A Study of Cognitive Effort of Decision Makers with Different NC under Framing

Chiung-Wen Hsu, Chen-li Kuo

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine cognitive effort of decision makers with different need for cognition (NC) while making decision under framing. Hundreds of empirical studies have demonstrated the framing effect moderating by NC in various contexts. However, these studies often treated cognition as a black box and focused on the outcomes rather than on the process by which decisions with different NC are made. In order to explore cognitive process of decision makers with different NC under framed problems, our research observes the cognitive effort of decision makers with different NC (High vs. Low NC) under different framing (Positive vs. Negative framing) from the perspective of their information process. A laboratory experiment of 65 subjects was conducted. Eye-tracking was applied to evaluate decision makers’ cognitive effort. The results indicate that all subjects are susceptible to framing effect, and NC doesn’t moderate framing effect. Decision makers with high NC will spend more cognitive effort to framed problems. In addition, decision makers with high NC, compared with those with low NC, will pay more cognitive effort in negative frame, but not for positive framing. Finally, there is no significant relationship between cognitive effort and framing effect. The results could compensate the shortage of past studies related to framing effect and NC, which only focused on final choices. In addition, by using eye tracking, we also unveil the track of information process before framing effect generated, which could benefit the richness of research on framing effect and NC.

References

  1. Cacioppo, J. T.; Petty, R. E.; Feinstein, J. A.; Jarvis, W. B. G., (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 197-253.
  2. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. F., (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Assessment, 48, 306-307.
  3. Cárdaba, M. A. M., Briñol, P., Horcajo, J., & Petty, R. E., (2013). The effect of Need for Cognition on the stability of prejudiced attitudes toward South American immigrants. Psicothema, 25(1), 73-78.
  4. Chatterjee, S., Heath, T. B., Milberg, S. J., & France, K. R., (2000). The differential processing of price in gains and losses: the effects of frame and need for cognition. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13(1), 61-75.
  5. Gonzalez, C., Dana, J., Koshino, H., and Just. M., (2005) The framing effect and risky decisions: examining cognitive functions with fMRI, Journal of Economic Psychology, 26(1), 1-20.
  6. Huang, Y.F., Kuo, F. Y., (2012). How impulsivity affects consumer decision-making in e-commerce. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications,11(6), 582-590.
  7. Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and Effort. New Jersey:Prentice-Hall.
  8. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A., (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-291.
  9. Kuhberger, A., (1995) The framing of decisions: a new look at old problems, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62 (2), 230-240.
  10. Kuhberger, A., (1998) The influence of framing on risky decisions: a meta-analysis, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 75 (1) 23-55.
  11. Kuo, F. Y., Hsu, C. W., & Day, R. F. (2009). An exploratory study of cognitive effort involved in decision under Framing - an application of the eyetracking technology. Decision Support Systems, 48(1), 81-91.
  12. LeBoeuf, R. A., & Shafir, E. (2003). Deep thoughts and shallow frames: on the susceptibility to framing effects. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 16, 77-92.
  13. Levin, I. P., Gaeth, G. J., Schreiber, J., & Lauriola, M. (2002). A new look at framing effects: distribution of effect sizes, individual differences, and independence of types of effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88, 411-429.
  14. Levin, I. P., Huneke, M. E., & Jasper, J. D., (2000). Information processing at successive stages of decision making: need for cognition and inclusionexclusion effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(2), 171-193.
  15. McElroy, T., & Seta, J. J., (2003). Framing effect :a analytic-holistic perspective. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 610-617.
  16. Payne, J. W., Johnson, E. J., Bettman, J. R., and Coupey E., (1990) Understanding contingent choice: a computer simulation approach, systems, man and cybernetics, IEEE transactions on systems, Man and Cybernetics, 20(2), 296-309.
  17. Petty, R. E., DeMarree, K. G., Briñol, P., Horcajo, J., & Strathman, A. J. (2008). Need for cognition can magnify or attenuate priming effects in social judgment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(7), 900-912.
  18. Rayner, K., (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372-422.
  19. See, Y. H. M., Petty, R. E., & Evans, L. M. (2009). The impact of perceived message complexity and need for cognition on information processing and attitudes. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(5), 880-889.
  20. Simon, A. F., Fagley, N. S., & Halleran, J. G. (2004). Decision framing: moderating effects of individual differences and cognitive processing. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 17, 77-93.
  21. Smith, S. M., & Levin, I. P. (1996). Need for cognition and choice framing effect. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 9, 283-290.
  22. Takemura, K., (1994). Influence of elaboration on the framing of decision. The Journal of Psychology, 128(1), 33-39.
  23. Tonetto, L. M., & Stein, L. M., (2010). Moderating Effects of Consumer Involvement and the Need for Cognition on Goal Framing. Revista Interamericana de Psicologia/Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 44(2), 256-262..
  24. Verplanken, B., (1993). Need for cognition and external information search response to time pressure during decision making. Journal of Research in Personality, 27, 238-252.
  25. Wang, J.-C., & Day, R.-F., (2007). The Effects of Attention Inertia on Advertisements on the WWW. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1390-1407.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Hsu C. and Kuo C. (2013). A Study of Cognitive Effort of Decision Makers with Different NC under Framing . In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 3: ICEIS, ISBN 978-989-8565-61-7, pages 75-82. DOI: 10.5220/0004437300750082


in Bibtex Style

@conference{iceis13,
author={Chiung-Wen Hsu and Chen-li Kuo},
title={A Study of Cognitive Effort of Decision Makers with Different NC under Framing},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 3: ICEIS,},
year={2013},
pages={75-82},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0004437300750082},
isbn={978-989-8565-61-7},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 3: ICEIS,
TI - A Study of Cognitive Effort of Decision Makers with Different NC under Framing
SN - 978-989-8565-61-7
AU - Hsu C.
AU - Kuo C.
PY - 2013
SP - 75
EP - 82
DO - 10.5220/0004437300750082