https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8378-8002
![Sample our Health and Social Care journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5938/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Health-Social-Care.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
This meta-analysis investigated the persuasive effects of temporal framing in health messaging. Our analysis included 39 message pairs from 22 studies in 20 articles (N = 4,998) that examined the effects of temporal framing (i.e. present-oriented messages vs. future-oriented messages) on attitudes, intentions, and behaviors in health contexts. We found that present-oriented messages were significantly more persuasive than future-oriented messages in terms of intentions and integrated persuasive outcomes. Effects of temporal framing on attitudes and behaviors were not statistically significant. We tested six moderators of temporal framing effects (gain vs. loss framing, temporal framing operationalization, behavior type, timing of effect assessment, age, CFC levels) but none of them was statistically significant. Implications for future temporal framing research are discussed.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1. The same research was reported (in whole or in part) in Kees (Citation2006, study 2) and Kees (Citation2011), recorded as the former; Kim and Nan (Citation2016) and Kim and Nan (Citation2019), reported as the latter.
2. For message pairs (J. Kim, Citation2015, study 1[gain], study 1[loss], study 2[gain], study 2[loss]; Kim & Nan, Citation2019[narrative], Citation2019[non-narrative]; Mollen et al., Citation2017[gain], Citation2017[loss]), the integrated persuasive outcome index is calculated based on the averaged mean and pooled standard deviation of attitude and intention. For message pairs (Cheetham & Ogden, Citation2016[visual], Citation2016[text]), the integrated persuasive outcome index is calculated based on the averaged mean and pooled standard deviation of intention and behavior. For message pairs (Nan et al., Citation2015[graphic/gain], Citation2015[graphic/loss], Citation2015[no graphic/gain], Citation2015[no graphic/loss]), the authors assessed attitudes toward smoking and intentions of quitting smoking. Since the two outcomes did not measure the exact same behavior, we chose effect sizes on intention as the integrated persuasive outcome.
3. Publication outlet = 1, Operationalization = 0.89, Behavior type = 0.85, Gain/Loss framing = 0.82, Timing of effect assessment = 1, Medium of message = 0.83, Study population = 0.83, Recruitment method = 0.91, Sample location = 0.90, Age = 1, Gender composition = 1, CFC = 1.
4. We also examined whether the six moderators moderate the persuasive effects of temporal framing on attitudes, intentions, and behaviors. None of the moderation tests is significant.