Kahneman和Tversky(1979)經由實驗發現，受試者會受到問題框架(frames)的影響，做出違反預期效用理論(Expected Utility Theory，EUT)的風險下決策，因而提出展望理論(Prospect Theory，PT)來替代EUT，做為一個個體於風險下決策的描述性理論(descriptive theory)。然而，PT的實驗，並未探討受試者在實驗中所選擇的賭博，是否為預期效用(Expected Utility，EU)最大的賭博。換言之，僅根據該實驗的實驗結果，並無法完全推翻以EU最大化假設為基礎的EUT。基於此，本研究提出一個「框架理性」(Framed Rationality，FR)假說，假設個體在框架的影響下，仍保有追求某種偏好衡量基準最大化的決策特性。為檢驗此假說，本研究除了複製PT實驗之外，並另外進行一項可用以取得PT實驗中，各賭博對受試者之EU的實驗，依此來探討受試者在PT實驗中的決策，是否仍遵循EU最大化的原則。本研究除了探討EU此最大化基準之外，亦探討預期價值(Expected Value，EV)和經決策權數(decision weight)修正過後的EV、EU(簡寫為EVdw、EUdw)等基準。研究結果發現，在EUdw基準之下，有充分證據證明個體之風險下決策有符合FR假說的傾向。因此，當EUdw基準經相關研究證實係描述性有效時，本研究提出之FR假說亦應同時成立。

In 1979, Kahneman and Tversky found the subjects of an experiment made decisions that violated Expected Utility Theory (EUT) because of the influence of problem frames. They proposed to replace EUT with Prospect Theory (PT) as a descriptive theory of individual decision making under risk. However, the PT experiment did not examine whether the gambles the subjects chose maximized expected utility (EU) between alternatives. In other words, they rejected EUT based on the principle of EU maximization only by the incomplete results of this experiment. In the research, we propose a Framed Rationality (FR) hypothesis in that individuals still maximize some measuring criterion of risky preferences subject to frames of questioning. In order to examine this hypothesis, we not only replicated the PT experiment, but also implemented two experiments that measured the subjects’ utilities of the gambles in the PT experiment. We tested whether the subjects still conformed to the principle of EU maximization in these two experiments. In this study, we not only tested the EU criterion, but also test the Expected Value (EV), EVdw and EUdw. EVdw and EUdw are the EV and EU adjusted by decision weights. There is sufficient evidence supporting the FR hypothesis under the EUdw criterion; therefore, the FR hypothesis is confirmed if the EUdw criterion is considered as valid as a descriptive model of choices.

Abdellaoui, M. (2000). "Parameter-free elicitation of utility and probability weighting functions." Management Science 46(11): 1497-1512.
Abdellaoui, M., H. Bleichrodt, et al. (2008). "A tractable method to measure utility and loss aversion under prospect theory." Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 36(3): 245-266.
Abdellaoui, M., H. Bleichrodt, et al. (2007). "Loss Aversion Under Prospect Theory: A Parameter-Free Measurement." Management Science 53(10): 1659-1674.
Abdellaoui, M., F. Vossmann, et al. (2005). "Choice-Based Elicitation and Decomposition of Decision Weights for Gains and Losses Under Uncertainty." Management Science 51(9): 1384-1399.
Barberis, N., M. Huang, et al. (2001). "Prospect theory and asset prices." Quarterly Journal of Economics 116(1): 1-53.
Bell, D. E. and P. H. Farquhar (1986). "Perspectives on Utility-Theory." Operations Research 34(1): 179-183.
Bernoulli, D. (1738/1954). "Exposition of a New Theory on the Measurement of Risk." Econometrica 22(1): 23-36.
Bleichrodt, H., J. M. Abellan-Perpian, et al. (2007). "Resolving Inconsistencies in Utility Measurement Under Risk: Tests of Generalizations of Expected Utility." Management Science 53(3): 469-482.
Bleichrodt, H. and J. L. Pinto (2000). "A parameter-free elicitation of the probability weighting function in medical decision analysis." Management Science 46(11): 1485-1496.
Bostic, R., R. J. Herrnstein, et al. (1990). "The Effect on The Preference-Reversal Phenomenon of Using Choice Indifferences." Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 13(2): 193-212.
Brandstatter, E., A. Kuhberger, et al. (2002). "A cognitive-emotional account of the shape of the probability weighting function." Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 15(2): 79-100.
Camerer, C. F. and R. M. Hogarth (1999). "The effects of financial incentives in experiments: A review and capital-labor-production framework." Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 19(1-3): 7-42.
CHEN, R. and J. JIA (2005). "Consumer Choices Under Small Probabilities: Overweighting or Underweighting?" Marketing Letters 16(1): 5-18.
Currim, I. S. and R. K. Sarin (1989). "Prospect Versus Utility." Management Science 35(1): 22-41.
Diederich, A. and J. R. Busemeyer (1999). "CONFLICT AND THE STOCHASTIC-DOMINANCE PRINCIPLE OF DECISION MAKING." American Psychological Society 10(4): 353-359.
Edwards, W. (1954). "The Theory of Decision Making." Psychological Bulletin 51(4): 380-417.
Etchart-Vincent, N. (2004). "Is Probability Weighting Sensitive to the Magnitude of Consequences? An Experimental Investigation on Losses." The Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 28(3): 217-235.
Farquhar, P. H. (1984). "Utility Assessment Methods." Management Science 30(11): 1283-1300.
