We tested whether framing a message as a gain or loss would alter its effectiveness by using a dichotic listening procedure to selectively present a health related message to the left or right hemisphere. A significant goal framing effect (losses > gains) was found when right, but not left, hemisphere processing was initially enhanced. The results support the position that the contextual processing style of the right hemisphere is especially sensitive to the associative implications of the frame. We discussed the implications of these findings for goal framing research, and the valence hypothesis. We also discussed how these findings converge with prior valence framing research and how they can be of potential use to health care providers.
AlfanoKMCiminoCR (2008) Alteration of expected hemispheric asymmetries: Valence and arousal effects in neuropsychological models of emotion. Brain and Cognition66: 213–220.
BloomJSHyndGW (2005) The role of the corpus callosum in interhemispheric transfer of information: Excitation or inhibition?Neuropsychology Review15: 59–71.
4.
CanliTDesmondJEZhaoAGloverGGabrieliJD (1998) Hemispheric asymmetry for emotional stimuli detected with fMRI. Neuroreport9: 3233–3239.
5.
DavidsonRJ (1992) Anterior cerebral asymmetry and the nature of emotion. Brain and Cognition20: 125–151.
6.
DavidsonRJ (1995) Cerebral Asymmetry, Emotion, and Affective Style. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7.
DetweilerJBBedellBTSaloveyPProninERothmanAJ (1999) Message framing and sunscreen use: Gain-framed messages motivate beach-goers. Health Psychology18: 189–196.
8.
FoundasALCoreyDMHurleyMMHeilmanKM (2006) Verbal dichotic listening in right and left-handed adults: Laterality effects of directed attention. Cortex42: 79–86.
9.
FriedmanRSForsterJ (2005) Effects of motivational cues on perceptual asymmetry: Implications for creativity and analytical problem solving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology88(2): 263–275.
10.
GadeaMEspertRSalvadorAMarti-BonmatiL (2011) The sad, the angry, and the asymmetrical brain: Dichotic listening studies of negative affect and depression. Brain and Cognition76: 294–299.
11.
GallagherPDagenbachD (2007) Manipulating audio frequencies alters hemispheric contributions to decision making. Brain and Cognition64: 42–49.
12.
GamlielEHersteinR (2011) To save or to lose: Does framing price promotion affect consumers’ purchase intentions?Journal of Consumer Marketing28(2): 152–158.
13.
GregorySWKalkhoffWHarknessSKPaullJL (2009) Targeted high and low speech frequency bands to right and left ears respectively improves task performance and perceived sociability in dyadic conversations. Laterality14: 423–440.
14.
HendriksMDe JongJDVan Den Brink-MuinenAGroenewegenPP (2010) The intention to switch health insurer and actual switching behaviour: Are there differences between groups of people?Health Expectations13: 195–207.
15.
HowardMFReggiaJA (2007) A theory of the visual system biology underlying development of spatial frequency lateralization. Brain and Cognition64: 111–123.
16.
IvryRBRobertsonLC (1998) The Two Sides of Perception. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17.
JaniszewskiC (1988) Preconscious processing effects: The independence of attitude formation and conscious thought. Journal of Consumer Research15: 199–209.
18.
KahnemanDTverskyA (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica47: 263–291.
19.
KerenG (2010) On the definition and possible underpinnings of framing effects: A brief review and a critical evaluation. In: KerenG (ed.) Perspectives on Framing. New York: Psychology Press, pp. 3–33.
20.
KitterleFLChristmanSHelligeJB (1990) Hemispheric differences are found in the identification, but not detection, of low versus high spatial frequencies. Perception & Psychophysics48: 297–306.
21.
LevinIP (1987) Associative effects of information framing. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society25: 85–86.
22.
LevinIPGaethGJ (1988) How consumers are affected by the framing of attribute information before and after consuming the product. Journal of Consumer Research15: 374–378.
23.
LevinIPSchneiderSLGaethGJ (1998) All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes76(2): 149–188.
24.
LevinIPSchnittjerSKTheeSL (1988) Information framing effects in social and personal decisions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology24: 520–529.
25.
LevyJ (1974) Psychobiological implications of bilateral symmetry. In: DimondSBeaumontJG (eds) Hemisphere Function in the Human Brain. New York: Wiley.
26.
LeyRGBrydenMP (1982) A dissociation of right and left hemispheric effects for recognizing emotional tone and verbal content. Brain and Cognition1: 3–9.
27.
McCormickMSetaJJ (2011) A new method for selectively enhancing hemisphere processing: Voice frequency amplification influences the strength of attribute framing. Laterality. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1357650X.2011.626559.
28.
McElroyTSetaJJ (2004) On the other hand am I rational? Hemispheric activation and the framing effect. Brain and Cognition55: 572–580.
29.
OldfieldRC (1971) The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia9: 97–113.
30.
OrnsteinRE (1997) The Right Mind: Making Sense of the Hemispheres. New York: Harcourt Brace.
31.
PettyRECacioppoJT (1984) The effects of involvement on responses to argument quantity and quality: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology46: 69–81.
32.
PietersmaSDijkstraA (2011) Do behavioural health intentions engender health behaviour change? A study on the moderating role of self-affirmation on actual fruit intake versus vegetable intake. British Journal of Health Psychology16: 815–827.
33.
PiñonAGambaraH (2005) A meta-analytic review of framing effect: Risky, attribute and goal framing. Psicothema17(2): 325–331.
34.
RothmanAJSaloveyP (1997) Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message framing. Psychological Bulletin12: 3–19.
35.
RothmanAJSaloveyPAntoneCKeoughKMartinC (1993) The influence of message framing on health behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology29: 408–433.
36.
SetaJJSetaCEMcCormickM (2010a) Associations: A commonality that crosses valence framing manipulations. Unpublished manuscript.
37.
SetaJJMcCormickMGallagherPMcElroyTSetaCE (2010b) Voice frequency impacts hemispheric processing of attribute frames. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology46: 1089–1092.
38.
StefanatosGAJoeWQAguirreGKDetreJAWetmoreG (2008) Activation of human auditory cortex during speech perception: Effects of monaural, binaural, and dichotic presentation. Neuropsychologia46: 301–315.
39.
TverskyAKahnemanD (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science211: 453–458.
40.
Van LanckerDRKemplerD (1987) Comprehension of familiar phrases by left- but not by right-hemisphere damaged patients. Brain and Language32: 265–277.
