ArticleJournal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition2016
Framing effects are robust to linguistic disambiguation: A critical test of contemporary theory.
Article in Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risky-choice framing effects persist when option descriptions are matched and complete: A replication and extension of DeKay and Dou (2024).Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- A reassessment of the Resistance to Framing scale.Behavior research methods · 2023Article
- Critical tests of fuzzy trace theory in brain and behavior: uncertainty across time, probability, and development.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2023Article
- Protective behaviors during COVID-19 confinement measures in Greece: the role of anxiety, perceived risk and risky-choice framing.AIMS public health · 2023Article
- Viruses, Vaccines, and COVID-19: Explaining and Improving Risky Decision-making.Journal of applied research in memory and cognition · 2021Article
- Explaining risky choices with judgments: Framing, the zero effect, and the contextual relativity of gist.Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition · 2021Article
- A formal model of fuzzy-trace theory: Variations on framing effects and the Allais paradox.Decision (Washington, D.C.) · 2018Article
- Brain activation covaries with reported criminal behaviors when making risky choices: A fuzzy-trace theory approach.Journal of experimental psychology. General · 2018Article
- Cognitive Style and Frame Susceptibility in Decision-Making.Frontiers in psychology · 2018Article
- How Reasoning, Judgment, and Decision Making are Colored by Gist-based Intuition: A Fuzzy-Trace Theory Approach.Journal of applied research in memory and cognition · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Theoretical accounts of risky choice framing effects assume that decision makers interpret framing options as extensionally equivalent, such that if 600 lives are at stake, saving 200 implies that 400 die. However, many scholars have argued that framing effects are caused, instead, by filling in pragmatically implied information. This linguistic ambiguity hypothesis is grounded in neo-Gricean pragmatics, information leakage, and schema theory. In 2 experiments, we conducted critical tests of the linguistic ambiguity hypothesis and its relation to framing. We controlled for this crucial implied information by disambiguating it using instructions and detailed examples, followed by multiple quizzes. After disambiguating missing information, we presented standard framing problems plus truncated versions, varying types of missing information. Truncations were also critical tests of prospect theory and fuzzy trace theory. Participants were not only college students, but also middle-age adults (who showed similar results). Contrary to the ambiguity hypothesis, participants who interpreted missing information as complementary to stated information nonetheless showed robust framing effects. Although adding words like "at least" can change interpretations of framing information, this form of linguistic ambiguity is not necessary to observe risky choice framing effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.