Research

Working paper 

Del Carpio, P., & Rodriguez-Paiva, J. (2024, July 16). The impact of framing on voters’ perceptions of electoral predictions. https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/cg7r6

Abstract: Electoral outcomes often generate conflicting perceptions among voters on the winning and losing sides. The negative sentiments of the losing voters have critical consequences in their judgments regarding the democratic system and can even affect personal well-being. In a preregistered laboratory study, 1,012 participants took part in a randomized controlled trial to investigate how the communication framing generates different perceptions toward the prediction outcome and the electoral process, on people whose candidate was most likely to win but ends up losing. As a moderator variable, the research included the degree to which the forecast leans towards one candidate over others, alongside four potential covariates. Results indicated that when predictions were presented as the probability of losing—instead of the equivalent probability of winning format—people were significantly less skeptical about the correctness of predictions and the legitimacy of the election overall. These findings have important implications for cost-effective communication strategies in public policy.

Master’s Dissertation 

Title: Moulding Uncertainty. Can Prompted Conviction Narratives Affect Judgment? (2015)

Degree: MSc in Cognitive and Decision Sciences

University: University College London (UCL)

Supervisors:  Adam J L Harris, David Tuckett

Link to the manuscript.

Objective. In this study we experimentally assessed the principal concepts of the Conviction Narrative theory, developed as a way to explain the cognitive and emotional mechanisms used for making financial decisions under conditions of radical uncertainty. Method. In a between-subjects design experiment, 219 non-expert participants read a purchasing decision case, presented in different arrangements of the evidence that varied in the information format (narrative or non-narrative) and the consistency level (coherent or ambivalent). Results. We found that the comfort with the task increases when the case is prompted in a narrative and coherent format. Additionally, coherent evidence creates a greater feeling of certainty about their ability to estimate the probabilities of outcomes. There was no statistically significant effect of the manipulations on the reported confidence with the decision and the number of possible downsides that participants could think of. Conclusions. Conviction narratives might act as a mental tool that creates a sense of comfort due to a higher cognitive fluency of the information, and also facilitates the estimate of the subjective expected utility by ‘moulding’ a situation perceived as of radical uncertainty into a manageable risk, or even into a certain scenario.