Bringing the frame into focus: the influence of regulatory fit on processing fluency and persuasion.

This research demonstrates that people's goals associated with regulatory focus moderate the effect of message framing on persuasion. The results of 6 experiments show that appeals presented in gain frames are more persuasive when the message is promotion focused, whereas loss-framed appeals are more persuasive when the message is prevention focused. These regulatory focus effects suggesting heightened vigilance against negative outcomes and heightened eagerness toward positive outcomes are replicated when perceived risk is manipulated. Enhanced processing fluency leading to more favorable evaluations in conditions of compatibility appears to underlie these effects. The findings underscore the regulatory fit principle that accounts for the persuasiveness of message framing effects and highlight how processing fluency may contribute to the "feeling right" experience when the strategy of goal pursuit matches one's goal.

[1]  Angela Y. Lee,et al.  The Effect of Conceptual and Perceptual Fluency on Brand Evaluation , 2004 .

[2]  N. Roese,et al.  Regulatory focus and temporal distance , 2003 .

[3]  E. Higgins,et al.  Transfer of value from fit. , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[4]  E Tory Higgins,et al.  Moral value transfer from regulatory fit: what feels right is right and what feels wrong is wrong. , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[5]  P. Salovey,et al.  Using message framing to motivate HIV testing among low-income, ethnic minority women. , 2003, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[6]  Lauren G. Block,et al.  We're at as Much Risk as We Are Led to Believe: Effects of Message Cues on Judgments of Health Risk , 2002 .

[7]  E. Tory Higgins,et al.  How Self-Regulation Creates Distinct Values: The Case of Promotion and Prevention Decision Making , 2002 .

[8]  Angela Y. Lee.  The Mere Exposure Effect: An Uncertainty Reduction Explanation Revisited , 2001 .

[9]  Jennifer Aaker,et al.  “I” Seek Pleasures and “We” Avoid Pains: The Role of Self-Regulatory Goals in Information Processing and Persuasion , 2001 .

[10]  E. Higgins.  Making a good decision: value from fit. , 2000, The American psychologist.

[11]  Angela Y. Lee,et al.  The pleasures and pains of distinct self-construals: the role of interdependence in regulatory focus. , 2000, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[12]  N. Liberman,et al.  Distinguishing Gains from Nonlosses and Losses from Nongains: A Regulatory Focus Perspective on Hedonic Intensity , 2000 .

[13]  Alexander J. Rothman,et al.  Message framing and sunscreen use: gain-framed messages motivate beach-goers. , 1999, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[14]  M. Masson,et al.  Conceptually driven encoding episodes create perceptual misattributions. , 1998, Acta psychologica.

[15]  N. Schwarz,et al.  Effects of Perceptual Fluency on Affective Judgments , 1998 .

[16]  A. Y. Lee,et al.  Stereotype efficiency reconsidered: encoding flexibility under cognitive load? , 1998, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[17]  Michaela Wänke,et al.  There Are Many Reasons to Drive a BMW: Does Imagined Ease of Argument Generation Influence Attitudes? , 1997 .

[18]  E. Higgins,et al.  Regulatory Focus and Strategic Inclinations : Promotion and Prevention in Decision-Making , 1997 .

[19]  Alexander J. Rothman,et al.  Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: the role of message framing. , 1997, Psychological bulletin.

[20]  K. Lemm,et al.  Sensitivity to varying gains and losses: the role of self-discrepancies and event framing. , 1995, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[21]  Lauren G. Block,et al.  When to Accentuate the Negative: The Effects of Perceived Efficacy and Message Framing on Intentions to Perform a Health-Related Behavior , 1995 .

[22]  John G. Seamon,et al.  The mere exposure effect is based on implicit memory: Effects of stimulus type, encoding conditions, and number of exposures on recognition and affect judgments. , 1995 .

[23]  S. Kalichman,et al.  Context framing to enhance HIV-antibody-testing messages targeted to African American women. , 1995, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[24]  A. Tversky,et al.  Weighing Risk and Uncertainty , 1995 .

[25]  T. Singelis,et al.  The Measurement of Independent and Interdependent Self-Construals , 1994 .

[26]  S. Chaiken,et al.  Message Framing, Self-Discrepancies, and Yielding to Persuasive Messages: The Motivational Significance of Psychological Situations , 1994 .

[27]  P Slovic,et al.  Perceived risks of radioactive waste transport through Oregon: results of a statewide survey. , 1994, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[28]  C. Neil Macrae,et al.  Stereotypes as energy-saving devices: A peek inside the cognitive toolbox. , 1994 .

[29]  B. W. Whittlesea.  Illusions of familiarity. , 1993 .

[30]  Peter Salovey,et al.  The Influence of Message Framing on Intentions to Perform Health Behaviors , 1993 .

[31]  Joan Meyers-Levy,et al.  The Influence of Message Framing and Issue Involvement , 1990 .

[32]  Steven L. Neuberg,et al.  A Continuum of Impression Formation, from Category-Based to Individuating Processes: Influences of Information and Motivation on Attention and Interpretation , 1990 .

[33]  George Mandler,et al.  Nonspecific Effects of Exposure on Stimuli That Cannot Be Recognized , 1987 .

[34]  S. Chaiken,et al.  The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior. , 1987, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[35]  G. Bodenhausen,et al.  Social stereotypes and information-processing strategies: the impact of task complexity. , 1987, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[36]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[37]  Veronica J. Dark,et al.  Perceptual Fluency and Recognition Judgments , 1985 .

[38]  Michael K. Lindell,et al.  How Close Is Close Enough: Public Perceptions of the Risks of Industrial Facilities , 1983 .

[39]  A. Tversky,et al.  The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. , 1981, Science.

[40]  L. A. Goodman.  On the Exact Variance of Products , 1960 .

[41]  E.,et al.  Self-Discrepancy : A Theory Relating Self and Affect , 2022 .