Journal of Intelligent Communication

Article

The Mediation Effects of Fear on the Relationship between Gain/Loss Message Frames and Cognitive/Conative Responses

Downloads

https://doi.org/10.54963/jic.v1i1.32
Shin, S., Park, S., & Ki, E.-J. (2022). The Mediation Effects of Fear on the Relationship between Gain/Loss Message Frames and Cognitive/Conative Responses. Journal of Intelligent Communication, 1(1), 8–16. https://doi.org/10.54963/jic.v1i1.32
Volume 1 Issue 1: March 2022
Copyright (c) 2022 Author(s)
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright

The authors shall retain the copyright of their work but allow the Publisher to publish, copy, distribute, and convey the work.

License

Journal of Intelligent Communication (JIC)  publishes accepted manuscripts under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). Authors who submit their papers for publication by Journal of Intelligent Communication (JIC) agree to have the CC BY 4.0 license applied to their work, and that anyone is allowed to reuse the article or part of it free of charge for any purpose, including commercial use. As long as the author and original source is properly cited, anyone may copy, redistribute, reuse and transform the content.

Authors

  • Sumin Shin
    Department of Communication, The University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, Whitewater, Wisconsin, 53190, USA
  • Sanghee Park Department of Communication, The University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, Whitewater, Wisconsin, 53190, USA
  • Eyun-Jung Ki Department of Advertising and Public Relations, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama, 35487, USA

This study investigates the underlying mechanism of fear appeal effects on behavioral changes applying the emotions-as-frame model and protection motivation theory to the green advertising context. The results indicate that a loss-framed message arises fear increasing severity, vulnerability, response efficacy, and self-efficacy, which in turn affect the intention to purchase a green product. Furthermore, this study results that a gain frame is more effective to lead green behavior than a loss frame.

Keywords:

Fear appeal Gain/loss framing Emotions-as-frame model Protection motivation theory Green advertising

References

  1. Moser, S.C., Dilling, L., 2004. Making climate hot. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development. 46(10), 32-46.
  2. LaTour, M.S., Pitts, R.E., 1989. Using fear appeals in advertising for AIDS prevention in the college-age population. Journal of Health Care Marketing. 9(3). 5-14.
  3. Chang, K.C., Strong, C., Pakpour, A.H., 2020. Factors related to preventive COVID-19 infection behaviors among people with mental illness. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association. 119(12), 1772- 1780.
  4. Chen, L., Yang, X., 2018. Using EPPM to evaluate the effectiveness of fear appeal messages across different media outlets to increase the intention of breast self-examination among Chinese women. Health Communication. 34(11), 1369-1373.
  5. Jensen, J.D., Ratcliff, C.L., Yale, R.N., et al., 2018. Persuasive impact of loss and gain frames on intentions to exercise: A test of six moderators. Communication Monographs. 85(2), 245-262.
  6. Davis, J.J., 1995. The effects of message framing on response to environmental communications. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. 72(2), 285-299.
  7. Homar, A.R., Cvelbar, L.K., 2021. The effects of framing on environmental decisions: A systematic literature review. Ecological Economics. 183, 1-18.
  8. O’Keefe, D.J., Jensen, J.D., 2009. The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages for encouraging disease detection behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Communication. 59(2), 296-316.
  9. O’keefe, D.J., Jensen, J.D., 2006. The advantages of compliance or the disadvantages of noncompliance? A meta-analytic review of the relative persuasive effectiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages. Annals of the International Communication Association. 30(1), 1-43.
  10. Amatulli, C., De Angelis, M., Peluso, A.M., et al., 2019. The effect of negative message framing on green consumption: An investigation of the role of shame. Journal of Business Ethics. 157(4), 1111-1132.
  11. Lu, H., 2016. The effects of emotional appeals and gain versus loss framing in communicating sea star wasting disease. Science Communication. 38(2), 143-169.
  12. Nabi, R.L., 2003. Exploring the framing effects of emotion: Do discrete emotions differentially influence information accessibility, information seeking, and policy preference? Communication Research. 30(2), 224-247.
  13. Nabi, R.L., Gustafson, A., Jensen, R., 2018. Framing climate change: Exploring the role of emotion in generating advocacy behavior. Science Communication. 40(4), 442-468.
  14. Ahn, S.J., Fox, J., Dale, K.R., et al., 2015. Framing virtual experiences: Effects on environmental efficacy and behavior over time. Communication Research. 42(6), 839-863.
  15. Morton, T.A., Rabinovich, A., Marshall, D., 2011. The future that may (or may not) come: How framing changes responses to uncertainty in climate change communications. Global Environmental Change. 21(1), 103-109.
  16. Witte, K., 1992. Putting the fear back into fear appeals: The extended parallel process model. Communications Monographs. 59(4), 329-349.
  17. Witte, K., 1994. Fear control and danger control: A test of the extended parallel process model (EPPM). Communications Monographs. 61(2), 113-134.
  18. Rogers, R.W., Cacioppo, J.T., Petty, R., 1983. Cognitive and physiological processes in fear appeals and attitude change: A revised theory of protection motivation. In J. T. Cacioppo (Ed.), Social Psychophysiology: A Sourcebook. pp. 153-177.
  19. Witte, K., Allen, M., 2000. A meta-analysis of fear appeals: Implications for effective public health campaigns. Health Education & Behavior. 27(5), 591-615.
  20. Shi, J., Smith, S.W., 2016. The effects of fear appeal message repetition on perceived threat, perceived efficacy, and behavioral intention in the extended parallel process model. Health Communication. 31(3), 275-286.
  21. Jang, K., Park, N., 2018. The effects of repetitive information communication through multiple channels on prevention behavior during the 2015 MERS outbreak in South Korea. Journal of health communication. 23(7), 670-678.
  22. Kim, S., Jeong, S.H., Hwang, Y., 2012. Predictors of pro-environmental behaviors of American and Korean students: The application of the theory of reasoned action and protection motivation theory. Science Communication. 35(2), 168-188.
  23. Hartmann, P., Apaolaza, V., D’Souza, C., et al., 2013. Nuclear power threats, public opposition and green electricity adoption: Effects of threat belief appraisal and fear arousal. Energy Policy. 62, 1366-1376.
  24. Shin, S., Ki, E.J., Griffin, W.G., 2017. The effectiveness of fear appeals in ‘green’advertising: An analysis of creative, consumer, and source variables. Journal of Marketing Communications. 23(5), 473-492.
  25. Bickart, B.A., Ruth, J.A., 2012. Green Eco-Seals and Advertising Persuasion. Journal of Advertising. 41(4), 51-67.
  26. Baron, R.M., Kenny, D.A., 1986. The moderator– mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
  27. Pollay, R.W., 1983. Measuring the cultural values manifest in advertising. Current Issues and Research in Advertising. 6(1), 71-92.
  28. Lavidge, R.J., Steiner, G.A., 1961. A model for predictive measurements of advertising effectiveness. Journal of Marketing. 25(6), 59-62.