Tversky & Kahneman (1981)[1] use the term decision frame to refer to the decision-maker's conception of the acts, outcomes and contingencies associated with a particular choice. The frame that a decision-maker adopts is controlled partly by the formulation of the problem and partly by the norms, habits and personal characteristics of the decision-maker.

Decision frames are particularly malleable in contexts where multiple and conflicting objectives are at stake, perceived and technical risks are not well aligned, and difficult tradeoffs must be made in order to implement a particular strategy ([3] cited by [2]).

Slovic [4] moreover indicates that people's preferences are often constructed in the process of elicitation.

ISO FDIS 15704 defines a decision frame as a set of items that constrain the degrees of freedom for the decision making on the object system operations as controlled by a decision centre (performing the governance or management activity).

This frame will not be modified by the decision. Its constituents typically are the result of a decision that has already been made (for instance in the governance activity). To avoid conflicts, a decision centre should be under the influence of only one decision frame.

The main items influencing the decision-making are:

Performance indicators should be consistent with objectives because it is necessary to compare performances targeted (objectives) and performances reached (indicators). Performance indicators should also be consistent with decision variables because those variables will have an effect on the performance monitored (controllability). The main issue is to ensure internal consistency inside a decision centre in terms of the triplet presented. This consistency is ensured if the performance indicators allow verification of the achievement of the objective and are influenced by actions on decision variables.

1. Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman: The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice, Science, New Series, Vol. 211, No. 4481. (Jan. 30, 1981), pp. 453-458.
2. Robyn S. Wilson and Jeremy T. Bruskotter: Assessing the Impact of Decision Frame and Existing Attitudes on Support for Wolf Restoration in the United States, Human Dimensions of Wildlife, Vol. 14 (2009), pp. 353-365.
3. J. W. Payne, J. R. Bettman & E. J. Johnson: Behavioral decision research: A constructive processing perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 43,pp. 87–132.
4. Paul Slovic: The Construction of Preference, American Psychologist, Vol. 50, no. 5, (May, 1995), pp. 364-371.