How framing and numerical information affect people's judgments when they read a newspaper story

The unit effect from a performance management perspective

Purpose

The subjective interpretation of numerical information can induce the so-called unit effect, i.e. the scale and unit chosen to quantify such information might influence a person's judgment. Although this bias is well-known, until now, it has been difficult to obtain an overview of the respective research. There are a variety of versions of the unit effect, different terms are used for the same kind of effect and proposals for grouping such effects lack a straightforward typology.

Design/methodology/approach

A literature review is conducted using a systematic literature search design. We address the following questions: (1) What knowledge exists about the unit effect? (2) What is a suitable concept for structuring the findings? (3) What ideas can be deduced for future research focusing on performance management?

Findings

A total of 11 versions of the unit effect and 27 moderating variables are identified and grouped into four contexts in which the effects occur. Structured according to these contexts, research ideas are depicted. They include suggestions for studies adapted to the field of performance management to scrutinize the main effects and moderators addressed in the literature to date as well as to consider additional potential moderators.

Originality/value

Few publications explicitly address the unit effect from the perspective of performance management. As one of the core objectives of this business function is to enable rational decision-making based on numerical information, it can be assumed that corresponding research will be very fruitful.

High But Not Low Probability of Gain Elicits a Positive Feeling Leading to the Framing Effect

Human risky decision-making is known to be highly susceptible to profit-motivated responses elicited by the way in which options are framed. In fact, studies investigating the framing effect have shown that the choice between sure and risky options depends on how these options are presented. Interestingly, the probability of gain of the risky option has been highlighted as one of the main factors causing variations in susceptibility to the framing effect. However, while it has been shown that high probabilities of gain of the risky option systematically lead to framing bias, questions remain about the influence of low probabilities of gain. Therefore, the first aim of this paper was to clarify the respective roles of high and low probabilities of gain in the framing effect. Due to the difference between studies using a within- or between-subjects design, we conducted a first study investigating the respective roles of these designs. For both designs, we showed that trials with a high probability of gain led to the framing effect whereas those with a low probability did not. Second, as emotions are known to play a key role in the framing effect, we sought to determine whether they are responsible for such a debiasing effect of the low probability of gain. Our second study thus investigated the relationship between emotion and the framing effect depending on high and low probabilities. Our results revealed that positive emotion was related to risk-seeking in the loss frame, but only for trials with a high probability of gain. Taken together, these results support the interpretation that low probabilities of gain suppress the framing effect because they prevent the positive emotion of gain anticipation.