Abstract
This chapter contains a description of the framing process in the ethical decision-making methodology. Before attempting to handle questions of ethics, a scenario must be deconstructed into component pieces. Facts, concepts, and morals are defined and discerned from like objects that contain some degree of ambiguity (known as factual issues, conceptual issues, and moral issues). Gaps in these components are filled with assumptions, an important but often insidious part of the decision process. Finally, process can continue iteratively until stopped by the decision-maker.
“ If while traveling in a mountain range you notice that the apparent relative height of mountain peaks varies with your vantage point, you will conclude that some impressions of relative height must be erroneous, even when you have no access to the correct answer. Similarly, one may discover that the relative attractiveness of options varies when the same decision problem is framed in different ways... The susceptibility to perspective effects is of special concern in the domain of decision-making because of the absence of objective standards such as the true height of mountains.”
-Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky (1981)
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Code, L. (1991). What can she know: Feminist theory and the construction of knowledge. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Heath, T. B., Chatterjee, S., & France, K. R. (1995). Mental accounting and changes in price: The frame dependence of reference dependence. Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 90–97.
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1990). Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase theorem. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 1325–1348.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453–458.
Kirschenbaum, H. (1992). A comprehensive model for values education and moral education. The Phi Delta Kappan, 73(10), 771–776.
Kohlberg, L., & Hersh, R. H. (1977). Moral development: A review of the theory. Theory Into Practice, 16(2), 53–59.
McCaffery, E. J., & Baron, J. (2004). Framing and taxation: Evaluation of tax policies involving household composition. Journal of Economic Psychology, 25(6), 679–705.
Rae, J. (2006). Life of Adam Smith. New York: Cosimo.
Rand, A. (1992). Atlas shrugged (35th Anniversary Edition). New York: Dutton.
Schelling, T. C. (1981). Economic reasoning and the ethics of policy. The Public Interest, 63, 37–61.
Smith, A. (1997). The theory of moral sentiments. Washington, DC: Regenery.
Stiglitz, J. E., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J. P. (2010). Mismeasuring our lives: Why GDP doesn’t add up. New York: New Press.
Thaler, R. (1980). Toward a positive theory of consumer choice. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 1(1), 39–60.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1986). Rational choice and the framing of decisions. Journal of Business, 59, S251–S278.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1991). Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(4), 1039–1061.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Searing, E.A.M., Searing, D.R. (2016). Framing the Problem. In: Searing, E., Searing, D. (eds) Practicing Professional Ethics in Economics and Public Policy. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7306-5_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7306-5_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-7305-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-7306-5
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)