All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Elaboration, content preference and framing: Effects of “Incompetent Authority” frame in China-made product recall coverage
Unformatted Document Text:  Elaboration, content preference and framing H1: Compared with the control group, subjects who read the framed version of the Chinese toothpaste recall story activate more thoughts on the responsibility of Chinese authorities. H2: The more thoughts on Chinese authorities’ responsibility are activated, the more negative attitude to Chinese product becomes. H3: The more thoughts on Chinese authorities’ responsibility are activated, the more subjects regard the incompetence of Chinese authorities as an important cause for the product safety issue in U.S. Elaboration as framing effects moderator? However, framing is more complex than an accessibility-based process. Knowledge (Nelson, et al., 1997), values (Shen & Edwards, 2005), information sources (Druckman, 2001; 2004), interpersonal interactions (Druckman & Bolsen, 2009) and competing frames (Chong & Druckman, 2007) have been found to moderate framing effects. Nonetheless, few studies have examined cognitive elaboration, defined as active thinking and critical evaluation of messages (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986), as a moderator. However, the elaboration likelihood model (ELM) suggests it could. The ELM predicts that as knowledge about and personal involvement with an issue increase, individuals tend to follow a central route of information processing and elaborate in- depth on an issue (e.g., Petty, Wheeler, & Bizer, 1999; Petty & Wegener, 1999). Under the central route, people endeavour to evaluate the substantive quality of an argument (O’Keefe, 1990; Areni, 2003); retrieve cognitive associations from memory; and seek an overall evaluation of the recommended remedies (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). In contrast, when issue knowledge or involvement is low, people are more likely to follow a peripheral route and

Authors: Pan, Ji.
first   previous   Page 7 of 34   next   last



background image
Elaboration, content preference and framing
H1: Compared with the control group, subjects who read the framed version of the 
Chinese toothpaste recall story activate more thoughts on the responsibility of 
Chinese authorities. 
H2: The more thoughts on Chinese authorities’ responsibility are activated, the more 
negative attitude to Chinese product becomes. 
H3: The more thoughts on Chinese authorities’ responsibility are activated, the more 
subjects regard the incompetence of Chinese authorities as an important cause for 
the product safety issue in U.S.
Elaboration as framing effects moderator?
However, framing is more complex than an accessibility-based process. Knowledge 
(Nelson, et al., 1997), values (Shen & Edwards, 2005), information sources (Druckman, 
2001; 2004), interpersonal interactions (Druckman & Bolsen, 2009) and competing frames 
(Chong & Druckman, 2007) have been found to moderate framing effects. Nonetheless, few 
studies have examined cognitive elaboration, defined as active thinking and critical 
evaluation of messages (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986), as a moderator. However, the elaboration 
likelihood model (ELM) suggests it could. 
The ELM predicts that as knowledge about and personal involvement with an issue 
increase, individuals tend to follow a central route of information processing and elaborate in-
depth on an issue (e.g., Petty, Wheeler, & Bizer, 1999; Petty & Wegener, 1999). Under the 
central route, people endeavour to evaluate the substantive quality of an argument (O’Keefe, 
1990; Areni, 2003); retrieve cognitive associations from memory; and seek an overall 
evaluation of the recommended remedies (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). In contrast, when issue 
knowledge or involvement is low, people are more likely to follow a peripheral route and 


Convention
Need a solution for abstract management? All Academic can help! Contact us today to find out how our system can help your annual meeting.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 7 of 34   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.