In COVID-19 health messaging, loss framing increases anxiety with little-to-no concomitant benefits: Experimental evidence from 84 countries

Charles A. Dorison; Jennifer S. Lerner; B.H. Heller; A. Rothman; I.I. Kawachi; Ulrich Tran; Stefan Stieger; Sandra Geiger; Paul Forbes; Martin Voracek; Johannes Vilsmeier; Ekaterina Pronizius; Claus Lamm

doi:10.1007/s42761-022-00128-3

In COVID-19 health messaging, loss framing increases anxiety with little-to-no concomitant benefits: Experimental evidence from 84 countries

Charles A. Dorison
, Jennifer S. Lerner
, B.H. Heller
, A. Rothman
, I.I. Kawachi
, Ulrich Tran
, Stefan Stieger
, Sandra Geiger
, Paul Forbes
, Martin Voracek
, Johannes Vilsmeier
, Ekaterina Pronizius
, Claus Lamm

Department of Cognition, Emotion, and Methods in Psychology

Publications: Contribution to journal › Article › Peer Reviewed

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic (and its aftermath) highlights a critical need to communicate health information effectively to the global public. Given that subtle differences in information framing can have meaningful effects on behavior, behavioral science research highlights a pressing question: Is it more effective to frame COVID-19 health messages in terms of potential losses (e.g., “If you do not practice these steps, you can endanger yourself and others”) or potential gains (e.g., “If you practice these steps, you can protect yourself and others”)? Collecting data in 48 languages from 15,929 participants in 84 countries, we experimentally tested the effects of message framing on COVID-19-related judgments, intentions, and feelings. Loss- (vs. gain-) framed messages increased self-reported anxiety among participants cross-nationally with little-to-no impact on policy attitudes, behavioral intentions, or information seeking relevant to pandemic risks. These results were consistent across 84 countries, three variations of the message framing wording, and 560 data processing and analytic choices. Thus, results provide an empirical answer to a global communication question and highlight the emotional toll of loss-framed messages. Critically, this work demonstrates the importance of considering unintended affective consequences when evaluating nudge-style interventions.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	577–602
Number of pages	26
Journal	Affective Science
Volume	3
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s42761-022-00128-3
Publication status	Published - 2022

