Abstract
The importance of individual self-protection in mitigating the negative consequences of risks and hazards cannot be overstated. To investigate the impact of positive versus negative goal-framing in risk communication on protective behavior, we conducted two experiments. We also examined how individualism/collectivism of information recipients moderates the effect of goal-framing. Study 1, which employed a 2 (positive frame vs. negative frame) design, revealed that individuals are more likely to engage in protective behavior when presented with positively framed information than negatively framed information. This effect was mediated by perceived responsibility. Study 2, a 2 (positive frame vs. negative frame) × 2 (individualism vs. collectivism) design experiment, confirmed that individualists are more inclined towards protective behavior when information is positively framed, while collectivists exhibit the opposite pattern. Our findings have important implications for risk communication. Positive framing can be an effective strategy to persuade individuals to reduce risky behavior. In collectivist societies, risk communication can be enhanced by emphasizing the importance of family care, which can lead to mutual restraint among members.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
References
Aaker JL, Lee AY (2001) I” seek pleasures and “we” avoid pains: the role of self-regulatory goals in information processing and persuasion. J Consum Res 28(1):33–49. https://doi.org/10.1086/321946
Apanovitch AM, McCarthy D, Salovey P (2003) Using message framing to motivate HIV testing among low-income, ethnic minority women. Health Psychol 22(1):60. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.22.1.60
Avineri E, Waygood EOD (2013) Applying valence framing to enhance the effect of information on transport-related carbon dioxide emissions. Transp Res part A: policy Pract 48:31–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2012.10.003
Bennett N, Lemoine GJ (2014) What a difference a word makes: understanding threats to performance in a VUCA world. Bus Horiz 57(3):311–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2014.01.001
Das E, Kerkhof P, Kuiper J (2008) Improving the effectiveness of fundraising messages: the impact of charity goal attainment, message framing, and evidence on persuasion. J Appl Communication Res 36(2):161–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909880801922854
Gamliel E, Peer E (2010) Attribute framing affects the perceived fairness of health care allocation principles. Judgm Decis Mak 5(1):11. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500001996
Geers AL, Weiland PE, Kosbab K, Landry SJ, Helfer SG (2005) Goal activation, expectations, and the placebo effect. J Personal Soc Psychol 89(2):143. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.2.143
Germani A, Buratta L, Delvecchio E, Mazzeschi C (2020) Emerging adults and COVID-19: the role of individualism-collectivism on perceived risks and psychological maladjustment. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17(10):3497. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17103497
Hayes AF, Preacher KJ (2014) Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable[J]. British J Math Stat Psychol 67(3): 451–470. https://doi.org/10.1111/bmsp.12028
Higgins ET (1997) Beyond pleasure and pain. Am Psychol 52(12):1280. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280
Higgins ET (2000) Making a good decision: value from fit. Am Psychol 55(11):1217. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.11.1217
Hofstede G (1980) Culture and organizations. Int Stud Manage Organ 10(4):15–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/00208825.1980.11656300
Hofstede G (1993) Cultural constraints in management theories. Acad Manage Perspect 7(1):81–94. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.1993.9409142061
Idson LC, Liberman N, Higgins ET (2004) Imagining how you’d feel: the role of motivational experiences from regulatory fit. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 30(7):926–937. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204264334
Kahneman D, Tversky A (2013) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. In Handbook of the fundamentals of financial decision making: Part I (pp. 99–127). https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814417358_0006
Kiene SM, Barta WD, Zelenski JM, Cothran DL (2005) Why are you bringing up condoms now? The effect of message content on framing effects of condom use messages. Health Psychol 24(3):321. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.24.3.321
Kim H, Rao AR, Lee AY (2009) It’s time to vote: the effect of matching message orientation and temporal frame on political persuasion. J Consum Res 35(6):877–889. https://doi.org/10.1086/593700
Kruczkiewicz A, Klopp J, Fisher J, Mason S, McClain S, Sheekh NM, …, Braneon C (2021) Compound risks and complex emergencies require new approaches to preparedness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(19), e2106795118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2106795118
Lanaj K, Chang CH, Johnson RE (2012) Regulatory focus and work-related outcomes: a review and meta-analysis. Psychol Bull 138(5):998. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027723
Levin IP, Schneider SL, Gaeth GJ (1998) All frames are not created equal: a typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 76(2):149–188. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1998.2804
Levin IP, Gaeth GJ, Schreiber J, Lauriola M (2002) A new look at framing effects: distribution of effect sizes, individual differences, and independence of types of effects. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 88(1):411–429. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2001.2983
McCormick M, Seta JJ (2012) Lateralized goal framing: how selective presentation impacts message effectiveness. J Health Psychol 17(8):1099–1109. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105311435944
Meyerowitz BE, Chaiken S (1987) The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior. J Personal Soc Psychol 52(3):500. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.500
Miller K (2006) Social obligation as reason for action. Cogn Syst Res 7(2–3):273–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsys.2005.11.005
Nan X (2007) Does psychological reactance to loss-framed messages dissipate the negativity bias? An investigation of the message framing effect. In annual conference of the International Communication Association, San Francisco, CA
Oyserman D, Coon HM, Kemmelmeier M (2002) Rethinking individualism and collectivism: evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychol Bull 128(1):3. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.1.3
Rothman AJ, Salovey P (1997) Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: the role of message framing. Psychol Bull 121(1):3. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.3
Schuck AR, De Vreese CH (2006) Between risk and opportunity: News framing and its effects on public support for EU enlargement. Eur J Communication 21(1):5–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323106060987
Sivadas E, Bruvold NT, Nelson MR (2008) A reduced version of the horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism scale: a four-country assessment. J Bus Res 61(3):201–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.06.016
Stürmer S, Simon B, Loewy M, Jörger H (2003) The dual-pathway model of social movement participation: the case of the fat acceptance movement. Social Psychol Q 71–82. https://doi.org/10.2307/3090142
Triandis HC, Gelfand MJ (1998) Converging measurement of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism. J Personal Soc Psychol 74(1):118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.1.118
Tversky A, Kahneman D (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211(4481):453–458. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7455683
Xiaohong T, Qiwen Q (2005) Responsibility researches from the psychological perspective. Psychol Science-Shanghai- 28(4):991
Zhang Y, Gelb BD (1996) Matching advertising appeals to culture: the influence of products’ use conditions. J advertising 25(3):29–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.1996.10673505
Zhao G, Pechmann C (2007) The impact of regulatory focus on adolescents’ response to antismoking advertising campaigns. J Mark Res 44(4):671–687. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.44.4.671
Acknowledgements
We appreciate Ziyi Yan’s help in early stage of this research.
Funding
This research was funded by the Humanities and Social Sciences Fund of Ministry of Education grants #17YJC630071 and the National Natural Science Foundation of China grants #72072169 and #72025402.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Yi-Na Li designed the study. Ruihan Li collected and analyzed the data, and wrote the manuscript. Yi-Na Li, Ruihan Li, Jiuchang Wei and Wanyue Yao revised the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
All procedures performed in this study were granted an exemption of ethical approval by Medical Research Ethics Committee of Anhui Provincial Hospital. Informed consent was obtained from all participants for being included in the study.
Competing interests
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Li, R., Li, YN., Wei, J. et al. How goal-framing of risk-coping slogans impacts protective behavior: an experimental study. J. of Data, Inf. and Manag. 5, 115–124 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42488-023-00097-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42488-023-00097-7