A study of the effect of message framing on oocyte donation

Human Reproduction

Volumn 24, Issue 12, 2009, Pages 3136-3143

  Purewal, S ^a   Van Den Akker, O B A ^a,b  

^a MIDDLESEX UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b BIRMINGHAM CHILDREN S HOSPITAL NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Framing effect; Health promotion; Infertility; Oocyte donation; Theory of planned behaviour

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; BEHAVIOR CONTROL; FEMALE; HUMAN; OOCYTE DONATION; PARENT; SOUTHEAST ASIA; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 72949124181     PISSN: 02681161     EISSN: 14602350     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dep342     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Ahuja KK, Simons EG, Mostyn BJ, Bowen-Simpkins P. As assessment of the motives and morals of egg share donors: policy of 'payment' to egg donors requires a fair review. Hum Reprod 1998; 13:2671-2678.
2. Ajzen I. From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behaviour. In: Kuhl J, Beckman J (eds). Action Control: From Cognition to Behaviour. Germany: Springer, 1985.
3. Ajzen I. Perceived behavioural control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behaviour. J Appl Soc Psychol 2002;32:665-683.
4. Banks SM, Salovey P, Greener S, Rothman AJ, Moyer A, Beauvais J, Epel E. The effects of message framing on mammography utilisation. Health Psychol 1995;14:178-184.
5. Bannon K, Schwartz MB. Impact of nutrition messages on children's food choice: pilot study. Appetite 2006;46:124-129.
6. Beatens P, Devroey P, Camus M, van Steirteghen A, Ponjaert-Kristofferse I. Counselling couples and donors for oocyte donation: the decision to use either known or anonymous oocytes. Hum Reprod 2000; 15:476-484.
7. Block G, Keller PA. When to accentuate the negative: the effects of perceived efficacy and message framing on intention to perform a health related behaviour. J Mark Res 1995;32:192-203.
8. Blyth E, Frith L. The UK's gamete donor 'crisis'-a critical analysis. Crit Soc Pol 2008;28:74-95.
9. Boden J, Hunt J, Williams Dl. When (and what) is an egg? Hum Fertil 2002; 5:47-50.
10. Brunton MA. One message for all? Framing public health messages to recognize diversity. Int J Intercult Relat 2007;31:127-132.
11. Bunce D, Birdi KS. The theory of reasoned action and theory of planned behaviour as a function of job control. Br J Health Psychol 1998; 3:265-275.
12. Byrd LM, Sidebotham M, Lieberman B. Egg donation-the donor's views: an aid to future recruitment. Hum Fertil 2002;5:175-182.
13. Byrne BM. Structural Equation Modelling With AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications and Programming. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc, 2001.
14. Chang CT Health care product advertising: the influences of message framing and perceived product characteristic. Psychol Market 2007; 24:143-169.
15. De Martino B, Kumaran D, Seymour B, Dolan RJ. Frames, biases, and rational decision making in the human brain. Science 2006; 313:684-687.
16. Detweiler JB, Bedell BT, Salovey P, Pronin E, Rothman AJ. Message framing and sunscreen use: gain framed messages motivate beach goers. Health Psychol 1999;18:189-196.
17. Gorill MJ, Johnson LK, Patton PE, Burry KA. Oocyte donor screening: the selection process and cost analysis. Fertil Steril 2001;75:400-404.
18. Jordan CB, Belar CD, Williams RS. Anonymous oocyte donation: a follow-up analysis of donors' experiences. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaeco 2004;25:145-151.
19. Kahneman D, Tversky A. Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 1979;47:263-291.
20. Kahneman D, Tversky A. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 1981;211:453-458.
21. Kalfoglou AL, Gittelsohn J. A qualitative follow-up of women's experiences with oocyte donation. Hum Reprod 2000;15:798-805.
22. Kirkman M. Egg and embryo donation and the meaning of motherhood. Women Health 2003;38:1-18.
23. Klock SC, Braverman AM, Rausch DT. Predicting anonymous egg donor satisfaction: a preliminary study. J Womens Health 1998;7:229-237.
24. Klock SC, Stout JE, Davidson M. Analysis of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality lnventory-2 profiles of prospective anonymous oocyte donors in relation to the outcome of the selection process. Fertil Steril 999;72:1066-1072.
25. Maule J, Villejoubert G. What lies beneath: reframing framing effects. Think Reasoning 2007; 13:25-44.
26. Moorman C, Matulich E. A model of consumers' preventive health behaviors: the role of health motivation and health ability. J Consum Res 1993;20:208-228.
27. Murray C, Golombok S. Oocyte and semen donation: a survey of UK licensed centres. Hum Reprod 2000;15:2133-2139.
28. O'Connor DB, Ferguson E, O'Connor RC. Intentions to use hormonal male contraception: The role of message framing, attitudes and stress appraisals. Br J Health Psychol 2005;96:351-369.
29. Purewal S, van den Akker OBA British women's attitudes towards oocyte donation: ethnic differences and altruism. Patient EducCouns2006;64:43-49.
30. Purewal S, van den Akker OBA. Systematic review of oocyte donation: investigating attitudes, motivations and experiences. Hum Reprod Update 2009a; 15:499-515.
31. Purewal S, van den Akker OBA. Attitudes and intentions towards volunteer oocyte donation. Reprod Biomed Online 2009b; l9(Supp I): 19-26.
32. Purewal S, van den Akker OBA. Attitudes and intention to donate oocytes for research. Fertil Steril 2009c, in press.
33. Reinhart AM, Marshall HM, Feeley TH, Tutzauer F. The persuasive effects of message framing in organ donation: the mediating role of psychological reactance. Commun Monogr 2007;74:229-255.
34. Robberson M, Roger R. Beyond fear appeals: negative and positive persuasive appeals to health and self esteem. J Appl Soc Psychol 1988; 18:277-287.
35. Rothman AJ, Salovey P. Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behaviour: the role of message framing. Psychol Bull 1997; 121:3-19.
36. Rothman AJ, Salovey P, Antone C, Keough K, Martin CD. The influence of message framing on intentions to perform health behaviours. J Exp Soc Psychol 1993;29:408-433.
37. Sherman DK, Mann T, Updegraff JA Approach/avoidance motivation, message framing, and health behaviour understanding the congruency effect. Motiv Emot 2006;30:165-169.
38. Skoog-Svanberg A, Lampic C, Bergh T, Lundkvisk O. Characterisation of potential oocyte donors in Sweden. Hum Reprod 2003;18:2205-2215.
39. Soderstrom-Anttila V. Follow-up study of Finnish volunteer oocyte donors concerning their attitudes to oocyte donation. Hum Reprod 1995; 10:3073-3076.
40. Webb TL, Sheeran P. Does changing behavioural intentions engender behaviour change? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychol Bull 2006;132:249-268.
41. Weil E, Cornet D, Sibony C, Mandelbaum J, Salat-Baroux J. Psychological aspects in anonymous and non-anonymous oocyte donation. Hum Reprod 1994;9:1344-1347.
42. Wilson DK, Purdon SE, Wallston KA. Compliance to health recommendations: a theoretical overview of message framing. Health EducRes 1988;3:161-171.
43. Winter A, Daniluk JC. A gift from the heart: the experiences of women whose egg donation helped their sisters become mothers. J Courts Dev 2004;82:483-495.
44. Wong CO, McMurray NE. Framing communication: communicating the antismoking message effectively to all smokers. J Community Psychol 2002;30:433-447.
45. Yee S, Hitkari JA, Greenblatt EM. A follow-up study of women who donated oocytes to known recipients couples for altruistic reasons. Hum Reprod 2007;22:2040-2050.