Decision Framing

In order to prepare for future situations in which you have to make decisions such

as these you go back to your office to evaluate the decision and particular to do the

following:

1. Frame Millhouse’s decision.

Millhouse’s decision was framed by the salesman in an effort to persuade

Millhouse to make the purchase. The frame consisted of arranging the wording in his

sales pitch to remove the emphasis from the actual cost of the product and place the

emphasis on the fact that the part could be purchased on a payment plan that would result

in less than forty cents a day in cost. To add a weight of responsibility, the salesman

implied Millhouse should be responsible enough to consider the value of organizational

success to be worth more than a daily can of soda.

The frame set up for Millhouse is referred to as a contrast frame. The frame

consisted of a value comparison of a can of soda versus the future success of the

organization.

2. Provide an alternative frame for this situation and discuss how using the

alternative frame could influence Millhouse’s decision.

If the new part is purchased it will require a yearly cost of $146.00.

3. What are the implications of framing on our judgments and our attempts to

influence others? Are there any moral considerations? Why or why not?

There are substantial implications from framing that manipulate human

perceptions of certain ideas. As noted by Rhoades, a frame “manipulates salience.” The

frame redirects the viewer to focus on specific features while ignoring other features. In

this way the framer can more easily manipulate the perception that they wish to

encourage.

The act of attempting to manipulate a viewer’s perception can balance on the

verge of what is ethical and moral. By intentionally directing a view to be seen a specific

way, the framer is challenging the expectations of honest and ethical behavior.

Some of the predominant occurrences of framing in today’s