This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Bernstein, L. M. Articles by Elstein, A. S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Bernstein, L. M. Articles by Elstein, A. S. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Framing Effects in Choices between Multioutcome Life-expectancy Lotteries

Gretchen B. Chapman, PhD

Arthur S. Elstein, PhD

Aim. To explore framing or editing effects and a method to debias framing in a clinical context. Method. Clinical scenarios using multioutcome life-expectancy lotteries of equal value required choices between two supplementary drugs that either prolonged or shortened life from the 20-year beneficial effect of a baseline drug. The effects of these supplementary drugs were presented in two conditions, using a between-sub jects design. In segregated editing (n = 116) the effects were presented separately from the effects of the baseline drug. In integrated editing ( n = 100), effects of supple mentary and baseline drugs were combined in the lottery presentation. Each subject responded to 30 problems. To explore one method of debiasing, another 100 subjects made choices after viewing both segregated and integrated editings of 20 problems (dual framing). Results. Statistically significant preference reversals between segre gated and integrated editing of pure lotteries occurred only when one framing placed outcomes in the gain domain, and the other framing placed them in the loss domain. When both editings resulted in gain-domain outcomes only, there was no framing ef fect. There was a related relationship of framing-effect shifts from losses to gains in mixed-lottery-choice problems. Responses to the dual framing condition did not con sistently coincide with responses to either single framing. In some situations, dual framing eliminated or lessened framing effects. Conclusion. The results support two components of prospect theory, coding outcomes as gains or losses from a reference point, and an s-shaped utility function (concave in gain, convex in loss domains). Pre senting both alternative editings of a complex situation prior to choice more fully in forms the decision maker and may help to reduce framing effects. Given the extent to which preferences shift in response to alternative presentations, it is unclear which choice represents the subject's "true preferences." Key words: life expectancy; mul tioutcome lotteries; framing effects; preference reversal; segregated and integrated editing; prospect theory; utility functions. (Med Decis Making 1999; 19:324-338)

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 19, No. 3, 324-338 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9901900311


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. Werch The Behavior-Image Model: a paradigm for integrating prevention and health promotion in brief interventions Health Educ. Res., October 1, 2007; 22(5): 677 - 690. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. C. Jones Implications of behavioral decision theory for health marketing Marketing Theory, March 1, 2007; 7(1): 75 - 91. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. K. Aberegg, H. Arkes, and P. B. Terry Failure to Adopt Beneficial Therapies Caused by Bias in Medical Evidence Evaluation Med Decis Making, November 1, 2006; 26(6): 575 - 582. [Abstract] [PDF]