Framing Virtual Experiences: Effects on Environmental Efficacy and Behavior Over Time

Communication Research

Volumn 42, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 839-863

  Fox, Jesse ^b   Dale, Katherine R ^b  

^a Grace)   (United States)

^b OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

environmental behavior; framing; interactivity; response efficacy; virtual environments

Indexed keywords

EID: 84937203051     PISSN: 00936502     EISSN: 15523810     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0093650214534973     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. S.J.Ahn (2015). Incorporating immersive virtual environments in health promotion campaigns: A construal-level theory approach. Health Communication, 30(6), 545-556.
2. S.J.AhnJ.N.Bailenson (2011). Self-endorsing versus other-endorsing in virtual environments: The effect on brand attitude and purchase intention. Journal of Advertising, 40, 93-106. doi:10.2753/JOA0091-3367400207
3. S.J.AhnJ.N.BailensonD.Park (2014). Short- and long-term effects of embodied experiences in immersive virtual environments on environmental locus of control and behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 235-245.
4. S.J.AhnA.M.T.LeJ.N.Bailenson (2013). The effect of embodied experiences on self-other merging, attitude, and helping behavior. Media Psychology, 16, 7-38. doi:10.1080/15213269.2012.755877
5. C.BadenS.Lecheler (2012). Fleeting, fading, or far-reaching? A knowledge-based model of the persistence of framing effects. Communication Theory, 22, 359-382. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2012.01413.x
6. J.N.BailensonS.IyengarN.YeeN.Collins (2008). Facial similarity between voters and candidates causes influence. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72, 935-961. doi:10.1093/poq/nfn064
7. A.Bandura (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.
8. J.BlascovichJ.N.Bailenson (2011). Infinite reality: Avatars, eternal life, new worlds, and the dawn of the virtual revolution. New York, NY: William Morrow.
9. P.Borah (2011). Seeking more information and conversations: Influence of competitive frames and motivated processing. Communication Research, 38, 303-325. doi:10.1177/0093650210376190
10. N.BowmanJ.GoodwinP.JonesN.Weaver (1998). Sustaining recycling: Identification and application of limiting factors in kerbside recycling areas. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 5, 263-276. doi:10.1080/13504509809469991
11. D.ChongJ.N.Druckman (2007). A theory of framing and opinion formation in competitive elite environments. Journal of Communication, 57, 99-118. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00331.x
12. M.ClevelandM.KalamasM.Laroche (2005). Shades of green: Linking environmental locus of control and pro-environmental behaviors. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22, 198-212. doi:10.1108/07363760510605317
13. R.Coleman (2010). Framing the pictures in our heads: Exploring the framing and agenda-setting effects of visual images. In P.D’AngeloJ.Kuypers (Eds.), Doing news framing analysis: Empirical, theoretical, and normative perspectives (pp. 233-261). New York, NY: Routledge.
14. C.H.de Vreese (2004). The effects of strategic news on political cynicism, issue evaluations, and policy support: A two-wave experiment. Mass Communication and Society, 7, 191-214. doi:10.1207/s15327825mcs0702_4
15. R.M.Entman (1993). Framing: Towards clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43, 51-58. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
16. M.Finger (1994). From knowledge to action? Exploring the relationships between environmental experiences, learning, and behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 50, 141-160. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1994.tb02424.x
17. D.R.FortinR.R.Dholakia (2005). Interactivity and vividness effects on social presence and involvement in a web-based advertisement. Journal of Business Research, 58, 387-396. doi:10.1016/S0148-2963(03)00106-1
18. J.FoxJ.N.Bailenson (2009). Virtual self-modeling: The effects of vicarious reinforcement and identification on exercise behaviors. Media Psychology, 12, 1-25. doi:10.1080/15213260802669474
19. J.FoxJ.N.BailensonJ.Binney (2009). Virtual experiences, physical behaviors: The effect of presence on imitation of an eating avatar. PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 18, 294-303. doi:10.1162/pres.18.4.294
