Exploring the role of gain versus loss framing and point of reference in messages to reduce human–bear conflicts

Abstract

As a fundamental social process, communication can help natural resource managers prevent or manage many human–wildlife conflicts, but research on how to present effectively information that contributes to the reduction of human–wildlife conflicts is scant. We examined the effectiveness of point-of-reference and gain-versus-loss framing in heightening intentions to prevent human–black bear conflicts. We randomly assigned 811 participants to one of six message conditions as part of a 3 (point of reference: family versus community versus bear) × 2 (message framing: gain versus loss) between-subjects factorial design or a control condition. The findings show that a match between loss framing and low-construal referencing point (e.g., family-referencing), and a congruency between gain framing and high-construal referencing point (e.g., bear-referencing) lead to higher risk perception and behavioral intentions. This study provides guidance for continuing research and design of risk communication in the context of human–bear conflicts.

Keywords:

• Message framing
• Point of reference
• Risk perception
• Human–wildlife conflict
• Communication

Acknowledgment

This work was supported by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC Contract # FWC-13145) (Cornell Office of Sponsored Programs, CALS Project No: 70881/A001).

Notes

1 For additional analyses, we also examined whether “being a rural versus non rural resident” and “having seen a bear before” moderated any message effects. We found that there was a significant three-way interaction between gain versus loss framing, point of reference and whether participants had seen a black bear before on behavioral intentions. Because our current manuscript focuses primarily on the effects of the experimental conditions on behavioral intentions, rather than how socio-demographic variables can serve as moderators for these experimental conditions, we chose not to discuss this finding in the main text. When participants had never seen a black bear in the wild before, the community-reference, loss-framed message was relatively more persuasive, whereas when participants had encountered black bears before, the family-reference, loss-framed message and the bear-reference, gain-framed message were relatively more effective. Detailed findings are available from the authors upon request.