IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/ecobur/v4y2018i2p64-79n4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The impact of mathematical competences and cognitive effort on the appearance of the framing effect

Author

Listed:
  • Kaczmarek Aleksander

    (Copernicus Science Center, Wybrzeże Kościuszkowskie 20, 00-390 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Przybyszewski Krzysztof

    (Kozminski University, Center for Economic Psychology and Decision Sciences, ul. Jagiellońska 57/59, 03-301 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Rutkowska Dorota

    (Warsaw University, Faculty of Psychology, Department of Cognitive Psychology, ul. Stawki 5/7, 00-183 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Sosnowska Honorata

    (Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of Economic Analysis, Department of Mathematics and Mathematical Economics, al. Niepodległości 162, 02-554 Warsaw, Poland)

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to check whether mathematical competences influence some manifestations of bounded rationality. A special example of bounded rationality called “framing effect” is dealt with to analyze empirically the thesis that mathematical competences and cognitive effort may reduce the framing effect. Two kinds of cognitive effort: probabilistic and deductive are analysed. Experiments were conducted using samples of Polish students, both mathematically and business oriented. As an example of a framing situation an example called “Asian disease”, (the first analyzed and the most popular example of the framing effect), is considered. The thesis that a mathematical background may diminish the occurrence of the framing effect was partly confirmed.

Suggested Citation

  • Kaczmarek Aleksander & Przybyszewski Krzysztof & Rutkowska Dorota & Sosnowska Honorata, 2018. "The impact of mathematical competences and cognitive effort on the appearance of the framing effect," Economics and Business Review, Sciendo, vol. 4(2), pages 64-79, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:ecobur:v:4:y:2018:i:2:p:64-79:n:4
    DOI: 10.18559/ebr.2018.2.4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.18559/ebr.2018.2.4
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.18559/ebr.2018.2.4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harry Markowitz, 1952. "The Utility of Wealth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 60(2), pages 151-151.
    2. Kuhberger, Anton, 1998. "The Influence of Framing on Risky Decisions: A Meta-analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 23-55, July.
    3. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Gonzalez, Cleotilde & Dana, Jason & Koshino, Hideya & Just, Marcel, 2005. "The framing effect and risky decisions: Examining cognitive functions with fMRI," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-20, February.
    5. Kowalski, Tadeusz, 2002. "The Simonian bounded rationality hypothesis and the expectation formation mechanism," MPRA Paper 33981, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Shane Frederick, 2005. "Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 25-42, Fall.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:cup:judgdm:v:6:y:2011:i:2:p:156-162 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Kazumi Shimizu & Daisuke Udagawa, 2011. "A re-examination of the effect of contextual group size on people's attitude to risk," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(2), pages 156-162, February.
    3. Christian Grund & Dirk Sliwka, 2007. "Reference-Dependent Preferences and the Impact of Wage Increases on Job Satisfaction: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 163(2), pages 313-335, June.
    4. Lovric, M. & Kaymak, U. & Spronk, J., 2008. "A Conceptual Model of Investor Behavior," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2008-030-F&A, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    5. Hooi Hooi Lean & Michael McAleer & Wing-Keung Wong, 2013. "Risk-averse and Risk-seeking Investor Preferences for Oil Spot and Futures," Documentos de Trabajo del ICAE 2013-31, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Instituto Complutense de Análisis Económico, revised Aug 2013.
    6. Chorvat, Terrence, 2006. "Taxing utility," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-16, February.
    7. Grund, Christian & Sliwka, Dirk, 2001. "The Impact of Wage Increases on Job Satisfaction - Empirical Evidence and Theoretical Implications," IZA Discussion Papers 387, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Christian Gollier & James Hammitt & Nicolas Treich, 2013. "Risk and choice: A research saga," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 129-145, October.
    9. Hamza Bahaji, 2011. "Incentives from stock option grants: a behavioral approach," Post-Print halshs-00681607, HAL.
    10. Maciej Nowak, 2010. "Interactive Multicriteria Decision Aiding Under Risk—Methods and Applications," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 69-91, October.
    11. Martin Kukuk & Stefan Winter, 2008. "An Alternative Explanation of the Favorite-Longshot Bias," Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 2(2), pages 79-96, September.
    12. Barberis, Nicholas & Xiong, Wei, 2012. "Realization utility," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 251-271.
    13. repec:cup:judgdm:v:12:y:2017:i:1:p:81-89 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim, 2024. "Consideration sets and reference points in a dynamic bargaining game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 381-403.
    15. Raymond H. Chan & Ephraim Clark & Xu Guo & Wing-Keung Wong, 2020. "New development on the third-order stochastic dominance for risk-averse and risk-seeking investors with application in risk management," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(2), pages 108-132, June.
    16. Lisa L. Posey & Vickie Bajtelsmit, 2017. "Insurance and Endogenous Bankruptcy Risk: When is it Rational to Choose Gambling, Insurance, and Potential Bankruptcy?," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 42(1), pages 15-40, March.
    17. Aloysius, John A., 2003. "Rational escalation of costs by playing a sequence of unfavorable gambles: the martingale," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 111-129, May.
    18. Mark Schneider & Mikhael Shor, 2016. "The Common Ratio Effect in Choice, Pricing, and Happiness Tasks," Working papers 2016-29, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    19. Philip Bromiley, 2009. "A Prospect Theory Model of Resource Allocation," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 124-138, September.
    20. Syngjoo Choi & Jeongbin Kim & Eungik Lee & Jungmin Lee, 2022. "Probability Weighting and Cognitive Ability," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(7), pages 5201-5215, July.
    21. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten, 2017. "On the applicability of maximum likelihood methods: From experimental to financial data," SAFE Working Paper Series 148, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2017.
    22. Thomas Epper & Helga Fehr-Duda & Adrian Bruhin, 2011. "Viewing the future through a warped lens: Why uncertainty generates hyperbolic discounting," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 169-203, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vrs:ecobur:v:4:y:2018:i:2:p:64-79:n:4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.