Effects of framing, perspective taking, and perspective (affective focus) on choice

Framing Alters Risk-Taking Behavior on a Modified Balloon Analogue Risk Task (Bart) in a Sex-Specific Manner

“…Unfortunately, the current procedure lacks easy categorization because the attributes of large balloons (i.e., good because they earn money or bad because they may burst) were linked to the goals of the game (i.e., positive because a lot of money would be banked or negative because a burst balloon results in the loss of possible money). Regardless of the specific form of framing used in the current study, these findings add to a growing literature demonstrating that women are more sensitive to framing effects (Fagley & Miller, 1990, 1997Fagley, et al, 2010). Given that performance on the BART has been shown to correlate with real-world risk taking (Lejuez, et al, 2002;Lejuez, Aklin, Zvolensky, et al, 2003;Lejuez, et al, 2004;Aklin, et al, 2005;Lejuez, et al, 2007), the finding that women altered their behavior on the BART in response to negative framing is significant given that attribute and goal framing are typically used in public health messages aimed at changing real-world risk-taking behaviors.…”

“…Decision-processing that more heavily relies upon rational, discreet analysis of information may be less influenced by framing manipulations than processing that is more automatic, experiential, or emotional (McElroy & Seta, 2003;Wang, 2006;Biswas, 2009). For example, Fagley, Coleman, and Simon (2010) found that an increased focus on an affective or emotional perspective, either through experimental manipulation or naturally occurring individual differences in which women scored higher than men, heightened framing effects. Other factors such as time constraints (Takemura, 1994;Igou & Bless, 2007), effortfulness of cognitive processing (Igou & Bless, 2007), frame form (Levin, Schneider, & Gaeth, 1998), and decision relevance (Krishnamurthy, Carter, & Blair, 2001) also modulate the effects of framing on decision making.…”

Expressive suppression and financial risk taking: A mediated moderation model

“…Compared with men, women were more inclined to focus on emotions during decision making (Fagley, Coleman, & Simon, 2010), and they were more likely to engage in rumination rather than suppression in regulating their emotions (Nolen-Hoeksema, 2012), while men had a greater tendency to use suppression (Gross & John, 2003). We speculated that males employed suppression with a higher frequency and efficiency; therefore, suppression had more influence on the males' decision making.…”

Individual differences in cognition, affect, and performance: Behavioral, neuroimaging, and molecular genetic approaches

“…Affect can influence the output of decision-making by providing heuristic information (Quartz, 2009; Slovic and Peters, 2006), by reinforcing and facilitating signal processing (Pessoa, 2009; Seymour and Dolan, 2008), by increasing the framing (i.e. wording) effect of decision choices (Fagley et al 2010), or by directly interfering with the process of reflexes or reacting with the approach-avoidance response (Winkielman et al, 2005). Importantly, affective processes should not simply be considered as purely modulatory influences on these phases, but as an integral part of them (Pfister and Bohm, 2008).…”