A Process Analysis of Message Style and Persuasion: The Effects of Gain-Loss Framing and Emotion-Inducing Imagery

References

• Anghelcev, G., & Sar, S. (2014). In the mood for [the right kind of] social marketing communication: How congruity between consumer mood and message framing influences intentions to recycle. Journal of Social Marketing, 4, 38–57.
   Google Scholar
• Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Burnkrant, R. E., & Unnava, H. R. (1995). Effects of self-referencing on persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 17–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cacioppo, J. T., Harkins, S. G., Petty, R. E., Ostrom, T. M., & Brock, T. C. (1981). The nature of attitudes and cognitive responses and their relationships to behavior. In R. E. Petty, T. M. Ostrom, & T. C. Brock (Eds.), Cognitive responses in persuasion (pp. 31–54). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Carpenter, C., Boster, F. J., & Andrews, K. R. (2013). Functional attitude theory. In J. P. Dillard & L. Shen (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of persuasion (2nd ed., pp. 104–119). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Cavazza, N., Graziani, A. R., Serpe, A., & Rubichi, S. (2010). Right-wing face, left-wing faces: The matching effect in the realm of political persuasion. Social Influence, 5, 1–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho, H., & Boster, F. J. (2008). Effects of gain versus loss frame antidrug ads on adolescents. Journal of Communication, 58, 428–446.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Dillard, J. P., Kinney, T. A., & Cruz, M. G. (1996). Influence, appraisals, and emotions in close relationships. Communication Monographs, 63, 105–130.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillard, J. P., & Seo, K. (2013). Affect and persuasion. In J. P. Dillard & L. Shen (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of persuasion (pp. 150–166). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Dimberg, U., Andréasson, P., & Thunberg, M. (2011). Emotional empathy and facial reactions to facial expressions. Journal of Psychophysiology, 25, 26–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dragojevic, M., Bell, R. A., & McGlone, M. S. (2014). Giving radon gas life through language: Effects of linguistic agency assignment in health messages about inanimate threats. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33, 89–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Droulers, O., Gallopel-Morvan, K., Lacoste-Badie, S., & Lajante, M. (2017). The influence of threatening visual warnings on tobacco packaging: Measuring the impact of threat level, image size, and type of pack through psychophysiological and self-report methods. PLoS ONE, 12, 1–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dyson, M. C., & Haselgrove, M. (2001). The influence of reading speed and line length on the effectiveness of reading from screen. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 54, 585–612.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ekman, P. (2007). Emotions revealed: Recognizing faces and feelings to improve communication and emotional life (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Henry Holt.
   Google Scholar
• Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43, 51–58.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forgas, J. P. (1995). Mood and judgment: The affect infusion model (AIM). Psychological Bulletin, 117, 39–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frijda, N. H. (1986). The emotions. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Frijda, N. H. (1987). Emotion, cognitive structure, and action tendency. Cognition and Emotion, 1, 115–143.
   Google Scholar
• Gerend, M. A., & Sias, T. (2009). Message framing and color priming: How subtle threat cues affect persuasion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 999–1002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenwald, A. G. (1968). Cognitive learning, cognitive response to persuasion, and attitude change. In A. G. Greenwald, T. C. Brock, & T. M. Ostrom (Eds.), Psychological foundations of attitudes (pp. 147–170). New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hale, J. L., Mongeau, P. A., & Thomas, R. M. (1991). Cognitive processing of one-and two-sided persuasive messages. Western Journal of Communication, 55, 380–389.
   Google Scholar
• Hall, R. J., Snell, A. F., & Foust, M. S. (1999). Item parceling strategies in SEM: Investigating the subtle effects of unmodeled secondary constructs. Organizational Research Methods, 2, 233–256.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Rapson, R. L. (1994). Emotional contagion. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hatfield, J. D., & Weider-Hatfield, D. (1978). The comparative utility of three types of behavioral units for interaction analysis. Communications Monographs, 45, 44–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1, 77–89.
