Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Promoting Good Behavior: Does Social and Temporal Framing Make a Difference?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Social marketing research grows increasingly relevant in the face of persistent modern problems; this study examines how social and temporal framing might influence the effectiveness of social marketing campaigns. By featuring diverse contexts, this study addresses both individual and prosocial behaviors. With a basis in self-referencing and psychological distance research, as well as social dilemma theory, the authors derive hypotheses about social and temporal framing effects. A between-subjects experiment, incorporated into an online survey among a large student sample, reveals the relevance of temporal framing for enhancing intentions to change both individual and prosocial behaviors. Social framing influences behavioral intentions especially in the prosocial condition. The category of behavior determines the effectiveness of social marketing related to that behavior. However, the small effect sizes and lack of globally interpretable effects indicate that social and temporal framing do not make relevant differences in social marketing effectiveness.

Résumé

Le marketing social gagne de l'importance face aux problèmes sociaux persistants. Cet article examine dans quelle mesure le framing social et le framing temporel ont une influence sur l'effectivité du marketing social. Le comportement individuel ainsi que le comportement prosocial sont analysés en utilisant divers sujets du marketing social. La recherche sur le point de référence, la distance psychologique et les dilemmes sociaux constituent la base des hypothèses. Une expérience incorporée dans un questionnaire en ligne montre l'impact du framing temporel sur l'intention de changer un comportement individuel ou prosocial. Les résultats indiquent que le framing social n'avait un impact que sur l'intention comportementale individuelle. La catégorie de comportement affectue l'efficacité du marketing social. Des effets faibles et le manque d'effets globalement interprétables mettent en lumière que le framing temporel ainsi que le framing social ne jouent pas de rôle décisif quant à l'efficacité du marketing social.

Zusammenfassung

Sozialmarketing gewinnt aufgrund andauernder gesellschaftlicher und sozialer Probleme an Bedeutung. Vor diesem Hintergrund beschäftigt sich die vorliegende Studie damit, inwiefern soziales und zeitliches Framing die Wirksamkeit von Sozialmarketing beeinflussen können. Anhand verschiedener Sozialmarketingthemen wird sowohl individuelles als auch prosoziales Verhalten untersucht. Basierend auf der Forschung zu Selbstreferenz, psychologischer Distanz und sozialen Dilemmata werden Hypothesen zu sozialem und zeitlichem Framing entwickelt. Ein experimentelles Zwischensubjektdesign, welches in eine Online-Befragung eingebettet wurde, zeigt die Bedeutung von zeitlichem Framing sowohl für die Förderung der individuellen als auch der prosozialen Verhaltensänderungsabsicht. Soziales Framing beeinflusst die prosoziale Verhaltensabsicht. Die Art des Verhaltens an sich beeinflusst ebenfalls die Wirksamkeit des Sozialmarketing. Geringe Effektstärken und die mangelnde globale Interpretierbarkeit der Effekte zeigen jedoch, dass soziales und auch zeitliches Framing keine entscheidende Rolle spielen hinsichtlich der Wirksamkeit von Sozialmarketing.

Resumen

El marketing social está ganando importancia frente a problemas sociales persistentes. Este artículo analiza el impacto del framing temporal y del framing social sobre la effectividad del marketing social. El comportamiento individual y el comportamiento prosocial están tratados utilizando differentes sujetos del marketing social. La investigación del punto de referencia, de la distancia psycológica y del dilema social forman la base de las hipótesis. Un experimento incorporado en un cuestionario en línea muestra que el framing temporal tiene un impacto sobre la intención de cambiar un comportamiento individual o prosocial. Los resultados indican que el framing social solamente influye la intención del comportamiento individual. El típo de comportamiento afecta a la effectividad del marketing social. Los pequeños tamaños de efecto y la falta de efectos globales e interpretables indican que el framing social y el framing temporal no tienen un impacto importante a la effectividad del marketing social.

