The Effect of Approach/Avoidance Motivation and Gain/Loss-Framing on the Processing of Information Cues by Non-Professional Investors

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie Jana ◽  
Tyge Kummer ◽  
Martin Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
Avoidance Motivation ◽  
Information Cues ◽  
Approach Avoidance ◽  
Gain Loss ◽  
Loss Framing ◽  
Gain Loss Framing

Enhancing Selective Exposure to Health Messages and Health Intentions

2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 217-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias R. Hastall ◽  
Anna J. M. Wagner
Keyword(s):  
Behavioral Intentions ◽  
Selective Exposure ◽  
Health Messages ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Health Message ◽  
Avoidance Motivation ◽  
Approach Avoidance ◽  
Gain Loss ◽  
Loss Framing ◽  
Gain Loss Framing

Abstract. Insufficient message exposure is still a major obstacle for effective health communication activities, and little is known on how message features affect selective exposure and persuasion. This study examined the effects of two health message features, suggested susceptibility and gain–loss framing, on respondents’ selective exposure and subsequent health behavior intentions. Two personality traits, repression-sensitization and approach/avoidance motivation, were studied as moderators of the proposed relationships. An experimental 2 (suggested susceptibility: low vs. high) × 2 (gain–loss framing: gain- vs. loss-framed message) study was conducted. Participants browsed through an online health magazine while their message choices were unobtrusively logged. A subsequent online questionnaire assessed personality dispositions and behavioral intentions. High levels of message susceptibility increased both selective exposure to health messages and respondents’ motivation to engage in adaptive health behaviors. Gain–loss framing did not affect message exposure or behavioral intentions, with one exception: Avoidance-oriented low-anxious respondents selected more loss-framed than gain-framed articles for reading. Repression-sensitization and approach/avoidance motivation did not moderate health message effects, but partly influenced these measures directly or in combination. The number of articles to choose from was limited, and it is unclear to what extent the findings can be generalized to other, more familiar health topics. Emphasizing readers’ susceptibility to health threats appears very effective for increasing exposure to health messages and protective behavioral intentions. The effectiveness of gain–loss framing, by contrast, largely depends on moderating factors.

scholarly journals Gain-loss asymmetry in neural correlates of temporal discounting: An approach-avoidance motivation perspective

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yang-Yang Zhang ◽  
Lijuan Xu ◽  
Li-Lin Rao ◽  
Lei Zhou ◽  
Yuan Zhou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Temporal Discounting ◽  
Neural Correlates ◽  
Avoidance Motivation ◽  
Approach Avoidance ◽  
Gain Loss

scholarly journals Functional connectivity with distinct neural networks tracks fluctuations in gain/loss framing susceptibility

2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (7) ◽  
pp. 2743-2755 ◽  
Author(s):  
David V. Smith ◽  
Kamila E. Sip ◽  
Mauricio R. Delgado
Keyword(s):  
Neural Networks ◽  
Functional Connectivity ◽  
Gain Loss ◽  
Loss Framing ◽  
Gain Loss Framing

scholarly journals Gain-loss framing enhances mnemonic discrimination in preschoolers

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chi Ngo ◽  
Nora Newcombe ◽  
Ingrid R. Olson
Keyword(s):  
Age Groups ◽  
Memory Task ◽  
Older Children ◽  
Fine Grain ◽  
Age Related ◽  
Gain Loss ◽  
Loss Frame ◽  
Gain Frame ◽  
Loss Framing ◽  
Gain Loss Framing

Episodic memory relies on discriminating among similar elements of episodes. Mnemonic discrimination is relatively poor at age 4, and then improves markedly. We investigated whether motivation to encode items with fine grain resolution would change this picture of development, using an engaging computer-administered memory task in which a bird ate items that made the bird healthier (gain frame), sicker (loss frame), or led to no change (control condition). Using gain-loss framing led to enhanced mnemonic discrimination in 4- and 5-year-olds, but did not affect older children or adults. Despite this differential improvement, age-related differences persisted. An additional finding was that loss framing led to greater mnemonic discrimination than gain framing across age groups. Motivation only partially accounts for development in mnemonic discrimination.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document