Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendelianae Brun. 2018, 66(5), 1267-1273 | DOI: 10.11118/actaun201866051267

Marketing Implications of Framing in the Decision-Making

Peter Gál
Department of Strategy and Entrepreneurship, Faculty of Management, Comenius University in Bratislava, Odbojárov 10, 820 05 Bratislava, Slovakia

Framing is a psychological concept closely related with decision-making. It says, that the way the information is served to the recipients, affects their opinion about a certain issue and, consequently, their decisions. Frame presents perception of the reality, since the limits of rationality often don't allow people to capture the reality in its complexity. Framing is manifested in several ways. The first relates to the starting point from which the reality is perceived. This dimension causes that people perceive differently the description of decision options formulated in terms of gains (positive frame) or losses (negative frame). The second dimension relates to the size or the width of the frame, i.e. whether the reality is seen from a wider or a narrower perspective. The aim of this study was to examine the impact of framing on the decision-making. The framing effect was studied by the analysis of answers to three problems, which were part of a broader questionnaire survey. The questionnaire was inspired or compiled from similar researches. The sample was 176 graduate university students (41 % men) of management major. The basic descriptive statistics and independent samples t-test were used for it. The results proved that the way the problem was framed to the respondents determined the outcomes of their decision-making. The implications both for the overall managerial decision-making and more specifically for the marketing practice are presented as well.

Keywords: framing, decision-making, psychological factors, prospect theory, marketing

Published: October 29, 2018  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Gál, P. (2018). Marketing Implications of Framing in the Decision-Making. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 66(5), 1267-1273. doi: 10.11118/actaun201866051267
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. ARIELY, D. 2009. Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions. New York: HarperCollins.
    2. BAZERMAN, H. M. and MOORE, A. D. 2009. Judgment in Managerial Decision-making. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
    3. BERNOULLI, D. 1954. Exposition of a New Theory on the Measurement of Risk (1738). Econometrica, 22(1): 23-36. DOI: 10.2307/1909829 Go to original source...
    4. BOLTON, G. E., OCKENFELS, A. and THONEMANN, U. 2012. Managers and students as newsvendors. Management Science, 58(12): 2225-2233. DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1120.1550 Go to original source...
    5. CAMERER, C. F. 2000. Prospect theory in the wild: Evidence from the field. In: KAHNEMAN, D. and TVERSKY, A. (Eds.). Choices, Values and Frames. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, pp. 148-161. Go to original source...
    6. CHEN, S. F. S., MONROE, K. B. and LOU, Y. C. 1998. The effects of framing price promotion messages on consumers' perceptions and purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing, 74(3): 353-372. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-4359(99)80100-6 Go to original source...
    7. CHENG, F. F and WU, C. S. 2010. Debiasing the framing effect: The effect of warning and involvement. Decision Support Systems, 49(3): 328-334. DOI: 10.1016/j.dss.2010.04.002 Go to original source...
    8. DELVECCHIO, D., KRISHNAN, H. S. and SMITH, D. C. 2007. Cents or percent? The effects of promotion framing on price expectations and choice. Journal of Marketing, 71(3): 158-170. DOI: 10.1509/jmkg.71.3.158 Go to original source...
    9. GANZACH, Y. and KARSAHI, N. 1995. Message framing and buying behavior: A field experiment. Journal of Business Research, 32(1): 11-17. DOI: 10.1016/0148-2963(93)00038-3 Go to original source...
    10. GILBERT, D. T. et al. 1998. Immune Neglect: A Source of Durability Bias in Affective Forecasting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(3): 617-638. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.617 Go to original source...
    11. GOODWIN, P. and WRIGHT, G. 2014. Decision Analysis for Management Judgment. 5th Edition. Chichester: J. Wiley.
    12. HAMMOND, J. S., KEENEY, R. L. and RAIFFA, H. 1998. The Hidden Traps in Decision-making. Harvard Business Review, 76(5): 47-58.
    13. HOLIENKA, M. and HOLIENKOVA, J. 2014. Enterprising Tendencies of Management and Psychology Students : Differences and Common Attributes. Comenius Management Review, 8(1): 39-52.
    14. HUANG, Y. and WANG, L. 2010. Sex differences in framing effects across task domain. Personality and Individual Differences. 48(5): 649-653. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.01.005 Go to original source...
    15. KAHNEMAN, D. 2011. Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
    16. KAHNEMAN, D. et al. 2006. Would You Be Happier If You Were Richer? A Focusing Illusion. Science, 312(5782): 1908-1910. DOI: 10.1126/science.1129688 Go to original source...
    17. KAHNEMAN, D. and TVERSKY, A. 1979. Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decisions under Risk. Econometrica, 47(2): 262-292. DOI: 10.2307/1914185 Go to original source...
    18. MAUBOUSSIN, M. J. 2012. Think twice: Harnessing the power of Counterintuition. 2nd Edition. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press.
    19. RUSSO, E. J. and SCHOEMAKER, P. J. H. 1980. Decision Traps. New York: Fireside.
    20. THALER, R. H. 1985. Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice. Marketing Science, 4(3): 199-214. DOI: 10.1287/mksc.4.3.199 Go to original source...
    21. TVERSKY, A. and KAHNEMAN, D. 1981. The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice. Science, 211(4481): 453-458. DOI: 10.1126/science.7455683 Go to original source...
    22. WRIGHT, G. and GOODWIN, P. 2002. Eliminating a framing bias by using simple instructions to 'think harder' and respondents with managerial experience: Comment on 'breaking the frame'. Strategic Management Journal, 23(11): 1059-1067. DOI: 10.1002/smj.265 Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY NC ND 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content