A new study used prospect theory and exemplification theory to investigate whether presenting anti-binge drinking campaign messages using different framing and evidence types influenced college students’ intentions to binge drink. Participants (n = 156) were undergraduate students at one U.S. university. The sample was 74% female. 84% (n = 134) of the sample identified as binge drinkers. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four experimental groups or a control group that did not view any messages. The study used a 2×2 factorial design to present each group with one of four possible combinations of framing and evidence messages. Before and/or after viewing the messages, participants reported their perceptions of message framing and evidence type, drinking behaviors, attitudes toward drinking and toward the message, and intention to avoid binge drinking. Messages were either loss-framed (e.g., binge drinking will “increase your change of experiencing negative health consequences”) or gain-framed (e.g., not binge drinking will “increase your chance of experiencing positive health consequences”). Evidence was presented in narrative or statistical form. The authors used the General Linear Model procedure to analyze results and test for interaction effects. Results showed participants reported a higher level of behavioral intention to avoid binge drinking in the near future when they were exposed to a loss-framed message compared to the control group, regardless of evidence type (all ps < 0.07). However, the authors found a significant difference was only detected among non-binge drinkers for framing (p < 0.01) and evidence type (p < 0.05). There was no evidence of a relationship (p > 0.05) between evidence type and behavioral intention. Participants had a more favorable attitude toward the message when it was loss-framed than gain-framed, as well as a more favorable attitude toward the message when evidence was presented statistically. Results also indicated participants’ attitude toward drinking was less favorable after they were exposed to a loss-framed message than a gain-framed message. There was no evidence of a significant effect of message faming or interaction effect on intention to avoid binge drinking (all ps > 0.05), nor was there evidence participants’ attitudes toward drinking were affected by their exposure to anti-binge drinking messages. One limitation of this study is behavioral intention does not always predict behavior.
Take away: Participants who were exposed to loss-framed anti-binge drinking messages reported higher levels of intention to avoid binge drinking in the near future than participants who did not view any messages; this effect occurred mainly among non-binge drinkers. There was no significant relationship observed between message evidence type (statistical vs. narrative) and intention to avoid binge drinking.