Show,Not Tell: The Contingency Role of Infographics Versus Text in the Differential Effects of Message Strategies on Optimistic Bias

Abstract

Using an online between-subject experiment, this study tested the effects of message framing (gain vs. loss), reference point (self vs. other), and modality (text vs. infographics) in the scenario of recycling promotion. The findings identified that modality determines under what circumstances message strategies make a difference in risk perception and optimistic bias. In particular, only when paired with infographics and other-referencing point are loss-framed messages more effective than gain-framed messages in increasing risk perception and reducing the self-other gap in perceived benefits. Moreover, risk perception variables and the self-other risk perceptual gap were significant predictors of promoted behavioral intentions.

Keywords

recycling message framing reference point infographics modality optimistic bias

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson

S. M.

Glassman

N. S.

Gold

D. A.

(1998). Mental representations of the self, significant others, and non-significant others: Structure and processing of private and public aspects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 845-861. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.4.845

Anghelcev

Sar

(2014). In the mood for [the right kind of] social marketing communication: How congruity between consumer mood and message framing influences intentions to recycle. Journal of Social Marketing, 4, 38-57. doi:10.1108/JSOCM-04-2013-0025

Baek

T. H.

Yoon

Kim

(2015). When environmental messages should be assertive: Examining the moderating role of effort investment. International Journal of Advertising, 34, 135-157. doi:10.1080/02650487.2014.993513

Bamberg

(2003). How does environmental concern influence specific environmentally related behaviors? A new answer to an old question. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 21-32. doi:10.1016/S0272-4944(02)00078-6

Buchan

N. R.

Johnson

E. J.

Croson

R. T. A.

(2006). Let’s get personal: An international examination of the influence of communication, culture and social distance on other regarding preferences. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 60, 373-398. doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2004.03.017

Buhrmester

Kwang

Gosling

S. D.

(2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 3-5. doi:10.1177%2F1745691610393980

Burnkrant

R. E.

Unnava

H. R.

(1995). Effects of self-referencing on persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 17-26. doi:10.1086/209432

Casaló

L. V.

Escario

J.-J.

(2016). Intergenerational association of environmental concern: Evidence of parents’ and children’s concern. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 48, 65-74. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.09.001

Casler

Bickel

Hackett

(2013). Separate but equal? A comparison of participants and data gathered via Amazon’s MTurk, social media, and face-to-face behavioral testing. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 2156-2160. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.05.009

10.

Cho

Lee

J.-S.

Lee

(2013). Optimistic bias about H1N1 flu: Testing the links between risk communication, optimistic bias, and self-protection behavior. Health Communication, 28, 146-158. doi:10.1080/10410236.2012.664805

11.

Davis

J. J.

(1995). The effects of message framing on response to environmental communications. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 72, 285-299. doi:10.1177/107769909507200203

12.

de Hann

Kruikemeier

Lecheler

Smit

van der Nat

. (2018). When does an infographic say more than a thousand words? Journalism Studies, 19, 1293-1312. doi:10.1080/1461670X.2016.1267592

13.

Dunlop

Wakefield

Kashima

(2008). Can you feel it? Negative emotion, risk, and narrative in health communication. Media Psychology, 11, 52-75. doi:10.1080/15213260701853112

14.

Fishbein

Ajzen

(1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

15.

Fogel

(2013, October 18). Show, not tell: The rise of the infographics. Science Friday. Retrieved from https://www.sciencefriday.com/articles/show-not-tell-the-rise-of-the-infographic/

16.

Haley

(1996). Exploring the construct of organization as source: Consumers’ understandings of organizational sponsorship of advocacy advertising. Journal of Advertising, 25(2), 19-35. doi:10.1080/00913367.1996.10673497

17.

Harrington

N. G.

Helme

D. W.

Noar

S. M.

(2015). Message design approaches to health risk behavior prevention. In Scheier

L. M.

(ed.), Handbook of adolescent drug use prevention: Research, intervention strategies, and practice (pp. 381-396). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

18.

