When reviewing studies regarding the framing effect and wording bias, the concepts it is being applied to are nearly always concepts that are outside of a respondent's control. For example, in the Yamagishi (1997) study, participants were asked to assess the risk of cancer, based on two differently framed statistics. The risk of being diagnosed with cancer is a variable that is outside individual control, which begs the question: what if the variable is within our control, such as jaywalking or lying? If participants were asked whether it is okay to cheat on a test, with two different framed questions, how would that change responses? For example, say half of respondents were told that 40% of people who cheat on tests get caught, and the other half were told that 60% of people who cheat don't get caught. Those statistics are equivalent but framed differently, and the concept of lying is within individual control. How would this alter a respondent's choice?