A young priest asked his bishop, “May I smoke while praying?” The answer was an emphatic “No!”
Later, when he sees an older priest puffing on a cigarette while praying, the younger priest scolded him, “You shouldn’t be smoking while praying! I asked the bishop, and he said I couldn’t do it!”
“That’s odd,” the old priest replied. “I asked the bishop if I could pray while I’m smoking, and he told me that it was okay to pray at any time!”
As this joke shows, the way you frame a problem profoundly influences the solutions you get. The same problem, when seen from a different angle can lead to a directly opposite interpretation!
Skillfully framing problems is paramount for better problem solving and decision making.
On the flip side, it’s too easy to fall into thinking traps when it comes to framing. Let’s look at one of these traps — and offer some ideas on how to overcome it.
A Brief Pause for You to Save Some Lives
Let’s make a thought experiment, shall we?
Suppose the government is gearing for the outbreak of an unusual disease, which is expected to kill 600 people. Two alternative programs to combat the disease have been proposed, and you must choose which one you think is better. These are the estimates of the outcomes for each program:
Program A: 200 people will be saved.
Program B: There’s a 1/3 chance that 600 people will be saved, and a 2/3 chance that no people will be saved.
Make a note of your choice.
Now suppose that, instead of those two programs above, you’ve been presented with the following two programs instead. As in the previous situation, pick the one you think is better.
Program C: 400 people will die.
Program D: There’s a 1/3 chance that nobody will die, and a 2/3 chance that 600 people will die.
Are You Being Consistent?
Which programs did you pick for the two questions above? (Hint: Most people pick A and D.)
This question was asked in a famous experiment by Tversky and Kahneman (which led to a Nobel Prize for Kahneman), with 72% of participants choosing option A over B, and 78% choosing D over C.
Well, I don’t know about you, but for me these are astonishing results!
Why?
In case you didn’t notice, programs A and C are identical, as are programs B and D. They’re objectively the same — the same number of people live and die, with the same odds — but they’re presented — or framed — in different ways!
If people were to act consistently, it would be expected they would pick either A-C or B-D. But the change in wording alone was enough for people to shift their choices from the first option to the second. Many people chose inconsistently compared with their previous choice.
And that’s how powerful framing is.
No matter how “rational” we think we are, emotions and mental images play a large part in our decisions — many times preventing us from seeing the real content behind our options.
The Problem is Not Risk Aversion. It’s Loss Aversion.
Have you ever heard that people are in general averse to risk?
Well, the experiment we looked at strongly suggests that that statement may not be entirely true. When the programs were presented in terms of lives saved, the participants preferred the safe program (Program A). However, when the programs were presented in terms of expected deaths, participants chose the gamble (Program D). If people were risk averse, they’d always choose the safe option.
People are willing to gamble — but usually only when the gamble can avoid losses.
It turns out that in our minds losses are much stronger than gains. We feel much stronger negative emotions when losing than positive emotions when winning (about 2 times stronger according to some studies).
We feel much more disappointed losing $1000 than happy when earning $1000. Saving 200 lives is good, but it is not as appealing as the possibility — even if not that favorable — of avoiding the loss of 600.
Framing Tools
If framing has such an impact in how we decide and solve problems, what is the “correct way” of framing a problem? How can we protect ourselves from our biases? Here are four ideas.
1. Try multiple different perspectives.
Never accept the initial framing without at least some thought — whether it was formulated by you or by someone else.
Try different perspectives and look for distortions in thinking. Play with your problem definition.
Because our perceptual positions determine how we view things, it’s important to learn how to shift perspectives and look at a subject in different ways.
2. Make all-encompassing and neutral statements.
To avoid the biases of posing your problem as losses or gains, state the problem in a neutral way — one that combines both positive and negative perspectives. Make it in such a way that it is redundant, simultaneously encompassing multiple reference points as objectively as possible.
In our previous example with the disease programs, it could become:
Program A: 200 people survive. 400 people die.
