RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Framing effects from misleading implicatures: an empirically based case against some purported nudges
JF Journal of Medical Ethics
JO J Med Ethics
FD BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and Institute of Medical Ethics
SP jme-2024-110015
DO 10.1136/jme-2024-110015
A1 Yeo, Shang Long
YR 2024
UL http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2024/08/29/jme-2024-110015.abstract
AB Some bioethicists argue that a doctor may frame treatment options in terms of effects on survival rather than on mortality in order to influence patients to choose the better option. The debate over such framing typically assumes that the survival and mortality frames convey the same numerical information. However, certain empirical findings contest this numerical equivalence assumption, demonstrating that framing effects may in fact be due to the two frames implying different information about the numerical bounds of survival and mortality rates. In this paper, I use these findings to argue that framing is presumptively wrong because it violates the duty of proper disclosure. Along the way, I highlight morally relevant features affecting the permissibility of framing, tackle three objections and draw some general lessons for the ethics of nudging.No data are available.