Dataset Information

Optimistic framing increases responsible investment of investment professionals.

ABSTRACT: The global warming crisis is unlikely to abate while the world continues to collectively fund the extraction and burning of fossil fuels. Carbon divestment is urgently needed to ward off the impending climate emergency. Yet responsible investments still only account for a modest share of global assets. We conduct an incentivized artefactual field experiment to test whether framing divestment as a social norm, communicating it by a person with perceived credibility and expertise (a messenger), and highlighting optimistic attributes bolster responsible investment. Our subjects are investment professionals who have significant influence over the allocation of funds. We provide evidence that optimistic framing increases responsible investment. Assuming a comparable effect size, the observed increase would represent a $3.6 trillion USD global shift in asset allocations.

SUBMITTER: Daugaard D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10770144 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Optimistic framing increases responsible investment of investment professionals.

Daugaard Dan D Kent Danielle D Servátka Maroš M Zhang Lyla L

Scientific reports 20240105 1

The global warming crisis is unlikely to abate while the world continues to collectively fund the extraction and burning of fossil fuels. Carbon divestment is urgently needed to ward off the impending climate emergency. Yet responsible investments still only account for a modest share of global assets. We conduct an incentivized artefactual field experiment to test whether framing divestment as a social norm, communicating it by a person with perceived credibility and expertise (a messenger), an ...[more]

PMID: 38182708

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceIn the neonatal intensive care unit, there is a lack of understanding about how best to communicate the prognosis of a serious complication to parents.ObjectiveTo examine parental preferences and the effects of optimistic vs pessimistic message framing when providing prognostic information about a serious complication.Design, setting, and participantsThis crossover randomized clinical trial was conducted at a single German university medical center between June and October 2021. Eligible participants were parents of surviving preterm infants with a birth weight under 1500 g. Data were analyzed between October 2021 and August 2022.InterventionsAlternating exposure to 2 scripted video vignettes showing a standardized conversation between a neonatologist and parents, portrayed by professional actors, about the prognosis of a hypothetical very preterm infant with severe intraventricular hemorrhage. The video vignettes differed in the framing of identical numerical outcome estimates as either probability of survival and probability of nonimpairment (optimistic framing) or a risk of death and impaired survival (pessimistic framing).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was preference odds (ratio of preference for optimistic vs pessimistic framing). Secondary outcomes included state anxiety, perceptions of communication, and recall of numerical estimates.ResultsOf 220 enrolled parents (142 [64.5%] mothers; mean [SD] age: mothers, 39.1 [5.6] years; fathers, 42.7 [6.9] years), 196 (89.1%) preferred optimistic and 24 (10.1%) preferred pessimistic framing (preference odds, 11.0; 95% CI, 6.28-19.10; P < .001). Preference for optimistic framing was more pronounced when presented second than when presented first (preference odds, 5.41; 95% CI, 1.77-16.48; P = .003). State anxiety scores were similar in both groups at baseline (mean difference, -0.34; -1.18 to 0.49; P = .42) and increased equally after the first video (mean difference, -0.55; 95% CI, -1.79 to 0.69; P = .39). After the second video, state anxiety scores decreased when optimistic framing followed pessimistic framing but remained unchanged when pessimistic framing followed optimistic framing (mean difference, 2.15; 95% CI, 0.91 to 3.39; P < .001). With optimistic framing, participants recalled numerical estimates more accurately for survival (odds ratio, 4.00; 95% CI, 1.64-9.79; P = .002) but not for impairment (odds ratio, 1.50; 95% CI, 0.85-2.63; P = .16).Conclusions and relevanceWhen given prognostic information about a serious complication, parents of very preterm infants may prefer optimistic framing. Optimistic framing may lead to more realistic expectations for survival, but not for impairment.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register (DRKS): DRKS00024466.

Project description:When the Fun Stops, Stop, is a prominent 'responsible gambling' campaign in the UK, originally funded and delivered by the industry-initiated and funded Senet Group. Since the Senet Group's dissolution in 2020, the campaign has been overseen by the Betting and Gambling Council (BGC), the main gambling industry trade body. There has been no prior analysis of the activities, ideas and framing adopted by the Senet Group, who claimed to be acting as an industry 'watchdog' and oversaw what they characterised as a major public education campaign. We collated written and image-based material related to the Senet Group and its When the Fun Stops, Stop campaign from multiple sources. Guided by Entman's four functions of framing, we analysed the Senet Group's framing of the issues it sought to address, particularly harmful gambling, as well as its causes, and the solutions, focusing on the group's main activity: the delivery of the When the Fun Stops, Stop campaign. We also critically appraised an evaluation of the campaign funded by the Senet Group, using the findings to interrogate the stated claims about the campaign's effectiveness. The analysis showed that the Senet Group's framing of the problem, its causes, and proposed responses resemble those adopted by other industries and industry-funded groups. This involves portraying any harms caused by their products as limited to an atypical minority, rejecting upstream determinants of harm, and promoting individually-targeted voluntary measures, all contrary to the evidence of what works in health promotion, and what would characterise a public health approach. Neither the existing evidence base nor the evidence presented by the Senet Group support their claims about the campaign's effectiveness. These findings add to concerns about industry-funded campaigns in other areas. To minimise conflicts of interest, interventions intended to address gambling-related harms, such as public education campaigns, should be evidence-based and developed, implemented and evaluated completely independent of the industry and industry-funded organisations.

Dataset Information

Optimistic framing increases responsible investment of investment professionals.

Publications

Optimistic framing increases responsible investment of investment professionals.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets