Skip to Content

What is the Framing Effect? How Presentation Changes Choices

image

Definition​

The Framing Effect is a psychological phenomenon where people's choices and judgments differ depending on how the same information is presented. Simply put, it's the tendency where "the way you say it changes the decision."

For example, a doctor recommends surgery in two ways. Method 1: "This surgery has a 90% survival rate." Method 2: "This surgery has a 10% mortality rate." Mathematically, they're completely identical. Out of 100 people, 90 live and 10 die. But people's reactions are completely different. When told "90% survival rate," most choose surgery. When told "10% mortality rate," many people hesitate. Same information, but only the frame (presentation method) changed.

The framing effect was proven in 1981 by Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky with the famous "Asian disease problem." They asked participants: "A disease will kill 600 people. There are two response options. Option A: 200 people will be saved. Option B: 1/3 probability everyone survives, 2/3 probability no one survives." 72% chose A. They thought certainty was better. But they changed the same problem to: "Option C: 400 people will die. Option D: 1/3 probability no one dies, 2/3 probability everyone dies." This time, 78% chose D. In reality, A=C and B=D, but only the "save" vs "die" frame changed, and choices became opposite.

Characteristics​

  • Content is same, only form differs - The core of the framing effect is that actual information doesn't change. Only whether you say it positively or negatively, whether you see it as gain or loss differs
  • Works unconsciously - People don't realize they're being influenced by framing. They think "I judged rationally" but were actually swayed by the presentation method
  • Emotion gets involved - Framing is effective because it stimulates emotion. The word "survival" gives hope, but "death" gives fear. Same probability though
  • Loss frames are stronger - Humans are more sensitive to losses than gains. "You can lose $10" feels stronger than "you can gain $10." This is called "loss aversion"
  • Context and reference points matter - Framing changes depending on what the reference point is. Like "half still remains" vs "only half left"

Examples​

Example 1: Beef Labels A supermarket sells two types of beef. One is "25% fat content," the other "75% lean meat." Mathematically identical. But most people choose "75% lean meat." It seems healthier. Same meat, but only the frame changed, and choices differ. Smart sellers don't write "25% fat." They always write "75% lean meat."

Example 2: Discount vs Additional Cost At a gas station, cash is $1.00 per liter, card is $1.10 per liter. This can be expressed two ways. Method 1: "10 cents extra for card use" Method 2: "10 cents discount for cash use." Mathematically same. But Method 1 makes you angry. "Why charge extra for using a card?" Method 2 feels good. "There's a benefit for cash, nice." Same price difference, but the frame changes emotions. That's why most gas stations say "cash discount" not "card extra."

Example 3: Success Rate vs Failure Rate Telling a student "this academy's pass rate is 80%" vs "this academy's failure rate is 20%" is the same. But the feeling is completely different. "80% pass rate" is hopeful and attractive. "20% failure rate" is anxious and negative. Naturally, academies advertise "80% pass rate."

Example 4: Environmental Message An environmental protection campaign can be done two ways. Method 1 (gain frame): "Recycling can save the earth." Method 2 (loss frame): "Not recycling will destroy the earth." According to research, loss frames are more effective. People fear "losing" more than "gaining." "The polar bear will go extinct" moves people more than "let's save polar bears."

Example 5: Price Display Same price can be expressed differently. "Coffee cup price of $3 per day" vs "$90 per month" vs "$1,080 per year." Mathematically identical, but feelings differ. "$3 per day" feels cheap. "$1,080 per year" feels expensive. That's why subscription services say "monthly $9.99" not "yearly $118.80."

Example 6: COVID Vaccine Vaccine effectiveness can be expressed two ways. "This vaccine is 95% effective" vs "Even with this vaccine, 5% can still get infected." Same information. But hearing "95% effective," most people want to get it. Hearing "5% can get infected," many hesitate. In reality, vaccine campaigns always use positive frames. Words like "protects," "prevents."

How to Use​

How can you use the framing effect and defend against it?

Using in Business and Marketing

1. Product Descriptions Are Positive "Fat-free" rather than "no fat," "natural ingredients" rather than "no chemicals," "value for money" rather than "cheap." Same content, but positive frames are more attractive.

2. Make Prices Look Small Break large amounts into small units. "Monthly $9.99" looks less burdensome than "yearly $118.80." Comparing to familiar things like "daily coffee cup price" is good too.

3. Use Loss Aversion "Without this insurance, you could suffer major losses" is more powerful than "This insurance protects you." Especially effective for insurance, security, and health products.

