Zusammenfassung
Gewinn- und Verlustframing sind populäre Persuasionsstrategien in der Gesundheitskommunikation und wurden in etlichen Studien zu diversen Gesundheitsrisiken und -verhaltensweisen empirisch untersucht. Während theoretische Ansätze für eine höhere Wirksamkeit von Verlust-Frames sprechen, sind die empirischen Ergebnisse inkonsistent. Meta-analytische Untersuchungen deuten darauf hin, dass Mediatoren und Moderatoren für eine unterschiedliche Effektivität der beiden Framing-Arten entscheidend sind und komplexe Zusammenhänge zwischen den Einflussvariablen berücksichtigt werden sollten.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Literatur
Abhyankar, P., O’Connor, D. B., & Lawton, R. (2008). The role of message framing in promoting MMR vaccination: Evidence of a lossframe advantage. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 13, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548500701235732.
Benz Scott, L., & Curbow, B. (2006). The effect of message frames and CVD risk factors on behavioral outcomes. American Journal of Health Behavior, 30, 582–597. https://doi.org/10.5993/AJHB.30.6.5.
Berry, D. C. (2004). Risk, communication and health psychology. Berkshire: Open University Press.
Bosone, L., Martinez, F., & Kalampalikis, N. (2015). The effect of message framing and the nature of the targeted illness on individuals‘ intention to participate in clincial trials. Revue européenne de psychologie appliquée, 65, 171–177.
Bresnahan, M. J., Zhuang, J., & Sun, S. (2013). Influence of smoking norms and gain/loss antismoking messages on young chinese adults. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 15, 1564–1571. https://doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntt015.
Cacioppo, J. T., Gardner, W. L., & Berntson, G. G. (1997). Beyond bipolar conceptualizations and measures: The case of attitudes and evaluative space. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0101_2.
Cesario, J., Corker, K. S., & Jelinek, S. (2013). A self-regulatory framework for message framing. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 238–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.10.014.
Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 10, 103–126. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.072805.
Covey, J. (2014). The role of dispositional factors in moderating message framing effects. Health Psychology, 33, 52–65. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029305.
Detweiler, J. B., Salovey, P., Pronin, E., & Rothman, A. J. (1999). Message framing and sunscreen use: Gain-framed messages motivate beach-goers. Health Psychology, 18, 189–196. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.18.2.189.
Dijksterhuis, A., & Aarts, H. (2003). On wildebeests and humans: The preferential detection of negative stimuli. Psychological Science, 14(1), 14–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.t01-1-01412.
Dijkstra, A., Rothman, A., & Pietersma, S. (2011). The persuasive effects of framing messages on fruit and vegetable consumption according to regulatory focus theory. Psychology & Health, 26, 1036–1048. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2010.526715.
Eilders, C., & Wirth, W. (1999). Die Nachrichtenwertforschung auf dem Weg zum Publikum: Eine experimentelle Überprüfung des Einflusses von Nachrichtenfaktoren bei der Rezeption. Publizistik, 44(1), 35–57.
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Towards clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43, 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x.
Gallagher, K. M., & Updegraff, J. A. (2012). Health message framing effects on attitudes, intentions, and behavior: A meta-analytic review. Annual Behavior Medicine, 43, 101–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-011-9308-7.
Gray, J. A. (1970). The psychophysiological basis of introversion-extraversion. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 8, 249–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(70)90069-0.
Gray, J. A. (1972). The structure of the emotions and the limbic system. In R. Porter & J. Knight (Hrsg.), Physiology, emotion & psychosomatic illness (S. 87–120). Amsterdam: Associated Scientific Publishers.
Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280–1300.
Hull, S. J., & Hong, Y. (2016). Sensation seeking as a moderator of gain- and loss-framed HIV-test promotion message effects. Journal of Health Communication, 21, 46–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2015.1033113.
Hutter, R. R. C., Lawton, R., Pals, E., O’Connor, D. B., & McEachan, R. R. C. (2015). Tackling student binge drinking: Pairing incongruent messages and measures reduces alcohol consumption. British Journal of Health Psychology, 20, 498–513. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjhp.12111.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263–291. https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185.
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1991). Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5, 193–206. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.5.1.193.
Kanouse, D. E. (1984). Explaining negativity biases in evaluation and choice behavior: Theory and research. In T. C. Kinnear (Hrsg.), Advances in consumer research (Bd. 11, S. 703–708). Provo: Association for Consumer Research.
