Distinguishing self-involving from self-serving choices in framing effects.

We distinguish two types of cases that have potential to generate quasi-cyclical preferences: choices where an agent oscillates between first- and third-person perspectives that conflict regarding their life-changing implications, and choices where frame-based reasoning can be "first-personally rational" yet "third-personally irrational." We argue that the distinction between these types of cases deserves more attention in Bermúdez's account.