IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/revfec/v42y2024i2p109-123.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conventional or reverse magnitude effect for negative outcomes: A matter of framing

Author

Listed:
  • Wolfgang Breuer
  • Can K. Soypak
  • Bertram I. Steininger

Abstract

We present and expand existing theories about why individuals may assess positive outcomes differently from negative outcomes in intertemporal choices. All of our theories—based on utility or cost considerations – predict a conventional magnitude effect for positive outcomes, that is, a negative relation between outcome size and subjective discount rates. For negative outcomes, however, implications are different for utility‐ and cost‐based approaches. We argue that the relevance of utility‐based aspects is strengthened in a money frame, leading to a conventional magnitude effect even for negative outcomes, whereas cost‐based considerations gain in importance in an interest rate frame, implying, in contrast, a “reverse” magnitude effect, that is, higher discount rates for (absolutely) higher outcome size. A web‐based experiment with 676 participants confirms our theoretical findings: the conventional magnitude effect prevails for positive outcomes in the money and the interest rate frame and negative outcomes in the money frame. However, there is a reverse magnitude effect for negative outcomes in the interest rate frame. Our results might help to better understand prevailing magnitude effects in practical applications and might also be apt to derive suggestions for better designing of intertemporal decision problems.

Suggested Citation

  • Wolfgang Breuer & Can K. Soypak & Bertram I. Steininger, 2024. "Conventional or reverse magnitude effect for negative outcomes: A matter of framing," Review of Financial Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(2), pages 109-123, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:revfec:v:42:y:2024:i:2:p:109-123
    DOI: 10.1002/rfe.1190
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/rfe.1190
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/rfe.1190?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
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:revfec:v:42:y:2024:i:2:p:109-123. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1873-5924 .

    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.