Cargando…
The Framing Preference for Large and Increasing Components in Static and Dynamic Descriptions
Describing sets in terms of a two-valued variable, either value can be chosen: exam results may be referred to by pass rates or fail rates. What determines such framing choices? Building on work by McKenzie and colleagues on reference points in the production and interpretation of framed information...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8636774/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34867599 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.720427 |
_version_ | 1784608599455039488 |
---|---|
author | Pander Maat, Henk Staal, Ben Holleman, Bregje |
author_facet | Pander Maat, Henk Staal, Ben Holleman, Bregje |
author_sort | Pander Maat, Henk |
collection | PubMed |
description | Describing sets in terms of a two-valued variable, either value can be chosen: exam results may be referred to by pass rates or fail rates. What determines such framing choices? Building on work by McKenzie and colleagues on reference points in the production and interpretation of framed information, we investigate two determinants of frame choice. One is that speakers tend to focus on the component that has increased vis-à-vis a previous state, the other is the tendency to choose the component larger than 50%. We propose to view reference points as pointing to different kinds of communicative relevance. Hence the use of the previous state and the 50% reference points by speakers is not just a function of the information, but is co-determined by a communicative cue in the context: the question being asked about this information. This line of thought is supported by two experiments containing items offering two-sided distribution information at two points in time. Our first experiment employs a static task, requiring a description of the most recent situation. The second experiment uses a dynamic task, asking participants to describe the development between the two time points. We hypothesize that in static tasks the component size is the strongest frame choice determinant, while in dynamic tasks frame choice is mainly driven by whether a component has increased. The experiments consist of 16 different scenarios, both with symmetrical contrasts (i.e., dogs vs. cats) and with asymmetrical ones (i.e., winning vs. losing). Both experiments support the hypotheses. In the static task, the size effect is the only consistent effect; in the dynamic task, the effect of direction of change is much larger than that of size. This pattern of differences between size and change effects applies across symmetrical and asymmetrical contrasts. Our experiments shed light on cognitive and communicative regularities involved in the production of framed messages: people do tend to prefer larger and increasing components when choosing a frame, but the relative strength of both these preferences depends on the communicative task. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8636774 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86367742021-12-03 The Framing Preference for Large and Increasing Components in Static and Dynamic Descriptions Pander Maat, Henk Staal, Ben Holleman, Bregje Front Psychol Psychology Describing sets in terms of a two-valued variable, either value can be chosen: exam results may be referred to by pass rates or fail rates. What determines such framing choices? Building on work by McKenzie and colleagues on reference points in the production and interpretation of framed information, we investigate two determinants of frame choice. One is that speakers tend to focus on the component that has increased vis-à-vis a previous state, the other is the tendency to choose the component larger than 50%. We propose to view reference points as pointing to different kinds of communicative relevance. Hence the use of the previous state and the 50% reference points by speakers is not just a function of the information, but is co-determined by a communicative cue in the context: the question being asked about this information. This line of thought is supported by two experiments containing items offering two-sided distribution information at two points in time. Our first experiment employs a static task, requiring a description of the most recent situation. The second experiment uses a dynamic task, asking participants to describe the development between the two time points. We hypothesize that in static tasks the component size is the strongest frame choice determinant, while in dynamic tasks frame choice is mainly driven by whether a component has increased. The experiments consist of 16 different scenarios, both with symmetrical contrasts (i.e., dogs vs. cats) and with asymmetrical ones (i.e., winning vs. losing). Both experiments support the hypotheses. In the static task, the size effect is the only consistent effect; in the dynamic task, the effect of direction of change is much larger than that of size. This pattern of differences between size and change effects applies across symmetrical and asymmetrical contrasts. Our experiments shed light on cognitive and communicative regularities involved in the production of framed messages: people do tend to prefer larger and increasing components when choosing a frame, but the relative strength of both these preferences depends on the communicative task. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-11-18 /pmc/articles/PMC8636774/ /pubmed/34867599 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.720427 Text en Copyright © 2021 Pander Maat, Staal and Holleman. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Psychology Pander Maat, Henk Staal, Ben Holleman, Bregje The Framing Preference for Large and Increasing Components in Static and Dynamic Descriptions |
title | The Framing Preference for Large and Increasing Components in Static and Dynamic Descriptions |
title_full | The Framing Preference for Large and Increasing Components in Static and Dynamic Descriptions |
title_fullStr | The Framing Preference for Large and Increasing Components in Static and Dynamic Descriptions |
title_full_unstemmed | The Framing Preference for Large and Increasing Components in Static and Dynamic Descriptions |
title_short | The Framing Preference for Large and Increasing Components in Static and Dynamic Descriptions |
title_sort | framing preference for large and increasing components in static and dynamic descriptions |
topic | Psychology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8636774/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34867599 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.720427 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pandermaathenk theframingpreferenceforlargeandincreasingcomponentsinstaticanddynamicdescriptions AT staalben theframingpreferenceforlargeandincreasingcomponentsinstaticanddynamicdescriptions AT hollemanbregje theframingpreferenceforlargeandincreasingcomponentsinstaticanddynamicdescriptions AT pandermaathenk framingpreferenceforlargeandincreasingcomponentsinstaticanddynamicdescriptions AT staalben framingpreferenceforlargeandincreasingcomponentsinstaticanddynamicdescriptions AT hollemanbregje framingpreferenceforlargeandincreasingcomponentsinstaticanddynamicdescriptions |