Fehr-Duda, H., M. De Gennaro, et al. (2006). "Gender, financial risk, and probability weights." Theory and Decision 60(2-3): 283-313.
Fennema, H. and M. Van Assen (1998). "Measuring the utility of losses by means of the tradeoff method." Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 17(3): 277-295.
Gonzalez, R. and G. Wu (1999). "On the shape of the probability weighting function." Cognitive Psychology 38(1): 129-166.
Hershey, J. C., H. C. Kunreuther, et al. (1982). "Sources of Bias in Assessment Procedures for Utility Functions." Management Science 28(8): 936-954.
Hertwig, R. and A. Ortmann (2001). "Experimental practices in economics: A methodological challenge for psychologists?" Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24(3): 383-+.
Kahneman, D. (2003). "Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics." The American Economic Review 93(5): 1449-1475.
Kahneman, D., J. L. Knetsch, et al. (1990). "Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem." The Journal of Political Economy 98(6): 1325-1348.
Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky (1979). "Prospect Theory - Analysis of Decision Under Risk." Econometrica 47(2): 263-291.
Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky (1984). "Choices, Values, and Frames." American Psychologist 39(4): 341-350.
Keeney, R. L. and H. Raiffa (1993). Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs. New York, Cambridge University Press.
Kilka, M. and M. Weber (2001). "What determines the shape of the probability weighting function under uncertainty?" Management Science 47(12): 1712-1726.
Krishnamurthy, P., P. Carter, et al. (2001). "Attribute framing and goal framing effects in health decisions." Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 85(2): 382-399.
Kuhberger, A. (1998). "The influence of framing on risky decisions: A meta-analysis." Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 75(1): 23-55.
Lattimore, P. K., J. R. Baker, et al. (1992). "The Influence of Probability on Risky Choice - A Parametric Examination." Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 17(3): 377-400.
Levin, I. P., S. L. Schneider, et al. (1998). "All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects." Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 76(2): 149-188.
Li, S. (1995). "Is There A Decision Weight PI." Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 27(3): 453-463.
Luce, R. D. and D. H. Krantz (1971). "Conditional Expected Utility." Econometrica 39(2): 253-&.
Machina, M. J. (1987). "Under Uncertainty: Problems Solved and Unsolved." The Journal of Economic Perspectives 1(1): 121-154.
McCord, M. and R. d. Neufville (1986). ""Lottery Equivalents": Reduction of the Certainty Effect Problem in Utility Assessment." Management Science 32(1): 56-60.
Oliver, A. (2003). "The internal consistency of the standard gamble: tests after adjusting for prospect theory." Journal of Health Economics 22(4): 659-674.
Prelec, D. (1998). "The probability weighting function." Econometrica 66(3): 497-527.
Quiggin, J. (1982). "A Theory of Anticipated Utility." Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 3(4): 323-343.
Rothman, A. J. and P. Salovey (1997). "Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message framing." Psychological Bulletin 121(1): 3-19.
Savage, L. J. (1954). The Foundations of Statistics. New York, Wiley.
Schunk, D. and C. Betsch (2006). "Explaining heterogeneity in utility functions by individual differences in decision modes." Journal of Economic Psychology 27(3): 386-401.
Simon, H. A. (1955). "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice." The Quarterly Journal of Economics 69(1): 99-118.
Simon, H. A. (1986). "Rationality in Psychology and Economics." The Journal of Business 59(4): S209-S224.
Simon, H. A. (1982). Models of bounded rationality. Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press.
Tsang, E. P. K. (2008). "Computational intelligence determines effective rationality." International Journal of Automation and Computing 5(1): 63-66.
Tversky, A. (1975). "A critique of expected utility theory: Descriptive and normative considerations." Erkenntnis 9(2): 163-173.
Tversky, A. and C. R. Fox (1995). "Weighing Risk and Uncertainty." Psychological Review 102(2): 269-283.
Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman (1981). "The Framing of Decisions and The Psychology of Choice." Science 211(4481): 453-458.
Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman (1986). "Rational Choice and The Framing of Decisions." Journal of Business 59(4): S251-S278.
Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman (1991). "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model." The Quarterly Journal of Economics 106(4): 1039-1061.
Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman (1992). "Advances in Prospect-Theory - Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty." Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5(4): 297-323.
Von Neumann, J. and O. Morgenstern (1944). Theory of games and economic behavior Princeton, N.J., Princeton University Press.
Wakker, P. and D. Deneffe (1996). "Eliciting von Neumann-Morgenstern Utilities When Probabilities are Distorted or Unknown." Management Science 42(8): 1131-1150.
Wakker, P. and A. Stiggelbout (1995). "Explaining Distortions in Utility Elicitation Through The Rank - Dependent Model for Risky Choices." Medical Decision Making 15(2): 180-186.
Wu, G. and R. Gonzalez (1996). "Curvature of the probability weighting function." Management Science 42(12): 1676-1690.
Wu, G. and R. Gonzalez (1999). "Nonlinear decision weights in choice under uncertainty." Management Science 45(1): 74-85.
張卿卿 (2004). "從性別差異與產品態度確定性高低來探討廣告框架效果." 管理評論 23(1): 1-23。
陳順宇、鄭碧娥 (2004). 統計學. 臺北市, 華泰書局。
孫鼇、陳雪梅 (2005). "新古典經濟學的假設與演變." 江蘇社會科學 2005(5): 45-50。
賴世剛 譯 (2005). 都市發展制定計畫的邏輯. 臺北市, 五南。
ISBN：9571140546。Hopkins, L. D. (2005). Urban development : the logic of making plans. Washington, Island Press.