Interplay between benefit appeal and valence framing in reducing smoking behavior: Evidence from a field experience
Smoking is one of the leading causes of preventable death globally, yet it remains a common behavior. Interventions that increase the concreteness of future smoking outcomes have been suggested to be effective, but little research has examined what type of future outcomes should be highlighted, and...
Saved in:
Published in | Journal of behavioral decision making Vol. 36; no. 2 |
---|---|
Main Author | |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Chichester
Wiley Periodicals Inc
01.04.2023
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Smoking is one of the leading causes of preventable death globally, yet it remains a common behavior. Interventions that increase the concreteness of future smoking outcomes have been suggested to be effective, but little research has examined what type of future outcomes should be highlighted, and in what way. The present study therefore explores the efficacy of two types of framings of smoking cessation consequences: Benefit appeal (time vs. money) and valence (gain vs. loss). A randomized controlled field experiment with 2935 participants conducted via a digital therapeutics app found an interplay between appeal type and valence such that messages focusing on money were most likely to lead to immediate reduced smoking behavior when framed as a gain, rather than loss. Effects on motivation or long‐term smoking cessation were not detected. The results shed light on psychological differences between money and time, between attitudes and behaviors, and between short‐term and long‐term behavior change. This study highlights the importance of considering both benefit appeal and valence framing when designing smoking cessation messages. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | Funding information 1 3 and Jan Wallanders och Tom Hedelius Stiftelse samt Tore Browaldhs Stiftelse, Grant/Award Numbers: P18 0073, P21 0091; Knut och Alice Wallenberg Foundation; Marcus och Amalia Wallenbergs minnesfond have been corrected in this version. Correction added on 23 September 2022, after first online publication: Tables This work was supported by the Jan Wallander and Tom Hedelius Foundation (Svenska Handelsbanken Forskningsstiftelser, grant number P18 0073 and P21 0091), as well as the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation and the Marianne and Marcus Wallenberg Foundation granted to Anna Dreber. The funders had no role in study design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 |
ISSN: | 0894-3257 1099-0771 1099-0771 |
DOI: | 10.1002/bdm.2301 |