Craig McKenzie: UC San Diego Department of Psychology

Framing effects are said to occur when “equivalent” redescriptions of objects or outcomes lead to different preferences or judgments. For example, a medical treatment is seen more favorably when described as resulting in “90% survival” rather than “10% mortality.” Such effects are widely considered to be classic violations of rationality. However, if framing effects are to be considered irrational, it is not sufficient that the frames in question be logically equivalent. Instead, they must be information equivalent, which means that no choice-relevant inferences can be drawn from the speaker’s choice of frame. However, logically equivalent frames used by researchers are often information non-equivalent. For example, we have shown that a speaker’s choice of attribute frame “leaks” information about relative abundance, and that listeners “absorb” the information. Information leakage provides a natural (and rational) explanation of attribute framing effects. Extensions of the information leakage approach to framing effects in risky choice, inference tasks, consumer behavior, and policy defaults will also be discussed.