|新冠疫情肆虐背景下，如何说服人们接种新冠疫苗引发了政策制定者和研究者的关注。文章从趋近-回避动机的视角，探讨了不同目标框架(积极 vs. 消极)和时间距离(现在vs.未来)对疫苗说服有效性的影响。结果发现：当宣传语关注现在时，“现在-消极”目标框架更能有效说服疫苗接种；而当宣传语关注未来时，则“未来-积极”目标框架更有说服力。其内在机制在于“现在-消极”目标框架启动的回避动机更强，而“未来-积极”目标框架启动的趋近动机更强。此外，疫情风险进一步影响目标框架与时间距离对疫苗说服的有效性。本研究从趋避动机的视角揭示了框架效应的理论机制和应用边界；同时也为助推新冠疫苗以及未来其他疫苗接种提供实践指导，具有重要的科学价值和实践指导意义。|
|[英文摘要]Vaccines are crucial for controlling deadly diseases, and how to persuade people to get vaccinated has become a hot topic in enhancing public health benefits. One way to increase the vaccination rate is to raise public awareness of the importance of vaccines through advertising. As an effective and cost-friendly approach, goal framing has been widely used in vaccine advertising. However, the literature has mixed findings about whether positive or negative goal framing is more effective in persuading people to get vaccinated. The present study aims to investigate how temporal distance (present vs. future) interacts with different types of goal framing (positive vs. negative) in persuading people to get the COVID-19 vaccine. We hypothesized that negative goal framing is more persuasive when the advertisingfocuses on present outcomes, while positive goal framing is more effective when combined with future-focused outcomes. We further hypothesized that the inner mechanism is the intertemporal asymmetry of approach and avoidance motivation. More specifically, the avoidance motivation induced by a negative frame is stronger in the present, while the approach motivation induced by a positive frame is stronger in the future. The perceived risk of COVID-19 moderated this effect.
Four studies were conducted to examine our hypotheses. Study 1 was conducted to preliminarily investigate how goal framing and temporal distance jointly influence willingness to get the COVID-19 vaccine. The aim of Study 2 was to verify the mediating effect of approach and avoidance motivation in a different advertising setting, as well as to rule out the potential mediators of the construal level and positive/negative emotions. In Study 3, we further tested the mediators by manipulating participants’ approach and avoidance motivation. Study 4 was a quasi-experiment in which we recruited participants from areas with different levels of COVID-19 risk to test how perceived risk moderated the interaction effect of goal framing and temporal distance.
The results showed that a negative goal frame was more persuasive when combined with present-focused advertising, while a positive goal frame was more effective when combined with future-focused advertising (Study 1, N = 363). Avoidance motivation mediated the relationship between the goal frame and vaccine uptake in the present context, while approach motivation mediated the relationship between the goal frame and vaccine uptake in the future context (Study 2, N = 292). The results in Study 3 (N = 347) revealed that approach motivation priming increases the persuasiveness of the present-positive frame, while avoidance motivation priming increases the persuasiveness of the future-negative frame. COVID-19 risk also had an impact on the relationship between goal framing and temporal distance on vaccine uptake. When the COVID-19 risk was high, the difference in vaccine uptake between present-positive and present-negative conditions disappeared, while the future-positive frame was still more persuasive than the future-negative frame (Study 4, N = 423).
In conclusion, the present study found an interactive effect of goal framing and temporal distance in persuading people to get the COVID-19 vaccine. Avoidance/approach motivation mediates the relationship between goal framing and vaccine uptake in the present/future temporal context. The perceived COVID risk further moderated the interaction effect. The present study contributes to both the framing and approach-avoidance motivation literature and sheds light on future practices in persuading people to get the COVIDvaccine and promoting the uptake of other vaccines.