Differential framing effects: 11 more ways to study them rejoinder
| Authors |
|
|---|---|
| Publication date | 07-2023 |
| Journal | Decision |
| Volume | Issue number | 10 | 3 |
| Pages (from-to) | 243-246 |
| Organisations |
|
| Abstract | We appreciate the comments that Mandel and Reyna provided to the target article. Already, the target article discussed a multitude of angles to the framing effect. In their contributions, Mandel and Reyna have highlighted several aspects that may fruitfully be investigated in future studies, we suggest 11 ways to do so. We hope that these future studies will continue to employ formal modeling approaches, as they offer the opportunity to compare theories and make assumptions and interpretations explicit. |
| Document type | Comment/Letter to the editor |
| Note |
Reply to: D.R. Mandel (2023) Subjective Equivalence : Commentary on Huizenga et al. (2023) A Basic Requirement for Strict Framing Effects. Volume 10 (3), p 235–237; and to: V.F. Reyna (2023) Models of Risky Choice Across Ages, Frames, and Individuals : The Fuzzy Frontier. Volume 10 (3), p 238–242. |
| Language | English |
| Related publication | Formal Models of Differential Framing Effects in Decision Making Under Risk |
| Published at |
https://doi.org/10.1037/dec0000216
(Final published version)
|
| Published at | |
| Permalink to this page | |
