RC: DDBBC
[Para 1] Risk aversion in positive light + Risks seeking when options are negative
[Para 2] Two approaches – over-emphasizing attributes/benefits (from using) or losses (from not using)
[Para 3] Superiority in +ve framing (for beef) but –ve framing (for BSE)
[Para 4] Both +ve and –ve same level of persuasiveness – dependent on the level of involvement
[Para 5] Framing is important for PH advocacies
Tone: Neutral
Author: Framing
CR: CC
Premise: Those who ate spicy food took longer to fall asleep and experienced lighter sleep --> increased BT
Conclusion: Spicy food affects sleep quality by influencing body temperature
Assumption: Body temperature affect sleep?
X – Is energy not related to sleep quality?
X – repeating the hypothesis
P – the experiment is likely to be accurate and controlled
X – we are concerned with people who have eaten stuff
X – So what? Bring in new information
Premise: Ants feed on FP – Govt. would remove FP – and ants may feed on the original flower
Conclusion: Reduce ant pop but not eradicate it
X – does not support the conclusion
X – possible that they can go extinct?
P – other food sources so won’t extinct
X – whether it is primary or not does not matter
X – irrelevant