Does perceived risk influence the effects of message framing? A new investigation of a widely held notion

Abstract

Health-promoting messages can be framed in terms of the beneficial consequences of healthy behaviour (gain-framed messages) or the detrimental consequences of unhealthy behaviour (loss-framed messages). An influential notion holds that the perceived risk associated with the recommended behaviour determines the relative persuasiveness of gain- and loss-framed messages. This ‘risk-framing hypothesis’, as we call it, was derived from prospect theory, has been central to health message framing research for the last two decades, and does not cease to appeal to researchers. The present paper examines the validity of the risk-framing hypothesis. We performed six empirical studies on the interaction between perceived risk and message framing. These studies were conducted in two different countries and employed framed messages targeting skin cancer prevention and detection, physical activity, breast self-examination and vaccination behaviour. Behavioural intention served as the outcome measure. None of these studies found evidence in support of the risk-framing hypothesis. We conclude that the empirical evidence in favour of the hypothesis is weak and discuss the ramifications of this for future message framing research.

Does perceived risk influence the effects of message framing? Revisiting the link between prospect theory and message framing

“…This third conceptualisation at first glance seems to yield more promising results than the previous two ( Van 't Riet et al, 2014), with several studies finding a significant effect in the hypothesised direction (e.g., Apanovitch, McCarthy, & Salovey, 2003;Gallagher et al, 2011;Gerend & Shepherd, 2007;Hwang et al, 2012; but for non-support, see Lalor & Hailey, 1989-1990Millar & Millar, 2000). However, predicting an interaction between perceived vulnerability and message-framing strays even further from prospect theory's original tenets than the risk-framing hypothesis does.…”

“…Prevention and detection products did not differ in perceived risk, and the predicted interaction between function and framing failed to materialise. In fact, the results pointed in the opposite direction, with a (non-significant) gainframed advantage in the high-risk condition and a (non-significant) loss-framed advantage in the low-risk condition (see also Van 't Riet et al, 2014, Study 1).…”

“…Recently, Van 't Riet et al (2014) reviewed the available empirical evidence for an interaction between perceived risk and message framing. They noted that different studies have used different operationalisations of risk, making comparisons difficult.…”

Factors associated with maternal influenza immunization decision-making

“…35,36 Prior studies have indicated challenges with processing gain-and loss-framed messages in light of lower perceived risk among younger women and adolescents. [37][38][39] Thus, compared with the older counterparts, a body of literature points to the fact that younger persons tend to be more willing to engage in risk-taking behaviors that may translate into "collective ambivalence" 38 toward preventive behavior. Consequently, this attitude toward risk may result in a decision to forego immunization until a higher (50%) illness susceptibility threshold is crossed.…”

“…36,37 We therefore adopted this term in our survey as women perceive vaccine effectiveness as a means to protect themselves from becoming infected rather than experiencing a reduction of risk. 57,58 The perception of influenza vaccine efficacy was therefore assessed by asking "Please indicate how protective you think the flu vaccine will be for pregnant women," with a an associated range of 0% ("Not Protective") to 100% ("Completely Protective") on the continuum scale.…”