ABSTRACT
F raming effects typically occur when an alternative or outcome is describedusing competing perspectives (see Levin, Schneider, & Gaeth, 1998).For example, attribute framing occurs when an attribute is described from a negative perspective (e.g., ground beef that is 25% fat) or a positive perspective (e.g., ground beef that is 75% lean). Risky choice framing occurs when choice outcomes are described using losses (e.g., deaths) or gains (e.g., lives saved). Goal framing occurs when a person is motivated to engage in a behavior owing to a desire to experience positive consequences (e.g., increase the chance of success) or to not miss out on positive consequences (e.g., decrease the chance of missing out on success). In each of these cases, an alternative is described in two different, but conceptually equivalent, ways. Despite the conceptual equivalence of the descriptions, people are nonetheless influenced by the shift in perspective. In general, the positively framed alternative is judged to be more attractive.
