A New Look at Framing Effects: Distribution of Effect Sizes, Individual Differences, and Independence of Types of Effects

By I. Levin, G. Gaeth, J. Schreiber, Marco Lauriola. 2002

491 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, General Decision Sciences, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/36406f5dd9e6a15f49d57195a84d76516934c44e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

In General Decision Sciences

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Actor/observer asymmetry in risky decision making (2007, unknown): “The more people trusted their intuitive judgment, the more risk they were willing to take, r = .26, a result that replicates previous findings ( Levin, Gaeth, Schreiber, & Lauriola, 2002; Epstein et al., 1996).”
Framing, gender and tax compliance (2003, background): “Levin et al. (1998) note that goal framing effects can be enhanced, eliminated or even removed depending on the characteristics of the situation.”
A self-regulatory framework for message framing☆ (2013, background): “3 As suggested by Levin et al. (1998), this lack of consistency may lie not with prospect”
Emotion and the Framing of Risky Choice (2008, unknown): “Like other studies that include multiple problems (e.g., Fagley and Miller 1997; Jou et al. 1996), we instructed participants to treat each problem independently and imagine that they were being confronted with each scenario (see Frisch 1993, p. 419; Levin et al. 2002 on using multiple problems).”
Deep thoughts and shallow frames; on the susceptibility to framing effects. (2003, background): “Participants responded to the Asian Disease problem, which has figured extensively in earlier research, including within-subjects research (e.g. Frisch, 1993; Levin et al., 2002; Stanovich & West, 1998), and the Frank versus Carl problem, in which the perceived status quo is altered, making for what”
Susceptibility to anchoring effects: How openness-to-experience influences responses to anchoring cues (2007, background): “Previous research has found a relationship between openness and risk preference, such that, high openness individuals demonstrated relatively more risk-seeking in their choices for typical framing tasks (Lauriola & Levin, 2001; Levin, Gaeth, Schneider, & Lauriola, 2002).”
Toward a unified theory of project governance: economic, sociological and psychological supports for relational contracting (2012, background): “…et al., 1994).7 As in the case of collective norms, a growing body of economic and psychological research highlights the importance of the words, frames or belief systems invoked to support or critique an otherwise identical argument (Tversky and Kahneman, 1981a, 1981b; Levin et al., 1998, 2002).”
Health‐care product advertising: The influences of message framing and perceived product characteristics (2007, background): “some researchers who have attempted to investigate the degree to which individual differences moderate framing effects, suggesting that framing effects can be enhanced, eliminated, or even removed depending on the characteristics of the situations or individual differences (Chang, 2005; Keller, Lipk”