Effects of <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=Personal&v=56">Personal</a> Involvement and Task Risk on Goal Framing

• Main Authors: Shu-Ling Yen, 顏淑鈴
• Other Authors: Lee, Ju-Whei
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2004
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/267t66

碩士 === 中原大學 === 心理學研究所 === 92 === Framing refers to the phenomena that two logically equivalent questions lead to different responses because information is processed in different ways. Researchers have demonstrated that framing is a reliable phenomenon and <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=personal&v=56">personal</a> involvement moderates goal framing. Nevertheless, conflicting findings have been observed in this line of research. The main purpose of the present study is to clarify such inconsistency by introducing another moderator, i.e., task risk. It is proposed that <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=personal&v=56">personal</a> involvement and task risk can additively affect people’s risk perception of the action course, which further moderates framing. Two experiments, both with a 2 (message frame: positive/negative) × 2 (personal involvement: high/low) × 2 (task risk: high/low) between-subjects <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=design&v=56">design</a>, were conducted. Experiment 2 was basically identical to Experiment 1, with some modifications in the questionnaire of risk perception. In both experiments, English Proficiency <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=Test&v=56">Test</a> for Graduation was the task. Involvement, task risk, and message frame were manipulated by instructions. The dependent variables were subjects’ attitudes and behavioral intentions toward the action course after they read the framed messages. In addition, the subject was assessed risk perception of the action course. There were 160 undergraduate students served as participants in Experiment 1, and 136 undergraduate students participated in Experiment 2. Subjects were randomly assigned to 8 experimental conditions. Our hypotheses are as follows: <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=people&v=56">people</a> under the condition of high involvement/high task risk would produce high risk perception, which further directs the subject’s attention to potential losses. Thus, the negatively framed message is more persuasive than the positive framed message. <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=People&v=56">People</a> under the conditions of high involvement/low task risk and low involvement/high task risk would generate low risk perception, which draws the participant’s attention to potential gains. Therefore, a positively frame was more persuasive than a negative one. <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=People&v=56">People</a> under the condition of low involvement/low task risk would produce the weakest risk perception, leading them care about neither potential gains nor losses. Thus, positively and negatively framed messages had the same effect. In Experiment 1, Findings in attitudes supported the hypotheses of framing effects, although findings in behavioral intentions failed to do so. As to the hypotheses regarding risk perception, the results were not as expected. It was conjectured that the unexpected findings in risk perception was due to either ambiguous wordings of risk questionnaire or the incomplete measurement of risk perception. Thus, in Experiment two, the questionnaire for assessing risk perception was modified and framing effects were reexamined. In Experiment 2, empirical results supported both hypotheses regarding risk perception and framing effects. In summary, <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=personal&v=56">personal</a> involvement and task risk will additively influence an individual’s risk perception of the action course, which further moderates framing effects. Therefore, the present study reconciles conflicting findings in goal framing.