摘要

当今社会正面临着很多持久性的现代问题,在这样的背景下,社会营销学的研究也发展迅速;本实验旨在探究社会和时空框架如何影响社会营销活动的效率。通过对不同背景地分析,该研究讨论了个体行为和亲社会行为。作者在自我参照和心理距离研究以及社会困境理论的基础上,推导出有关社会和时间框架效应的假设。作者通过一个大学生样本的网络调查进行了一次主体间实验,揭示了采用时空框架来增强改变个体和亲社会行为的意图的重要性。社会框架对行为意图的影响在亲社会的情况下更为明显。行为的类别决定了与之相关的社会营销的效率。然而,由于影响规模较小且缺乏全局性的影响,表明社会和时间框架在社会营销中并没有与之相当的影响。

ملخص

بحث اجتماعي تسويق وتنمو باطراد في ظل استمرار المشاكل المعاصرة, فكيف تبحث هذه الدراسة وضع واجتماعية, زمني قد يؤثر على فاعلية حملات تسويقية الاجتماعي. من سياقات مختلفة تظهر هذه الدراسة تعالج التصرفات الفردية. أساسا في المرجعية الذاتية والنفسية المسافة, وكذلك بحث اجتماعي مأزق والنظرية, في الكتاب عن فرضيات تنجم الاجتماعي, وزمنية صياغة نتائجها.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ajzen, I., & Madden, T. J. (1986). Prediction of goal-directed behavior: Attitudes, intentions, and perceived behavioral control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22(5), 453–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albanese, R., & Van Fleet, D. D. (1985). Rational behavior in groups: The free-riding tendency. Academy of Management Review, 10(2), 244–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andreasen, A. R. (2003). A social marketing research agenda for consumer behavior researchers. Advances in Consumer Research, 20(1), 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arthur, D., & Quester, P. (2004). Who’s afraid of that ad? Applying segmentation to the protection motivation model. Psychology & Marketing, 21(9), 671–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R. P. (1981). Attitudes, intentions, and behavior: A test of some key hypotheses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(4), 607–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y., & Phillips, L. W. (1991). Assessing construct validity in organizational research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(3), 421–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batson, C. D. (1990). How social an animal? The human capacity for caring. American Psychologist, 45(3), 336–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellezza, F. S. (1984). The self as a mnemonic device: The role of internal cues. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(3), 506–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, R. (1996). Effects of horrific fear appeals on public attitudes towards AIDS. International Journal of Advertising, 15(3), 183–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biener, L., Ji, M., Gilpin, E. A., & Albers, A. B. (2004). The impact of emotional tone, message, and broadcast parameters in youth anti-smoking advertisements. Journal of Health Communication, 9(3), 259–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Block, L. G., & Keller, P. A. (1995). When to accentuate the negative: The effects of perceived efficacy and message framing on intentions to perform a health-related behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 32(2), 192–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradburn, N. M., & Mason, W. M. (1964). The effect of question order on responses. Journal of Marketing Research, 1(4), 57–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnkrant, R. E., & Unnava, H. R. (1995). Effects of self-referencing on persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(1), 17–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T. (1957). Factors relevant to the validity of experiments in social settings. Psychological Bulletin, 54(4), 297–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandran, S., & Menon, G. (2004). When a day means more than a year: Effects of temporal framing on judgments of health risk. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2), 375–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J., Rajaratnam, N., & Gleser, G. C. (1963). Theory of generalizability: A liberalization of reliability theory. British Journal of Statistical Psychology, 16(2), 137–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawes, R. M. (1980). Social dilemmas. Annual Review of Psychology, 31(1), 169–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Dreu, C. K. W., & McCusker, C. (1997). Gain-loss frames and cooperation in two-person social dilemmas: A transformational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(5), 1093–1106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillman, D. A., & Redline, C. D. (2004). Testing paper self-administered questionnaires: Cognitive interview and field test comparisons. In S. Presser, J. M. Rothgeb, J. T. Lessler, E. Martin, J. Martin, & E. Singer (Eds.), Methods for testing and evaluating survey questionnaires (pp. 299–317). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dunlop, S. M., Wakefield, M., & Kashima, Y. (2010). Pathways to persuasion: Cognitive and experiential responses to health-promoting mass media messages. Communication Research, 37(1), 133–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edney, J. J. (1980). The commons problem: Alternative perspective. American Psychologist, 35(2), 131–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellen, P. S., & Madden, T. J. (1990). The impact of response format on relations among intentions, attitudes, and social norms. Marketing Letters, 1(2), 161–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Entnam, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, J. M., & Lynch, J. G. (1988). Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement on belief, attitude, intention and behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(3), 421–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. C. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(2), 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George, J. M. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic origins of perceived social loafing in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 35(1), 191–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, R., McDermott, L., & Hastings, G. (2008). Critical issues in social marketing: A review and research agenda. In A. Sargeant & W. W. Wymer (Eds.), The Routledge companion to nonprofit marketing (pp. 333–346). Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, S. J. (1988). Consumer attitudes towards health and health care: A differential perspective. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 22(1), 96–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenhow, C. (2009). Engaging youth in social media: Is Facebook the new media frontier? A NewsCloud—University of Minnesota Research Report Executive, 1–13.

