Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An affective booster moderates the effect of gain- and loss-framed messages on behavioral intentions for colorectal cancer screening

  • Published:
Journal of Behavioral Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Previous research has demonstrated that loss-framed messages are more effective than gain-framed messages in motivating detection behaviors such as screening. The present study examined whether affective context moderates the degree to which message frame is associated with behavioral intentions to engage in colorectal cancer screening. In particular, we buttressed a framing manipulation with an “affective booster” to increase anticipated and anticipatory emotions associated with the framed messages. Consistent with previous research, we found that loss-framed messages are more effective in increasing intentions to screen. However, we found that among individuals who received gain-framed messages (but not loss-framed messages), the affective booster increased message persuasiveness. This effect on intentions was partially mediated by self-efficacy for engaging in screening. This study indicates that in the presence of emotional boosters, loss-framed messages may lose their advantage over gain-framed messages in motivating detection behaviors, and that self-efficacy may partially explain these effects.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. These items were also analyzed as separate outcomes. Analyses yielded similarly significant results. For ease of interpretation, we present results of analyses using the combined scale.

  2. Analyses were also undertaken without controlling for baseline likelihood, and the pattern of results did not change.

  3. Analyses could also be undertaken using a series of planned comparisons and assuming a 4 group design, as opposed to a 2 × 2. We recognize that this approach may be clearer in reflecting that the affective booster conditions differed in terms of the emotions targeted, and were not a uniform intervention. Results of planned comparisons were consistent with results of regressions of main and interacting effects. However, we assert that the affective booster is conceptually similar across condition, despite its necessitated focus on different emotions in the loss versus gain framed conditions. Thus, we present results from regressions, consistent with this assertion.

  4. For all analyses, gender, age, insurance status, race, education, household income, and marital status were originally included as control variables; ethnicity was not included due to extremely limited variability. However, these covariates were not significant in predicting any outcomes, and were trimmed from the final models.

  5. We replicated these findings with data from the present study. In the subsample of participants who received only the framed message but no affective booster, we found that loss-framed messages were more effective in promoting colorectal cancer screening intentions among those with high perceived risk for colorectal cancer, but not among those with low perceived risk (interaction β = −6.78, p = .02). Given that we were underpowered to examine a three-way interaction, we did not include these analyses in the results section.

References

  • Abraham, C., & Sheeran, P. (2004). Deciding to exercise: The role of anticipated regret. British Journal of Health Psychology, 9, 269–278.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • American Cancer Society. Cancer Prevention and Early Detection Facts and Figures. (2010). Available at: http://www.cancer.org/

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R. P., Baumgartner, H., & Pieters, R. (1998). Goal-directed emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 12, 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychology research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, D. E. (1982). Regret in decision making under uncertainty. Operations Research, 30, 961–981.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, D. J., Helmes, A., Powers, D., Andersen, R., Burke, W., Mctiernan, A., et al. (2003). Predicting breast cancer screening intentions and behavior with emotion and cognition. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 22, 213–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, L. D., & Reeve, J. (2006). Risk perceptions, worry, and attitudes about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility. Psychology and Health, 21, 211–230.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2010). Vital signs: Colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 50–75 years—United States, 2008. MMWR, 59, 808–812.