   Google Scholar
• Hunter, J. E., & Gerbing, D. W. (1982). Unidimensional measurement, second order factor analysis, and causal models. Research in Organizational Behavior, 4, 267–320.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iyer, A., Webster, J., Hornsey, M. J., & Vanman, E. J. (2014). Understanding the power of the picture: The effect of image content on emotional and political responses to terrorism. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 44, 511–521.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Juni, S., & Gross, J. S. (2008). Emotional and persuasive perception of fonts. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 106, 35–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King, A. (2014). Visual messaging and risk communication. In H. Cho, T. Reimer, & K. A. McComas (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of risk communication (pp. 193–205). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Latimer, A., Salovey, P., & Rothman, A. J. (2007). The effectiveness of gain-framed messages for encouraging disease prevention behavior: Is all hope lost? Journal of Health Communication, 12, 645–649.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lavine, H., & Snyder, M. (1996). Cognitive processing and the functional matching effect in persuasion: The mediating role of subjective perceptions of message quality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32, 580–604.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leth-Steensen, C., & Gallitto, E. (2016). Testing mediation in structural equation modeling: The effectiveness of the test of joint significance. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 76, 339–351.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matsumoto, D., Keltner, D., Shiota, M. N., O'Sullivan, M., & Frank, M. (2008). Facial expressions of emotion. In M. Lewis, J. M. Haviland-Jones, & L. F. Barrett (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (3rd ed., pp. 211–234). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nabi, R. L. (2002). Anger, fear, uncertainty, and attitudes: A test of the cognitive-functional model. Communication Monographs, 69, 204–216.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nan, X. (2009). Emotional responses to televised PSAs and their influence on persuasion: An investigation of the moderating role of faith in intuition. Communication Studies, 60, 426–442.
   Google Scholar
• 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. Communication Yearbook, 30, 1–43.
   Google Scholar
• O'Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2007). The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages for encouraging disease prevention behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Health Communication, 12, 623–644.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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.
   Google Scholar
• 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.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paivio, A. (2007). Mind and its evolution: A dual coding theoretical approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Powell, T. E., Boomgaarden, H. G., De Swert, K., & de Vreese, C. H. (2015). A clearer picture: The contribution of visuals and text to framing effects. Journal of Communication, 65, 997–1017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rhodes, N., & Ewoldsen, D. R. (2013). Outcomes of persuasion: Behavioral, cognitive, and social. In J. P. Dillard & L. Shen (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of persuasion (2nd ed., pp. 53–69). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Roseman, I. J. (2001). A model of appraisal in emotion system: Integrating theory, research, and applications. In K. R. Scherer, A. Schorr, & T. Johnstone (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion (pp. 68–91). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rozin, P., & Royzman, E. B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 296–320.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russell, J. A. (1979). Affective space is bipolar. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 345–356.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salovey, P., Schneider, T. R., & Apanovitch, A. M. (2002). Message framing in the prevention and early detection of illness. In J. P. Dillard & M. Pfau (Eds.), The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice (pp. 391–406). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Scherer, K. R. (1999). Appraisal theory. In T. Dalgleish & M. Power (Eds.), Handbook of cognition and emotion (pp. 637–663). New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Seo, K., & Dillard, J. P. (in press). The persuasive effects of two stylistic elements: Framing and imagery. Communication Research.
   Google Scholar
• Seo, K., Dillard, J. P., and Shen, F. (2013). The effects of message framing and visual image on persuasion. Communication Quarterly, 61, 564–583.
   Google Scholar
• Shen, L., & Bigsby, E. (2010). Behavioral activation/inhibition systems and emotions: A test of valence vs. action tendency hypotheses. Communication Monographs, 77, 1–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen, L., & Bigsby, E. (2013). The effects of message features: Content, structure, and style. In J. P. Dillard & L. Shen (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of persuasion (2nd ed., pp. 20–35). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Shen, L., & Dillard, J. P. (2007). The influence of behavioral inhibition/approach systems and message framing on the processing of persuasive health messages. Communication Research, 34, 433–467.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stafford, E. R., Walker, B. A., & Blasko, V. J. (1996). Headline-visual consistency in print advertisements: Effects on processing and evaluation. Advances in Consumer Research, 23, 56–62.
   Google Scholar
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Timmers, R., & Van Der Wijst, P. (2007). Images as anti-smoking fear appeals: The effect of emotion on the persuasion process. Information Design Journal, 15, 21–36.
   Google Scholar
• van't Riet, J., Ruiter, R. A. C., Werrij, M. Q., Candel, M. J. J. M., & de Vries, H. (2010). Distinct pathways to persuasion: The role of affect in message framing effects. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 1261–1276.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yi, S., & Baumgartner, H. (2008). Motivational compatibility and the role of anticipated feelings in positively valenced persuasive message framing. Psychology & Marketing, 25, 1007–1026.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao, X., Nan, X., Yang, B., & Iles, I. A. (2014). Cigarette warning labels: Graphics, framing, and identity. Health Education, 114(2), 101–117.
   Google Scholar
• Zillmann, D. (2002). Exemplification theory of media influence. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 19–41). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar