Decision making is a central activity in the design of an engineered system and has a significant impact on project outcomes. Although much research exists on engineering decision making, relatively little addresses behavioral aspects of how engineers make decisions. This is a potentially significant gap, as factors such as the way in which information is communicated and presented to engineers can matter greatly. For example, cognitive psychology has demonstrated that the choices people make can be strongly influenced by how the options are framed even when the different framings are mathematically equivalent. This paper explores the impact of framing on the types of decisions engineers face. Given engineers' intense mathematical training, it is possible that they are less susceptible to framing effects. Thus, there is motivation to determine whether relevant findings can be replicated in an engineering context. This paper presents a set of positively and negatively framed design scenarios. Consistent with prior experiments, engineers in the positive (gain) framed scenarios were more likely to choose the less risky option for three of the four scenarios. One of the scenarios did not show this bias but did include a longer time horizon which likely explains the difference. Engineers were risk neutral when the scenarios were presented negatively (loss) framed, which is in contrast to prior experiments on nonengineering populations. These results motivate the future research into the impact of framing on engineering decision making and effective guidelines on how to create engineering processes and tools that leverage or avoid inducing cognitive biases.
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
August 2015
Technical Briefs
A Study on Outcome Framing and Risk Attitude in Engineering Decisions Under Uncertainty
Sean D. Vermillion,
Sean D. Vermillion
Design Systems Laboratory,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
e-mail: sdvermillion@tamu.edu
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Texas A&M University
,College Station, TX 77843
e-mail: sdvermillion@tamu.edu
Search for other works by this author on:
Richard J. Malak,
Richard J. Malak
1
Design Systems Laboratory,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
e-mail: rmalak@tamu.edu
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Texas A&M University
,College Station, TX 77843
e-mail: rmalak@tamu.edu
1Corresponding author.
Search for other works by this author on:
Rachel Smallman,
Rachel Smallman
Social Cognition Lab,
Department of Psychology,
e-mail: rsmallman@tamu.edu
Department of Psychology,
Texas A&M University
,College Station, TX 77843
e-mail: rsmallman@tamu.edu
Search for other works by this author on:
Julie Linsey
Julie Linsey
Innovation, Design Reasoning,
Engineering Education and Method Lab,
George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering,
e-mail: julie.linsey@me.gatech.edu
Engineering Education and Method Lab,
George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering,
Georgia Institute of Technology
,Atlanta, GA 30313
e-mail: julie.linsey@me.gatech.edu
Search for other works by this author on:
Sean D. Vermillion
Design Systems Laboratory,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
e-mail: sdvermillion@tamu.edu
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Texas A&M University
,College Station, TX 77843
e-mail: sdvermillion@tamu.edu
Richard J. Malak
Design Systems Laboratory,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
e-mail: rmalak@tamu.edu
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Texas A&M University
,College Station, TX 77843
e-mail: rmalak@tamu.edu
Rachel Smallman
Social Cognition Lab,
Department of Psychology,
e-mail: rsmallman@tamu.edu
Department of Psychology,
Texas A&M University
,College Station, TX 77843
e-mail: rsmallman@tamu.edu
Julie Linsey
Innovation, Design Reasoning,
Engineering Education and Method Lab,
George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering,
e-mail: julie.linsey@me.gatech.edu
Engineering Education and Method Lab,
George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering,
Georgia Institute of Technology
,Atlanta, GA 30313
e-mail: julie.linsey@me.gatech.edu
1Corresponding author.
Contributed by the Design Automation Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received September 21, 2014; final manuscript received April 14, 2015; published online June 8, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Harrison M. Kim.
J. Mech. Des. Aug 2015, 137(8): 084501 (4 pages)
Published Online: August 1, 2015
Article history
Received:
September 21, 2014
Revision Received:
April 14, 2015
Online:
June 8, 2015
Citation
Vermillion, S. D., Malak, R. J., Smallman, R., and Linsey, J. (August 1, 2015). "A Study on Outcome Framing and Risk Attitude in Engineering Decisions Under Uncertainty." ASME. J. Mech. Des. August 2015; 137(8): 084501. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4030434
Download citation file:
Get Email Alerts
Cited By
Multi-Split Configuration Design for Fluid-Based Thermal Management Systems
J. Mech. Des (February 2025)
Related Articles
Quantifying the Impact of Domain Knowledge and Problem Framing on Sequential Decisions in Engineering Design
J. Mech. Des (October,2018)
Conducting Non-adaptive Experiments in a Live Setting: A Bayesian Approach to Determining Optimal Sample Size
J. Mech. Des (March,2020)
Building the Next Space Age
Mechanical Engineering (January,2014)
Joint Probability Formulation for Multiobjective Optimization Under Uncertainty
J. Mech. Des (May,2011)
Related Proceedings Papers
Related Chapters
Helping Experts Communicate with Their Public (PSAM-0013)
Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment & Management (PSAM)
Performance-Based Expert Judgement Weighting Using Moment Methods (PSAM-0264)
Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment & Management (PSAM)
Developing Human Performance Measures (PSAM-0207)
Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment & Management (PSAM)