Frame Effect: This Is What This Cognitive Bias Is Like
In most cases, we are not aware of the effect that the way in which the information is presented to us has on our responses or opinions, to the point of choosing options that are not always beneficial to us but that at first glance are not They are perceived as a loss.
This is what happens with the framing effect, a type of cognitive bias which we will talk about throughout this article. In the same way we will review those factors that exert an influence on it, as well as the causes of this.
The framing effect is a psychological phenomenon that belongs to the group of cognitive biases. A cognitive bias refers to an alteration in the mental processing of information which gives rise to an inaccurate or distorted interpretation of reality.
In the specific case of the framing effect, the person tends to offer a particular response or choice depending on the way in which the information is presented. or in the way the question is asked.
That is, the response or predilection of the subject when faced with a dilemma will depend on the way in which it is posed, this form being the “frame” of the issue.
When this response or choice is related to loss or gain, people They tend to avoid taking risks when the question or issue is stated in a positive way while if it is formulated in a negative way the subject is more willing to take risks.
This theory points to the idea that any loss, no matter how large, is more significant to the person than the equivalent gain. Furthermore, according to this assumption, there are a series of principles that occur when the person must make a choice of this type:
The main problem and one of the biggest dangers of the framing effect is that, in most cases, People only receive options regarding gains or losses not profits/profits or losses/losses.
This concept helps to facilitate the understanding of frame analysis within social movements, as well as the formation of political opinions in which the way in which questions are asked in opinion surveys determines the response of the respondent. In this way, the aim is to obtain a response that is beneficial to the organization or institution that commissioned the survey.
The Tversky and Kahneman study
The best way to understand this framing effect is by reviewing the results of studies that analyze it. One of the best-known investigations was carried out by Stanford University psychologists Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman.
In this work we attempted to demonstrate how the way in which different phrases and situations are presented conditions the response or reaction of the respondents, in this specific case, in relation to a plan for the prevention and eradication of a deadly disease.
The study consisted of the formulation of two problems in which different alternatives are provided to save the lives of 600 affected by a supposed disease. The first two possibilities were reflected in the following options:
The result in this first problem was that 72% of the people surveyed chose the first alternative, since they perceived the second as too risky. However, this response dynamic changed in the second phase of the study, in which the following choices were made:
In this second case, 78% of the participants chose the second option, since the first (despite being equivalent to the first problem) was perceived as much riskier.
The explanation is found in the different expressions used. In the first presentation of the alternatives, the choice was named positively (“Save the lives of 200 people”), while in the second a negative consequence was presented (“400 die”).
Therefore, although the two options imply the same type of consequence, the transformation of the alternatives caused respondents to focus more on the benefits or losses. From this point of view, people show an inclination to try to avoid risks when the choice is presented in terms of gain, but prefer them when it comes to choosing an option that involves losses.
What causes this phenomenon?
Although there are no defined and demonstrable causes that justify the appearance of this phenomenon, the theorists of cognitive psychology they appeal to the imperfection of people’s reasoning process. This defect is defined by the general inability we have to generate multiple alternative formulations of a problem, as well as the consequences of each one of them.
Therefore, the reason why people give in to the framing effect is that in most cases people tend to passively accept choice conflicts as they are framed, so they are not aware that when Their choices are conditioned by the framework rather than by their own interests or benefits.
