Fifty shades of green:The effects of message framing in policy communication on climate change
Mauro BertolottiPatrizia Catellani
Bertolotti & Catellani
Changing climate, changing attitudes?
Social psychology has been studying people's understanding of climate change and their attitudes primarily in an individual and behavioural perspective.
Action against climate change requires collective effort in addition to individual commitment.
How can we influence citizens' attitudes towards climate change policies and increase public support for them?
Bertolotti & Catellani
Message framing on climate change policies Frames select and organise information, providing it a
meaningful interpretation (Entman, 1993; Scheufele, 1999).
The framing of issues and policies by the media has been investigated by research on political communication (Chong & Druckman, 2007; De Vreese, 2005;
Hulme, 2008).
The effects of message framing on attitudes have been initially investigated in terms of positive (gain) and negative (loss) framing (e.g., Tversky & Kahneman,
1981).
Bertolotti & Catellani
Message framing and self-regulation
Recent developments (Cesario et al., 2013) connect the effects of framing to receivers' behavioural regulation system.
Regulatory focus (Higgins, 1997, 1998) is the individual orientation to achieve positive outcomes (promotion focus) or avoid negative outcomes (prevention focus).
Regulatory fit (Cesario et al., 2004; Higgins et al., 2002) derives from the interaction of multiple levels of framing and receivers' individual orientation:
Hedonic consequences Outcome sensitivity Regulatory concern Goal-pursuit strategy
Bertolotti & Catellani
Framing climate change policiesGoal-pursuit strategies
How do we act against global warming and climate change?
Eager approach Vigilant avoidance
Investing in clean energy sources
Reducing reliance on fossil fuels
Bertolotti & Catellani
Framing climate change policies
Regulatory concerns
What basic need will the policy affect?
Growth concern Safety concern
Goal-pursuit strategies
How do we act against global warming and climate change?
Eager approach Vigilant avoidance
Foster economic growthTechnological advancement
Safety of human activitiesCoping with extreme climatic conditions
Bertolotti & Catellani
Framing climate change policies
Outcome sensitivities
What is the desired outcome of the policy?
Attaining positive outcomes Avoiding negative outcomes
Regulatory concerns
What basic need will the policy affect?
Growth concern Safety concern
Goal-pursuit strategies
How do we act against global warming and climate change?
Eager approach Vigilant avoidance
More affordable energyObtain better climatic conditions
Less expensive energyAvoid worse climatic conditions
Bertolotti & Catellani
Research questionsHow do we apply different levels of framing
to communication on climate change policies?
Do different levels of framing and their interaction affect the persuasiveness of messages?
Does receivers' promotion vs. prevention focus moderate the effectiveness of message framing?
Do these preferences reflect on vote choice?
Bertolotti & Catellani
MethodTwo online studies (N = 95; N = 66) with student participants (77.5 % females, age M = 24.5).
Independent variables: Goal-pursuit strategy of the policy Regulatory concern of the message Outcome sensitivity of the message
Measured variables: Initial attitudes towards the policies Agreement with the policy messages Voting intention
Individual regulatory focus scale (Lockwood et al., 2002)
Bertolotti & Catellani
Stimuli
Outcome Sensitivity
Regulatory Concern
Achievement of Positive Outcomes
Avoidance of Negative Outcomes
Growth Concern“…we will obtain a positive
return on the economic development.”
“…we will avoid a negative impact on the economic
development.”
Safety Concern “…we will obtain a reduction of energy costs.”
“…we will avoid an increase of energy costs.”
Eager Approach Strategy: “If we invest in renewable energy sources like solar and wind power…”
• To what extent do you agree with the statement you have just read?
• Would you vote for a politician making this statement?
Bertolotti & Catellani
Stimuli
Outcome Sensitivity
Regulatory Concern
Achievement of Positive Outcomes
Avoidance of Negative Outcomes
Growth Concern “…we will obtain better climatic conditions.”
“…we will avoid worse climatic conditions.”
Safety Concern“…we will obtain a reduction
of the negative effects of natural disasters.”
“…we will avoid an increase of the negative effects of
natural disasters.”
Vigilant Avoidance Strategy: “If we intervene on the emissions of greenhouse gases responsible of global warming…”
• To what extent do you agree with the statement you have just read?
• Would you vote for a politician making this statement?
Bertolotti & Catellani
Agreement as a function of outcome sensitivity and regulatory concern
Attainment of Positive Outcomes
Avoidance of Negative Outcomes
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0Renewable Energy Policy
Growth Concern
Safety Concern
Bertolotti & Catellani
Agreement as a function of outcome sensitivity and regulatory concern
Attainment of Positive Outcomes
Avoidance of Negative Outcomes
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0Greenhouse gas emissions policy
Growth Concern
Safety Concern
Voting intention as a function of message framing
Attainment of Positive Out-
comes
Avoidance of Negative Outcomes
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0Renewable Energy Policy
Attainment of Positive Out-
comes
Avoidance of Negative Outcomes
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0Greenhouse Gas Emissions Policy
Bertolotti & Catellani
Agreement as a function of outcome sensitivity and regulatory focus
Attainment of Positive Out-
comes
Avoidance of Negative Outcomes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 Renewable Energy Policy
Promotion FocusPrevention Focus
Bertolotti & Catellani
Agreement as a function of outcome sensitivity and regulatory focus
Attainment of Positive Outcomes
Avoidance of Negative Outcomes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Policy
Promotion Focus
Prevention Focus
Bertolotti & Catellani
ConclusionsFrom sugaring the pill... Support for climate change policies can be increased
by coherent framing of policy messages. Messages whose outcome sensitivity fits with
receivers' individual regulatory focus are even more persuasive.
...to empowering citizens Who is responsible for acting against climate change? Is prefactual communication beneficial?
Bertolotti, M., & Catellani, P. (in press). Effects of message framing in policy communication on climate change. European Journal of Social Psychology.
Top Related