Harris

Middleton

Joiner

(2000). The typical student as an in-group member: Eliminating optimistic bias by reducing social distance. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 235-253. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(200003/04)30:2<235::AID-EJSP990>3.0.CO;2-G

19.

Hayes

A. F.

(2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based perspective (2nd ed). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

20.

Kahneman

Tversky

(1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291. doi:10.2307/1914185

21.

Kang

Lin

C. A.

(2015). Effects of message framing and visual-fear appeals on smoker responses to antismoking ads. Journal of Health Communication, 20, 647-655. doi:10.1080/10810730.2015.1012242

22.

Kelly

B. J.

Hornik

R. C.

(2016). Effects of framing health messages in terms of benefits to loved ones or others: An experimental study. Health Communication, 31, 1284-1290. doi:10.1080/10410236.2015.1062976

23.

Kim

Baek

T. H.

Yoon

Choi

Y. K.

(2017). Assertive environmental advertising and reactance: Differences between South Koreans and Americans. Journal of Advertising, 46, 550-564. doi:10.1080/00913367.2017.1361878

24.

Kühberger

(1998). The influence of framing on risky decisions: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 75, 23-35. doi:10.1006/obhd.1998.2781

25.

Landow

Ritchie

Crooks

(2012). Infographics: The power of visual storytelling. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.

26.

Lazard

Atkinson

(2015). Putting environmental infographics center stage: The role of visuals at the elaboration likelihood model’s critical point of persuasion. Science Communication, 37, 6-33. doi:10.1177/1075547014555997

27.

Lee

E.-J.

Kim

Y. W.

(2016). Effects of infographics on news elaboration, acquisition, and evaluation: Prior knowledge and issue involvement as moderators. New Media & Society, 18, 1579-1598. doi:10.1177/1461444814567982

28.

Leiserowitz

(2006). Climate change risk perception and policy preferences: The role of affect, imagery, and values. Climate Change, 77(1-2), 45-72. doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9059-9

29.

Levin

I. P.

Schneider

S. L.

Gaeth

G. J.

(1998). All frames are not created equal: A typologyand critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76, 149-188. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6981/295c720ab95dcbfc3c270419b39c790059d2.pdf

30.

Loroz

P. S.

(2007). The interaction of message frames and reference points in prosocial persuasive appeals. Psychology & Marketing, 24, 1001-1023. doi:10.1002/mar.20193

31.

Morton

T. A.

Duck

J. M.

(2001). Communication and health beliefs: Mass and interpersonal influences on perceptions of risk to self and others. Communication Research, 28, 602-626. doi:10.1177/009365001028005002

32.

Newman

C. L.

Howlett

Burton

Kozup

J. C.

Tangari

A. H.

(2012). The influence of consumer concern about global climate change on framing effects for environmental sustainability messages. International Journal of Advertising, 31, 511-527. doi:10.2501/IJA-31-3-511-527

33.

O’Keefe

D. J.

Jensen

J. D.

(2007). The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages for encouraging disease prevention behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Health Communication, 12, 623-644. doi:10.1080/10810730701615198

34.

O’Keefe

D. J.

Jensen

J. D.

(2009). The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages for encouraging disease detection behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Communication, 59, 296-316. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01417.x

35.

O’Keefe

D. J.

Nan

(2012). The relative persuasiveness of gain- and loss-framed messages for promoting vaccination: A meta-analytic review. Health Communication, 27, 776-783. doi:10.1080/10410236.2011.640974

36.

O’Keefe

D. J.

(2012). Gain-framed appeals do not motivate sun protection: A meta-analytic review of randomized trials comparing gain-framed and loss-framed appeals for promoting skin cancer prevention. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 9, 2121-2133. doi:10.3390/ijerph9062121

37.

Pagiaslis

Krontalis

A. K.

(2014). Green consumption behavior antecedents: Environmental concern, knowledge, and beliefs. Psychology & Marketing, 31, 335-348. doi:10.1002/mar.20698

38.

Pahl

Harris

P. R.

Todd

H. A.

Rutter

D. R.

(2005). Comparative optimism for environmental risks. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25, 1-11. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.12.004

39.

Paivio

(1971). Imagery and verbal processes. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

40.

Paivio

(1986). Mental representations: A dual-coding approach. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

41.

Park

J. S.

(2016). Prescription drug advertising, disease knowledge, and older adults’ optimistic bias about the future risk of Alzheimer’s disease. Health Communication, 31, 346-354. doi:10.1080/10410236.2014.957375

42.

Perloff

L. S.

Fetzer

B. K.

(1986). Self-other judgments and perceived vulnerability to victimization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 502-510. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.50.3.502

43.

Petty

R. E.

Briñol

Priester

J. R.

(2009). Mass media attitude change: Implications of the elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In Jennings

Oliver

M. B.

(Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 125-164). Hoboken, NJ: Routledge.

44.

Reber

Winkielman

Schwarz

(1998). Effects of perceptual fluency on affective judgments. Psychological Science, 9, 45-48. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00008

45.

Segel

Heer

(2010). Narrative visualization: Telling stories with data. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 16, 1139-1148. doi:10.1109/TVCG.2010.179

46.

Segev

Fernandes

Wang

(2015). The effects of gain versus loss message framing and point of reference on consumer responses to green advertising. Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 36, 35-51. doi:10.1080/10641734.2014.912600

47.

Severin

W. J.

(1967). Another look at cue summation. AV Communication Review, 15, 233-245.

48.

Shen

Kollar

L. M. M.

(2015). Testing moderators of message framing effect: A motivational approach. Communication Research, 42, 626-648. doi:10.1177/0093650213493924

49.

Shepperd

J. A.

Carroll

Grace

Terry

(2002). Exploring the causes of comparative optimism. Psychologica Belgica, 42, 65-98.

50.

Stern

P. C.

Dietz

Kalof

(1993). Value orientations, gender, and environmental concern. Environment and Behavior, 25, 322-348. doi:10.1177/0013916593255002

51.

Tyler

T. R.

Cook

F. L.

(1984). The mass media and judgments of risk: Distinguishing impact on personal and societal level judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 693-708. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.47.4.693

52.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2018, July). Advancing sustainable materials management: 2015 fact sheet. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-07/documents/2015_smm_msw_factsheet_07242018_fnl_508_002.pdf

53.

Van de Velde

Verbeke

Popp

Van Huylenbroeck

(2010). The importance of message framing for providing information about sustainability and environmental aspects of energy. Energy Policy, 38, 5541-5549. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.04.053

54.

Weber

E. U.

Blais

A-R.

Betz

N. E.

(2002). A domain-specific risk-attitude scale: Measuring risk perceptions and risk behaviors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15, 263-290. doi:10.1002/bdm.414

55.

Wei

V.-H.

H.-Y.

(2007). Reconsidering the relationship between the third person perception and optimism bias. Communication Research, 34, 665-684. doi:10.1177/0093650207307903

56.

Weinstein

N. D.

(1980). Unrealistic optimism about future life events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 806-820. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.39.5.806

57.

Weinstein

N. D.

(1982). Unrealistic optimism about susceptibility to health problems. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 5, 441-460. doi:10.1007/BF00845372

58.

Weinstein

N. D.

Klein

W. M.

(1996). Unrealistic optimism: Present and future. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 15, 1-8. doi:10.1521/jscp.1996.15.1.1

59.

White

MacDonnell

Dahl

D. W.

(2011). It’s the mind-set that matters: The role of construal level and message framing in influencing consumer efficacy and conservation behaviors. Journal of Marketing Research, 48, 472-485. doi:10.1509/jmkr.48.3.472

60.

Winterich

K. P.

Nenkov

G. Y.

Gonzales

G. E.

(2019). Knowing what it makes: How product transformation salience increases recycling. Journal of Marketing, 83(4), 21-37. doi:10.1177/0022242919842167

61.

Yoon

H. J.

La Ferle

(2018). Saving behavior messaging: Gain/loss framing, self/family orientations, and individual differences in collectivism. Journal of Advertising, 47, 146-160. doi:10.1080/00913367.2017.1408507

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

2.16 MB