Manipulating Public Heath Officials

 From the wonderful book Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman (written 10 years ago).

One of the experiments he did was pose this question .

Imagine that the United States is preparing for the outbreak of an unusual Asian disease (!), which is expected to kill 600 people. Two alternative programs have been proposed. If chosen

1. 200 people will be saved
2. There is a one-third probability that 600 people will be saved and a two-thirds probability that no one will be saved.

A substantial majority chose A even though the expected number of people saved is identical.

Then he asked the same question, but put it this way:

1. 400 people will die
2. There is a one-third probability that nobody will die and a two-thirds probability that 600 people will die.

Framed this way, a substantial majority chose B. The two are obviously identical in outcomes, yet framing it about deaths versus lives-saved radically changed the selection.

He went on to say, that he was even more disturbed when he posed this to a group of public health officials he was speaking to. They chose the same way. As he put it, “It is somewhat worrying that the officials who make decisions that affect everyone’s health can be swayed by such a superficial manipulation.”

 I’d love to know what they think about this now that we’ve seen pubic health officials be manipulated for real.