Advertisement

Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 46, Issue 2, pp 385–394 | Cite as

The Impact of Gain- and Loss-Framed Messages on Young Adults’ Sexual Decision Making: An Experimental Study

  • Kathryn MacapagalEmail author
  • Erick Janssen
  • Margaret Matson
  • Peter R. Finn
  • Julia R. Heiman
Original Paper

Abstract

Messages that frame a target behavior in terms of its benefits (gain frame) or costs (loss frame) have been widely and successfully used for health promotion and risk reduction. However, the impact of framed messages on decisions to have sex and sexual risk, as well as moderators of these effects, has remained largely unexplored. We used a computerized laboratory task to test the effects of framed messages about condom use on young adults’ sexual decision making. Participants (N = 127) listened to both gain- and loss-framed messages and rated their intentions to have sex with partners who posed a high and low risk for sexually transmitted infections (STIs). The effects of message frame, partner risk, participant gender, ability to adopt the messages, and message presentation order on intentions to have sex were examined. Intentions to have sex with high-risk partners significantly decreased after the loss-framed message, but not after the gain-framed message, and intentions to have sex increased for participants who received the gain-framed message first. Yet, participants found it easier to adopt the gain-framed message. Results suggest that loss-framed messages may be particularly effective in reducing intentions to have sex with partners who might pose a higher risk for STIs, and that message presentation order may alter the relative effectiveness of gain- and loss-framed messages on sexual decision making. Future studies should examine the precise conditions under which gain- and loss-framed messages can promote healthy sexual behaviors and reduce sexual risk behaviors.

Keywords

Message framing Sexual risk taking Sexual decision making Young adults 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Data collection was supported in part by predoctoral fellowships to the first author (F31 MH090895 and TL1 RR025759) and R01 DA017924 to Peter Finn. We are grateful to Caitlin Anderson, Rebeka Schwartz, and Loren Twigg, who assisted with data collection and processing, and to Heather Rupp and Thomas James, who gave feedback on earlier drafts of this article.

