Tag Archives: fear-frame

What is “Framing”? How Is It Used at WOFF? (4)

Framing Defenses:

   This is the last post in the series on “framing” (as far as I know). Our source text, which is authored by Kelton Rhoads, Ph.D. is found here.. http://www.workingpsychology.com/index.html . In the previous post, we mentioned the definition of “framing” written by the author: “A frame is a psychological device that offers a perspective and manipulates salience in order to influence subsequent judgment.” We have covered several aspects of how this influence tool is used at Word of Faith Fellowship (WOFF). As stated in previous posts, my opinion is that this framing tool is compounded with fear to actual form a “fear-frame” that explodes on its hearers with such power to freeze the listener and hinder rational decisions. Jane Whaley has constructed a total control environment for the WOFF faithful. This control is exercised many times with the use of such “fear-frames” as we have explained in the previous posts.

  Previously, we discussed studies that make it clear –“that a human’s first priority is not to lose–gains are secondary to the “no loss” rule.” Add the tendency to “not lose” with the “fear-frames” used by Jane Whaley at Word of Faith Fellowship (WOFF) and it becomes clear that life at WOFF is not what a first impression might reveal. Jane uses “fear-frames” to build into her faithful fears of losing something near and dear such as family, jobs, houses, salvation, and prospect of missing heaven, friends and so on. In order to gain “fear-relief”, her faithful members go to Jane for “the word of the Lord”. Actually, that is a super-charged religious euphemism which actually means they are seeking relief from the fears of losing that “something” where Jane holds sway over them. As I agreed with another former member earlier this week, this whole scenario is hard to understand unless you have been inside WOFF or a group like WOFF where fear is the modus operandi of the leader. I am trying to break it down as best I know how. This forum does not allow me to cover all the material Rhoads covers on the subject. I suggest you take the time and read the series on his website.  

    Continue reading What is “Framing”? How Is It Used at WOFF? (4)

What is “Framing”? How Is It Used at WOFF? (3)

   This is the next post in the series on “framing”. Our source text, which is authored by Kelton Rhoads, Ph.D. is found here.. http://www.workingpsychology.com/index.html . In the previous post, we covered the definition of “framing” written by the author: “A frame is a psychological device that offers a perspective and manipulates salience in order to influence subsequent judgment.” We covered several aspects of how this influence tool is used at Word of Faith Fellowship (WOFF). My opinion is that this framing tool is compounded with fear to actual form a “fear-frame” that explodes on its hearers with such power to freeze the listener and hinder rational decisions. Jane Whaley has constructed a total control environment for the WOFF faithful. This control is exercised many times with the use of such “fear-frames” as we have explained in the previous post.

    This post will review the hideous evil behind that use of such “fear-frames”. Rhoads continues to explain the use of frames in the source text. He begins be citing work from another study. “Kahneman & Tversky (1979) were interested in understanding the conditions under which people made conservative or risky judgments. They observed evidence supporting what they called “prospect theory:” that the prospect of a loss has a greater impact on decision making than does the prospect of an equivalent gain.” (Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect Theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometirca 4, 362-377; Econometrica 47, 263-291. emphasis added)  He covers the findings of this study as they measure a person’s gains against their losses. The study found that “The pleasure of winning money is less intense than the pain of losing the same sum!” It is not practical to repeat word for word the information Rhoads gives to support this study. I recommend you use the link provided and read it for yourself.

    Here is a synopsis of what I took away from the reading. “Again, we humans hate to lose. We’d rather not win, than lose!” (Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1982). The psychology of preferences. Scientific American, 246, 160-173. Emphasis added) And Rhoads writes in summary.. “We know that a human’s first priority is not to lose–gains are secondary to the “no loss” rule. Thus, framing a decision in terms of possible loss should motivate a person more than framing the same decision in terms of possible gain. And, given various obligatory caveats and constraints which we explore later, subsequent research largely supports the contention that humans are acutely loss-averse and thus extraordinarily sensitive to loss frames.” (emphasis added)

   Continue reading What is “Framing”? How Is It Used at WOFF? (3)

What is “Framing”? How Is It Used at WOFF? (2)

   This is the second post in a series on the subject of “framing” – what it is and how it is used at Word of Faith Fellowship (WOFF). We mentioned in the last post that the source material for this subject was found on a website here… http://www.workingpsychology.com/index.html which is authored by Kelton Rhoads, Ph.D. He explains several aspects of his studies dealing with the subject of influence. In the previous post, we reviewed some information about “framing” types and effects.

     At the end of the previous post we finished with these words: next, “we will look at the parts of a “frame”. I will also share my observations on the continual use of fear to frame every decision and rule during my time at WOFF. We will discuss a new term – “fear-frame” as well as how this affected life at WOFF. Please, check back soon for the next post. I believe this “fear-frame” concept is vital to understanding life for members of WOFF.”

   From the source material we read the author’s definition of a frame: “A frame is a psychological device that offers a perspective and manipulates salience in order to influence subsequent judgment.”  Rhoads breaks down the definition to help understand the meaning: 1) A frame “offers a perspective.” It manages the viewer’s alignment in relation to the issue.” The theme used by the author to help his readers understand his definition was the use of actual frames, for instance around a picture. He uses this analogy several times very effectively. The “perspective” at WOFF was narrow to say the least. You agreed with Jane’s perspective or you did not stay around long. The starting position for a faithful member of WOFF was/is Jane was/is always right and all others are listening to devils. The mantra is not that evident at first. New folks are given room to “grow” and “come into their place” of “understanding”. The phrases used to direct a member to Jane’s counsel or one of the approved leaders may be gentle or innocuous at first.. Have you heard God on that? Are you sure? Are you under authority? Have you inquired of God? Have you submitted to authority in that area? Are you out from under authority? After a while, the code becomes clearer. Jane Whaley is the “authority” and all decisions flow through her. If it is evident that a new person is not getting the meaning of the WOFF code, the directives will be more obvious. Have you asked Jane? Have you checked that out with Jane? Does Jane know about that? Did Jane say that was God (God’s will)? It was clear that perspective you needed to stay in WOFF- was Jane’s.

   Continue reading What is “Framing”? How Is It Used at WOFF? (2)