Program B: 1/3 chance for 600 people to survive and 0 to die, and 2/3 for 0 people to survive and 600 to die.
Regardless of which of the options you end up choosing, you can now evaluate them in a much more balanced way.
3. Invert the situation.
Take your problem, invert it and see how you feel about it.
For example, if it’s about earning $1000, imagine that you already have it and now would lose it. In the same manner, if it’s about losing $1000, imagine that you’re $1000 behind and that you’ll earn it.
Check how that feels comparing to the original situation. If you notice a strong asymmetry between your feelings in both situations, this is a strong signal that you’re being affected by the framing of the question.
4. Detach yourself from it.
Check for elements in your problem that trigger disproportionally emotional responses. It’s always useful to be aware of the role our own emotions play when we make decisions. Acknowledge and express your emotions — it would be impossible not to, anyway — but don’t let them cloud your vision.
To separate the rational and the emotional components of the problem, detach yourself from it: Imagine the situation is happening to someone else, someone you don’t know. Conversely, get the opinion of other people who are not involved.
Tune the emotions down for a minute to add a new perspective to your problem. Then feel free to tune them back up.
What About You?
Now, it’s over to you… Have you ever been affected by misframing a situation? Were you able to reframe it? How did it work? Share in the comments!
Hey, I just wanted to share a very recent experience where reframing the problem really helped me a lot.
I am working on my thesis in theoretical physics, which is highly mathematical. (I don’t intend to get too nitty gritty about the details here, but this article is so relevant to how I got through a recent stumbling block, I really want to share!)
My thesis involves particles that are moving with respect to each other, and any time a physical system is described, the coordinate axes are generally chosen to coincide with certain aspects that are being described. (“Without loss of generality” is a phrase that is used to point out that the physics isn’t changing, just the way it is described.)
In my first approach, I got what seemed like definitive proof that my hypothesis was actually wrong. But then I realized that I had chosen one of the coordinates to line up with something within the particles, when instead I could choose one of the coordinates to line up with the relative motion between the particles.
Changing the perspective from which I’m describing the situation really did help. I now think my hypothesis is going to end up being shown to actually be right, which is great, because I had formulated it from what seemed like a really sensible set of reasoning. I was fully prepared to accept that I could’ve been wrong, and that it would be interesting to explore the consequences of the wrongness of my hypothesis, but I was delighted to discover that just changing the reference frame made such a big difference to my results.
It wasn’t a huge surprise that I needed a different point of view, because this happens a lot with relativity, but my first attempt was so wrapped up in hopes and expectations that I was obscuring my ability to reframe it. If I had read this article before getting unstuck, I’m pretty sure it would’ve helped!
Hi Qrystal,
I missed your comments here in the site!
Thank you so much for sharing your story!
I understand just enough about math and physics to be thrilled by your description of choosing the right axis system. That’s probably the perfect parallel in math for what I “reframing”, isn’t it?
And changing the axes is a very elegant solution to math problems… at least that’s how I feel about it! Very cool!
hello
how do u do ?
actually ,
i need your help please !!
i’m a new teacher i’m teaching english language
and i want to applay scamper stratageis with my students and also my supervisor want me to explain it to mu colluques.
so if you can help me send e-mail to me
thanks.
Hi Lanoo,
You can find a comprehensive article on SCAMPER here:
Creative Problem Solving with SCAMPER
Hope this helps!
Luciano,
I think reframing can be incredibly powerful even in our social interactions. Just to share one or two examples from my personal experience, I’ve sometimes been in a bar when some girl will tell me she hates me or something because I’ve something I said. What’s amazing is reframing the same situation as “this is just attraction at work” will completely change how you respond to the situation. All of a sudden when you no longer take what seems like an attack on you personally and as you said “detach” from it, things are much better. I can think of numerous times when I’ve just turned around the situation and reframed it to my advantage
Hey Srinivas, thanks for dropping by!