    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, 375–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, C.-T., & Lee, Y.-K. (2009). Framing charity advertising: Influences of message framing, image valence, and temporal framing on a charitable appeal. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39, 2910–2935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, G. B., & Coups, E. J. (2006). Emotions and preventive health behavior: Worry, regret, and influenza vaccination. Health Psychology, 25, 82–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • De Martino, B., Kumaran, D., Seymour, B., & Dolan, R. (2006). Frames, biases and rational decision-making in the human brain. Science, 313, 684–687.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Detweiler, J. B., Bedell, B. T., Salovey, P., Pronin, E., & Rothman, A. J. (1999). Message framing and sunscreen use: Gain-framed messages motivate beach-goers. Health Psychology, 18, 189–196.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Diefenbach, M. A., Miller, S. M., & Daly, M. B. (1999). Specific worry about breast cancer predicts mammography use in women at risk for breast and ovarian cancer. Health Psychology, 18, 532–536.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra, A., & Brosschot, J. (2003). Worry about health in smoking behavior change. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41, 1081–1092.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Druckman, J. N., & McDermott, R. (2008). Emotion and the framing of risky choice. Political Behavior, 30, 297–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frazier, A. L., Colditz, G. A., Fuchs, C. S., & Kuntz, K. M. (2000). Cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer in the general population. Journal of the American Medical Association, 284, 1954–1961.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, K. M., Updegraff, J. A., Rothman, A. J., & Sims, L. (2011). Perceived susceptibility to breast cancer moderates the effect of gain- and loss-framed messages on use of screening mammography. Health Psychology, 30, 145–152.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, D. T., & Ebert, J. E. (2002). Decisions and revisions: The affective forecasting of changeable outcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 503–514.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gollwitzer, P. M., & Brandstetter, V. (1997). Implementation intentions and effective goal pursuit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 186–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hay, J. L., McCaul, K. D., & Magnan, R. E. (2006). Does worry about breast cancer predict screening behaviors? Meta-analysis of the prospective evidence. Preventive Medicine, 42, 401–408.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Janis, I., & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanouse, D. E., & Hanson, L. R. (1972). Negativity in evaluations. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior. Morristown: General Learning Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, W. M. P., Lipkus, I. M., Scholl, S. M., McQueen, A., Cerully, J. L., & Harris, P. R. (2010). Self-affirmation moderates effects of unrealistic optimism and pessimism on reactions to tailored risk feedback. Psychology and Health, 25, 1195–1208.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Latimer, A. E., Salovey, P., & Rothman, A. J. (2007). The effectiveness of gain-framed messages for encouraging disease prevention and behavior: Is all hope lost? Journal of Health Communication, 12, 645–649.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lazarus, R., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, J., & Keltner, D. (2000). Beyond valence: Toward a model of emotion-specific influences on judgment and choice. Emotion and Cognition, 14, 473–493.

    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 Processe, 76, 149–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipkus, I. M., & Klein, W. M. P. (2006). Effects of communicating social comparison information on risk perceptions for colorectal cancer. Journal of Health Communication, 11, 391–407.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Loewenstein, G. F., & Lerner, J. S. (2003). The role of affect in decision making. In R. Davidson, K. Scherer, & H. Goldsmith (Eds.), Handbook of affective science (pp. 619–642). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loewenstein, G. F., Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K., & Welch, N. (2001). Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 267–286.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McCaul, K. D., Branstetter, A. D., Schroeder, D. M., & Glasgow, R. E. (1996). What is the relationship between breast cancer risk and mammography screening? A meta-analytic review. Health Psychology, 15, 423–429.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McCaul, K. D., & Mullens, A. B. (2003). Affect, thought, and self-protective health behavior: The case of worry and cancer screening. In J. Suls & K. A. Wallston (Eds.), Social psychological foundations of health and illness. Blackwell series in health psychology and behavioral medicine (pp. 137–168). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCaul, K. D., Mullens, A. B., Romanek, K. M., Erickson, S. C., & Gatheridge, B. J. (2007). The motivational effects of thinking and worrying about the effects of smoking cigarettes. Cognition and Emotion, 21, 1780–1798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNeil, B. J., Pauker, S. G., & Tversky, A. (1988). On the framing of medical decisions. In D. E. Bell, H. Raiffa & A. Tversky (Eds.), Decision making: Descriptive, normative, and prescriptive interactions (pp. 562–568). New York: Cambridge University Press.

