Using Framing Effects to Inform More Sustainable Infrastructure Design Decisions
01 Sep 2016-Journal of Construction Engineering and Management-asce (American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE))-Vol. 142, Iss: 9, pp 04016037
TL;DR: To measure framing effects in engineering decisions, the Envision rating system for sustainable infrastructure is used, which aims to help the authors better understand how choice structures influence engineering decisions.
Abstract: Decision aids, ranging from rating systems to design software to regulatory standards, guide the design and evaluation of infrastructure projects. To present the information in these decision aids, there must first be some options such as, attributes are or are not presented, and, just as in other domains, these factors are likely to influence decisions in infrastructure development. The authors of this paper seek to better understand how choice structures influence engineering decisions. Prospect theory, which is well established in the behavioral sciences, asserts that people tend to think of possible outcomes relative to their starting point, not the resulting end point. For instance, framing a decision outcome as a loss in value (rather than a gain) can reduce the decision makers’ acceptance of risk and, in turn, lead to more conservative outcomes. To measure framing effects in engineering decisions, this paper uses the Envision rating system for sustainable infrastructure, which aims to help ...
Citations
More filters
Journal Article•
TL;DR: Prospect Theory led cognitive psychology in a new direction that began to uncover other human biases in thinking that are probably not learned but are part of the authors' brain’s wiring.
Abstract: In 1974 an article appeared in Science magazine with the dry-sounding title “Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases” by a pair of psychologists who were not well known outside their discipline of decision theory. In it Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman introduced the world to Prospect Theory, which mapped out how humans actually behave when faced with decisions about gains and losses, in contrast to how economists assumed that people behave. Prospect Theory turned Economics on its head by demonstrating through a series of ingenious experiments that people are much more concerned with losses than they are with gains, and that framing a choice from one perspective or the other will result in decisions that are exactly the opposite of each other, even if the outcomes are monetarily the same. Prospect Theory led cognitive psychology in a new direction that began to uncover other human biases in thinking that are probably not learned but are part of our brain’s wiring.
4,351 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors proposed that integrated management of construction risk and stakeholder is feasible and can promote the effectiveness of both risk management (RM) and stake holder management (SM).
108 citations
47 citations
01 Jan 2017
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors review 13 behavioral tools that can help meet four behavioral objectives: getting people's attention, engaging people's desire to contribute to the social good, making complex information more accessible, and facilitating accurate assessment of risks, costs, and benefits.
Abstract: To increase consumers' conservation of energy and other resources, government agencies, utilities, and energy-related businesses can complement regulatory and market-based policies with simple and effective behavioral interventions grounded in extensive behavioral science research. In this article, we review 13 behavioral tools that we find especially promising. Collectively, these tools help meet four behavioral objectives: getting people's attention; engaging people's desire to contribute to the social good; making complex information more accessible; and facilitating accurate assessment of risks, costs, and benefits.
37 citations
Cites methods from "Using Framing Effects to Inform Mor..."
...The sustainability index of designs created with the software increased by 24%.(69)...
[...]
References
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a critique of expected utility theory as a descriptive model of decision making under risk, and develop an alternative model, called prospect theory, in which value is assigned to gains and losses rather than to final assets and in which probabilities are replaced by decision weights.
Abstract: This paper presents a critique of expected utility theory as a descriptive model of decision making under risk, and develops an alternative model, called prospect theory. Choices among risky prospects exhibit several pervasive effects that are inconsistent with the basic tenets of utility theory. In particular, people underweight outcomes that are merely probable in comparison with outcomes that are obtained with certainty. This tendency, called the certainty effect, contributes to risk aversion in choices involving sure gains and to risk seeking in choices involving sure losses. In addition, people generally discard components that are shared by all prospects under consideration. This tendency, called the isolation effect, leads to inconsistent preferences when the same choice is presented in different forms. An alternative theory of choice is developed, in which value is assigned to gains and losses rather than to final assets and in which probabilities are replaced by decision weights. The value function is normally concave for gains, commonly convex for losses, and is generally steeper for losses than for gains. Decision weights are generally lower than the corresponding probabilities, except in the range of low prob- abilities. Overweighting of low probabilities may contribute to the attractiveness of both insurance and gambling. EXPECTED UTILITY THEORY has dominated the analysis of decision making under risk. It has been generally accepted as a normative model of rational choice (24), and widely applied as a descriptive model of economic behavior, e.g. (15, 4). Thus, it is assumed that all reasonable people would wish to obey the axioms of the theory (47, 36), and that most people actually do, most of the time. The present paper describes several classes of choice problems in which preferences systematically violate the axioms of expected utility theory. In the light of these observations we argue that utility theory, as it is commonly interpreted and applied, is not an adequate descriptive model and we propose an alternative account of choice under risk. 2. CRITIQUE
35,067 citations
TL;DR: Two 10-item mood scales that comprise the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) are developed and are shown to be highly internally consistent, largely uncorrelated, and stable at appropriate levels over a 2-month time period.
