Decisions,Decisions: Analysis of Age,Cohort,and Time of Testing on Framing of Risky Decision Options

Abstract

Decision making in uncertain environments is a daily challenge faced by adults of all ages. Framing decision options as either gains or losses is a common method of altering decision-making behavior. In the experiment reported here, benchmark decision-making data collected in the 1970s by Tversky and Kahneman (1981, 1988) were compared with data collected from current samples of young and older adults to determine whether behavior was consistent across time. Although differences did emerge between the benchmark and the present samples, the effect of framing on decision behavior was relatively stable. The present findings suggest that adults of all ages are susceptible to framing effects. Results also indicated that apparent age differences might be better explained by an analysis of cohort and time-of-testing effects. Actual or potential applications of this research include an understanding of how framing might influence the decision-making behavior of people of all ages in a number of applied contexts, such as product warning interactions and medical decision scenarios.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Consumer inflation calculator. (1999). Retrieved January 3, 2003, from http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/bu2/inflateCPI.html

Craik, F. I. M. , & Salthouse, T. A. (2000). The handbook of aging and cognition (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Edwards, A. Elwyn, G. , Covey, J. , Matthews, E. , & Pill, R. (2001). Presenting risk information - A review of the effects of "framing" and other manipulations on patient outcomes. Journal of Heath Communication, 6, 61–82.

Fagley, N. S. , & Miller, P. M. (1997). Framing effects and arenas of choice: Your money or your life. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 71, 355–373.

Goldstein, W. M. , & Hogarth, R. M. (1997). Research on judgment and decision-making: Currents, connections, and controversies. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Kuhberger, A. (1998). The influence of framing on risky decisions: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 75, 23–55.

Sanfey, A. G. , & Hastie, R. (2000). Judgment and decision-making across the adult life span: A tutorial review of psychological research. In D. C. Park & N. Schwartz (Eds.), Cognitive aging: A primer (pp. 253–273). Philadelphia: Taylor & Francis.

Shipley, W. C. (1986). Shipley Institute of Living Scale. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.

Stanovich, K. E. , & West, R. F. (1998). Individual differences in framing and conjunction effects. Thinking and Reasoning, 4, 289–317.

10.

Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453–458.

11.

Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1988). Rational choice and the framing of decisions. In D. E. Bell , H. Raiffa , & A. Tversky (Eds.), Decision-making: Descriptive, normative, and prescriptive interactions (pp. 167–192). New York: Cambridge University Press.

12.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1996). Current population reports, special studies, P23-190, 65+ in the United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

13.

Wechsler, D. (1997). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale III (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.

14.

Wiseman, D. B. , & Levin, L. P. (1996). Comparing risky decision making under conditions of real and hypothetical consequences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 66, 241–250.

15.

Yates, J. F. , & Palatano, A. L. (1999). Decision making and aging. In D. C. Park , R. W. Morrell , & K. Shifren (Eds.), Processing of medical information in aging patients (pp. 31–54). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

16.

Zeitlin, L. R. (1994). Failure to follow safety instructions: Faulty communication or risky decisions? Human Factors, 36, 172–181.