Abstract
AbstractA quasi‐experimental field‐study (n = 314) investigated the consequences of framing the problem of HIV infection in terms of ‘risky practices’ versus ‘high risk groups’. It was reasoned that respondents in the risky practices frame would be more conscious of the risks to people in general leading them to make more pessimistic prognoses of HW spread than those for whom the issue had been framed in terms of high risk groups. This hypothesis was strongly supported on three related indices, and results also indicated more pessimistic prognoses by female than male respondents. The implications of these findings for framing AIDS related issues are discussed.
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
