Do you want the good news or the bad news? The effects of gain- versus loss-framed messages on health and physical activity beliefs and cognitions

Abstract

Prospect theory suggests that the effectiveness of health messages varies depending on the emphasis on benefits of adopting a health behaviour (i.e., gain-framed) versus risks of not adopting a behaviour (i.e., loss-framed). Gain-framed messages are thought to be more effective (vs. loss-framed) for persuading health-prevention behaviours such as physical activity (PA). Guided by protection motivation theory, this study examined the effects of PA messages targeting people with spinal cord injury (SCI). Gain-framed messages were hypothesized to be more effective than loss-framed. People with SCI (N=96) were randomized to receive control, gain-framed, or loss-framed messages targeting health and PA. Perceived health risk, response efficacy, intentions, and PA were measured pre- and 24hr-post message. A series of 2(time) x 3(frame) repeated-measures ANOVAs indicated time x frame interactions (partial-eta2>.01). Post-hoc analyses indicated significant changes in perceived health risk for loss- and gain-framed conditions (t<-2.6, p<.05), with larger effects for loss-framed. Significant changes in response efficacy (t=-2.0, p=.05) and intentions (t=-3.3, p<.01) were found for loss-framed only. No significant main or interaction effects were observed for PA. Contrary to hypothesis, loss-framed messages were more effective than gain-framed messages and may be an effective tool for changing PA beliefs and cognitions among people with SCI.