Kim, H. J. (2012). The effects of gender and gain versus loss frame on processing breast cancer screening messages. Communication Research, 39, 385–412. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211406707.
Mann, T., Sherman, D., & Updegraff, J. (2004). Dispositional motivations and message framing: A test of the congruency hypothesis in college students. Health Psychology, 23, 330–334. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.23.3.330.
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(3), 500–510. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.500.
Nan, X. (2007). The relative persuasive effect of gain- versus lossframed messages: Exploring the moderating role of the desirability of end-states. Journalism Mass Communication Quarterly, 84, 509–524. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769900708400307.
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 of Journal Psychology, 96, 351–369. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712605X49114.
O’Keefe, D. J. (2012). From psychological theory to message design: Lessons from the story of gain-framed and loss-framed persuasive messages. In H. Cho (Hrsg.), Health communication message design: Theory, research, and practice (S. 3–20). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
O’Keefe, D. J., & Nan, X. (2012). The relative persuasiveness of gain- and loss-framed messages for promoting vaccination: A meta-analytic review. Health Communication, 27, 776–783. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2011.640974.
O’Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2006). The advantages of compliance or the disadvantages of non-compliance? A meta-analytic review of the relative persuasive effectiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages. In C. S. Beck (Hrsg.), Communication yearbook 30 (S. 1–43). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
O’Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2007). The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages for encouraging disease detection behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Health Communication, 12, 623–644. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01417.x.
O’Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2008). Do loss-framed persuasive messages engender greater message processing than do gain-framed messages? A meta-analytic review. Communication Studies, 59, 51–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510970701849388.
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, 296–316. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01417.x.
Peeters, G., & Czapinski, J. (1990). Positive-negative asymmetry in evaluations: The distinction between affective and informational negativity effects. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Hrsg.), European review of social psychology (S. 33–60). New York: Wiley.
Rothman, A. J., & Salovey, P. (1997). Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message framing. Psychological Bulletin, 121(1), 3–19.
Rothman, A. J., & Updegraff, J. A. (2010). Specifying when and how gain- and loss-framed messages motivate healthy behavior: An integrated approach. In G. Keren (Hrsg.), Perspectives on Framing (S. 257–278). London: Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis.
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. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167299259003.
Shen, L., & Bigsby, E. (2013). The effects of message features: content, structure, and style. In J. P. Dillard & L. Shen (Hrsg.), The SAGE handbook of persuasion: Developments in theory and practice (S. 20–35). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
Shen, L., & Dillard, J. P. (2009). Message frames interact with motivational systems to determine depth of message processing. Health Communication, 24, 504–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410230903104897.
Sherman, D. K., Mann, T., & Updegraff, J. A. (2006). Approach/avoidance motivation, message framing, and health behavior: Understanding the congruency effect. Motivation and Emotion, 30, 164–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-006-9001-5.
Skowronski, J. J., & Carlston, D. E. (1989). Negativity and extremity biases in impression formation: A review of explanations. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.105.1.131.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453–458.
Uskul, A. K., Sherman, D. K., & Fitzgibbon, J. (2009). The cultural congruency effect: Culture, regulatory focus, and the effectiveness of gain- vs. loss-framed health messages. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 535–541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2008.12.005.
Wansink, B., & Pope, L. (2014). When do gain-framed health messages work better than fear appeals? Nutrition Reviews, 73, 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuu010.
Williams, T., Clarke, V., & Borland, R. (2001). Effects of message framing on breast-cancer-related beliefs and behaviors: The role of mediating factors. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 925–995. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb02656.x.
Yan, C., Dillard, J. P., & Shen, F. (2012). Emotion, motivation, and the persuasive effects of message framing. Journal of Communication, 62, 682–700. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01655.x.
Yi, S., & Baumgartner, H. (2009). Regulatory focus and message framing: A test of three accounts. Motivation and Emotion, 33, 435–443. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-009-9148-y.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wagner, A.J.M. (2019). Gewinn- und Verlustframing in der Gesundheitskommunikation. In: Rossmann, C., Hastall, M. (eds) Handbuch der Gesundheitskommunikation. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-10727-7_42
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-10727-7_42
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-658-10726-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-658-10727-7
eBook Packages: Social Science and Law (German Language)