4. Create Comparison Reference Points Show a high reference point and present a discounted price, like "Original $100 → Special $50." $50 feels cheap.

5. Limited Messages "Only 10% stock left" feels more urgent than "90% stock remains." "Already 9,500 sold" looks more popular than "500 still available."

Using Personally

1. Use Positive Frames in Self-Talk Instead of "10kg still left," say "already lost 5kg." Instead of "only 5 years left," say "still 5 years remaining." Changing the frame of what you tell yourself changes motivation.

2. Emphasize Gains in Negotiation "This price is profitable" is more persuasive than "not accepting this price is a loss." Emphasizing gains over losses makes the other party respond more positively.

3. Positive Frames for Children or Subordinates "Good results will come if you do this" is more motivating than "you can't not do this." Presenting positive outcomes is more effective than threatening negative consequences.

Defending Against Framing

1. Think About Both Frames If you hear "90% survival rate," think again "so 10% mortality rate." If you hear "50% discount," recalculate "but still $50." Don't look at just one frame; see both sides.

2. Convert to Absolute Values If you hear "daily $3," calculate "that's $1,095 per year." Re-combine what's broken into small units into large ones. Then you see the actual size.

3. Look Only at Numbers Without Emotion Ignore emotional language like "don't miss out!", "last chance!", "only 5% left!" Just look at numbers. "So what's the actual price?", "How many actually remain?" Check only facts.

4. Think Again After Time Don't decide on the spot. The emotional effect of framing weakens over time. "90% survival rate! Get surgery right now!" Go home first and think for a day. When emotions settle, you can judge more rationally.

5. View from Third-Party Perspective "If my friend were making this decision, what would I advise?" You view your own problems emotionally, but others' problems objectively. View your situation like someone else's problem.

Actual Research​

Kahneman and Tversky's Asian Disease Problem (1981) The famous experiment I explained earlier. "Save 200 people" (positive frame) was chosen by 72%, while "400 people die" (negative frame, actually same option) was chosen by only 22%. Just changing the frame completely flipped the choice.

Beef Label Study (Levin & Gaeth, 1988) They labeled beef differently as "25% fat" vs "75% lean" and had people evaluate it. Same meat, but "75% lean" was rated as tastier, healthier, and better quality. Even after actually eating it, they evaluated it that way. The frame changed even the actual taste experience.

Breast Cancer Screening Framing Study (Meyerowitz & Chaiken, 1987) When recommending breast cancer screening to women, two messages were used. Gain frame: "Screening can detect early and cure completely" vs Loss frame: "Not screening means late detection and difficult treatment." The loss frame was much more effective. More women went for screening.

Coupon Framing Experiment (Ganzach & Karsahi, 1995) They compared "$30 discount" and "$30 bonus." Mathematically same, but the word "bonus" felt more attractive. "Discount" gives the feeling the original price was expensive, but "bonus" gives the feeling of getting something extra for free.

Investment Decision Study (2000s) They showed investors "10-year return 8%" and "2 years of losses in 10 years." Mathematically similar information (8% means occasional losses), but the first feels positive, the second negative. People who saw the first frame invested more.

COVID-19 Mask Campaign (2020) "Wearing masks protects you and others" vs "Not wearing masks endangers you and others." According to studies, the loss frame (second) was more effective. Especially the social responsibility frame of "protecting others" was powerful.

Types​

Framing has several types.

1. Positive vs Negative Framing The most basic type. Saying the same information positively or negatively. "90% survival rate" vs "10% mortality rate," "high chance of success" vs "low chance of failure."

2. Gain vs Loss Framing Focusing on what you gain or what you lose. "Buy this and save $10" vs "Don't buy this and lose $10." Loss frames are usually more powerful.

3. Attribute Framing How you express characteristics of a product or object. "25% fat" vs "75% lean," "10% failure rate" vs "90% success rate." Same attribute viewed from different sides.

4. Risk Choice Framing How you express choices in uncertain situations. "Definitely save 200 people" vs "1/3 probability save 600 people." In gain situations, people prefer certainty; in loss situations, they prefer risk.

5. Goal Framing How you present the purpose of an action. "Exercise to become healthy" vs "Exercise if you don't want to get sick." Positive goal vs negative goal.

Impact​

Positive Aspects​

  • Effective communication: The same message can be conveyed more persuasively with good framing. Useful for public campaigns, education, and health promotion
  • Motivation: Positive framing gives people hope and motivation. "You can do it" is better than "you can't fail"
  • Risk management: In medical, investment, and safety fields, appropriate framing can help people make better decisions

Negative Aspects​

  • Manipulation and deception: Framing can be a tool to manipulate people. Politicians, advertisers, and scammers abuse it. They package the same facts differently to their advantage
  • Irrational decisions: Being swayed by frames can lead to disadvantageous decisions. Like choosing expensive insurance because of how it's explained, even though it's the same insurance
  • Emotional manipulation: Framing stimulates emotions. It interferes with cool judgment by exploiting fear, anxiety, and greed
  • Information distortion: Framing technically isn't lying, but it distorts truth. "10% stock left" is true, but they might have made little stock to begin with

FAQ​

Q: Is framing lying? A: Technically no. Framing is expressing facts differently, not giving false information. "90% survival rate" and "10% mortality rate" are both true. But ethically it's a gray area. If you intentionally emphasize only one side to mislead people, it's not honest. For example, if a doctor emphasizes only "90% survival rate" to do more surgeries while hiding risks, that's unethical. The honest attitude is giving balanced information. "Survival rate is 90%, but there's also 10% death risk, and complication possibilities." That's honesty.

Q: Which is more effective, positive or negative framing? A: Depends on the situation. Generally: 1) Preventive actions (vaccines, checkups, seatbelts) are more effective with loss frames. "It's dangerous if you don't" is more persuasive. 2) Promotional actions (exercise, healthy diet, investment) are more effective with gain frames. "It's beneficial if you do" is more motivating. 3) Innovative products are better with gain frames. "This will improve your life" is better than "you'll fall behind without this." 4) Insurance or security is powerful with loss frames. "You'll be in trouble without protection" is effective. According to research, loss frames are generally stronger. Humans are more sensitive to losses. But being too negative can make people avoid it instead.

Q: Even knowing about framing, are you still influenced? A: Unfortunately yes. The framing effect is very powerful and hard to completely escape even when you know about it. Even psychologists are influenced by framing in their own experiments. But just being aware helps a lot. "Oh this is framing, let me think about the opposite too." You can reduce the influence, especially for important decisions. If you hear "90% survival rate," get in the habit of automatically converting to "so 10% mortality, meaning 1 in 10 people die."

Q: How do politicians use framing? A: They use it a lot. In politics, framing is an essential strategy. Examples: 1) Tax policy: Conservatives call it "death tax," progressives call it "wealth tax." Same tax, different frame. 2) Abortion: Pro-choice says "choice," pro-life says "life." Each choosing favorable frames. 3) War: "preemptive defense," "peacekeeping operation," "war on terror"... Framing to justify war. 4) Immigration: Conservatives say "illegal immigrants," progressives say "undocumented migrants"... Same people, completely different frames. Politicians test which frames are effective through polls and keep repeating them. Being aware is important. Think critically "why is this politician using this expression?"

Q: Where's the line between framing and lying? A: It's subtle. The criterion is: 1) Selective truth: Showing only one side of truth is framing. Example: "Only $90 left!" (true). But if you hide "originally $100, cut $10," it's misleading. 2) Inducing misunderstanding: Technically true but making people misunderstand is close to lying. Example: "Recommended by doctors" (truth: 1 doctor). 3) Omitting context: Removing important context is lying. Example: "30% return!" (truth: only 1 year out of 10). 4) Statistical manipulation: "80% of users satisfied" (truth: 4 out of 5 people). Legal but not honest. Honest framing shows truth from various angles. Dishonest framing shows only favorable sides and intentionally hides unfavorable sides.

Q: Is framing more dangerous in the SNS age? A: Much more dangerous. Reasons: 1) Fast spread: Framed information spreads to millions instantly. No time for fact-checking. 2) Echo chamber: Only people with same thoughts gather and repeat same frames. No chance to encounter "different perspectives." 3) Emotion amplification: SNS spreads emotional content more. The emotional stimulation effect of framing is maximized. 4) Anonymity: Hard to know who's framing with what intent. Political organizations, companies, foreign governments could be manipulating behind the scenes. 5) Algorithms: SNS algorithms show only frames you like. No chance for balanced perspective. Solution? 1) Check various sources, 2) Use fact-check sites, 3) Look for opposing views too, 4) Think critically "how is this framed?" Especially content that makes you feel strong emotions (anger, fear, excitement)—suspect it. High chance it's framed.