Hahah, your example of reframing cracks me up! And I’m sure it does work indeed!
Reframing is a great exercise of awareness (not to mention creativity)!
Excellent post, Luciano. I have heard similar ideas on this topic presented, but never so concisely and practically. Just being aware of how powerfully loss aversion can affect decision making is critical.
For me, loss aversion becomes an emotionally charged issue when trading stocks. At times I focus so heavily on avoiding loss that I do not let my winners run, and tend to habitually sell too soon. Your point on detaching oneself from the problem when you see disproportionate emotional triggers being tripped is so important!
I’m going to try aggressively focusing on reframing and inverting variables after reading this post. Thanks!
Hi Rod,
Your story is very interesting. What I’ve seen happening many times with stock market investors is precisely the opposite: overconfidence (continuing to hold on a stock that is winning, in the hope that it won’t go down… or clinging to ever-dropping stocks — the quintessential example of Sunk Cost Bias.
Regardless, it’s clear that detaching from strong emotional triggers is a great trait for an investor, right?
Thanks for sharing your story, and let me know how the techniques helped in your investing!
Thanks for this really interesting post. From a product management perspective, how problems are framed, and listening to others framing of a problem really helps align appropriate behaviours based on the person your interacting with. It gives an immediate sense of whether this person is a “glass half full” kinda guy.
Now that you mentioned it I realized: marketing is all about framing a solution in a way that resonates with a target audience, isn’t it? The product is what it is, but the way you frame it (i.e., designs and presents it) changes everything.
Brilliant!
I read somewhere (it’s a famous quote, I just don’t remember the source now) that we don’t see things as they are, we see things as we are (I think it was Anais Nin, though). That’s so true, and especially in the solving problems area, where we tend to substitute the solution with the problem all the time.
Thanks for a great read (loved the joke in the beginning too)!
Hey Dragos,
You’re right: that quote is Anain Nin’s.
Thanks for stopping by!
Your suggestion to invert the situation can change things dramatically. If you can see something from a different angle, it can open things up surprisingly.
I commented in your last post about the method of drawing from a book called “Drawing on the Right Side of Your Brain.” In the book they illustrate that beginning artists can improve their drawing abilities by leaps and bounds by turning the image they are drawing upside down! They then tap into another part of their mind which enables them to bypass preconceptions.
That’s drawing a nice parallel between framing and drawing (pun intended). I already (partially) followed the method in “Drawing on the Right Side of Your Brain” — the results we get with drawing upside down are mind-boggling indeed!
Luciano, I always find this kind of studies fascinating. Once again we see that moving away from pain is a more powerful incentive for action than moving toward pleasure. I like to flip the emotional anchors when possible.
If we have a habit that is counter productive, but pleasurable, it will be very difficult to break (logic never wins). However, if we can get ourselves to focus on the negative consequences of that habit and anchor those consequences in a painful emotion, that negative (painful) anchor can then override our sense of pleasure. This anchor flip can then empower us to move away from that unwanted habit.
Hey Jonathan,
Thanks for your perspective on framing and habit changing! That’s a super-useful, practical way of putting the concept of framing at work. Glad to have you around, Jonathan!
Wow… what an awesome article. I always say, its not what you say but how you say it. But now I’m even more aware of how true this is. Its truly amazing that you can frame the same information in a different way and get a totally different reaction. So interesting. Can’t wait to share this one.
Glad you liked it Nea! Thanks for helping spread the word!
Luciano,
Thank you for your blog and all of the effort you put into your passion. I was encouraged to read your illustration and explanation that followed. It re-confirms and reminds me of how much emotions impact “decisions.” I agree it’s not about being risk averse, but rather loss averse.
I’ve observed in business, as in life, that most people if given the time to stop and think, rather than immediately reacting from emotion, they will, as in your example choose a different solution. I believe the issue is “time” and also the perception that to gain requires work, because it takes more time/work to re-frame; that is question and discover alternative solutions to gain pleasure, than it does to just allow the initial habitual reaction – key word “reaction” (i.e. less time/work) to avoid pain/loss.