Funding

This work was supported by the following sources: National Science Foundation (SES-1559511; J.S. Lerner); National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute (RO1-CA-224545; V.W. Rees; also J.S. Lerner); European Union\u2019s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program, grant agreement No 769595 (Z. Chen); JSPS KAKENHI 16H03079, 17H00875, 18K12015, and 20H04581 (Y. Yamada); Research Grant EDUHK 28611118 awarded to W. Law by the Research Grant Council, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China; the Japanese Psychological Association, Grant for research and practical activities related to the spread of the novel coronavirus to (T. Ishii; K. Ihaya); Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (# 950-224884; T. Gill); Program FUTURE LEADER of Lorraine Universit\u00E9 d\u2019Excellence within the program Investissements Avenir (ANR-15-IDEX-04-LUE) operated by the French National Research Agency (S. Massoni); the Portuguese National Foundation for Science and Technology (UID/PSI/03125/2020; R.R. Ribeiro); the Australian Research Council (DP180102384; R.M. Ross); a PhD grant from Funda\u00E7\u00E3o para a Ci\u00EAncia e Tecnologia (PD/BD/150570/2020; R. Oliveira); a French National Research Agency \u2015Investissements d\u2019avenir\u2016 program grant (ANR-15-IDEX-02) awarded to Hans IJzerman (supporting P.S. Forscher); VIDI Grant 452-17-013 from the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (P.M. Isager); Slovak Research and Development Agency APVV-20-0319 (P. Ka\u010Dm\u00E1r); the Slovak Research and Development (project number APVV-17-0418; P. Babin\u010D\u00E1k); the Portuguese National Foundation for Science and Technology (UID/PSI/03125/2020; P. Arriaga); the Huo Family Foundation (N. Johannes); the research program \u2015Dipartimenti di Eccellenza\u2016 from MIUR to the Department of General Psychology of the University of Padua (N. Cellini; G. Mioni); CAPES (Coordena\u00E7\u00E3o de Aperfei\u00E7oamento de Pessoal de N\u00EDvel Superior), number PNPD 3002010037P0 \u2013 MEC/CAPES (M.A. Varella); Charles University Research Programme \"Progres\" Q18 (M. Vranka); Polish National Science Center & DFG Beethoven grant (2016/23/G/HS6/01775; M. Parzuchowski); the Foundation for Polish Science (; A. Groyecka-Bernard); the National Science Centre (2020/36/T/HS6/00256; M. Misiak; 2020/36/T/HS6/00254; A. Groyecka-Bernard); IDN Being Human Lab, University of Wroclaw (M. Misiak, A. Sorokowska, P. Sorokowski); Slovak Research and Development Agency APVV-18-0140 (M. Marton\u010Dik); Slovak Research and Development Agency APVV-17-0596 (M. Hru\u0161ka); Slovak Research and Development Agency APVV-20-0319 (M. Adamkovi\u010D); Rubicon Grant (019.183SG.007) from the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (K. van Schie); the National Science Centre, Poland (UMO-2019/35/B/HS6/00528; K. Barzykowski); the statutory funds of the Institute of Psychology, Jagiellonian University (M. Kossowska, P. Szwed, G. Czarnek), ANID Millennium Science Initiative /Millennium Institute for Research on Depression and Personality-MIDAP ICS13_005 FONDECYT 1221538 (J.R. Silva); Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation (2016:0229; J.K. Olofsson); the Slovak Research and Development Agency APVV-15-0662 (J.Benka); the Sherwin Early Career Professor in the Rock Ethics Institute (J.A. Soto); Penn State's Office of the Senior Faculty Mentor (J.A. Soto); German National Academic Foundation (J. Berkessel); the Scientific Grant Agency of the Slovak Republic under the grant No. VEGA 1/0748/19 (J. Bavolar); Chair for Public Trust in Health, Grenoble Ecole de Management (I. Ziano); PRIMUS/20/HUM/009 (I. Ropovik); Tufts University (H. Urry); the National Institute of Mental Health T32MN018931 (H. Moshontz); APVV-17-0418 (G. Banik); J. William Fulbright Program (F. Azevedo); the Innovational Research Incentives Scheme Veni from the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research\u2014Division for the Social Sciences 451-15-028 (E.S. Smit); AWS Imagine Grant (E.M. Buchanan); the Basic Research Program at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (D. Grigoryev); the Basic Research Program at HSE University, RF (D.Dubrov). Contract no. APVV-18-0140 (D. Dubrov); the Research Council of Norway 288083, 223273 (C. Tamnes); the South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority 2020023 (A.D. Askelund); the South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority 2019069, 2021070, 500189 (C. Tamnes); EFOP-3.6.1.-16-2016-00004 and NKFIH PD 137588 (A.N. Zsido); Faculty Development Grant from Dominican University (A.J. Krafnick); Portuguese National Foundation for Science and Technology SFRH/BD/126304/2016 (A.C. Santos); the statutory funds of the University of Wroclaw (A. Sorokowska); Internal funding from Kingston University (A. Gourdon-Kanhukamwe); the Slovak Research and Development Agency under contract no. APVV-17-0596 (A. Findor); Pacifica and the ANRT through the CIFRE grant 2017/0245 (A. Bran); Portuguese National Foundation for Science and Technology UIDP/4950/2020 (I. Almeida, A. Ferreira, D. Sousa); PhD grant co-funded by the Portuguese National Foundation for Science and Technology and the European Social Fund 2020.08597.BD (A. Ferreira); European Project H2020 Grant agreement ID 731827 STIPED - Transcranial brain stimulation as innovative therapy for chronic pediatric neuropsychiatric disorders (D. Sousa); a special grant from the Association for Psychological Science (to the Psychological Science Accelerator); an in-kind purchase from the Leibniz Institute for Psychology (protocol https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.3012 ); a fee waiver from Prolific, Inc. Further financial support was provided by the Psychological Science Accelerator. We thank the Leibniz Institute for Psychology (ZPID) for help with data collection via the organization and implementation of semi-representative panels. Funders had no other roles in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.

Austrian Fields of Science 2012

501021 Social psychology
501002 Applied psychology
501013 Motivational psychology

Keywords

Anxiety
COVID-19
Message framing
Nudges

Access to Document

10.1007/s42761-022-00128-3

Cite this

Dorison, C. A., Lerner, J. S., Heller, B. H., Rothman, A., Kawachi, I. I., Tran, U., Stieger, S., Geiger, S., Forbes, P., Voracek, M., Vilsmeier, J., Pronizius, E., & Lamm, C. (2022). In COVID-19 health messaging, loss framing increases anxiety with little-to-no concomitant benefits: Experimental evidence from 84 countries. Affective Science, 3(3), 577–602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42761-022-00128-3

@article{291f5606a04e4e0d8ae604bef29b1a3e,

title = "In COVID-19 health messaging, loss framing increases anxiety with little-to-no concomitant benefits: Experimental evidence from 84 countries",

abstract = "The COVID-19 pandemic (and its aftermath) highlights a critical need to communicate health information effectively to the global public. Given that subtle differences in information framing can have meaningful effects on behavior, behavioral science research highlights a pressing question: Is it more effective to frame COVID-19 health messages in terms of potential losses (e.g., {\textquotedblleft}If you do not practice these steps, you can endanger yourself and others{\textquotedblright}) or potential gains (e.g., {\textquotedblleft}If you practice these steps, you can protect yourself and others{\textquotedblright})? Collecting data in 48 languages from 15,929 participants in 84 countries, we experimentally tested the effects of message framing on COVID-19-related judgments, intentions, and feelings. Loss- (vs. gain-) framed messages increased self-reported anxiety among participants cross-nationally with little-to-no impact on policy attitudes, behavioral intentions, or information seeking relevant to pandemic risks. These results were consistent across 84 countries, three variations of the message framing wording, and 560 data processing and analytic choices. Thus, results provide an empirical answer to a global communication question and highlight the emotional toll of loss-framed messages. Critically, this work demonstrates the importance of considering unintended affective consequences when evaluating nudge-style interventions.",

