Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35851678›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2023

A reassessment of the Resistance to Framing scale.

Sandra J Geiger, Jáchym Vintr, Nikolay R Rachev

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sandra J GeigerDepartment of Cognition, Emotion, and Methods, Faculty of Psychology, Environmental Psychology Unit, University of Vienna, Wächtergasse 1, 1010, Vienna, Austria. sandra.geiger@univie.ac.at.ORCID 0000-0002-3262-5609
Jáchym VintrDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Arts, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-7228-3287
Nikolay R RachevDepartment of General, Experimental, Developmental, and Health Psychology, Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski, Sofia, Bulgaria.ORCID 0000-0002-5654-2883

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Risky-choice and attribute framing effects are well-known cognitive biases, where choices are influenced by the way information is presented. To assess susceptibility to these framing types, the Resistance to Framing scale is often used, although its performance has rarely been extensively tested. In an online survey among university students from Bulgaria (N = 245) and North America (N = 261), we planned to examine the scale's psychometric properties, structural validity, and measurement invariance. However, some of these examinations were not possible because the scale displayed low and mostly non-significant inter-item correlations as well as low item-total correlations. Followingly, exploratory item response theory analyses indicated that the scale's reliability was low, especially for high levels of resistance to framing. This suggests problems with the scale at a basic level of conceptualization, namely that the items may not represent the same content domain. Overall, the scale in its current version is of limited use, at least in university student samples, due to the identified problems. We discuss potential remedies to these problems, as well as provide open code and data ( https://osf.io/j5n6f ) which facilitates testing the scale in other samples (e.g., general population, different languages and countries) to obtain a comprehensive picture of its performance.

Indexed as

LanguageHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesConfirmatory factor analysisItem response theoryPsychometricsResistance to Framing scaleValidation

Identifiers

PMID35851678
PMCPMC10439025

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.