A thought process closely aligned with the loss/pain to gain/pleasure relationship relates to a misperception that it’s better for people to focus on improving their weaknesses, rather than capitalizing on their strengths.
Example: Starting from a zero (0) baseline, if your weakness is negative (-) 10, but your strength is positive (+) 20, focusing your energy to improve your weakness by plus (+) 10 will only get you to the baseline. Whereas, if your energy is focused plus (+) 10 on your strength, you will be 30 above the baseline.
All that to say, if you’re not achieving a goal (i.e. solving a problem), the goal will be achieved more readily by re-framing and focusing on the solution (strength) rather than focusing on the problem (weakness).
Ciao
I wholeheartedly agree with your line of reasoning regarding improving on weaknesses over capitalizing on strengths. I do believe it has a lot to do with the loss aversion idea.
When “you’re behind” on something, it feels like you’re missing out something (loss). It’s much more comfortable to go plug weaknesses holes than improving on strengths (leaving those holes — “mementos of your losses” — around for you and other people to see)…
Thanks for a new perspective on the subject, Deb!
Hi Luciano, Awesome and grt blog it’s my first visit. Interesting points you have highlighted I particularly love the whole concept around emotions to see the light from a new perspective … “Tune the emotions down for a minute to add a new perspective to your problem. Then feel free to tune them back up”.
I admit that’s not the easiest advice to follow… but if you’re able to apply it, it almost certainly gives interesting new insights to the problem.
Welcome to the site! Thanks for commenting!
The book you want to read if you are interested in this stuff is Nudge by Richard Thaler. It applies these concepts of behavioral economics to personal life and society.
Or you can go for “Don’t think of an elephant” by George Lakoff.. the linguist who helped to transform liberal marketing during the election.
Hey Kevin, thank you so much for the recommendations — I’m going to check them out! What can I say, I just love behavioral economics!
Luciano:
Any ideia of someone who could give a lecture on this subject in Brazil? I run CEO Forum Groups and would like to introduce this subject into my Groups
Thank you
Andre Kaufmann
S Paulo / Brazil
Hi Andre,
Although I probably can’t go to São Paulo to give a lecture, I will be glad to help you in anyway I can. I’m sending you an email so we can discuss it…
Framing really is about looking at a half-filled glass of water as either half-full or half-empty.
The paradigm we bring to a situation determines how it will be framed. Our attitudes, experiences and expectations all contribute.
Thanks for sharing this,
Alex
Hey Alex, speaking of glasses half-filled glasses, I recalled of some old “reframing jokes” on the subject:
Is the glass half-empty or half-full?
…an engineer says the container is twice the size it needs to be.
…a realist says it doesn’t matter. It’s just going to be washed later anyway.
…a Zen Master picks up the glass and drinks.
…an opportunist drinks the contents while the other two argue.
…an accountant wants to know why you’re wasting money on a glass that’s obviously too large.
…an analyst says it is neither, it simply contains 50% of its potential capacity.
…a physicist says the glass is neither. It is completely full, half with water, the other half with air.
Really great post Luciano, very clear description of prospect theory and good ideas to counteract it! I did an essay for my positive psychology course which overlapped with what you talk about here; there is mounting evidence that this aversion to loss might be playing a role on a national level, in response to a country’s income.
We know that when countries get richer, the people are quick to adapt to the new lifestyle. Luxuries soon become necessities, so essentially, countries need huge increases in GDP to achieve small gains in happiness.
However… when our creature comforts are taken away through recession or social problems, people find it hard to let go of a richer lifestyle, so losses in income do cause losses in happiness.
There is more research underway and this is not definite yet, but it might be the case, that the only time money causes lasting increases in happiness is when you get back what you have recently lost!