keywords = "Anxiety, COVID-19, Message framing, Nudges",

author = "Dorison, \{Charles A.\} and Lerner, \{Jennifer S.\} and B.H. Heller and A. Rothman and I.I. Kawachi and Ulrich Tran and Stefan Stieger and Sandra Geiger and Paul Forbes and Martin Voracek and Johannes Vilsmeier and Ekaterina Pronizius and Claus Lamm",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2022, The Society for Affective Science.",

year = "2022",

doi = "10.1007/s42761-022-00128-3",

language = "English",

volume = "3",

pages = "577{\textendash}602",

journal = "Affective Science",

issn = "2662-205X",

number = "3",

}

Dorison, CA, Lerner, JS, Heller, BH, Rothman, A, Kawachi, II, Tran, U, Stieger, S, Geiger, S, Forbes, P, Voracek, M, Vilsmeier, J, Pronizius, E & Lamm, C 2022, 'In COVID-19 health messaging, loss framing increases anxiety with little-to-no concomitant benefits: Experimental evidence from 84 countries', Affective Science, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 577–602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42761-022-00128-3

TY - JOUR

T1 - In COVID-19 health messaging, loss framing increases anxiety with little-to-no concomitant benefits: Experimental evidence from 84 countries

AU - Dorison, Charles A.

AU - Lerner, Jennifer S.

AU - Heller, B.H.

AU - Rothman, A.

AU - Kawachi, I.I.

AU - Tran, Ulrich

AU - Stieger, Stefan

AU - Geiger, Sandra

AU - Forbes, Paul

AU - Voracek, Martin

AU - Vilsmeier, Johannes

AU - Pronizius, Ekaterina

AU - Lamm, Claus

PY - 2022

Y1 - 2022

N2 - The COVID-19 pandemic (and its aftermath) highlights a critical need to communicate health information effectively to the global public. Given that subtle differences in information framing can have meaningful effects on behavior, behavioral science research highlights a pressing question: Is it more effective to frame COVID-19 health messages in terms of potential losses (e.g., “If you do not practice these steps, you can endanger yourself and others”) or potential gains (e.g., “If you practice these steps, you can protect yourself and others”)? Collecting data in 48 languages from 15,929 participants in 84 countries, we experimentally tested the effects of message framing on COVID-19-related judgments, intentions, and feelings. Loss- (vs. gain-) framed messages increased self-reported anxiety among participants cross-nationally with little-to-no impact on policy attitudes, behavioral intentions, or information seeking relevant to pandemic risks. These results were consistent across 84 countries, three variations of the message framing wording, and 560 data processing and analytic choices. Thus, results provide an empirical answer to a global communication question and highlight the emotional toll of loss-framed messages. Critically, this work demonstrates the importance of considering unintended affective consequences when evaluating nudge-style interventions.

AB - The COVID-19 pandemic (and its aftermath) highlights a critical need to communicate health information effectively to the global public. Given that subtle differences in information framing can have meaningful effects on behavior, behavioral science research highlights a pressing question: Is it more effective to frame COVID-19 health messages in terms of potential losses (e.g., “If you do not practice these steps, you can endanger yourself and others”) or potential gains (e.g., “If you practice these steps, you can protect yourself and others”)? Collecting data in 48 languages from 15,929 participants in 84 countries, we experimentally tested the effects of message framing on COVID-19-related judgments, intentions, and feelings. Loss- (vs. gain-) framed messages increased self-reported anxiety among participants cross-nationally with little-to-no impact on policy attitudes, behavioral intentions, or information seeking relevant to pandemic risks. These results were consistent across 84 countries, three variations of the message framing wording, and 560 data processing and analytic choices. Thus, results provide an empirical answer to a global communication question and highlight the emotional toll of loss-framed messages. Critically, this work demonstrates the importance of considering unintended affective consequences when evaluating nudge-style interventions.

KW - Anxiety

KW - COVID-19

KW - Message framing

KW - Nudges

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85147715208

U2 - 10.1007/s42761-022-00128-3

DO - 10.1007/s42761-022-00128-3

M3 - Article

SN - 2662-205X

VL - 3

SP - 577

EP - 602

JO - Affective Science

JF - Affective Science

IS - 3

ER -

In COVID-19 health messaging, loss framing increases anxiety with little-to-no concomitant benefits: Experimental evidence from 84 countries

Abstract

Funding

Austrian Fields of Science 2012

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this