Advertisement

Framing and Time Pressure in Decision Making

  • Ola Svenson
  • Lehman BensonIII

Abstract

This study investigates the effect of time pressure on decision framing. Tversky and Kahneman (1981) introduced the term decision frame for a decision maker’s representation of a decision problem including acts outcomes and contingencies associated with different alternatives (cf. Tversky & Kahneman, 1981). They showed that different decision frames can be induced from the same factual information. Two versions of a particular decision problem may be constructed that are formally identical, yet the wording of each is slightly different by emphasizing either the gains or the losses.

Keywords

Decision Problem Time Pressure Prospect Theory Framing Effect Positive Framing 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Fischhoff, B. (1983). Predicting frames. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 9, 103–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Johnson, E., Payne, J., & Bettman, J. (1988). Information displays and preference reversals. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 42, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect Theory: An analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1976). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  5. Maule, J. (1989). Positive and negative decision frames: A verbal protocol analysis of the Asian disease problem of A. Tversky and D. Kahneman. In Montgomery & O. Svenson (Eds.), Process and structure in decision making (pp. 163–180). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. McNeil, B., Pauker, S., Sox, H., & Tversky, A. (1982). On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies. The New England Journal of Medicine, 306, 1259–1262.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Miller, J. G. (1960). Information input overload and psychopathology. American Journal of Psychiatry, 116, 695–704.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Svenson, O. (1992). Differentiation and Consolidation theory of human decision making: A frame of reference for the study of pre-and post-decision processes. Acta Psychologica, 80, 143–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Svenson, O. (1990). Some propositions for the classification of decisions. In K. Borcherding, O. Larichev, & D. M. Messick (Eds.), Contemporary issues in decision making (pp. 17–31 ). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  10. Svenson, O., & Edland, A. (1987). Change and preference under time pressure: Choices and judgments. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 28, 322–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Svenson, O., Edland, A., & Slovic, P. (1990). Choices and judgments of incompletely described decision alternatives under time pressure. Acta Psychologica, 75, 153–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453–458.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Wright, P. (1974). The harassed decision maker: Time pressure, distraction and the use of evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 555–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ola Svenson
    • 1
  • Lehman BensonIII
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyStockholm UniversityStockholmSweden
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyLund UniversityLundSweden

Personalised recommendations