When Are Loss Frames More Effective in Climate Change Communication? An Application of Fear Appeal Theory

This study investigated how goal frames (gain, non-loss, loss) either with or without efficacy statements affect consumers’ support for climate-change policy. Addressing the goal-framing literature’s difficulty in establishing a guiding theory with consistent findings, we (1) propose fear appeal the...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Sustainability 2022-06, Vol.14 (12), p.7411
Main Authors: Armbruster, Scott, Manchanda, Rajesh, Vo, Ngan
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Behavior
Cancer
Climate change
Climate policy
Consumers
Decision making
Environmental policy
Fear
Hypotheses
Mammography
Sustainability
Threats
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This study investigated how goal frames (gain, non-loss, loss) either with or without efficacy statements affect consumers’ support for climate-change policy. Addressing the goal-framing literature’s difficulty in establishing a guiding theory with consistent findings, we (1) propose fear appeal theory as an alternative framework to guide goal-framing research; (2) test five fear appeal variables (fear, perceived threat, hope, perceived efficacy, and message processing) as mediators of goal-framing effects on policy support; and (3) highlight four common goal-framing confounds that may partly underlie the literature’s inconsistent findings. Aligning with fear appeal theory, results from a carefully controlled experiment revealed that a more threatening loss frame paired with an efficacy statement produced the strongest pro-policy attitudes and the greatest willingness-to-pay by successfully balancing fear/threat with hope/efficacy and by producing deeper message processing.
ISSN:2071-1050
2071-1050
DOI:10.3390/su14127411