IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/v30y2003i3p311-25.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Different Scales for Different Frames: The Role of Subjective Scales and Experience in Explaining Attribute-Framing Effects

Author

Listed:
  • Janiszewski, Chris
  • Silk, Tim
  • Cooke, Alan D J

Abstract

Consumers respond more favorably to positively framed attribute information than to negatively framed attribute information, a finding that has been attributed to the affective associations evoked by each frame. We contend that framing effects also depend on the range and level of reference values used to evaluate attribute information. When the range of reference values is narrower for a positive frame than a negative frame, attribute values above expected performance levels favor the positively framed information and attribute values below expected performance levels favor the negatively framed information. When the range of reference values is wider for a positive frame than a negative frame, the opposite pattern emerges. Experience with a frame is one factor that reduces the range of reference values recruited to judge attribute information. Copyright 2003 by the University of Chicago.

Suggested Citation

  • Janiszewski, Chris & Silk, Tim & Cooke, Alan D J, 2003. "Different Scales for Different Frames: The Role of Subjective Scales and Experience in Explaining Attribute-Framing Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(3), pages 311-325, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:30:y:2003:i:3:p:311-25
    DOI: 10.1086/378612
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/378612
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/378612?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Timothy Gilbride & Sha Yang & Greg Allenby, 2005. "Modeling Simultaneity in Survey Data," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 311-335, December.
    2. Dino Borie & Dorian Jullien, 2019. "Description-dependent Choices," Working Papers halshs-01651086, HAL.
    3. Kuo, Ying-Feng & Lin, Cathy S. & Liu, Li-Te, 2022. "The effects of framing messages and cause-related marketing on backing intentions in reward-based crowdfunding," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    4. Kurt A. Carlson & Samuel D. Bond, 2006. "Improving Preference Assessment: Limiting the Effect of Context Through Pre-exposure to Attribute Levels," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(3), pages 410-421, March.
    5. Weijters, Bert & Millet, Kobe & Cabooter, Elke, 2021. "Extremity in horizontal and vertical Likert scale format responses. Some evidence on how visual distance between response categories influences extreme responding," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 85-103.
    6. Grappe, Cindy G. & Lombart, Cindy & Louis, Didier & Durif, Fabien, 2022. "Clean labeling: Is it about the presence of benefits or the absence of detriments? Consumer response to personal care claims," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    7. Biswas, Dipayan & Pechmann, Cornelia, 2012. "What do these clinical trial results mean? How product efficacy judgments are affected by data partitioning, framing, and quantification," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 341-350.
    8. Cindy Grappe & Cindy Lombart & Didier Louis & Fabien Durif, 2022. "Clean labeling: Is it about the presence of benefits or the absence of detriments? Consumer response to personal care claims," Post-Print hal-04293232, HAL.
    9. Shang, Wenjing & Hooker, Neal H., 2006. "Scales or Stars? Consumer Preferences for Food Quality Signals," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21237, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    10. Jain, Gaurav & Gaeth, Gary J. & Nayakankuppam, Dhananjay & Levin, Irwin P., 2020. "Revisiting attribute framing: The impact of number roundedness on framing," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 109-119.
    11. Meise, Jan Niklas & Rudolph, Thomas & Kenning, Peter & Phillips, Diane M., 2014. "Feed them facts: Value perceptions and consumer use of sustainability-related product information," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 510-519.
    12. Kim, Jungkeun & Kim, Jae-Eun & Marshall, Roger, 2014. "Search for the underlying mechanism of framing effects in multi-alternative and multi-attribute decision situations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 378-385.
    13. Pierre Chandon & Romain Cadario, 2023. "Healthy in the wrong way: Mismatching of marketers’ food claim use and consumers’ preferences in the United States but not France," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 153-173, January.
    14. M. Pandelaere & B. Briers, 2011. "How to Make a 29% Increase Look Bigger: Numerosity Effects in Option Comparisons," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 11/712, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    15. Á. Ní Choisdealbha & P. D. Lunn, 2020. "Green and Simple: Disclosures on Eco-labels Interact with Situational Constraints in Consumer Choice," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 699-722, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:30:y:2003:i:3:p:311-25. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.