Robin L Nabi, Christopher M Dobmeier, Chris L Robbins, Debora Pérez Torres, Nathan Walter
{"title":"Effects of Scanning Health News Headlines on Trust in Science: An Emotional Framing Perspective.","authors":"Robin L Nabi, Christopher M Dobmeier, Chris L Robbins, Debora Pérez Torres, Nathan Walter","doi":"10.1080/10410236.2024.2321404","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Rooted in the emotions-as-frames model (EFM), this research examines how hope, fear, and annoyance are evoked through health news headline scanning, and how these emotions influence perceptions of news and medical science institutions as well as health behavioral intentions. A sample of U.S. adults (<i>N</i> = 327) were assigned to one of four headline framing conditions expected to associate with different emotions (positive future frame-hope; threat frame-fear/anxiety; reversal frame-annoyance; and control-neutral) and then asked about their emotional states, trust in science and news, and health-related behavioral intentions. Overall, health news headlines generated more hope than any other emotion across all conditions, and positive future-framed headlines evoked more hope than other framed headlines. Felt hope, in turn, generated greater trust in news and science, higher expectations of medical breakthroughs and cures, and greater intention to engage in preventative health behaviors. Felt anxiety had marginal positive benefits whereas felt annoyance negatively impacted the outcomes of interest. Notably, felt emotion mediated the headline frame-outcome relationships in the positive future/hope condition. These findings offer some support for the EFM and demonstrate that scanning headlines imbued with specific emotional frames can influence important health-related outcomes through the emotions they evoke. We discuss both the theoretical and practical implication of these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":12889,"journal":{"name":"Health Communication","volume":" ","pages":"3342-3354"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Communication","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2024.2321404","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Rooted in the emotions-as-frames model (EFM), this research examines how hope, fear, and annoyance are evoked through health news headline scanning, and how these emotions influence perceptions of news and medical science institutions as well as health behavioral intentions. A sample of U.S. adults (N = 327) were assigned to one of four headline framing conditions expected to associate with different emotions (positive future frame-hope; threat frame-fear/anxiety; reversal frame-annoyance; and control-neutral) and then asked about their emotional states, trust in science and news, and health-related behavioral intentions. Overall, health news headlines generated more hope than any other emotion across all conditions, and positive future-framed headlines evoked more hope than other framed headlines. Felt hope, in turn, generated greater trust in news and science, higher expectations of medical breakthroughs and cures, and greater intention to engage in preventative health behaviors. Felt anxiety had marginal positive benefits whereas felt annoyance negatively impacted the outcomes of interest. Notably, felt emotion mediated the headline frame-outcome relationships in the positive future/hope condition. These findings offer some support for the EFM and demonstrate that scanning headlines imbued with specific emotional frames can influence important health-related outcomes through the emotions they evoke. We discuss both the theoretical and practical implication of these findings.
期刊介绍:
As an outlet for scholarly intercourse between medical and social sciences, this noteworthy journal seeks to improve practical communication between caregivers and patients and between institutions and the public. Outstanding editorial board members and contributors from both medical and social science arenas collaborate to meet the challenges inherent in this goal. Although most inclusions are data-based, the journal also publishes pedagogical, methodological, theoretical, and applied articles using both quantitative or qualitative methods.