  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. A global perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helmig, B., & Thaler, J. (2010). On the effectiveness of social marketing—what do we really know? Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 22(4), 264–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280–1300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Igou, E. R. (2008). ‘How long will I suffer?’ versus ‘How long will you suffer?’ A self-other effect in affective forecasting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(4), 899–917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Insko, C. A., Schopler, J., Pemberton, M. B., Wieselquist, J., McIlraith, S. A., Currey, D. P., et al. (1998). Long-term outcome maximization and the reduction of interindividual-intergroup discontinuity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(3), 695–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jayanti, R. K., & Burns, A. C. (1998). The antecedents of preventive health care behavior: An empirical study. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26(1), 6–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, S. C., & Owen, N. (2006). Using fear appeals to promote cancer screening: Are we scaring the wrong people? International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 11(2), 93–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karniol, R., & Ross, M. (1996). The motivational impact of temporal focus: Thinking about the future and the past. Annual Review of Psychology, 47(1), 593–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, P. A., & Block, L. G. (1996). Increasing the persuasiveness of fear appeals: The effect of arousal and elaboration. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(4), 448–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K., Zhang, M., & Li, X. (2008). Effects of temporal and social distance on consumer evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(4), 706–713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, K. W., & Reid, L. (1989). Fear arousing anti-drinking and driving PSAs: Do physical injury threats influence young adults? Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 12(1), 155–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, S. B., & Loftus, J. (1988). The nature of self-referent encoding: The contributions of elaborative and organizational processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(1), 5–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Komorita, S. S., & Parks, C. D. (1994). Social dilemmas. Dubuque, IA: Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotler, P., & Armstong, G. (2009). Principles of marketing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotler, P., Roberto, N., & Lee, N. (2002). Social marketing—improving the quality of life. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuiper, N. A., & Rogers, T. B. (1979). Encoding of personal information: Self-other differences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(4), 499–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107(1), 34–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, A. Y., & Aaker, J. L. (2004). Bringing the frame into focus: The influence of regulatory fit on processing fluency and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(2), 205–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenhart, A. (2009). Pew internet project data memo. Washington: Pew Internet & American Life Project.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leventhal, H. (1970). Findings and theory in the study of fear communications. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 5, 119–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, I. P., Schneider, S. L., & Gaeth, G. J. (1998). All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76(2), 149–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmeier, J. (2008). Promoting volunteerism: Effects of self-efficacy, advertisement-induced emotional arousal, perceived costs of volunteering and message framing. Voluntas—International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 19(1), 43–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loroz, P. S. (2007). The interaction of message frames and reference points in prosocial persuasive appeals. Psychology and Marketing, 24(11), 1001–1023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mangold, W. G., & Faulds, D. J. (2009). Social media: The new hybrid element of the promotion mix. Business Horizons, 52(4), 357–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyers-Levy, J., & Maheswaran, D. (1992). When timing matters: The influence of temporal distance on consumers’ affective and persuasive responses. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 424–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newcomb, M. D., Mercurio, C. S. A., & Wollard, C. A. (2000). Rock stars in anti-drug-abuse commercials: An experimental study of adolescents’ reactions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(6), 1160–1185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Cass, A., & Griffin, D. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of social issue advertising believability. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 15(1/2), 87–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peracchio, L. A., & Luna, D. (1998). The development of an advertising campaign to discourage smoking initiation among children and youth. Journal of Advertising, 27(3), 49–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perdue, B. C., & Summers, J. O. (1986). Checking the success of manipulations in marketing. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(4), 317–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perloff, L. S., & Fetzer, B. K. (1986). Self-other judgments and perceived vulnerability to victimization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(3), 502–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perreault, W. D., & Darden, W. R. (1975). Unequal cell sizes in marketing experiments. Journal of Marketing Research, 12(3), 333–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Platt, J. (1973). Social traps. American Psychologist, 28(8), 641–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reardon, J., & Miller, C. (2008). Smoking prevention messages for adolescents: How intensity, valence, and recipient of consequences affect attitude toward the ad and intent to smoke. The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 16(1), 67–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, J. P., Shaver, P. R., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1991). Criteria for scale selection and evaluation. