Framing Effect: It Is Not What You Say It Is How You Say It

Imagine you are sitting in a doctor's office facing a complex heart surgery. The doctor gives you the statistics. Consider two possible ways they could phrase it. Option A is that ninety out of one hundred patients are alive after five years. Option B is that ten out of one hundred patients are dead after five years. Mathematically these statements are identical. Psychologically they are different universes.

In studies the vast majority of patients choose the surgery when hearing Option A (Survival Frame) but refuse it when hearing Option B (Mortality Frame). Option A sounds like life. Option B signals death. This is the Framing Effect. We do not evaluate information in a vacuum. We evaluate it through the emotional lens in which it is presented. Change the frame and you change the decision.

Why does the wrapper matter more than the gift?

Our brains are cognitive misers that accept the emotional context of information rather than expending energy to verify the facts.

We try to save mental energy whenever possible. We typically accept a question as it is phrased rather than rephrasing it to check for bias. If a label implies loss our risk aversion kicks in. If a label implies gain our greed kicks in.

This is evident in the surcharge versus discount battle. Credit card companies knew customers would hate a 3 percent Surcharge for using a card. It feels like a penalty. So they allowed merchants to offer a Cash Discount instead. The math is identical. Paying 4 dollars and 10 cents instead of 4 dollars. But people are indifferent to missing a discount (a foregone gain) while they hate paying a surcharge (an out-of-pocket loss). By reframing the cost the behavior changes completely.

How do politicians weaponize language?

Politicians weaponize language by using distinct labels to trigger specific emotional associations that bypass logical analysis.

Politics is a war of frames. The side that establishes the language wins. Consider the tax on assets when a person dies. If you call it the Estate Tax it sounds technical and wealthy. It polls well. If you call it the Death Tax it sounds immoral. They are taxing me for dying. Support collapses.

Pollster Frank Luntz taught politicians to never say drilling for oil. That sounds dirty. Say exploring for energy. Exploration is noble. Energy is necessary. Don't say tax cuts for the rich. Say tax relief. Relief implies the tax is a burden causing pain. Everyone wants relief. The label dictates the emotion.

How can you seize control of the comparison?

You must reframe the baseline of the decision so your product appears as an investment rather than a cost.

Charities do this by changing the denominator. They don't ask for 365 dollars a year. That sounds like a bill. They ask for less than a dollar a day or the price of a cup of coffee. They reframe the large cost into a trivial daily expense.

In sales never let your price stand alone. If you say it costs 500 dollars the customer compares it to zero. It looks expensive. If you say it replaces a 5000 dollar agency the customer compares it to 5000 dollars. It looks cheap. You must frame the alternative. If you are selling insurance don't sell stability. Sell loss prevention. Frame the disaster that happens if they don't buy. Reality is objective but perception is subjective. Control the frame and you control the outcome.

Read More Biases

• Loss Aversion
• Hyperbolic Discounting
• Anchoring Bias