献血的信息框架和感知风险

Nilamadhab Mohanty, S. Biswas, Debiprasad Mishra
{"title":"献血的信息框架和感知风险","authors":"Nilamadhab Mohanty, S. Biswas, Debiprasad Mishra","doi":"10.1080/10495142.2021.1959488","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper builds on previous research into message framing, focusing on the persuasiveness of message framing on blood donation intention, moderating effect of perceptions of risk, and the role of previous experience of blood donation. A total of 273 participants took part in this between-subjects post-test only with control experiment. The researchers measured participants’ perceived risk (RISK-AB and RISK-EB) and past donation behavior before assigning the stimuli and measured blood donation intention after exposure to the stimulus. Positively-framed messages were found to be more effective when RISK-AB (perceived risk associated with blood donation) was high, and RISK-EB (perceived risk associated with non-donation of blood) was low, or RISK-AB was low, and RISK-EB was high or both RISK-AB and RISK-EB were low. Negatively framed messages were found to be more persuasive when people had high RISK-AB and high RISK-EB. People’s previous experience had no impact on the effectiveness of message framing. Based on these findings, the authors suggest designing persuasive blood donation messages according to RISK-AB and RISK-EB. The study emphasizes the impact of goal framing. Future studies can explore the impact of both goal and attribute framed messages on blood donation. Future research can also use the actual donation as an outcome measure. The study introduces components of perceived risk (RISK-AB and RISK-EB) as essential moderators of framed blood donation messages. In this study, we measured the impact of existing perceived risk, which is natural to an individual. It also confirmed no impact of prior donation experience.","PeriodicalId":46735,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing","volume":"35 1","pages":"165 - 193"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Message Framing and Perceived Risk of Blood Donation\",\"authors\":\"Nilamadhab Mohanty, S. Biswas, Debiprasad Mishra\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10495142.2021.1959488\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This paper builds on previous research into message framing, focusing on the persuasiveness of message framing on blood donation intention, moderating effect of perceptions of risk, and the role of previous experience of blood donation. A total of 273 participants took part in this between-subjects post-test only with control experiment. The researchers measured participants’ perceived risk (RISK-AB and RISK-EB) and past donation behavior before assigning the stimuli and measured blood donation intention after exposure to the stimulus. Positively-framed messages were found to be more effective when RISK-AB (perceived risk associated with blood donation) was high, and RISK-EB (perceived risk associated with non-donation of blood) was low, or RISK-AB was low, and RISK-EB was high or both RISK-AB and RISK-EB were low. Negatively framed messages were found to be more persuasive when people had high RISK-AB and high RISK-EB. People’s previous experience had no impact on the effectiveness of message framing. Based on these findings, the authors suggest designing persuasive blood donation messages according to RISK-AB and RISK-EB. The study emphasizes the impact of goal framing. Future studies can explore the impact of both goal and attribute framed messages on blood donation. Future research can also use the actual donation as an outcome measure. The study introduces components of perceived risk (RISK-AB and RISK-EB) as essential moderators of framed blood donation messages. In this study, we measured the impact of existing perceived risk, which is natural to an individual. It also confirmed no impact of prior donation experience.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46735,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"165 - 193\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10495142.2021.1959488\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10495142.2021.1959488","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

摘要本文在以往信息框架研究的基础上,重点研究了信息框架对献血意愿的说服力、风险感知的调节作用以及既往献血经验的作用。共有273名参与者参加了这项受试者之间的测试,仅进行了对照实验。研究人员在分配刺激之前测量了参与者的感知风险(risk-AB和risk-EB)和过去的献血行为,并在暴露于刺激后测量了献血意愿。当RISK-AB(与献血相关的感知风险)高、RISK-EB(与不献血相关的认知风险)低、RISK-AB低、RISK-EB高或RISK-AB和RISK-EB都低时,发现阳性框架信息更有效。当人们具有高RISK-AB和高RISK-EB时,否定框架的信息被发现更有说服力。人们以前的经历对信息框架的有效性没有影响。基于这些发现,作者建议根据RISK-AB和RISK-EB设计有说服力的献血信息。该研究强调了目标制定的影响。未来的研究可以探索目标和属性框架信息对献血的影响。未来的研究也可以使用实际捐赠作为结果衡量标准。该研究介绍了感知风险的组成部分(risk-AB和risk-EB)作为框架献血信息的重要调节因素。在这项研究中,我们测量了现有感知风险的影响,这对个人来说是自然的。它还证实之前的捐赠经历没有影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Message Framing and Perceived Risk of Blood Donation
ABSTRACT This paper builds on previous research into message framing, focusing on the persuasiveness of message framing on blood donation intention, moderating effect of perceptions of risk, and the role of previous experience of blood donation. A total of 273 participants took part in this between-subjects post-test only with control experiment. The researchers measured participants’ perceived risk (RISK-AB and RISK-EB) and past donation behavior before assigning the stimuli and measured blood donation intention after exposure to the stimulus. Positively-framed messages were found to be more effective when RISK-AB (perceived risk associated with blood donation) was high, and RISK-EB (perceived risk associated with non-donation of blood) was low, or RISK-AB was low, and RISK-EB was high or both RISK-AB and RISK-EB were low. Negatively framed messages were found to be more persuasive when people had high RISK-AB and high RISK-EB. People’s previous experience had no impact on the effectiveness of message framing. Based on these findings, the authors suggest designing persuasive blood donation messages according to RISK-AB and RISK-EB. The study emphasizes the impact of goal framing. Future studies can explore the impact of both goal and attribute framed messages on blood donation. Future research can also use the actual donation as an outcome measure. The study introduces components of perceived risk (RISK-AB and RISK-EB) as essential moderators of framed blood donation messages. In this study, we measured the impact of existing perceived risk, which is natural to an individual. It also confirmed no impact of prior donation experience.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
7.10%
发文量
19
期刊最新文献
Conceptualizing Barriers to Individual Recycling: A Qualitative Study with Multiple Stakeholders in Türkiye Nonprofits, Social Media, and Mission Sympathy and Guilt: Optimizing Advertising Appeals for Charitable Giving to Generation Z Do Top managers’ Psychological Attributes Influence Nonprofit Alliances for Resource Acquisition? An Application of Stimulus-Organization-Behavior-Consequence (S-O-B-C) Theory Using Social Media as a Marketing Communication Strategy: Perspectives from Health-Related Non-Profit Organizations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1