Using frames to influence consumer willingness to pay for the patient health record: A randomized experiment

Health Communication

Volumn 24, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 473-482

  Vishwanath, Arun ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; ECONOMICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MEDICAL RECORD; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT RIGHT; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SOCIOECONOMICS;

ADULT; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MEDICAL RECORDS SYSTEMS, COMPUTERIZED; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; PATIENT ACCESS TO RECORDS; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS;

EID: 70350712935     PISSN: 10410236     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10410230903025407     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Aaker, J. L., & Williams, P. (1998). Empathy versus pride: The influence of emotional appeals across cultures Journal of Consumer Research 25, 241-261.
2. Alvarez, R. M., & Brehm, J. (1995). American ambivalence toward abortion policy: A heteroskedastic probit method for assessing conflicting values. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 345-374.
3. American Health Information Management Association Personal Health Record Work Group. (2005). Defining the personal health record. Journal of AHIMA, 76(6), 24-25.
4. Cappella, J. N., & Jamieson, K.H. (1997). Spiral of cynicism: The press and public good. New York: Oxford University Press.
5. Druckman, J. N. (2001a). The implications of framing effects for citizen competence. Political Behavior, 23, 225-256.
6. Druckman, J. N. (2001b). On the limits of framing effects: Who can frame? Journal of Politics, 63, 1041-1066.
7. Eveland, W. P. (2004). The effects of political discussion in producing informed citizens: The roles of information, motivation, and elaboration. Political Communication, 21, 177-193.
8. Fagley, N. S., & Miller, P.M. (1997). Framing effects and arenas of choice: Your money or your life? Organizational Behavior and Human Decisions Processes, 71, 355-373.
9. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
10. Gamson, W. (1992). Talking politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
11. Gitlin, T. (1980). The whole world is watching. Berkeley: University of California Press.
12. Goldsmith, R. E., & Hofacker, C.F. (1991). Measuring consumer innovativeness. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 19, 209-221.
13. Grewal, D., Gotlieb, J., & Marmorstein, H. (1994). The moderating effects of message framing and source credibility on the price-perceived risk relationship. The Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 143-153.
14. Hagland, M. (2000). Online consumer health records: Revolution or confusion? Journal of AHIMA, 71(3), 28-32.
15. Iyengar, S. (1990). Framing responsibility for political issues: The case of poverty. Political Behavior, 12(1), 19-40.
16. Iyengar, S. (1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
17. Jones, B. D. (2001). Politics and the architecture of choice: Bounded rationality and governance. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
18. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1986). Rational choice and the framing of decisions. The Journal of Business, 59(4, Suppl.), S251-S278.
19. Kim, M. I., & Johnson, K. B. (2002). Personal health records: Evaluation of functionality and utility. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 9, 171-180.
20. Larkin, H. (1999, November 8). Allowing patients to post their own medical records on the Internet is becoming big business. American Medical News. Retrieved from http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/1999/pick_99/biza1108.htm
21. Lau, R. R., Smith, R.A., & Fiske, S.T. (1991). Political beliefs, policy interpretations and political persuasion. Journal of Politics, 53, 644-675.
22. Landro, L. (2004, March 11). Push grows for online health data. The Wall Street Journal Online. Retrieved June 9, 2009, from http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB107895751875751779.html
23. Levin, I. P. (1987). Associative effects of information framing. Bulletin on the Psychometrics Society, 25(3), 85-86.
24. Mahajan, V., Muller, E., & Bass, F. M. (1990). New product diffusion models in marketing: A review and directions for research. Journal of Marketing, 54(1), 1-26.
25. Markus, H., & Kitayama, S. (1991, April). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review 98, 224-253.
26. Nelson, T. E., & Oxley, Z.M. (1999). Issue framing effects on belief importance and opinions. The Journal of Politics, 61, 1040-1067.
27. Nelson, T. E., Oxley, Z. M., & Clawson, R. A. (1997). Toward a psychology of framing effects. Political behavior, 19, 221-246.
28. Reese, S. D. (2001). Prologue-Framing public life: A bridging model for media research. In S. D. Reese, O.H. Gandy, Jr., & A. E. Grant (Eds.), Framing public life: Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
29. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
30. Scheufele, D. A., & Tewksbury, D. (2007). Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication, 57, 9-20.
31. Shah, D. V., Kwak, N., Schmierbach, M., & Zubric, J. (2004). The interplay of news frames on cognitive complexity. Human Communication Research, 30, 102-120.
32. Singelis, T. (1994). The measurement of independent and inter-dependant self construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 580-591.
33. Sundar, S. S., Westerwick, S. K., & Hastall, M. R. (2007). News cues: Information scent and cognitive heuristics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(3), 366-378.
34. Tang, P. C., Ash, J. S., Bates, D. W., Overhage, J. M., & Sands, D. Z. (2006). Personal health records: Definitions, benefits, and strategies for overcoming barriers to adoption. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 13, 121-126.
35. Vishwanath, A. (2005). Impact of personality on technology adoption: An empirical model. The Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 56, 803-811.
36. Vishwanath, A. (2009). From beliefs to intentions: The impact of framing on the adoption of innovations. Communication Monographs, 76, 177-206.
37. Vishwanath, A., & Chen, H. (2006). Technology clusters: Using multidimensional scaling to evaluate and structure technology clusters. The Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 57, 1451-1460.
38. Vishwanath, A., & Scamurra, D. S. (2007). Barriers to the adoption of electronic health records: Using concept mapping to develop a comprehensive empirical model. Health Informatics Journal, 13, 119-134.
39. Wallis, K., & Rice, R. E. (2006). Technology and health information privacy: Consumers and the adoption of digital medical records technology. In M. Murero & R. E. Rice (Eds.), The Internet and health care: Theory, research and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.