Should we tell students it’s ‘homework’ or ‘independent practice’? Should suggest they ‘get the most out of it’ or ‘avoid missing out’? The way a situation is framed can affect how people perceive it and the choices they make. Doctors asked to choose between surgery or radiation to treat lung cancer were given identical information about the short-term risks of surgery, framed differently:
- Group A were told that the survival rate is 90%
- Group B were told that the mortality rate is 10%
In Group A, 84% chose surgery; in Group B, it was 50%: it’s hard to ignore emotive framing; “90% survival sounds encouraging whereas 10% mortality is frightening (Kahneman, 2011, p.367).” Four frames may affect students’ decisions:
Frame 1: Putting students ‘in credit’
We feel losses more intensely than equivalent gains. In one experiment, people either:
- Group A – received a mug branded with their university’s logo
- Group B – did not
Group A were asked to name the price at which they would sell their mug; Group B, the price at which they would buy it. On average, sellers demanded twice what buyers would pay (Kahneman, 2011, p.295): people become attached to what they possess – the ‘endowment effect’ – and are averse to losses. Another example describes someone buying fine wine at no more than $35 a bottle, but never selling for less than $100: “giving up a bottle of nice wine is more painful than getting an equally good bottle is pleasurable (Ibid., p.293).” Teachers are no different: most performance-related pay schemes don’t increase student learning; a rare exception gave teachers a bonus at the start of the year, which they had to repay if students didn’t reach their targets (I’m not advocating this – just illustrating the mechanism; Fryer et al., 2012). Since losses hurt more than gains please, and people work harder to avoid losses than to make equivalent gains, we may wish to put students ‘in credit’ at the start of the lesson, knowing they will strive harder to hang onto it than they would to earn it. Rather than inviting them to earn merits or ticks on the board, we might start them on 100 merits or full ticks, removing them if their behaviour slips. I’ve found this provides a simple, effective sanction: students care more about losing this credit than about earning it. Similarly, we can endow students with progress, inviting them to complete partially-solved problems (discussed further here). Endowing students with credit or progress encourages them to work harder to maintain their ‘achievement’.
Frame 2: Encouraging ‘safer’ choices
If people feel they are doing well, they avoid risk; if they feel they are doing badly, they embrace it. When we emphasise existing positives, people seek to retain what they have; when we emphasise negatives, they take risks (Kuhberger, 1998): having lost money gambling, people risk another roll of the dice; having won, they bank their winnings (Kahneman, 2011). Let’s say a student is behaving poorly, we want to get them back on track, and they are teetering between doing so and rebelling: if we highlight their losses – “You’re already in trouble, don’t make it worse, get this done.” – they may feel there’s little to lose in saying something rude or funny. If we highlight gains – “You’ve already half-completed this exercise, if you focus on writing for the rest of the lesson, you can get this done”, they may prefer the safer path of compliance. We need to name and challenge poor behaviour, but emphasising successes worth maintaining may help students recover the rest of the lesson.
Frame 3: Emphasising potential losses or gains
People’s desire to avoid losses or achieve gains also depends on how risky actions seem:
- Cancer screening feels risky (it may offer undesirable information): people are more likely to accept it if potential losses are emphasised (don’t miss out on knowing…) than potential gains
- Suncream feels positive (it protects us): people are more likely to ask for a tube if the benefits are emphasised, not potential risks (Rothman et al., 2006).
Emphasising potential losses (bad things that could happen or good things that could not happen) encourages people to take risky or unpleasant actions; emphasising potential gains (good things that will happen or bad things that will not) encourages people to take safe or pleasant actions (Rothman et al., 2006). If an action looks unattractive to students, we might frame our appeal around potential, avoidable losses:
- “These questions are challenging: don’t miss out on thinking really hard about this issue” rather than,
- “These questions are challenging: you’ll benefit from thinking really hard about this issue.”
Conversely, if it looks tempting, we might emphasise the benefits:
- “This game will prove you can use the key ideas” should work better than asking students to,
- “This game will show whether you’ve misunderstood key ideas.”
What matters is not whether the action is beneficial, but how students perceive it: cancer screening is a good thing, medically, but it can feel intimidating and unpleasant; students benefit from speaking publicly and from revision quizzes – but they may feel like risks to students. Assessing how risky an action seems should help us decide whether to emphasise its benefits or potential losses.
Frame 4: Making learning tempting
Beyond risk, we may frame actions temptingly. The Behavioural Insights Team (2019) tested language to encourage meat eaters to choose vegetarian options: ‘field-grown’ sells better than ‘meat-free’ and more indulgent names sell better than conventional ones; renaming “Low Fat Vegetarian Black Bean Soup” as “Cuban Black Bean Soup” increased sales by 13% (Vennard 2019). We may choose language to emphasise motivating factors, like autonomy, relatedness and competence: a task students must complete is a chance for greater autonomy; a tough task may build competence.
- Instead of, “You need to get this done at home”, we can emphasise autonomy: “I don’t think you need my help to complete this”.
- Instead of, “Complete an extra five problems”, we can highlight the chance to gain competence: “If you complete these five problems, I think you’ll have understood this perfectly.”
- Instead of, “Ask each other for help before asking me” we can emphasise relatedness: “You’ll face similar challenges: you should be able to help each other solve many of them.”
Conclusion
The way we frame situations can influence students’ choices. Doug Lemov argues that “People are motivated by the positive far more than by the negative. Seeking success and happiness will spur stronger action than seeking to avoid punishment (2015, p,426).” He’s right to encourage us to create trusting relationships and to assume the best of students, but sometimes, emphasising potential losses will elicit more effort than emphasising gains. People respond individually: some may focus more on achieving success or avoiding failure, due to their disposition, the situation or their past experiences (Rothman et al., 2006). We can judge which frames will encourage action by asking:
- What’s in it for students?
- What might they ‘lose’ or ‘gain’?
- What might seem risky?
- How can we frame the situation to increase the chance they benefit?
My last post looked at how goals can elicit motivation; in future posts I’ll consider how we can make goals seem important and relevant to students.
This is a draft excerpt from Habits of success: getting every student learning. It’s available from Amazon & Routledge.
If you found this interesting, you might benefit from/won’t want to miss out on:
This post, on setting meaningful goals to guide action
This post, on helping students feel that they’re making progress
This post, on how to time requests
References
Behavioural Insights Team (2019). Annual Report 2017-18. London.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. London: Penguin.
Kuhberger, A. (1998) The Influence of Framing on Risky Decisions: A Meta-analysis. Organizational behavior and human decision processes. 75(1), pp.23-55.