From belief-importance to intention: The impact of framing on technology adoption

Communication Monographs

Volumn 76, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 177-206

  Vishwanath, Arun ^a  

^a School of Informatics   (United States)

Author keywords

Diffusion of innovations; Issue framing; Persuasion; Sense making; Technology adoption

Indexed keywords

EID: 70449469251     PISSN: 03637751     EISSN: 14795787     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03637750902828438     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Atkin, D. J. (1993). Adoption of cable amidst a multimedia environment. Telematics and Informatics, 10(1), 51-58.
2. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3. Block, L. G., & Keller, P. A. (1995).When to accentuate the negative: The effects of perceived efficacy and message framing on intensions to perform a health-related behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 32, 192-203.
4. Cabana, M. D., Cynthia, R. S., Power, N. R., Albert, W. W., Wilson, M. H., Andre, P. A., & Haya, R. R. (1999). Why don't physicians follows clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. Journal of the American Medical Association, 282, 1458-1465.
5. Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). A theory of opinion formation in competitive elite environments. Journal of Communication, 57, 99-118.
6. Crkvencic, D. (2005). ShirusuPad [Computer software]. Retrieved from http://www.shirusupad.tk.
7. Dalrymple, J. (2004, December 8). Consumer reports gives Apple high marks. MacWord. Retrieved from http://www.macworld.com/article/41295/2004/12/consumer.html
8. D'Angelo, P. (2002). News framing as a multiparadigmatic research program: A response to Entman. Journal of Communication, 52, 570-888.
9. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, P. R., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 25, 923-1003.
10. DeSanctis, G. (1983). Expectancy theory as an explanation of voluntary use of a decision support system. Psychological Reports, 52, 247-260.
11. DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. S. (1994). Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science, 5, 121-147.
12. Dickson, G. W., DeSanctis, G., & McBride, D. J. (1986). Understanding the effectiveness of computer graphics for decision support: A cumulative experimental approach. Communications of the ACM, 29, 40-47.
13. Druckman, J. N. (2001). On the limits of framing effects: Who can frame? Journal of Politics, 63, 1041-1066.
14. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward the clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43, 51-58.
15. Fulk, J. (1993). Social construction of communication technology. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 921-950.
16. Fulk, J., Schmitz, J., & Steinfield, C. W. (1990). A social influence model of technology use. In J. Fulk & C. Steinfield (Eds.), Organizations and communication technology (pp. 117-142). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
17. Greweal, D., Gotlieb, J., & Marmorstein, H. (1994). The moderating effects of message framing and source credibility on the price-perceived risk relationship. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 143-153.
18. Griffith, T. L. (1999). Technology features as sense-making triggers. Academy of Management Review, 24, 472-488.
19. Jacoby, J., Olson, J. C., & Haddock, R. A. (1971). Price, brand name and product composition as determinants of perceived quality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 55, 570-579.
20. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984). Choice, values and frames. The American Psychologist, 39, 341-350.
21. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1986). Rational choice and the framing of decisions. Journal of Business, 59, 4(Pt. 2: The Behavioral Foundations of Economic Theory), S251-S278.
22. Karahanna, E., Straub, D. W., & Chervany, N. L. (1999). Information technology adoption across time: A cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs. MIS Quarterly, 23, 183-213.
23. Keller, K. L. (1991). Cue compatibility and framing in advertising. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(1), 42-57.
24. Levin, I. P. (1987). Associative effects of information framing. Bulletin of the Psychometrics Society, 25(3), 85-86.
25. Levin, I. P., & Gaeth, G. J. (1988). How consumers are affected by the framing of attribute information before and after consuming the product. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 374-379.
26. 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.
27. Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research, 2, 192-220.
28. Nelson, T. E., & Kinder, D. R. (1996). Issue frames and group-centrism in American public opinion. Journal of Politics, 58, 1055-1078.
29. Nelson, T. E., & Oxley, Z. M. (1999). Issues framing effects on belief importance and opinions. Journal of Politics, 61, 1040-1067.
30. Nelson, T. E., Oxley, Z. M., & Clawson, R. A. (1997). Toward a psychology of framing effects. Political Behavior, 19, 221-246.
31. Olson, C. L. (1974). Comparative robustness of six tests in multivariate analysis of variance. Psychological Bulletin, 83, 579-586.
32. Price, V., & Tewksbury, D. (1997). News values and public opinion: A theoretical account of media priming and framing. In G. A. Barnett & F. J. Boster (Eds.), Progress in communication sciences: Advances in persuasion (Vol. 13, pp. 173-212). Greenwich, CT: Ablex.
33. Price, V., Tewksbury, D., & Powers, E. (1997). Switching trains of thought: The impact of news frames on reader's cognitive response. Communication Research, 24, 481-498.
34. Rhee, J. W. (1997). Strategy and issue frames in election campaign coverage: A social cognitive account of framing effects. Journal of Communication, 47(3), 26-48.
35. Rice, R. E., & Aydin, C. (1991). Attitudes toward new organizational technology: Network proximity as a mechanism for social information processing. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 219-244.
36. Rogers, E. M. (1960). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.
37. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed). New York: Free Press.
38. Rubin, D. B. (1976). Inference and missing data. Biometrika, 63(3), 581-592.
39. Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Agenda setting, priming, and framing revisited: Another look at cognitive effects of political communication. Mass Communication and Society, 3, 297-316.
40. Scheufele, D. A. (2000). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49, 103-122.
41. Scheufele, D. A., & Tewksbury, D. (2007). Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication, 57, 9-20.
42. Schmitz, J. A., & Fulk, J. (1991). Organizational colleagues, information richness, and electronic mail: A test of the social influence model of technology use. Communication Research, 18, 487-523.
43. Shah, D. V., Domke, D., & Wackman, D. B. (1996). To thine own self be true'': Values, framing and voter decision-making strategies. Communication Research, 23, 509-560.
44. Shah, D. V., Kwak, N., Schmierbach, M., & Zubric, J. (2004). The interplay of news frames on cognitive complexity. Human Communication Research, 30, 102-120.
45. Shiv, B. S., Edell, J. A., & Payne, J. W. (1997). Factors affecting the impact of negatively and positively framed ad messages. Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 285-294.
46. Stevens, J. P. (1980). Power of multivariate analysis of variance tests. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 728-737.
47. 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, 366-378.
48. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27, 425-478.
49. Vishwanath, A. (2006). Effect of number of opinion leaders and seekers on technology adoption. Human Communication Research, 32, 322-345.
50. Vishwanath, A. (2008, May). From theory to practice: Evaluating software websites from a diffusion perspective. Scholar to scholar poster session presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Montreal, Canada.
51. Vishwanath, A. (in press). Using frames to influence consumer willingness to pay for the patient health record (PHR): A randomized experiment. Health Communication.
52. Vishwanath, A., Broadsky, L., & Shaha, S. (2009). Physician adoption of personal digital assistants (PDA): Testing its determinants within a structural equation model. Journal of Health Communication, 14, 77-95.
53. 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(11), 1451-1460.
54. 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.
55. Weick, K. E. (1990). Technology as equivoque: Sense making in new technologies. In P. S. Goodman, L. S. Sproull, & Associates (Eds.), Technology and organizations (pp. 1-44). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.