Decision-Making and Justifications

This poster explores the differential predictions tested pertaining decision-making and the framing effect. The framing effect is described as the phenomenon of risk aversion with positively framed outcomes and risk-seeking behavior with negatively framed outcomes (Tversky & Kahnemann, 1981). The purpose of the current study is to grasp a better understanding of how participants think about their decisions. Four hundred participants responded to four decision-making scenarios; two dealt with a monetary gamble, and two regarded an outbreak of a disease that put human lives at risk. One outbreak occurred in the general population, whereas the other outbreak occurred in a major prison complex. Frame of the decision option was manipulated between-subjects. For each scenario, participants chose between two options for how to respond to that decision, and also gave a rationale for why they made the choice they did. These rationales were coded for whether participants referred to emotion, logic, and other categories. It is hypothesized that the participants will focus on morally right feelings when justifying decisions regarding human lives, but will focus more on logical concerns when justifying decisions about gambling and monetary risk. It is also predicted that justifications will vary between the two human life scenarios: prisoners versus people in general. Preliminary results suggest that the scenario context did influence both the decisions that participants made, as well as how they justified their decision. This research helps us better understand how the wording (framing) of decision options influences how people think about their decisions