The sure thing: The role of integral affect in risky choice framing

How do emotions respond to outcome values and influence choice?

Emotions powerfully, predictably, and pervasively influence decision making. The risk-as-feelings hypothesis states that two kinds of emotions are important in decision-making, anticipatory emotions and anticipated emotions. We empirically investigated whether and how anticipatory and anticipated emotions may change as a function of outcome values and whether anticipatory or anticipated emotions may explain the influence of outcome values on risky choice. To study the effects of value on emotions and choice, we offered people hypothetical large amounts ($100, $200, $300, $400) and incentivized moderate amounts ($10, $20, $30, $40) as prospects in gambles over two consecutive studies. Using a representative sample from the US to ensure the generalizability of the findings, each participant in our two studies made choices in gain and loss domains. Overall, anticipatory and anticipated emotions responded very similarly to changes in value for the sure gains in both studies. The findings also indicated that both anticipatory and anticipated emotions explained the effects of the value on choice for the sure gain and sure losses, while both mediated the effect of framing on choice towards the sure and the gamble option. Although anticipatory emotions mediated a larger portion of the effect, anticipated emotions also show some mediation.

Emotion, Aging, and Decision Making: A State of the Art Mini-Review

Over the past few decades, interest has begun to surge in understanding the role of emotion in decision making, and more recently in studies across the adult life span. Relevant to age-related changes in decision making, theoretical perspectives in judgment and decision making draw critical distinctions between deliberative versus intuitive/affective processes, as well as integral versus incidental affect. Empirical findings demonstrate the central role of affect in various decision-related domains such as framing and risk taking. To situate this review within an adult life-span context, we focus on theoretical perspectives in adult development regarding emotion and motivation. As a result of age differences in deliberative and emotional processes, taking a life-span perspective is critical to advance a comprehensive and grounded understanding of the role of affect in decision making. Age-related shifts in information processing from negative toward positive material also have consequential implications. By taking a life-span perspective, not only will decision theorists and researchers benefit, but so too will practitioners who encounter individuals of various ages as they make consequential decisions.

Positivity helps the medicine go down: Leveraging framing and affective contexts to enhance the likelihood to take medications

Affect can influence judgments and decision-making in multiple ways. One way is through (a) integral affect, or affect related to the choice at hand, and another way is through (b) incidental affect, or affect unrelated to the choice at hand. Research suggests integral affect influences risk-related decision-making, especially in the context of risky choice framing. However, the role of affect in other forms of framing (e.g., attribute framing) has received little attention. We examined how integral affect (Study 1) along with incidental affect (Study 2) can alter perceptions of risk and likelihood to take hypothetical medications. Participants read pamphlets about medications with unique side effects presented as a gain (e.g., 86% of people who took this medication did not experience nausea) or loss (e.g., 14% of people who took this medication did experience nausea). Study 2 extended Study 1 by manipulating incidental affect through positive, neutral, and negative affective contexts to examine its impact on subsequent evaluations of framed information. Studies 1 and 2 measured positive and negative feelings about medications, risk perceptions, and likelihood of taking medications. Across both studies, gain-framed attributes led to more positive integral affect, subsequently increasing likelihood to take medications, whereas loss-framed attributes led to more negative feelings and increased perceived riskiness of medications. Study 2 found that positive affective contexts indirectly led to an increased likelihood to take medication by increasing positive feelings about the medications. Taken together, leveraging positivity through gain frames and positive contexts could improve adherence to medication plans. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).