Hi Warren,
Those are terrific insights on loss aversion and happiness on a large scale!
Thank you so much for sharing them!
I checked your blog and found some great articles in there.
I am particularly attracted to adopting more scientific methods to personal development. I am a big fan of science, and your article really made me more aware of the lack of rigor in the field (my own blog included of course!), and how a more scientific approach would benefit us all. Thinking a lot about it…
Thank again for your contribution!
Nice post. Framing is everything in a certain respect. If you choose to look at something in a different way compared to another, it can consciously alter the importance. Most likely why re-framing in NLP is so powerful.
Hi Craig, I realized that I talk a lot about NLP here in the blog, although I never explictly mention it. I guess it’s just a matter of framing, isn’t it?
Lovely post. Enjoyed reading it. Politicians are very skilful in framing issues and almost always to manipulate people for their own advantage e.g. Proposition 8 in California in 2008.
Hi Rana,
Ha, you bet! That’s why we should never accept frames that are given to us “as is”. Many people manipulate frames deliberately — which is sad — but it’s our job to spot the frames and redefine them so we can think more clearly.
Thanks for the comment!
maybe i am too logical, i picked B and D
Me too! But I suspect that was only because I sensed I was being tricked beforehand…
Brilliant post!!!
What we really miss is observing objectively from the first place from the inner (unconscious) mind. So, realizing the things in practical way and stopping by to evaluate onself as presented here helps a lot.
This reminds me of the trolley problem (another popular, widely cited moral conundrum). You may have heard of it.
A runaway trolley car is headed for a group of five people. If it stays on this course, the five will die. However, you have the ability to throw a switch and move the trolley to another track; however, if you do the trolley will hit one person instead. Do you flip the switch?
Most people say “yes.” However, then the problem is given again in the context of a doctor who has the option of discretely killing one patient, harvesting his organs, and distributing them to five others who would die if they did not receive these transplants. Most people are opposed to his scenario even though both outcomes are essentially the same: take one life, save five.
I’m a huge fan of problems like these that make people really think about their choices. Great post!
-Saint
Hi Saint,
Ah, the trolley problem — yes, I knew about it (and love asking people how they would behave!). However, I didn’t know (and never thought about) the subsequent situation with the doctor. Awesome parallel!
Thank you so much for your contribution. That’s a marvelous example of framing — and bringing a moral conundrum to the table only adds to it… I absolutely love it!
Hi Luciano,
The framing tools you’ve suggested are great ways to kick ourselves out of conditioned thinking. Excellent, thanks! Another simple way to un-frame is to think with a beginner’s mind. It’s not exactly detaching oneself, but more of starting from ground zero. Not an easy task, but can be really useful.
Great point about “beginner’s mind”. I am a big fan of the concept, and I like very much the way you put it: “un-framing”…
Here’s an article I wrote that I believe has a lot to do with that:
Are you stuck in a rut? Run from the experts!
Thanks for the insight!
Hello Luciano,
Very intriguing post about the framing of situations. We at Peak Potentials Training help people put things into perspective regarding their financial blueprint. One quote that your post reminds me about is “rich people play the money game to win vs. poor people play the money game not to lose”. Thanks for a great reminder- i look forward to your future posts.
I appreciate the POS (Posit. Org. Scholarship) reference by Warren and the NLP reference by you and Craig. I also thought of conversations I had with a consulting colleague and trained Gestalt therapist in the latter 80s. Strategic thinking is a necessity and a challenge in group work; developing keen judgment is a lifelong task.
Your post and commentary itself illustrates the richness of perspective and framing. As for helping organizations take this on, I applaud the leaders who cultivate the structures that not only allow this, but create it as an business value. May we all find ways to help that happen in our own spheres of influence.
Your comment on the old “reframing jokes” with the subject ‘Is the glass half-empty or half-full?’ is very hilarious and entertaining, like it! two thumbs up…:-)
hope to read another interesting article…