# Framing effects in evaluation of accuracy of others' predictions

- Saiwing Yeung,
*Beijing Institute of Technology*

## Abstract

Most predictions can be partitioned into two components: the
predicted outcome, and the chance that one considers the outcome will happen. We
studied how people evaluate predictions with binary outcomes. These predictions
can be conveyed in two equivalent ways: one predicting an outcome with some
probability, and the other predicting the other outcome with the probability of
the complement of the first outcome. Although these two ways of stating the
predictions are mathematically interchangeable, we hypothesized that people would
judge the congruently stated prediction, one that has the same qualitative
component as the actual outcome, as more accurate. We tested this hypothesis in
four experiments. Results suggested that this effect is consistent across a
number of domains; depends on the frame in which the prediction is stated; is
robust regardless of whether the ratings were elicited in positive or negative
terms; holds for both rating and choice tasks.

Back to Table of Contents