Please wait a minute...
Acta Psychologica Sinica    2012, Vol. 44 Issue (8) : 1038-1046     DOI:
Dissecting the Win-Loss Framing Effect of Intertemporal Choice: Researches from Intertemporal Choice of Money-Gain & Loss
MA Wen-Juan;SUO Tao;LI Ya-Dan;LUO Li-Zhu;FENG Ting-Yong;LI Hong
(1 Faculty of Psychology, Key Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (Ministry of Education),
Southwest University, Chongqing 400715, China)
(2 College of Education and Science, Institute of Psychology & Behavior, Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, China)
(3 Research Center of Psychological Development and Education, Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, China)
Download: PDF(439 KB)  
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks    
Abstract  Human choices are remarkably susceptible to the manner in which options are presented, which can be called ‘‘framing effect’’ (De Martino, Kumaran, Seymour, & Dolan, 2006). Growing bodies of studies have demonstrated that the win-loss framing effect was ubiquitous in risk decision-makings. And some other studies also found a so-called framing effect in intertemporal choice, which involved tradeoffs among costs and benefits at different points in time (Frederick, Loewenstein, & Donoghue, 2002). As a matter of fact, this is an accelerate-delay framing effect, which changes the way of time’s presentation in options through accelerating or delaying frames. However, it is still unclear whether human choices are modulated by the win-loss frame of available options in intertemporal decision-making. Therefore, the present study used intertemporal choice tasks to explore whether the win-loss framing effects existed in money-gain and money-loss intertemporal choices, and also to explore its possible inner mechanisms.
In this study, we conducted two experiments separately in situations of money-gain (Exp. a) and money-loss (Exp. b), in which subjects were forced to make choices between two amounts of money attained in different delay time in money-gain or loss fictitious scenario stories. In both situations, the intertemporal choices were phrased in win and loss frames, and moreover, the difficulty of the intertemporal choice task in the two experiments was also manipulated through different amounts of money in options. Subjects recruited in Exp. a and Exp. b were thirty (16 male, average age=21.7±1.56) and thirty-eight (14 male, average age=21.92±0.81) respectively, and both experiments were within-subject design.
The results showed that, in the money-gain situation, win-loss framing effect occurred when the intertemporal choice task was easy, but disappeared when it was difficult. Specifically, compared to lose framing, the probability of choosing to gain immediately was higher when subjects in gain framing (Exp. a). In addition, regardless of task difficulty, no framing effect existed in intertemporal choices in the money-loss situation (Exp. b).
In conclusion, the present study suggested that win-loss framing effect existed in intertemporal choices in the money-gain situation and was modulated by the tasks’ difficulty. But no framing effect existed in intertemporal choices in the money-loss situation. Therefore, win-loss frame was such an indispensable factor of intertemporal choice that should not be ignored. In turn, we should pay more attention to it as well as the contexts of intertemporal choice in the future studies.
Keywords intertemporal choice      framing effect      representation      task difficulty     
Corresponding Authors: LI Hong;FENG Ting-Yong   
Issue Date: 28 August 2012
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
Articles by authors
MA Wen-Juan
LI Ya-Dan
LUO Li-Zhu
FENG Ting-Yong
LI Hong
Cite this article:   
MA Wen-Juan,SUO Tao,LI Ya-Dan, et al. Dissecting the Win-Loss Framing Effect of Intertemporal Choice: Researches from Intertemporal Choice of Money-Gain & Loss[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2012, 44(8): 1038-1046.
URL:     OR
[1] Aimei LI,Haixia WANG,Hailong SUN,Guanxing XIONG,Shaoli YANG. The nudge effect of “foresight for the future of our children”: Pregnancy and environmental intertemporal choice[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2018, 50(8): 858-867.
[2] Bihua YAN,Xiaomin LIU,Haozhe LIU. Landmark attraction effect and landmark repulsion effect on representational momentum in airplane movement scene[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2018, 50(7): 703-714.
[3] LUO Ting, QIU Ruyi, CHEN Bin, FU Shimin.  The stimulus representation of unconscious information and its temporal characteristics[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2018, 50(5): 473-482.
[4] YE Haosheng, MA Yankun, YANG Wendeng.  Body and cognitive representation: Understandings and divergences[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2018, 50(4): 462-472.
[5] HAN Meng, MAO Xinrui, CAI Mengtong, JIA Xi, GUO Chunyan.  The effect of positive and negative signs on the SNARC effect in the magnitude judgment task[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2017, 49(8): 995-1008.
[6] YANG Jiping, GUO Xiumei, WANG Xingchao. Metaphorical representation of moral concepts: Evidence from red/white color, left/right position and upright/skew font[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2017, 49(7): 875-885.
[7] SONG Xiaolei; FU Xuna; ZHANG Junting; YOU Xuqun. The influence of different numeral representations and body experience on numeral cognition under the paradigm of response-effect compatibility[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2017, 49(5): 602-610.
[8] LIU Xinyuan; ZHANG Zhijie. The intermediate common representation of space-time association: Evidence from the reversed STEARC effect[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2017, 49(4): 427-438.
[9] WU Shiyu; ZHANG Yuying; HU Qingqing. A cognitive inquiry into the short-circuit hypothesis in L2 reading: A paradigm of online L2 discourse processing[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2017, 49(3): 285-295.
[10] YU Wei; WANG Aijun; ZHANG Ming. Effect of selective and divided attentions on auditory dominance in multisensory integration[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2017, 49(2): 164-173.
[11] LIU Zhiying, KU Yixuan.  Perceiving better, inhibiting better: Effects of perceptual precision on distractor-inhibition processes during working memory[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2017, 49(10): 1247-1255.
[12] HU Qingfen; LU Jing. The combination of self-position and self-orientation in children’s map task[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2016, 48(9): 1143-1150.
[13] CHEN Xiaomeng; LIU Chunling; QIAO Fuqiang; QI Kemin. The process of construction of spatial representation in the unfamiliar environment in the blind: The role of strategies and its effect[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2016, 48(6): 637-647.
[14] YANG Haibo; LIU Dianzhi. Validity and sensitivity analysis of segment recognition task on implicit sequence learning[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2016, 48(3): 230-237.
[15] LIU Wenjuan; SHEN Manqiong; LI Ying; WANG Ruiming. The interaction between emotional concept processing and emotional face perception[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2016, 48(2): 163-173.
Full text



Copyright © Acta Psychologica Sinica
Support by Beijing Magtech