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 1–15). San Diego: Gulf Professional Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Roch, S. G., & Samuelson, C. D. (1997). Effects of environmental uncertainty and social value orientation in resource dilemmas. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 70(3), 221–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R. W. (1975). A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Psychology, 91(1), 93–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenstock, I. M., Strecher, V. J., & Becker, M. H. (1988). Social learning theory and the health belief model. Health Education and Behavior, 15(2), 175–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, D. W., & Russell, C. A. (2010). Here or there? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility initiatives: Egocentric tendencies and their moderators. Marketing Letters, 21(1), 65–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1), 103–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlenker, B. R. (1980). Impression management: The self-concept, social identity, and interpersonal relations. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shoham, A., Ruvio, A., Vigoda-Gadot, E., & Schwabsky, N. (2006). Market orientations in the nonprofit and voluntary sector: A meta-analysis of their relationships with organizational performance. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(3), 453–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, S., & Petty, R. E. (1996). Message framing and persuasion: A message processing analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(3), 257–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. H., & Stutts, M. A. (2003). Effects of short-term cosmetic versus long-term health fear appeals in anti-smoking advertisements on the smoking behavior of adolescents. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 3(2), 157–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. H., & Stutts, M. A. (2006). The influence of individual factors on the effectiveness of message content in anti-smoking advertisements aimed at adolescents. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 40(2), 261–293. E.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strathman, A., Gleicher, F., Boninger, D. S., & Edwards, C. S. (1994). The consideration of future consequences: Weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(4), 742–752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tourangeau, R. (2004). Experimental design considerations for testing and evaluating questionnaires. In S. Presser, J. M. Rothgeb, M. P. Couper, J. T. M. E. Lessler, J. Martin, & E. Singer (Eds.), Methods for testing and evaluating survey questionnaires (pp. 209–224). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Trope, Y., Liberman, N., & Wakslak, C. (2007). Construal levels and psychological distance: Effects on representation, prediction, evaluation, and behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(2), 83–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uhrig, J., Bann, C., Williams, P., & Evans, W. D. (2010). Social networking websites as a platform for disseminating social marketing interventions: An exploratory pilot study. Social Marketing Quarterly, 16(1), 2–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, J. A, I. I. I. (1995). Studies of individualism-collectivism: Effects on cooperation in groups. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 152–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, D. J., Green, C. L., & Brashear, T. G. (2000). Development and validation of scales to measure attitudes influencing monetary donations to charitable organisations. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 299–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, N. D. (1984). Why it won’t happen to me: Perceptions of risk factors and susceptibility. Health Psychology, 3(5), 431–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, K., & Peloza, J. (2009). Self-benefit versus other-benefit marketing appeals: Their effectiveness in generating charitable support. Journal of Marketing, 73(4), 109–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witte, K., & Allen, M. (2000). A meta-analysis of fear appeals: Implications for effective public health campaigns. Health Education and Behaviour, 27(5), 591–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wymer, W. (2010). Rethinking the boundaries of social marketing: Activism or advertising? Journal of Business Research, 63(2), 99–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wymer, W. (2011). Developing more effective social marketing strategies. Journal of Social Marketing, 1(1), 17–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, G., & Pechmann, C. (2007). The impact of regulatory focus on adolescents’ response to antismoking advertising campaigns. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(4), 671–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Administration, Public & Nonprofit Management, University of Mannheim, L 5, 4 (Castle), 68131, Mannheim, Germany

    Julia Thaler & Bernd Helmig

Authors
  1. Julia Thaler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bernd Helmig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bernd Helmig.

Appendix

Appendix

See Fig. 6 and Tables 2, 3, 4, 5.

Fig. 6
figure 6

Examples of stimuli: a Unhealthy eating self-focus, short-term condition, b Environmental destruction, self- and other-focus, long term condition, and c Domestic violence, other-focus, short-term condition

Full size image
Table 2 Experimental cells
Full size table
Table 3 Constructs, items, and results of factor analyses
Full size table
Table 4 Assessment of discriminant validity
Full size table
Table 5 Regression analyses
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Thaler, J., Helmig, B. Promoting Good Behavior: Does Social and Temporal Framing Make a Difference?. Voluntas 24, 1006–1036 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-012-9293-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-012-9293-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation