English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This short paper aims to untangle the effect of loss-framing versus gain and non-gain; explaining when, how and why it influences individuals’ intentions to engage in cholesterol screening. We argue that framing-effects are (1) significant only when individuals perceive the issue to be highly relevant and (2) are mediated by perceived negative consequences (resulting from undergoing the test) and response-efficacy. In a 2(issue-relevance: high vs low) × 3(framing: gain vs non-gain vs loss) experiment, 229 participants received a message and answered to a questionnaire measuring personal relevance, perceived negative consequences, response-efficacy, intention. Results validated a mediation model, explaining that loss-framing is more persuasive than non-gain, which is more persuasive than gain-framing, partly because of their effect on individuals’ perceptions of response-efficacy.

When, How and Why is Loss-Framing More Effective than Gain- and Non-Gain-Framing in the Promotion of Detection Behaviors?