Why Influence?
Everyday
Modern
Definitions
Ethics I
Ethics II
Disciplines
Approach
Bad Info
Structure
Mindfulness
Mindlessness
6 Principles
Matrix
Cults I
Cults II
Cults III
Framing I
Framing II
Framing III
Framing IV
Framing V
Framing VI
Framing VII
Framing VIII
Bibliography
Links |
 |
Risky Behavior and Negative Framing:
The Roots of Modern Framing Research
Kahneman
& Tversky (1979) were interested in understanding the conditions under
which people made conservative or risky judgments. They observed evidence
supporting what they called "prospect theory:" that the prospect of a loss
has a greater impact on decision making than does the prospect of an equivalent
gain. Considerable evidence has amassed supporting the statement that humans
do not consider gains and losses logically. A decision maker will select
the option with the highest subjective utility, whether or not that
provides the highest objective gain (Kahneman & Tversky, 1982).
If actual gains and losses matched their psychological incarnations
exactly, you'd find that people who found a $100 bill would be ten times
as happy as those who found a $10 bill, and 100x as happy as the person
who found a $1 bill. The inverse should also be true for losing money.
If you were to plot a logical relationship on a vertical axis of value
(happiness at the top of the blue line, unhappiness at the bottom) and
a horizontal axis of valence (gains on the right side of the green line,
losses on the left), it would look like this:

Logically, each increment in good fortune should represent an equal
increment of value (happiness). But the relationship isn't this simple
or logical. Finding a single dollar makes a person disproportionately happy.
Each additional dollar found makes him happier, but not in a linear fashion.
That first dollar gives "the most bang for a buck" as far as pleasure is
concerned. Each additional dollar found, won, or earned gives somewhat
less pleasure than the previous one. Now let's look at the losing end of
the line. The loss of a dollar will make the purple line dip faster than
it rose when it was in gain territory. The pleasure of winning money is
less intense than the pain of losing the same sum! Kahneman & Tversky
(1982) plotted the psychological relationship that exists between value,
gains and losses. I've copied it from their article and reproduced it below:

In the upper right "gain" quadrant, notice that "value" rises rather
quickly in the lower value ranges and then levels off at higher ranges.
This indicates that small fortunes are very efficient in making one happy.
In the lower, or "loss" quadrant, notice that the line dips sharply below
where the logical 45° line should be, and stays there. This demonstrates
that losses are felt more keenly than is logical. Felt losses remain below
the logical line throughout the range depicted, indicating that losing
continues to hurt worse than "it actually is." Notice also that the loss
line dips more sharply than the gain line ever rises. Again, we humans
hate to lose. We'd rather not win, than lose!
Prospect theory, and its function above, give us an invaluable insight
into human nature. We know that a human's first priority is not to lose--gains
are secondary to the "no loss" rule. Thus, framing a decision in terms
of possible loss should motivate a person more than framing the same decision
in terms of possible gain. And, given various obligatory caveats and constraints
which we explore later, subsequent research largely supports the contention
that humans are acutely loss-averse and thus extraordinarily sensitive
to loss frames. Continue . . .ontrol,
argument, argumentation, debate, adherence, Kelton Rhoads, Kelton Rhoads,
Kelton Rhoads, Cialdini, Cialdini, Robert Cialdini. |