References

  1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Apanovitch, A. M., McCarthy, D., & Salovey, P. (2003). Using message framing to motivate HIV testing among low-income, ethnic minority women. Health Psychology, 22, 60–67. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.22.1.60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bancroft, J., Janssen, E., Strong, D., Carnes, L., Vukadinovic, Z., & Long, J. S. (2003). Sexual risk-taking in gay men: The relevance of sexual arousability, mood, and sensation seeking. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32, 555–572. doi: 10.1023/A:1026041628364.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 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, 192–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Braverman, J. (2008). Testimonials versus informational persuasive messages. Communication Research, 35, 666–694. doi: 10.1177/0093650208321785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Buda, R., & Zhang, Y. (2000). Consumer product evaluation: The interactive effect of message framing, presentation order, and source credibility. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 9, 229–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Camenga, D. R., Hieftje, K. D., Fiellin, L. E., Edelman, E. J., Rosenthal, M. S., & Duncan, L. R. (2014). The use of message framing to promote sexual risk reduction in young adolescents: A pilot exploratory study. Health Education Research, 29, 360–366. doi: 10.1093/her/cyt156.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2014). Sexually transmitted disease surveillance 2013. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.Google Scholar
  9. Covey, J. (2014). The role of dispositional factors in moderating message framing effects. Health Psychology, 33, 52–65. doi: 10.1037/a0029305.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Devos-Comby, L., & Salovey, P. (2002). Applying persuasion strategies to alter HIV-relevant thoughts and behavior. Review of General Psychology, 6, 287–304. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.6.3.287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gallagher, K. M., & Updegraff, J. A. (2012). Health message framing effects on attitudes, intentions, and behavior: A meta-analytic review. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 43, 101–116. doi: 10.1007/s12160-011-9308-7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Garcia-Retamero, R., & Cokely, E. T. (2011). Effective communication of risks to young adults: Using message framing and visual aids to increase condom use and STD screening. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17, 270–287. doi: 10.1037/a0023677.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Gerend, M. A., & Shepherd, J. E. (2007). Using message framing to promote acceptance of the human papillomavirus vaccine. Health Psychology, 26, 745–752. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.26.6.745.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Haugtvedt, C. P., & Wegener, D. T. (1994). Message order effects in persuasion: An attitude strength perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 205–218. doi: 10.1086/209393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hull, S. J. (2012). Perceived risk as a moderator of the effectiveness of framed HIV-test promotion messages among women: A randomized controlled trial. Health Psychology, 31, 114–121. doi: 10.1037/a0024702.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Kiene, S. M., Barta, W. D., Zelenski, J. M., & Cothran, D. L. (2005). Why are you bringing up condoms now? The effect of message content on framing effects of condom use messages. Health Psychology, 24, 321–326. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.24.3.321.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Kuffel, S. W., & Heiman, J. R. (2006). Effects of depressive symptoms and experimentally adopted schemas on sexual arousal and affect in sexually healthy women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 35, 163–177. doi: 10.1007/s10508-005-9015-1.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Middleton, L. S., Kuffel, S. W., & Heiman, J. R. (2008). Effects of experimentally adopted sexual schemas on vaginal response and subjective sexual arousal: A comparison between women with sexual arousal disorder and sexually healthy women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 950–961. doi: 10.1007/s10508-007-9310-0.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. O’Connor, D. B., Ferguson, E., & O’Connor, R. C. (2005). Intentions to use hormonal male contraception: The role of message framing, attitudes and stress appraisals. British Journal of Psychology, 96, 351–369. doi: 10.1348/000712605X49114.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Parsons, J. T., Halkitis, P. N., Bimbi, D., & Borkowski, T. (2000). Perceptions of the benefits and costs associated with condom use and unprotected sex among late adolescent college students. Journal of Adolescence, 23, 377–391. doi: 10.1006/jado.2000.0326.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Prause, N., Staley, C., & Finn, P. (2011). The effects of acute ethanol consumption on sexual response and sexual risk-taking intent. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 373–384. doi: 10.1007/s10508-010-9718-9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Prochaska, J. O., & DiClemente, C. C. (1986). Toward a comprehensive model of change. In W. R. Miller & N. Heather (Eds.), Treating addictive behaviors: Processes of change (Vol. 13, pp. 3–27). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Reichert, T. (2002). Sex in advertising research: A review of content, effects, and functions of sexual information in consumer advertising. Annual Review of Sex Research, 13, 241–273. doi: 10.1080/10532528.2002.10559806.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Richardson, J. L., Milam, J., McCutchan, A., Stoyanoff, S., Bolan, R., Weiss, J., … Marks, G. (2004). Effect of brief safer-sex counseling by medical providers to HIV-1 seropositive patients: A multi-clinic assessment. AIDS, 18, 1179–1186. doi: 10.1097/00002030-200405210-00011.
  25. Robinson, B. E., Bockting, W. O., Rosser, B. R. S., Miner, M., & Coleman, E. (2002). The sexual health model: Application of a sexological approach to HIV prevention. Health Education Research, 17, 43–57. doi: 10.1093/her/17.1.43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Rothman, A. J., & Salovey, P. (1997). Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message framing. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 3–19. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Rupp, H. A., James, T. W., Ketterson, E. D., Sengelaub, D. R., Janssen, E., & Heiman, J. R. (2009). The role of the anterior cingulate cortex in women’s sexual decision making. Neuroscience Letters, 449, 42–47. doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2008.10.083.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Scott-Sheldon, L. A., & Johnson, B. T. (2006). Eroticizing creates safer sex: A research synthesis. Journal of Primary Prevention, 27, 619–640. doi: 10.1007/s10935-006-0059-3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Simpson, J. A., & Gangestad, S. W. (1991). Individual differences in sociosexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 870–883. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.60.6.870.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Toll, B. A., Salovey, P., O’Malley, S. S., Mazure, C. M., Latimer, A., & McKee, S. A. (2008). Message framing for smoking cessation: The interaction of risk perceptions and gender. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 10, 195–200. doi: 10.1080/14622200701767803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453–458. doi: 10.1126/science.7455683.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. United States Department of Health and Human Services, Healthy People 2020. (2013). Reproductive and sexual health. Retrieved from http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/LHI/reproductiveHealth.aspx.
  33. Vanable, P. A., Ostrow, D. G., McKirnan, D. J., Taywaditep, K. J., & Hope, B. A. (2000). Impact of combination therapies on HIV risk perceptions and sexual risk among HIV-positive and HIV-negative gay and bisexual men. Health Psychology, 19, 134–145. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.19.2.134.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Witte, K. (1991). The role of threat and efficacy in AIDS prevention. International Quarterly of Community Health Education, 12, 225–249. doi: 10.2190/U43P-9QLX-HJ5P-U2J5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Medical Social SciencesNorthwestern University Feinberg School of MedicineChicagoUSA
  2. 2.The Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and ReproductionIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA
  3. 3.Institute for Family and Sexuality Studies, Department of NeurosciencesUniversity of LeuvenLeuvenBelgium
  4. 4.Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public HealthIndiana University—Purdue University IndianapolisIndianapolisUSA
  5. 5.Department of Psychological and Brain SciencesIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations