The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Relative Persuasiveness of Gain-Framed Loss-Framed Messages for Encouraging Disease Prevention Behaviors: A Meta-Analytic Review
Abstract
A meta-analytic review of 93 studies (N = 21,656) finds that in disease prevention messages, gain-framed appeals, which emphasize the advantages of compliance with the communicator's recommendation, are statistically significantly more persuasive than loss-framed appeals, which emphasize the disadvantages of noncompliance. This difference is quite small (corresponding to r = .03), however, and appears attributable to a relatively large (and statistically significant) effect for messages advocating dental hygiene behaviors. Despite very good statistical power, the analysis finds no statistically significant differences in persuasiveness between gain- and loss-framed messages concerning other preventive actions such as safer-sex behaviors, skin cancer prevention behaviors, or diet and nutrition behaviors.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.7455683 · Cited by 18,497
Actual Causes of Death in the United States, 2000
Mokdad, A. H. (2004) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.291.10.1238 · Cited by 5,211
Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research
Rosenthal, R. (1991) · doi:10.4135/9781412984997 · Cited by 4,635
Cohen, J. (1994) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.49.12.997 · Cited by 4,003
A Meta-Analysis of Fear Appeals: Implications for Effective Public Health Campaigns
Witte, K., & Allen, M. (2000) · Health Education & Behavior · doi:10.1177/109019810002700506 · Cited by 3,216
Fixed-and random-effects models in meta-analysis.
Hedges, L. V., & Vevea, J. L. (1998) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.3.4.486 · Cited by 2,977
The power of statistical tests in meta-analysis
Hedges, L. V., & Pigott, T. D. (2001) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.6.3.203 · Cited by 716 · cited 1×
“With 84 cases, a typical study sample size of 247 (the mean study sample size across these 84 cases), and large heterogeneity (using the conventional v value of Hedges & Pigott, 2001 ), the power for detecting a population effect size of r = .”
BackgroundRothman, A. J., Martino, S. C., Bedell, B. T., Detweiler, J. B., & Salovey, P. (1999) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167299259003 · Cited by 379
Dillard, J. P., Weber, K. M., & Vail, R. G. (2007) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00360.x · Cited by 276
Cited by
Framing Climate Change: Exploring the Role of Emotion in Generating Advocacy Behavior
Nabi, R. L., Gustafson, A., & Jensen, R. (2018) · Science Communication · doi:10.1177/1075547018776019 · Cited by 461
Loss or gain? The role of message framing in hotel guests’ recycling behaviour
Grazzini, L., Rodrigo, P., Aiello, G., & Viglia, G. (2018) · Journal of Sustainable Tourism · doi:10.1080/09669582.2018.1526294 · Cited by 230
The effects of framing on environmental decisions: A systematic literature review
Ropret Homar, A., & Knežević Cvelbar, L. (2021) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.106950 · Cited by 190
Laws, M. B., Lee, Y., Taubin, T., Rogers, W. H., & Wilson, I. B. (2018) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0191940 · Cited by 118
O’Keefe, D. J. (2013) · Annals of the International Communication Association · doi:10.1080/23808985.2013.11679151 · Cited by 51
Self-citationArmbruster, S., Manchanda, R., & Vo, N. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su14127411 · Cited by 34
Goldstein, S. P., Zhang, F., Klasnja, P., Hoover, A., Wing, R. R., & Thomas, J. G. (2021) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/33568 · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- O'Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D.
- Venue
- Journal of Health Communication
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2007-10-11
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 623-644
- ISSN
- 1081-0730 (ISSN-L)
- 1087-0415
- OpenAlex
- W2114823211
- Cited by
- 743
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 357.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
