Previous research has demonstrated that the way in which information is presented or framed affects the evaluation and choice of objects such as consumer purchases. In the present study, more favorable associations to a purchase of ground beef were produced when the beef was described in terms of “percent lean” rather than “percent fat.” It is suggested that such associations to stimulus labels serve as mediators of the effects of information frame on judgment and decision making.
Anderson, N. H. (1981). Foundations of information integration theory. New York: Academic Press.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 4, 362–377.
Levin, I. P., Johnson, R. D., Deldin, P. J., Carstens, L. M., Cressey, L. J., & Davis, C. R. (1986). Framing effects in decisions with completely and incompletely described alternatives. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 38, 48–64.
Levin, I. P., Johnson, R. D., Russo, C. P., & Deldin, P. J. (1985). Framing effects in judgment tasks with varying amounts of information. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 37, 362–377.
Mellers, B. A., & Birnbaum, M. H. (1982). Loci of contextual effects in judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 8, 582–601.
Neale, M. A., & Bazerman, M. H. (1985). The effects of framing and negotiation overconfidence on bargaining behaviors and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 34–49.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453–458.