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
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
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
Self-Discrepancy Theory02:45

Self-Discrepancy Theory

18.4K
One influential perspective on what motivates people's behavior is detailed in Tory Higgin's self-discrepancy theory (Higgins, 1987). He proposed that people hold disagreeing internal representations of themselves that lead to different emotional states.  
18.4K
Decision Making: P-value Method01:09

Decision Making: P-value Method

5.6K
The process of hypothesis testing based on the P-value method includes calculating the P- value using the sample data and interpreting it.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim  is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses:  a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can...
5.6K
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

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

That's not what you said! Semantic constraints on literal speech.

Mind & language·2025
Same author

Moderating Synthetic Content: the Challenge of Generative AI.

Philosophy & technology·2024
Same author

Large language models and their big bullshit potential.

Ethics and information technology·2024
Same author

Correction to: Pain priors, polyeidism, and predictive power: a preliminary investigation into individual differences in ordinary thought about pain.

Theoretical medicine and bioethics·2022
Same author

Pain priors, polyeidism, and predictive power: a preliminary investigation into individual differences in ordinary thought about pain.

Theoretical medicine and bioethics·2021

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Aug 24, 2025

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

Defining preferences over framed outcomes does not secure agents' rationality.

Sarah A Fisher1

  • 1Department of Philosophy, University of Vienna, 1010 Vienna, Austria sarah.fisher@univie.ac.athttps://sites.google.com/view/sarahafisher/.

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

Agents may not rationally prefer framed outcomes over actual outcomes. Knowledge of neutral outcomes challenges the argument for rational framing effects in decision-making.

More Related Videos

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

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Aug 24, 2025

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
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

Area of Science:

  • Decision Theory
  • Behavioral Economics
  • Cognitive Science

Background:

  • Agents' preferences are often analyzed based on outcomes.
  • Framing effects suggest preferences can depend on how outcomes are presented.
  • Bermúdez proposed agents evaluate framed outcomes, not outcomes themselves, to rationalize preferences.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically evaluate Bermúdez's claim that preferences are based on framed outcomes.
  • To investigate whether framing effects can be considered rational.
  • To challenge the theoretical basis for rational framing effects.

Main Methods:

  • Conceptual analysis of decision-making models.
  • Examination of hypothetical agent scenarios presented by Bermúdez.
  • Logical critique of the relationship between framed and neutral outcomes.

Main Results:

  • Agents in Bermúdez's examples possess knowledge of the underlying, neutrally understood outcomes.
  • This awareness allows agents to recognize different frames as representing the same objective outcome.
  • The agents' awareness undermines the premise that preferences are exclusively tied to framed outcomes.

Conclusions:

  • The argument for rational framing effects is weakened when agents understand the neutral reality of outcomes.
  • Agents' ability to distinguish frames from outcomes challenges the notion of inherent rationality in framing.
  • Further research is needed to understand the cognitive processes underlying preference formation under framing conditions.