Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Framing Effects03:26

Framing Effects

7.5K
Information is everywhere and its presentation—such as how and when items are presented—can impact our perceptions and decisions surrounding the info. This broad concept umbrellas framing effects—influences that occur due to the way information is framed in its appearance, whether it’s purely the order or the specific wording of a message. Let’s take a look at numerous ways in which two versions of something can objectively say the same thing, yet we respond in...
7.5K
The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic01:25

The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic

7.4K
In order to make good decisions, we use our knowledge and our reasoning. Often, this knowledge and reasoning is sound and solid. However, sometimes, we are swayed by biases or by others manipulating a situation. For example, let’s say you and three friends wanted to rent a house and had a combined target budget of $1,600. The realtor shows you only very run-down houses for $1,600 and then shows you a very nice house for $2,000. Might you ask each person to pay more in rent to get the...
7.4K
Reason and Intuition01:37

Reason and Intuition

6.6K
The human brain processes information for decision-making using one of two routes: an intuitive system and a rational system (Epstein, 1994; popularized by Kahneman, 2011 as System 1 and System 2, respectively). The intuitive system is quick, impulsive, and operates with minimal effort, relying on emotions or habits to provide cues for what to do next, while the rational system is logical, analytical, deliberate, and methodical. Research in neuropsychology suggests that the...
6.6K
Fundamental Attribution Error01:14

Fundamental Attribution Error

13.0K
According to some social psychologists, people tend to overemphasize internal factors as explanations—or attributions—for the behavior of other people. They tend to assume that the behavior of another person is a trait of that person, and to underestimate the power of the situation on the behavior of others. They tend to fail to recognize when the behavior of another is due to situational variables, and thus to the person’s state. This erroneous assumption is...
13.0K
Self-Presentation: Self-Monitoring and Self-Handicapping02:05

Self-Presentation: Self-Monitoring and Self-Handicapping

39.5K
People can go to great lengths to protect their self-image and present themselves in ways that they want others to see them. Sociologist Erving Goffman presented the idea that a person is like an actor on a stage. Calling his theory dramaturgy, Goffman believed that we use “impression management” to present ourselves to others as we hope to be perceived. Each situation is a new scene, and individuals perform different roles depending on who is present (Goffman, 1959). Think about...
39.5K
Decision Making01:20

Decision Making

182
Decision-making is a fundamental cognitive process that involves evaluating alternatives and selecting among them. This process can range from simple choices, such as deciding what to wear, to complex decisions, like choosing a major in college or a career path. The complexity of the decision often dictates the approach we use, which can be broadly categorized into two types: automatic and controlled decision-making.
Automatic decision-making is fast, intuitive, and relies on gut feelings...
182

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Citation penalties following sexual versus scientific misconduct allegations.

PloS one·2025
Same author

Choices without preferences: Principles of rational arbitrariness.

Psychological review·2025
Same author

Is it a judgment of representativeness? Re-examining the birth sequence problem.

Psychonomic bulletin & review·2022
Same author

Sensitivity to shifts in probability of harm and benefit in moral dilemmas.

Cognition·2021
Same author

Default sensitivity in attempts at social influence.

Psychonomic bulletin & review·2020
Same author

Exploiting asymmetric signals from choices through default selection.

Psychonomic bulletin & review·2020
Same journal

Are language models models?

The Behavioral and brain sciences·2026
Same journal

Large language models illuminate the mechanistic underpinnings of the creative aspect of language use (CALU), long regarded as a mystery.

The Behavioral and brain sciences·2026
Same journal

LLMs as a platform for studying constraint interaction: Motivation and challenges.

The Behavioral and brain sciences·2026
Same journal

Beyond the data gap: Children create languages, violate their input statistics, and exhibit critical periods.

The Behavioral and brain sciences·2026
Same journal

Not-so-strange love: Language models and generative linguistic theories are more compatible than they appear.

The Behavioral and brain sciences·2026
Same journal

Rich data drive generalization: Lessons from machine learning for linguistics and cognitive science.

The Behavioral and brain sciences·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Aug 24, 2025

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies
08:24

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies

Published on: August 25, 2023

790

Incomplete preferences and rational framing effects.

Shlomi Sher1, Craig R M McKenzie2

  • 1Department of Psychological Science, Pomona College, Claremont, CA 91711, USAShlomi.Sher@pomona.edu, https://www.pomona.edu/directory/people/shlomi-sher.

The Behavioral and Brain Sciences
|October 25, 2022
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Rational preferences are often assumed to be complete, but this assumption is questionable. Rejecting completeness allows for rational framing effects, challenging standard views on decision-making.

More Related Videos

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice
07:07

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice

Published on: June 5, 2016

8.7K
Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods
13:04

Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods

Published on: September 19, 2012

12.2K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Aug 24, 2025

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies
08:24

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies

Published on: August 25, 2023

790
Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice
07:07

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice

Published on: June 5, 2016

8.7K
Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods
13:04

Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods

Published on: September 19, 2012

12.2K

Area of Science:

  • Decision Theory
  • Cognitive Science
  • Philosophy of Mind

Background:

  • The principle of description invariance in decision theory assumes rational preferences must be complete.
  • The completeness axiom, a cornerstone of rational choice theory, is increasingly debated.
  • Framing effects, where presentation influences choices, challenge the notion of stable rational preferences.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically examine the normative assumption of completeness in rational preferences.
  • To explore how rejecting the completeness axiom can accommodate rational framing effects.
  • To situate Bermúdez's critique of framing within a broader challenge to completeness.

Main Methods:

  • Conceptual analysis of normative principles in decision theory.
  • Philosophical argumentation regarding the completeness axiom.
  • Literature review of existing critiques on framing effects and rational choice.

Main Results:

  • The completeness axiom is normatively dubious and not essential for rational decision-making.
  • Rejection of completeness provides a framework for understanding rational framing effects.
  • Bermúdez's challenge to framing can be strengthened by a wider critique of completeness.

Conclusions:

  • The standard normative view of framing requires re-evaluation by questioning preference completeness.
  • Decision-making models should consider scenarios where preferences may not be complete.
  • A broader critique of completeness offers new perspectives on rationality and framing.