Abstract
We tested the plausibility of a cognitive-emotional model to understand the effects of messages framed in terms of gain, non-loss, non-gain, and loss, and related to the health consequences of red/processed meat consumption. A total of 544 Italian participants reported their attitude toward reduced red/processed meat consumption and intention to eat red/processed meat (time 1 questionnaire). One week later, participants were randomly assigned to four different message conditions: (a) gain messages focused on the positive health outcomes associated with low meat consumption; (b) non-loss messages focused on the avoided negative health outcomes associated with low meat consumption; (c) non-gain messages focused on the missed positive health outcomes associated with high meat consumption; (d) loss messages focused on the negative health outcomes associated with high meat consumption (message sending). After reading the messages, participants answered a series of questions regarding their emotional and cognitive reactions to the messages, their evaluation of the messages, and again their attitude and intention toward red/processed meat consumption (time 2 questionnaire). Comparing different multivariate linear models under the Bayesian approach, we selected the model with the highest plausibility conditioned to observed data. In this model, message-induced fear influenced systematic processing, which in turn positively influenced message evaluation and attitude, leading to reduced intention to consume red/processed meat. Vice versa, message-induced anger reduced systematic processing, which in turn negatively influenced message evaluation, and led to no effect on attitude and intention. The comparison among message conditions showed that gain and non-loss messages activated integrated emotional and cognitive processing of the health recommendation, while loss and non-gain messages mainly activated emotional shortcuts toward attitude and intention. Overall, these results advance our comprehension of the effects of message framing on receivers' attitudes and intentions.
Highlights
High consumption of red/processed meat has been recognized as connected to the risk of developing various diseases, such as cancer and type 2 diabetes (Misra et al, 2018; Bianchi et al, 2019)
To move further into the comprehension of the factors that may underlie the different effectiveness of the four types of messages, in the present study we explored the reactions receivers have when they are exposed to these messages, in terms of systematic and heuristic processing of the messages, positive or negative emotional reactions triggered by the messages, and message evaluation
Based on the above literature, in the present study we proposed and tested a composite theoretical model to understand the cognitive and emotional mechanisms activated by message exposure in the case of gain, non-loss, non-gain, and loss messages on RPMC reduction
Summary
High consumption of red/processed meat has been recognized as connected to the risk of developing various diseases, such as cancer and type 2 diabetes (Misra et al, 2018; Bianchi et al, 2019). For this reason, health authorities have recommended eating a maximum of three servings per week (e.g., Bach-Faig et al, 2011). In the domain of communication research, many scholars have investigated how to overcome the aforementioned psychological barriers, with message interventions focused on health, environmental, and ethical issues connected to high red/processed meat consumption ( on RPMC) (e.g., Bertolotti et al, 2016; Carfora et al, 2019a,b; Stea and Pickering, 2019; Harguess et al, 2020). Providing more evidence on how to frame messages to reduce RPMC and analyzing the factors through which message framing influences people’s responses is a substantial research challenge
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