Abstract: In recent studies of the structure of affect, positive and negative affect have consistently emerged as two dominant and relatively independent dimensions. A number of mood scales have been created to measure these factors; however, many existing measures are inadequate, showing low reliability or poor convergent or discriminant validity. To fill the need for reliable and valid Positive Affect and Negative Affect scales that are also brief and easy to administer, we developed two 10-item mood scales that comprise the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). The scales are shown to be highly internally consistent, largely uncorrelated, and stable at appropriate levels over a 2-month time period. Normative data and factorial and external evidence of convergent and discriminant validity for the scales are also presented.
34,482 citations
"Using Framing Effects to Inform Mor..." refers methods in this paper
...Eight survey questions were adapted from previous posttask motivation surveys (Fernet 2011; Thelk et al. 2009; Watson et al. 1988; Wolf and Smith 1995)....
[...]
27,773 citations
"Using Framing Effects to Inform Mor..." refers background in this paper
...These findings follow the authors’ hypothesis and the Prospect theory of Kahneman and Tversky (1979)....
[...]
...The main assertion of the theory is that people tend to think of possible outcomes relative to their starting point rather than the resulting end point (Kahneman and Tversky 1979)....
[...]
Book•
08 Apr 2008TL;DR: In Nudge as discussed by the authors, Thaler and Sunstein argue that human beings are susceptible to various biases that can lead us to blunder and make bad decisions involving education, personal finance, health care, mortgages and credit cards, the family, and even the planet itself.
Abstract: A groundbreaking discussion of how we can apply the new science of choice architecture to nudge people toward decisions that will improve their lives by making them healthier, wealthier, and more free Every day, we make decisions on topics ranging from personal investments to schools for our children to the meals we eat to the causes we champion. Unfortunately, we often choose poorly. Nobel laureate Richard Thaler and legal scholar and bestselling author Cass Sunstein explain in this important exploration of choice architecture that, being human, we all are susceptible to various biases that can lead us to blunder. Our mistakes make us poorer and less healthy; we often make bad decisions involving education, personal finance, health care, mortgages and credit cards, the family, and even the planet itself. In Nudge, Thaler and Sunstein invite us to enter an alternative world, one that takes our humanness as a given. They show that by knowing how people think, we can design choice environments that make it easier for people to choose what is best for themselves, their families, and their society. Using colorful examples from the most important aspects of life, Thaler and Sunstein demonstrate how thoughtful "choice architecture" can be established to nudge us in beneficial directions without restricting freedom of choice. Nudge offers a unique new take-from neither the left nor the right-on many hot-button issues, for individuals and governments alike. This is one of the most engaging and provocative books to come along in many years.
7,772 citations
"Using Framing Effects to Inform Mor..." refers methods in this paper
...Across fields, modifications to choice structures are viewed as a method to improve the decision process (Thaler and Sunstein 2008)....
[...]
Journal Article•
TL;DR: Prospect Theory led cognitive psychology in a new direction that began to uncover other human biases in thinking that are probably not learned but are part of the authors' brain’s wiring.
Abstract: In 1974 an article appeared in Science magazine with the dry-sounding title “Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases” by a pair of psychologists who were not well known outside their discipline of decision theory. In it Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman introduced the world to Prospect Theory, which mapped out how humans actually behave when faced with decisions about gains and losses, in contrast to how economists assumed that people behave. Prospect Theory turned Economics on its head by demonstrating through a series of ingenious experiments that people are much more concerned with losses than they are with gains, and that framing a choice from one perspective or the other will result in decisions that are exactly the opposite of each other, even if the outcomes are monetarily the same. Prospect Theory led cognitive psychology in a new direction that began to uncover other human biases in thinking that are probably not learned but are part of our brain’s wiring.
4,351 citations
"Using Framing Effects to Inform Mor..." refers background in this paper
...Human rationality is bounded by time and cognitive limitations (Gigerenzer 2006; Kahneman 2013)....
[...]