1. A Dirty Word or a Dirty World? Framing, Politics, and Query Theory David J. Hardisty, Eric J. Johnson & Elke U. Weber Columbia University Method Abstract Discussion Effect of labeling strongly depended on political affiliation: Democrats did not distinguish between frames, while Republicans showed strong negative reactions to the tax label As predicted by Query Theory, this differential framing effect was driven by a cognitive difference in the order & balance of thoughts supporting each option Results References Introduction Results We explored the effect of attribute framing on choice, labeling charges for environmental costs as either an earmarked tax or an offset. 898 Americans chose between otherwise identical products or services, where one option included a surcharge for emitted CO 2. The cost framing changed preferences for self-identified Republicans and Independents, but did not affect Democrats' preferences. We explain this interaction using Query Theory and show that attribute framing can change the order in which internal queries supporting one or the other choice option are posed. The effect of attribute labeling on query order is shown to depend on the representations of either taxes or offsets held by people with different political affiliations. CO 2 taxes are politically unpalatable, yet many people voluntarily pay more for CO 2 offsets Attribute framing may interact with individual differences: women, but not men, prefer an 80% fat-free chocolate bar to one labeled 20% fat (Braun, Gaeth & Levin, 1997) There are strong, reliable individual differences based on political conservatism (Jost, 2006), including responsiveness to financial labels specifically (Morris, Carranza & Fox, 2008) Query Theory (Johnson et al., 2007) suggests preferences are constructed from memory through a series of mental queries for and against each option Hypothesis: conservative individuals will have immediate, negative thoughts in response to the tax label Hypothesis: the ordering of thoughts affects the cognitive balance of support for each option, in turn predicting choices Braun, K. A., Gaeth, G. J. & Levin, I. P. (1997). Framing effects with differential impact: The role of attribute salience. Advances in Consumer Research, 24, 405-411. Jost, J. T. (2006). The end of ideology. American Psychologist, 61, 651-670. Morris, M. W., Carranza, E. & Fox, C. R. (2008). Activating conservative political identities induces "Conservative" Financial decisions. Psychological Science, 19, 1154-1160. Johnson, E. J., Haubl, G. & Keinan, A. (2007). Aspects of endowment: A query theory of value. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 461-474. National sample of participants (Study 1 N=245, Study 2 N=337, Study 3 N=316), mean age = 41 (SD=13), recruited and run online Ps read a description of a program which was labeled as either a carbon tax or a carbon offset (between subjects) Ps then made choices between pairs of otherwise identical flights, gas brands, electricity providers & computers, one of which was more expensive but included a carbon tax [offset] Ps then indicated whether the tax [offset] should be made mandatory for all products in that category In Study 2, Ps listed their thoughts before making choices, and later self-coded their thoughts. In Study 3, the order of thought listings was experimentally manipulated. Choices 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 DemocratIndependentRepublican Proportion Choosing the Costlier Product Offset Tax Support for Regulation -3 -2 0 1 2 3 DemocratIndependentRepublican Mean Support for Regulation Offset Tax Order of Thoughts -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 DemocratIndependentRepublican Tendency of Thoughts Supporting the Costlier Option to Appear Earlier Offset Tax Balance of Thoughts -2 -1.5 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 DemocratIndependentRepublican Mean Supporting Minus Opposed Thoughts Offset Tax Order and balance of thoughts were strongly correlated, r =.68, p <.001, such that participants listing pro thoughts earlier also listed more of them Choices were mediated by both order of thoughts, p <.05, and balance of thoughts, p <.001, as confirmed by bootstrapping tests In Study 3, merely reversing the order in which participants listed their thoughts eliminated the frame by party interaction On April 30 th 2009 this research was accepted for publication in Psychological Science Contact: David Hardisty, http://davidhardisty.info, djh2117@columbia.edu