral Economics. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35923-1_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35923-1_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-35922-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-35923-1
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)