20. M.E.GrabeE.P.Bucy (2009). Image bite politics: News and the visual framing of elections. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
21. C.R.HallK.A.Martin (1997). Measuring movement imagery abilities: A revision of the Movement Imagery Questionnaire. Journal of Mental Imagery, 21, 143-154.
22. P.S.Hart (2011). One or many? The influence of episodic and thematic climate change frames on policy preferences and individual behavior change. Science Communication, 33, 28-51. doi:10.1177/1075547010366400
23. P.S.Hart (2013). The role of numeracy in moderating the influence of statistics in climate change messages. Public Understanding of Science, 22, 785-798. doi:10.1177/0963662513482268
24. P.S.HartE.C.Nisbet (2012). Boomerang effects in science communication: How motivated reasoning and identity cues amplify opinion polarization about climate mitigation policies. Communication Research, 39, 701-723. doi:10.1177/0093650211416646
25. A.F.Hayes (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling (White paper). Retrieved from http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf
26. H.E.HershfieldD.G.GoldsteinW.F.SharpeJ.FoxL.YeykelisL.L.CarstensenJ.N.Bailenson (2011). Increasing saving behavior through age-progressed renderings of the future self. Journal of Marketing Research, 48, S23-S37. doi:10.1509/jmkr.48.SPL.S23
27. R.HertwingG.BarronE.U.WeberI.Erev (2004). Decisions from experience and the effect of rare events. Psychological Science, 15, 534-539. doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00715.x
28. J.M.HinesH.R.HungerfordA.N.Tomera (1987). Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Education, 18(2), 1-8. doi:10.1080/00958964.1987.9943482
29. D.KahnemanA.Tversky (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291. doi:10.2307/1914185
30. H.J.Kim (2012). The effects of gender and gain versus loss frame on processing breast cancer screening messages. Communication Research, 39, 385-412. doi:10.1177/0093650211427557
31. A.KollmussJ.Agyeman (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior?Environmental Education Research, 8, 239-260. doi:10.1080/13504620220145401
32. S.-P.Lam (2006). Predicting intention to save water: Theory of planned behavior, response efficacy, vulnerability, and perceived efficiency of alternative solutions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 2803-2824. doi:10.1111/j.0021-9029.2006.00129.x
33. S.LechelerC.H.de Vreese (2011). Getting real: The duration of framing effects. Journal of Communication, 61, 959-983. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01580.x
34. S.LechelerC.H.de Vreese (2013). What a difference a day makes? The effects of repetitive and competitive news framing over time. Communication Research, 40, 147-175. doi:10.1177/0093650212470688
35. S.LechelerC.de VreeseR.Slothuus (2009). Issue importance as a moderator of framing effects. Communication Research, 36, 400-425. doi:10.1177/0093650209333028
36. I.M.LewisB.WatsonK.M.White (2010). Response efficacy: The key to minimizing rejection and maximizing acceptance of emotion-based anti-speed messages. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 42, 459-467. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2009.09.008
37. M.LombardT.Ditton (1997). At the heart of it all: The concept of presence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3. Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol3/issue2/lombard.html
38. E.W.MaibachM.NisbetP.BaldwinK.AkerlofG.Diao (2010). Reframing climate change as a public health issue: An exploratory study of public reactions. BMC Public Health, 10, Article 299. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-10-299.
39. S.M.MarxE.U.WeberB.S.OrloveA.LeiserowitzD.H.KrantzC.RoncoliJ.Phillips (2007). Communication and mental processes: Experiential and analytic processing of uncertain climate information. Global Environmental Change, 17, 47-58. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.10.004
40. P.MessarisL.Abraham (2001). The role of images in framing news stories. In S.D.ReeseO.H.GandyA.E.Grant (Eds.), Framing public life: Perspective on media and our understanding of the social world (pp. 215-226). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
