The DOI matches its Crossref record; 173 of the 173 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Message framing effects on sustainable consumer behaviour: a systematic review and future research directions for social marketing
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this research is to provide a systematic review of the literature relating to message framing and its effectiveness in persuading consumers to adopt environmentally sustainable behaviour, which is a form of pro-social behaviour. Specifically, this paper focuses on three types of message framing: positive–negative, self–other and abstract–concrete. Design/methodology/approach: This paper reports on a systematic review guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses framework identifying 108 articles published relating to message framing and environmental sustainability between 2005 and 2020. Descriptive analysis of the data was undertaken in combination with a thematic approach. Findings: The results demonstrate that single frames do not reliably increase sustainable consumer behaviour. Instead, the use of two message frames is more consistently effective. However, there is some disparity in relation to the combined effects of two message frames. The research also identifies that the use of three combined message frames is underexplored in the existing literature. Research limitations/implications: Social marketing and consumer psychology researchers have explored many types of message framing. This study focuses on three common types. Also, the review is limited to valence framing. The authors recognise that visual aspects of message frames also determine the effectiveness of messaging. Another limitation is that only empirical studies published between 2005 and 2020 were reviewed. Originality/value: Past review papers related to the impact of messaging on sustainable consumer behaviour either focus on one type of message framing, such as the positive–negative frame, or did not categorise message framing into different types. The current review focuses on three types of message framing that have been examined separately and in combination in the literature. Based on the findings, this study proposes a synthesised theoretical framework for future research.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“In particular, loss-framed messages, which highlight the negative consequences of failing to act, tend to evoke stronger behavioral responses among high-efficacy individuals because such messages are perceived as both personally relevant and actionable [43].”
From The power of loss: message framing, climate anxiety, and engagement in personal carbon trading (2025) · cites this paper as [43]
Citations
Cites
The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., et al. (2021) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.n71 · Cited by 108,283
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & the PRISMA Group* (2009) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135 · Cited by 37,554
The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.7455683 · Cited by 18,497
Construal-level theory of psychological distance.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/a0018963 · Cited by 6,618
Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda
Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2009) · Journal of Environmental Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.10.004 · Cited by 5,089
Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1983) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.45.3.513 · Cited by 4,952
Liberman, N., & Yaacov Trope, B. (1998) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.75.1.5 · Cited by 2,366
The Psychological Distance of Climate Change
Spence, A., Poortinga, W., & Pidgeon, N. (2011) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01695.x · Cited by 1,678
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- 2011, Communications in social marketing
- 2020, Marketing Communications
- 2001, Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations across Nations
- 2000, Choices, Values, and Frames
- 2008, Social Marketing: Influencing Behaviors for Good
Cited by
The power of loss: message framing, climate anxiety, and engagement in personal carbon trading
Li, T., Yang, Y., Liu, X., & Zeng, S. (2025) · BMC Psychology · doi:10.1186/s40359-025-03713-w · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Florence, E. S., Fleischman, D., Mulcahy, R., & Wynder, M.
- Venue
- Journal of Social Marketing
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2022-07-25
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 623-652
- ISSN
- 2042-6763
- Cited by
- 113
- References
- 173
- Language
- en
- Licence
- www.emerald.com/insight/site-policies (tdm)
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.