Abstract
A persuasive message can focus on either the advantages of compliance (i.e., gain-framed) or the disadvantages of non-compliance (i.e., loss-framed). Previous findings regarding the relative persuasive effect of gain- versus loss-framed messages have been largely inconsistent. This research suggests that there exist two distinct operationalizations of message framing, with one involving desirable end-states and the other involving undesirable end-states. Through two experiments, this research demonstrates that the desirability of end-states has a systematic impact on the relative persuasiveness of gain- versus loss-framed messages and that the nature of such impact is further dependent upon the audience's issue involvement.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.