不同COVID-19干预措施的经济和健康前景的得失框架效应:一项整合等效和强调框架的实验

IF 1.9 3区 社会学 Q2 COMMUNICATION
M. Hameleers, M. Boukes
{"title":"不同COVID-19干预措施的经济和健康前景的得失框架效应:一项整合等效和强调框架的实验","authors":"M. Hameleers, M. Boukes","doi":"10.1093/IJPOR/EDAB027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A survey experiment was conducted that exposed Dutch citizens to different scenarios that either emphasized the gains or the losses regarding the number of victims or the economic damage caused by SARS-CoV-2. Replicating prospect theory in an ecologically valid crisis context, we found that gain frames promoted risk-aversive preferences, whereas loss frames increased support for risk-seeking alternatives. We further demonstrate the effect's conditionality: Framing effects are strongest for health compared to economic scenarios and most pronounced when the type of intervention entails the highest risk associated with the respective domain. Theoretically, we show that the strongest media effects occur as an interplay between emphasis and equivalence framing effects, which underlines the need for media effects research to integrate both framing elements rather than studying them separately.","PeriodicalId":51480,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Public Opinion Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Effect of Gain-versus-Loss Framing of Economic and Health Prospects of Different COVID-19 Interventions: An Experiment Integrating Equivalence and Emphasis Framing\",\"authors\":\"M. Hameleers, M. Boukes\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/IJPOR/EDAB027\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A survey experiment was conducted that exposed Dutch citizens to different scenarios that either emphasized the gains or the losses regarding the number of victims or the economic damage caused by SARS-CoV-2. Replicating prospect theory in an ecologically valid crisis context, we found that gain frames promoted risk-aversive preferences, whereas loss frames increased support for risk-seeking alternatives. We further demonstrate the effect's conditionality: Framing effects are strongest for health compared to economic scenarios and most pronounced when the type of intervention entails the highest risk associated with the respective domain. Theoretically, we show that the strongest media effects occur as an interplay between emphasis and equivalence framing effects, which underlines the need for media effects research to integrate both framing elements rather than studying them separately.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51480,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Public Opinion Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Public Opinion Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/IJPOR/EDAB027\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Public Opinion Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/IJPOR/EDAB027","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

进行了一项调查实验,将荷兰公民暴露在不同的场景中,这些场景要么强调受害者人数的得失,要么强调严重急性呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒2型造成的经济损失。在生态有效的危机背景下复制前景理论,我们发现收益框架促进了规避风险的偏好,而损失框架增加了对寻求风险的替代方案的支持。我们进一步证明了这种影响的条件性:与经济情景相比,框架效应对健康的影响最强,当干预类型涉及与相应领域相关的最高风险时,框架效应最为明显。理论上,我们表明,最强的媒体效应是强调和对等框架效应之间的相互作用,这突出了媒体效应研究需要整合这两个框架元素,而不是单独研究它们。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Effect of Gain-versus-Loss Framing of Economic and Health Prospects of Different COVID-19 Interventions: An Experiment Integrating Equivalence and Emphasis Framing
A survey experiment was conducted that exposed Dutch citizens to different scenarios that either emphasized the gains or the losses regarding the number of victims or the economic damage caused by SARS-CoV-2. Replicating prospect theory in an ecologically valid crisis context, we found that gain frames promoted risk-aversive preferences, whereas loss frames increased support for risk-seeking alternatives. We further demonstrate the effect's conditionality: Framing effects are strongest for health compared to economic scenarios and most pronounced when the type of intervention entails the highest risk associated with the respective domain. Theoretically, we show that the strongest media effects occur as an interplay between emphasis and equivalence framing effects, which underlines the need for media effects research to integrate both framing elements rather than studying them separately.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Public Opinion Research welcomes manuscripts that describe: - studies of public opinion that contribute to theory development and testing about political, social and current issues, particularly those that involve comparative analysis; - the role of public opinion polls in political decision making, the development of public policies, electoral behavior, and mass communications; - evaluations of and improvements in the methodology of public opinion surveys.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信