41. T.A.MortonA.RabinovichD.MarshallP.Bretschneider (2011). The future that may (or may not) come: How framing changes responses to uncertainty in climate change communications. Global Environmental Change, 21, 103-109. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.09.013
42. C.Obermiller (1995). The baby is sick/the baby is well: A test of environmental communication appeals. Journal of Advertising, 2, 55-69.
43. D.J.O’KeefeJ.D.Jensen (2006). The advantages of compliance or the disadvantages of noncompliance? A meta-analytic review of the relative persuasive effectiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages. Communication Yearbook, 30, 1-43.
44. R.E.PettyJ.T.Cacioppo (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York, NY: Springer.
45. Pew Research Center. (2010). Millennials: A portrait of generation next. Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/files/2010/10/millennials-confident-connected-open-to-change.pdf
46. R.W.Rogers (1975). A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Psychology, 91, 93-114. doi:10.1080/00223980.1975.9915803
47. A.RothmanP.Salovey (1997). Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message framing. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 3-19. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.3
48. D.A.Scheufele (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49, 103-122. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02784.x
49. D.A.ScheufeleS.Iyengar (2012). The state of framing research: A call for new directions. In K.KenskiK.H.Jamieson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political communication. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
50. T.R.SchneiderP.SaloveyU.PallonenN.MundorfN.F.SmithW.T.Steward (2001). Visual and auditory message framing effects on tobacco smoking. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 667-682. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb01407.x
51. K.Y.SegoviaJ.N.Bailenson (2009). Virtually true: Children’s acquisition of false memories in virtual reality. Media Psychology, 12, 371-393. doi:10.1080/15213260903287267
52. L.ShenJ.P.Dillard (2007). The influence of inhibition/approach systems and message framing on the processing of persuasive health messages. Communication Research, 34, 433-467. doi:10.1177/0093650207302787
53. P.SkalskiR.TamboriniA.SheltonM.BuncherP.Lindmark (2011). Mapping the road to fun: Natural video game controllers, presence, and game enjoyment. New Media & Society, 13, 224-242. doi:10.1177/1461444810370949
54. N.J.Smith-SebastoR.W.Fortner (1994). The Environmental Action Internal Control Index. Journal of Environmental Education, 25(4), 23-29. doi:10.1080/00958964.1994.9941961
55. S.S.Sundar (2004). Theorizing interactivity’s effects. Information Society, 20, 385-389. doi:10.1080/01972240490508072
56. S.S.SundarS.KalyanaramanJ.Brown (2003). Explicating web site interactivity: Impression formation effects in political campaign sites. Communication Research, 30, 30-59. doi:10.1177/0093650202239025
57. D.TewksburyJ.JonesM.W.PeskeA.RaymondW.Vig (2000). The interaction of news and advocate frames: Manipulating audience perceptions of a local public policy issue. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77, 804-829. doi:10.1177/107769900007700406
58. E.U.Weber (2006). Experience-based and description-based perceptions of long-term risk: Why global warming does not scare us (yet). Climatic Change, 77, 103-120. doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9060-3
59. K.WhiteR.MacDonnellD.W.Dahl (2011). It’s the mind-set that matters: The role of construal level and message framing in influencing consumer efficacy and conservation behaviors. Journal of Marketing Research, 48, 472-485. doi:10.1509/jmkr.48.3.472
60. N.YeeJ.N.BailensonN.Ducheneaut (2009). Implications of transformed digital self-representation on online and offline behavior. Communication Research, 36, 285-312. doi:10.1177/0093650208330254
61. R.ZaalbergC.J.H.Midden (2010). Human responses to climate change: Flooding experiences in the Netherlands. In P.MartensE.Chang (Eds.), The social and behavioural aspects of climate change: Linking vulnerability, adaptation, and mitigation (pp. 157-176). Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf.
62. P.ZimbardoJ.Boyd (2008). The time paradox: The new psychology of time that will change your life. New York, NY: Free Press.