  • McQueen, A., Vernon, S. W., Meyers, R. E., Watts, B. G., Lee, E. S., & Tilley, B. C. (2007). Correlates and predictors of colorectal cancer screening among male automotive workers. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention, 16, 500–509.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meyerowitz, B. E., & Chaiken, S. (1987). The effect of message framing on breast self examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 500–510.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • O’Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2007). The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed loss-framed messages for encouraging disease prevention behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Health Communication, 12, 623–644.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, E., Lipkus, I., & Diefenbach, M. A. (2006). The functions of affect in health communications and in the construction of health preferences. Journal of Communication, 56, S140–S162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinon, A., & Gambara, H. (2005). A meta-analytic review of framing effects: Risky attribute and goal framing. Psicothema, 17, 325–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prochaska, J. O., & Redding, C. A. (2002). The transtheoretical model and stages of change. In K. Glanz, B. K. Rimer, & F. M. Lewis (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (3rd ed., pp. 99–120). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richard, R., van der Pligt, J., & de Vries, N. (1996). Anticipated regret and time perspective: Changing sexual risk-taking behavior. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 9, 185–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R. W. (1975). A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Psychology, 91, 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 Quarterly, 15, 175–183.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rothman, A. J., Bartels, R. D., Wlaschin, J., & Salovey, P. (2006). The strategic use of gain- and loss-framed messages to promote healthy behavior: How theory can inform practice. Journal of Communication, 56, S202–S220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothman, A. J., Klein, W. M., & Weinstein, N. D. (1996). Absolute and relative biases in estimations of personal risk. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 1213–1236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothman, A. J., Martino, S. C., Bedell, B. T., Detweiler, J. B., & Salovey, P. (1999). The systematic influence of gain- and loss-framed messages on interest in and use of different types of health behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1355–1369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothman, A. J., & Salovey, P. (1997). Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message framing. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 3–19.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiter, R. A. C., Abraham, C., & Kok, G. (2001). Scary warning and rational precautions: A review of the psychology of fear appeals. Psychology and Health, 16, 613–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheeran, P., & Orbell, S. (1999). Augmenting the theory of planned behaviour: Roles for anticipated regret and descriptive norms. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 2107–2142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, D. K., Mann, T., & Updengraff, J. A. (2006). Approach/avoidance motivation, message framing, and health behavior: Understanding the congruency effect. Motivation and Emotion, 30, 165–169.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1987). Rational choice and the framing of decisions. In R. M., Hogarth & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Rational choice: The contrast between economics and psychology (pp. 67–94). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. (2008). Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. preventive services task force recommendation statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 149, 627–637.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, N. D., Kwitel, A., McCaul, K. D., Magnan, R. E., Gerrard, M., & Gibbons, F. X. (2007). Risk perceptions: Assessment and relationship to influenza vaccination. Health Psychology, 26, 146–151.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • West, R. (2009). The multiple facets of cigarette addiction and what they mean for encouraging and helping smokers to stop. Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, 6, 277–283.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, T. D., & Gilbert, D. T. (2005). Affective forecasting: Knowing what to want. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 131–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, D. K., Purdon, S. E., & Wallston, K. A. (1988). Compliance to health recommendations: A theoretical overview of message framing. Health Education Research: Theory and Practice, 3, 161–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winawer, S. J., Zauber, A. G., Ho, M. N., O’Brien, M. J., Gottlieb, L. S., & Sternberg, S. S. (1993). Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. NEJM, 329, 1977–1981.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, C. O., & McMurray, N. E. (2002). Framing communication: Communicating the antismoking message effectively to all smokers. Journal of Community Psychology, 30, 433–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan, C., Dillard, J. P., & Shen, F. (2010). The effects of mood, message framing, and behavioral advocacy on persuasion. Journal of Communication, 60, 344–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zajac, L. E., & Klein, W. M. P. (October 2007). Effect of worry on behavioral intentions, behavior, and processing of health information. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Medical Decision Making, Pittsburgh, PA.

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a grant from the Prevent Cancer Foundation (formerly the Cancer Research and Prevention Foundation). We thank Helena Admassu, Dana Aravich, Hannah Bergman, Chloe Bolon, Beth Dugan, Emily Galvin, Katy Griffith, Molly Green, Marina Jackson, and Kelley Jones for their assistance in conducting the experiment reported herein.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Behavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, 6130 Executive Blvd., Room 4083, Rockville, MD, 20852, USA

    Rebecca A. Ferrer & William M. P. Klein

  2. Department of Psychology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    William M. P. Klein & Laura E. Zajac

  3. Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Stephanie R. Land

  4. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Bruce S. Ling

Authors
  1. Rebecca A. Ferrer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. William M. P. Klein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Laura E. Zajac
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stephanie R. Land
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Bruce S. Ling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rebecca A. Ferrer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ferrer, R.A., Klein, W.M.P., Zajac, L.E. et al. An affective booster moderates the effect of gain- and loss-framed messages on behavioral intentions for colorectal cancer screening. J Behav Med 35, 452–461 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-011-9371-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-011-9371-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation