Ni  ingenuos ni malvados: Enmarcado y estrategias dominantes en la toma de decisiones en contextos de ignorancia

Juan Antonio González de Requena Farré

doi:10.16925/pe.v11i18.1219

Neither Naïve nor Evil : Framing and Dominant Strategies in Decision-making in Contexts of Ignorance

Original Research Articles

https://doi.org/10.16925/pe.v11i18.1219

Juan Antonio González de Requena Farré Ver Biografía

Universidad Austral de Chile

Introduction: Numerous psychological research studies about decision-making address both risk and ignorance under the category of decision in contexts of uncertainty.

Objective: In this research work, the aim is to specifically describe the ways certain decision rules are used in a context of ignorance in the context of different consequences, affected parties and properties. In this way, it is possible to determine whether or not some of the ways of framing a decision that have been observed in contexts of risk actually occur, such as those considered by the prospective theory of Kahneman and Tversky.

Methodology: A comparative study of the results was made of the results of a questionnaire with 24 gambling situations with different properties, affected parties and consequences, which was then applied to a sample of 232 people with their informed consent.

Results: The results showed significant differences in the use of decision criteria in contexts of ignorance, with a clear predominance of the conservative strategy.

Conclusions: It may be concluded that in contexts of decision-making in ignorance, aversion to loss becomes acute and the framing effect observed in low-risk decisions is slightly modified, because more risk is not necessarily run in a perspective of loss.

Keywords: contexts of ignorance, rational choice, framing, decision rules

Aguiar, F. (2004). Teoría de la decisión e incertidumbre: modelos normativos y descriptivos. Empiria. Revista de Metodología de Ciencias Sociales, 8, 139-160. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/empiria.8.2004.982

Baron, J. y Ritov, I. (2009). Protected Values and Omission Bias as Deontological Judgments. En D. M. Bartels, C. W. Bauman, L. J. Skitka, & D. L. Medin (Eds.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation (pp. 133–167). San Diego, ca: Academic Press.

Baron , J. (2001). Confusion of group-interest and self-interest in parochial cooperation on behalf of a group. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 45, 283-296. doi:10.1177/0022002701045003002

Baron, J., y Leshner, S. (2000). How Serious Are Expressions of Protected Values? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 6(3), 183-194. doi: 10.1037//1076-898X.6.3.183

Bermúdez, J. L. (2009). Decision Theory and Rationality. New York: Oxford University Press.

Cipolla, C. (2009). Allegro ma non troppo. Barcelona: Crítica.

Driver, M. J., Brousseau, K. E. y Hunsaker, P. L. (1990). The Dynamic Decision Maker. New York: Harper & Row.

Elster, J. (1988). Uvas amargas. Sobre la subversión de la racionalidad. Barcelona: Península.

Ert, E. y Erev, I. (2013). On the Descriptive Value of Loss Aversion in Decisions under Risk: Six Clarifications. Judgment and Decision Making, 8 (3), 214–235. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1012022

Fox, C. R. y Tannenbaum, D. (2011). The elusive search for stable risk preferences. Frontiers in Psychology, 2: 298. Recuperado de http://fox-lab.org/elusive-search-for-stable-risk-preferences/ doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00298

Gigerenzer, G. (2008). Why Heuristics Work. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3 (1), 20-29. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00058.x

Goldstein, W. M. & Hogarth, R. M. (1997). Judgment and Decision Research: Some Historical Context. En W. M. Goldstein & R. M. Hogarth (Eds.), Research on Judgment and Decision Making: Currents, Connections, and Controversies (pp. 3-65). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hadar, L. y Fox, C. R. (2009). Information asymmetry in decision from description versus decision from experience. Judgment and Decision Making, 4(4), 317–325.

Harren, V. A. (1979). A Model of Career Decision Making for College Students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 119-133. doi: 10.1016/0001-8791(79)90065-4

Hastie, R. (2001). Problems for Judgment and Decision Making. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 653-683. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.653

Kahneman, D. y Tversky, A. (1983). Choices, Values, and Frames. American Psychologist, 39(4), 341-350. doi: 10.1037/0003066X.39.4.341

Kühberger, A. (1997). Theoretical Conceptions of Framing Effects in Risky Decisions. En R. Ranyard, W.R. Crozier & O. Svenson (Eds.), Decision Making: Cognitive Models and Explanations (pp. 128-144). London: Routledge.

Lauriola, M., Levin, I. P. y Hart, S. S. (2007). Common and Distinct Factors in Decision Making under Ambiguity and Risk: A Psychometric Study of Individual Diﬀerences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 104, 130–149. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.04.001

León, O. G. (1987). La toma de decisiones individuales con riesgo desde la psicología. Infancia y aprendizaje, 30, 81-94.

Luce, R. y Raiffa, H. (1957). Games and Decisions. New York: Wiley.

Mann, L., Harmoni, R. y Power, C. (1989). Adolescent Decision-making, the Development of Competence.Journal of Adolescence, 12, 265-278. doi: 10.1016/0140-1971(89)90077-8

Pearce, D. W. (Ed.) (1999). Diccionario Akal de Economía moderna. Madrid: Akal.

Plous, S. (1993). The Psychology of Judgment and Decision Making. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Polman, E. (2012). Self-Other Decision Making and Loss Aversion. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 119, 141-150. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.06.005

Resnik, M. D. (1998). Elecciones. Una introducción a la teoría de la decisión. Barcelona: Gedisa.

Rowe, A. J. y Mason, R. O. (1987). Managing with Style: A Guide to Understanding, Assessing, and Improving Decision Making. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Savage, L. J. (1954). The Foundations of Statistics. Nueva York: Dover Press.

Scott, S. G. y Bruce, R. A. (1995). Decision Making Style: the Development and Assessment of a New Measure. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55, 818-831. doi: 10.1177/0013164495055005017

Schwartz, B., Ward, A., Monterosso, J., Lyubomirsky, S., White, K. y Lehman, D. R. (2002). Maximizing versus Satisficing: Happiness is a Matter of Choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1178-1197. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.83.5.1178

Simon, H. (1955). A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69, 99-118. doi: 10.2307/1884852

Tversky, A. y Kahneman, D. (1981). The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice. Science, New Series, 211(4481), 453-458. doi: 10.1126/ science.7455683

Vidal de la Rosa, G. (2008). La Teoría de la Elección Racional en las ciencias sociales. Sociológica, 23(67), 221-236.

Von Neumann, J. y Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Weber, E. U. y Johnson, E. J. (2009). Mindful Judgment and Decision Making. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 53-85. doi: 10.1146/ annurev.psych.60.110707.163633

González de Requena Farré, J. A. (2015). Neither Naïve nor Evil: Framing and Dominant Strategies in Decision-making in Contexts of Ignorance. Pensando Psicología, 11(18), 59-71. https://doi.org/10.16925/pe.v11i18.1219

Download Citation

As the author of the article, I declare that is an original unpublished work exclusively created by me, that it has not been submitted for simultaneous evaluation by another publication and that there is no impediment of any kind for concession of the rights provided for in this contract.

In this sense, I am committed to await the result of the evaluation by the journal Pensando Psicología before considering its submission to another medium; in case the response by that publication is positive, additionally, I am committed to respond for any action involving claims, plagiarism or any other kind of claim that could be made by third parties.

At the same time, as the author or co-author, I declare that I am completely in agreement with the conditions presented in this work and that I cede all patrimonial rights, in other words, regarding reproduction, public communication, distribution, dissemination, transformation, making it available and all forms of exploitation of the work using any medium or procedure, during the term of the legal protection of the work and in every country in the world, to the Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia Press.

Issue

Vol. 11 No. 18 (2015)

Published

2015-12-15

Downloads

PDF (Spanish)

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

https://plu.mx/plum/a/?doi=10.16925/pe.v11i18.1219