Participants show a significant reminder bias (overuse of reminders relative to the optimal strategy) when reminders are framed as gains¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r3 · q3 · i2–i3
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 In Experiment 1, reminder bias in the gain framing condition was significantly greater than zero (dz = 0.82). → Lea Fröscher 2022 q3 i2 In Experiment 2, reminder bias in the gain framing condition was significantly greater than zero with a medium effect size (d = 0.60). → Lea Fröscher 2022 (2)

Evidence¶

Lea Fröscher 2022¶

Lea Fröscher, Ann‑Kathrin Friedrich, Max Berentelg, Curtis Widmer, Sam J. Gilbert and Frank Papenmeier. (2022). Framing cognitive offloading in terms of gains or losses: achieving a more optimal use of reminders. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-022-00416-3

q3 · i3 · causal · r3

Preregistered between-participants online experiment (N = 141 after exclusions) using the optimal reminders task with gain vs. loss framing. One-tailed paired t test (OIPs vs AIPs) showed the gain condition reminder bias was "still significant", t(62) = 6.49, p < 0.001, dz = 0.82 (printed effect size dz = 0.82, a large effect).

"Although framing reminders in terms of losses instead of gains resulted in a significant reduction of the reminder bias, the reminder bias was still significant both in the gain, t(62) = 6.49, p < 0.001, dz = 0.82"

Lea Fröscher 2022 (2)¶

Lea Fröscher, Ann‑Kathrin Friedrich, Max Berentelg, Curtis Widmer, Sam J. Gilbert and Frank Papenmeier. (2022). Framing cognitive offloading in terms of gains or losses: achieving a more optimal use of reminders. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-022-00416-3

q3 · i2 · causal · r3

Preregistered within-participants MTurk experiment (N = 300) with performance-based payment. Preregistered two-tailed one-sample t tests on reminder bias (OIP minus AIP) found a significant bias under gain framing, t(299) = 10.32, p < 0.001, d = 0.60 (printed effect size d = 0.60, a medium effect).

"We observed a significant reminder bias both in the gain framing condition, t(299) = 10.32, p < 0.001, d = 0.60, and in the loss framing condition, t(299) = 4.37, p < 0.001, d = 0.25."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Participants still offload more than optimal under loss framing — related
• Framing reminders as losses reduces, but does not eliminate or reverse, the reminder bias in both between- and within-participants designs — related
• In Experiment 1, participants in both groups were significantly biased towards excessive reminder use relative to the optimal strategy — related
• Individuals systematically overuse reminders relative to the optimal offloading level, and reminder bias correlates with confidence and metacognitive bias — a broader claim this one bears on
• Effort avoidance contributes to reminder overuse beyond metacognitive error — related
• Framing adds an additive predictive value to the reminder bias beyond participants' internal metacognitive bias — related